Cry freedom, cry conscience

'My conscience, my choice' is the mantra of contemporary moral relativism. Politicians demand it, the press defend it and some theologians even make it a dogma. The recent controversy over the abortion debate and the role of politicians both in the US and the UK ended in the usual mud slinging match of modern journalism. I should imagine that such a tactic is deliberate, it gets your mind off the truth.

The end result, as decided by the press, is that politicians have the right to freedom of conscience and should be allowed to legislate in peace without any external pressure that does not come from the media itself. The only ones allowed to have any say in the matter are journalists. After all, they are the prophets and priests of the 'new faith'.

The New York Times has another article on the freedom of conscience, this time from the other side of the fence. It seems that the politicians now are forcing pharmacists to go against their conscience and making them prescribe the morning after pill, widely known to be a chemical abortion.

How quickly things change, arguments forgotten and the power of coercion used when the shoe is on the other foot. In this case its a boot that is being put into the side of pharmacists. These same politicians who told the bishops to get their grubby crosier bearing hands of their conscience, are now directly forcing pharmacists to act against theirs.

Of course one is comforted by the fact that the Democratic Gov. Chris Gregoire 'feels' that an extensive public process was adequate for legislation disallowing the pharmacists to conscientiously object. One is so relieved that the Governor's conscience has not been violated and that her feelings haven't been hurt. It's a pity she wouldn't extend the same courtesy to the pharmacists.

In the world of moral relativism it would seem that even the rights of conscience are relative. Obviously not all consciences are created equal.