It’s not surprising that Randal Rauser’s liberal theology terminates in liberal morals.
If you would have told me yesterday that I would find myself in sympathy with a controversial ethical position taken by Pat Robertson I wouldn’t have believed you. But here we are...All I am saying is that I am sympathetic with Robertson’s reasoning as well.
In my previous post I found myself in the surprising situation of defending Pat Robertson’s widely panned commentary on the morality of divorce in the case of advanced Alzheimer’s. I was not necessarily agreeing with Pat’s view, but I was certainly sympathetic to it.
If I correctly discern his ethics and family values, Rauser finds it more morally objectionable for a third party to repost a picture which happened to include a family member than for a family member to divorce or at least consider divorcing another family member.
ReplyDeleteIn any case, I honestly hope Rauser's wife never suffers from dementia.
If I recall from watching the clip where Robertson is speaking after the letter is read to him by the lady, wasn't the question framed such that the "husband" was having an illicit relationship already while carrying the burden of his wife with alzheimers?
ReplyDeleteSeems to me the wife has the grounds for prosecuting a divorce because the husband has developed another relationship?
Might it be Robertson was just justifying that divorces are sanctioned and that would be the justifiable way of resolving the dilemma?
The best solution though, of course, is for the Husband to stop seeing other women and just be faithful to his marriage til death parts ways?
It's become increasingly obvious that Rauser's insights provide a fantastic moral compass. In order to know what's right in any situation, one need only remember that Rauser is heading in the diametrically opposite direction. He's so perfectly misguided that he's a perfect guide.
ReplyDelete