The ultimate value of life depends upon awareness and the power of contemplation rather than upon mere survival.
-- Aristotle
“We are stopping cold the attacks on Judeo-Christian values”
That was President Donald Trump addressing the Value Voters Summit in Washington D.C. last Friday.
We are stopping cold the attacks on Judeo-Christian values.
That’s what he said.
Attacks.
On Judeo-Christian values.
What does that mean?
No, stop. Think about it. What does that mean? How do you attack a value?
Seriously. How do you attack a value?
Look here: Values are defined as those principles we hold important in life.
How do you attack that?
Values are personal. We each determine for ourselves what is important. Values are your personal ethics, morals, your standards of behavior. Values are often, but not always, the ideals imposed on us by our environment, ways of thinking learned from various examples: our parents when we are young, leaders, public figures, community, law, teachers, friends, societal groups, and so on. Because everyone’s experience is different, our values are often different in varying degrees.
A man who views the world the same at fifty as he did at twenty has wasted thirty years of his life.
-- Muhammad Ali
Our values tend to change over time as our relationships and community and experience change and indeed if your worldview is the same at fifty as it was at twenty, well, like the man said, you might have wasted much of your life. But that doesn’t necessarily mean we get wiser. There’s nothing more enlightening than listening to a fifty-year-old conservative moral absolutist describe how he was once a liberal but his values changed when he [found Jesus, joined the NRA, became a Republican, etc] and that’s why moral relativism is evil.
But ask that same moral absolutist to provide a list of universal values, see what you get.
No, better yet, ask a room full of moral absolutists to provide a single list of human values, ordered by importance.
Then time how long it takes for the angry shouting to start.
Is there an agreed upon list of human values? Not Judeo-Christian values (we’ll get to that in a minute), just plain old ordinary every day human values?
Is there?
Quick, what are they? List them in order. What’s the most important value to you? Truth? Compassion? Strength? Altruism? Selflessness? Courage? Wait. Are those even recognized values?
Are they?
Are you sure?
Funny, isn’t it? Certain words we use. Words describe concepts. And we all think we know the definition of those concepts. Moreover, we assume that everybody else’s understanding of that concept is the same as ours.
But ask a hundred people to list the most important human values, and you’ll get a hundred different answers.
Because values are relative. Values are subjective.
I’m not the first person to notice this. Obviously. There are entire fields of study going all the way back to the great philosophers of Ancient Greece.
A lot of very smart people have devoted lifetimes of research into this very subject. One of those people, a social-psychologist named Shalom H. Schwartz, came up something called the Schwartz Theory of Basic Values. You can find a current and reasonably readable overview of Schwartz’s theory here, published by the The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Schwartz’s Theory of Basic Values has been around for a while and it’s commonly used by psychologists and sociologists and those who study ethics and human interaction as a starting point. Schwartz said that values are “beliefs linked inextricably to affect.” And what he meant was that values are tied to emotion and goals. For example, “People for whom independence is an important value become aroused if their independence is threatened, despair when they are helpless to protect it, and are happy when they can enjoy it.” This applies to nearly any value you can name – again in varying degrees depending individual circumstance. But it’s not something you can measure quantitatively.
Basically the theory says:
- Values are beliefs.
- Values refer to desirable goals that motivate action.
- Values transcend specific actions and situations.
- Values serve as standards or criteria.
- Values are ordered by importance.
- The relative values of multiple values guides action.
And I think that works as a general description of what a value is. But what are actual human values?
What would you list as human values?
Schwartz defines ten basic human values based on the criteria above:
- Self-Direction: independent thought and action--choosing, creating, exploring.
- Stimulation: excitement, novelty, and challenge in life.
- Hedonism: pleasure or sensuous gratification for oneself.
- Achievement: personal success through demonstrating competence according to social standards.
- Power: social status and prestige, control or dominance over people and resources.
- Security: safety, harmony, and stability of society, of relationships, and of self.
- Conformity: restraint of actions, inclinations, and impulses likely to upset or harm others and violate social expectations or norms.
- Tradition: respect, commitment, and acceptance of the customs and ideas that one's culture or religion provides.
- Benevolence: preserving and enhancing the welfare of those with whom one is in frequent personal contact (the ‘in-group’).
- Universalism: understanding, appreciation, tolerance, and protection for the welfare of all people and for nature.
Hedonism. Stimulation. Power. Conformity. When you were trying to think up a list of human values, unless you are a sociologist, you probably weren’t thinking in those terms, were you? But nearly any value you can name falls into one of those categories as described by Schwartz’s theory.
It matters.
Precision of language matters.
Because that language, the words we use, defines how we see the world around us. How we relate to each other. Words can build a society, or tear a civilization apart. Language is information. And information used as a weapon can bring a dictator to power, topple governments, start wars (or end them), or shape the worldview of a nation.
And I want you to remember that.
“We are stopping cold the attacks on Judeo-Christian values”
That’s what the most powerful man in the world said last Friday.
He was speaking to an audience made up largely of hardline conservative Evangelical Christians.
What does that audience think Trump meant by that statement? To them, to those particular people, what are Judeo-Christian Values?
Remember: Values are beliefs linked to emotion, values are ordered by importance, values motivate action towards particular goals.
Remember: Values tend to be personal, and thus relative.
Remember: Language defines concept. Terms matter.
Thus: for values to be shared, they have to be defined and we all must agree to the definition and its emotional importance. And ultimately, we must agree with the goals inherent to each value.
Also please note that when Trump said, “We are stopping cold the attacks on Judeo-Christian values,” he didn’t bother to define … anything.
He didn’t define “attack.”
He didn’t define who was doing the attacking.
And most importantly he didn’t define “Judeo-Christian values.”
And Donald Trump is not the only one.
Breitbart led off their article on the subject with,
President Donald Trump vowed to end leftist attacks on Christian values that threatened the United States.
President Trump vowed to end Leftist attacks on Christian values that threatened the United States?
Christian Values. That threatened the United States.
Wait a minute here.
Words matter. Let’s read that again.
… on Christian values that threatened the United States…
Yep, still says, Christian values have threatened the United States.
(On a side note, odd that Breitbart mysteriously dropped the Judeo part. It’s almost like their old Anti-Semite CEO is back. But again, I digress)
If Christian values threatened the United States, why would the President vow to end attacks on them? Shouldn’t all Americans attack these Christian values that threaten America? I mean…
What?
Oh.
Right. Okay. Sure. But again, precision of language matters. Particularly when we’re talking about somebody attacking the United States. As such, somebody needs to let Steven Bannon know his editors don’t understand basic sentence structure at even the sixth grade level. I’m just saying. For clarity’s sake. Given that it’s the lede and all. Right up front and ....
What?
Fine. Fine. Moving on.
So, if I’m reading confused Breitbart grammar correctly, the basic idea here is that certain undefined “leftists” are somehow in some manner “attacking” “Christian values.” And, given the context, an attack on Christian values is an attack on America.
But see, the problem here is that the article again doesn’t define (other than in vague terms) who is doing the attacking, why they are attacking, how they are attacking, and most importantly of all: exactly what Judeo-Christian values are. Nor does the article explain how Donald Trump might end these attacks.
We are all just supposed to know what those things are.
Values change.
Morality changes.
This is the nature of civilization.
Once upon a time in America, it was moral to own other people. The measure of a decent man was once determined by how he treated his property, his slaves.
Is that a value we respect nowadays?
Is that an American value we want to bring back?
Is that a Judeo-Christian value? After all, slavery and how you treat it is integral to both the Jewish and Christian holy books.
No?
No, I suppose not.
But how do you know? How do you know if the terms are never defined? Given recent violent demonstrations in places like Charlottesville by hardcore Christian conservative Trump supporters marching under the Swastika and the flag of the Confederacy, how can I know that slavery isn’t a Judeo-Christian value?
How do I know?
I mean, I assume that’s not what these conservatives mean, but how do I know?
If the terms are not defined?
Let me show you. Fox News, in a Special Report last Friday entitled: Eagle Scout: RIP Boy Scouts of America. You were great for 100 years, laments the destruction of the once venerable organization.
We all knew this was coming. The Boy Scouts of America stood for over a century on its strong foundation of Judeo-Christian values, growing boys into young men, and young men into leaders. However, in recent years the BSA has allowed cracks to form in that foundation.
There is it, Judeo-Christian values.
Undefined.
Unexplained.
Unspecific.
Nowhere in that article does the author list those supposed values. Don’t take my word for it, click on the link and go look for yourself. The article doesn’t describe in any way whatsoever the specific Judeo-Christian values that Lord Baden-Powell supposedly based the Boy Scouts on, nor does the author tell you which values they’ve supposedly discarded.
The author just assumes we all know what he means.
Because, of course, we are all Judeo-Christian in America, are we not?
And all Jews and Christians are the same, with the same worldview and outlook and values. Same as the author. Right?
Right?
With much handwringing and teeth-gnashing, the article goes on to bemoan the “incredibly disappointing news” that girls – girls – will not only be allowed to enter into Cub Scouts, but the BSA organization will soon create a scouting program for older girls – girls – to advance and earn Scouting’s highest rank of Eagle Scout. The author is outraged at the idea of stinky girls – girls – being allowed anywhere near Scouting. He rages against “inclusion” and the end of “manhood” and points out how “[i]t is important for boys and young men to grow together free from the distraction of girls.”
It is important for boys and men to grow together free from the distraction of girls.
It’s important.
For boys and men.
To grow together.
Free from the distraction of girls.
The article doesn’t bother to explain why it’s important for boys and men to grow together. In the woods. Alone. Though he does point out the danger of putting girls – girls – into the same situation:
I have to wonder why any parent would want their young teenage girls camping in the woods with young teenage boys?
(this is where I politely don’t provide links to literally thousands of Christian and Jewish church youth programs across America where boys and girls do exactly that)
The article ends with this:
This is what the Left does best: target and destroy everything good in America. They cannot compete with us on ideas, so they have to eliminate everything that makes us who we are. If they were truly motivated to provide girls, homosexuals, and “transgenders,” with the same experiences Boy Scouts provides, then they would form their own youth organization. But it isn’t really about that, is it? [sic]
So, is that it?
Are those Judeo-Christian values? Exclusion? Bigotry? Segregation of the sexes? So that boys and men might grow together, free from the “distraction” of stinky girls? Alone. In the woods.
Well, is it?
But why then call it Judeo-Christian? Why not call it Islamic-Judeo-Christian values, given that devout Muslim fundamentalists forbid mixing of the sexes.
Separation of the sexes isn’t a Judeo-Christian value you say?
Well then what is?
A guy named Michael Imhof wrote a letter to the editor of Madison Country Herald Bulletin, in Anderson City, Illinois.
It’s time to eliminate the Democratic Party. This is no longer the Democratic Party of the John F. Kennedy era. The Democratic Party has transitioned into the Marxist and Socialist Party of America.
Because apparently in this American’s mind, freedom is when the government dictates what political parties you can have. Because that’s totally not Marxist at all.
But here I am, digressing. Again.
Mr. Imhof spends a couple of paragraphs describing how everybody who isn’t just like him must certainly be an un-American commie socialist and then he gets to this:
The Democratic Party doesn’t care about the Judeo-Christian values of America, nor the Constitution. They’re the party of globalism, and they’re anti-American, anti-sovereignty. They use people and causes to promote the godless agenda of the global elitists.
There it is again. Judeo-Christian values of America.
Judeo-Christian values.
Undefined.
Unexplained.
The author just assumes we all know what he means.
Because, of course, we are all Judeo-Christians in America, are we not?
Imhof spends another paragraph describing how all liberals obviously must love Lenin, and then fetches up here:
Vote the Democrats and Republican In Name Only (RINO) Republicans out of office. Vote for candidates with tea party and Judeo-Christian values.
Tea Party and Judeo-Christian values.
Which would seem to indicate that in Imhof’s mind, those values are the same.
The Tea Party. Taxed enough already. I’ll keep my freedom, my money, and my guns, and you can keep the change. That Tea Party?
Is that it? Are those Judeo-Christian values? Isolationism? America first? Sovereignty? Teabagging for Jesus? Money and guns?
No?
Are you sure?
A few weeks ago, former White House hobo Steve Bannon went to Alabama to speak at a rally for Roy Moore – Alabama’s openly racist, homophobic, Christian-nationalist former Chief Justice. Moore was running for the Senate against Donald Trump favorite Luther Strange.
Moore has somewhat interesting interpretation of the First Amendment.
You have to understand it was the duty of the government under the First Amendment…to foster religion and foster Christianity
That’s what Moore told Vox reporter Jeff Stein in August of last year.
The First Amendment makes it the duty of the government to foster religion and specifically Christianity.
Got that?
I know. I know. You thought the First Amendment meant pretty much exactly the opposite. That’s why you’re not a judge in Alabama.
There’s more.
There’s so much more.
Roy Moore: There are communities under Sharia law right now in our country. Up in Illinois. Christian communities; I don’t know if they may be Muslim communities. But Sharia law is a little different from American law. It is founded on religious concepts.
Jeff Stein: Which American communities are under Sharia law? When did they fall under Sharia law?
Moore: Well, there’s Sharia law, as I understand it, in Illinois, Indiana — up there. I don't know.
Stein: That seems like an amazing claim for a Senate candidate to make.
Moore: Well, let me just put it this way — if they are, they are; if they’re not, they’re not. That doesn’t matter. Oklahoma tried passing a law restricting Sharia law, and it failed. Do you know about that?
No. No. Don’t roll your eyes, that’s not even close to the best part of Moore’s interview. Not even close. But I don’t want to spoil it for you. You can read the whole thing here – and remember, this guy was Alabama’s chief justice and he’s probably going to be one of the state’s senators when Alabamians go to the polls this December.
Moore was the leading voice of birtherism, he is rabidly homophobic and anti-Muslim, and he spends a lot of his time hanging out with neo-Confederates – you know, people who actually and openly hate America and parade about under the flag of America’s enemies. Moore’s fanatical religious ideology has prompted his critics to nickname him the “Ayatollah of Alabama.” And despite the fact that Moore’s repeated claim of communities living under Islamic Law in the United States has been repeatedly and soundly debunked (and Moore himself can produce no evidence whatsoever and essentially admits he doesn’t really know or care), he continues to push this falsehood.
So, I suppose it was unsurprising when Steve Bannon showed up in Alabama to stump for Roy Moore.
Judge Moore knows the Ten Commandments is the basis for the Judeo-Christian West. Judge Moore is a good man, he’s a courageous man, and more importantly he’s a righteous man.
And there it is again.
The Judeo-Christian West.
Judeo-Christian. Undefined. Unexplained. Except for some vague reference to the Christian’s Ten Commandments (which are apparently the solution to pretty much everything).
Steve Bannon just assumes everybody in the crowd knew what he meant.
And from the cheering, everybody in the crowd assumed that they did know what he meant and their definition and list of Judeo-Christian values was exactly the same as Roy Moore’s, Steve Bannon’s, and everybody else in the crowd. But, well, look at who was up on that stage. Are those Judeo-Christian values? Knowingly pushing falsehoods and conspiracy theories? Bigotry? Intolerance? Xenophobia? I mean, don’t take my word for it, look up Roy Moore for yourself (and Steve Bannon while you’re at it) and tell me which part of his career embodies Judeo-Christian values. Tell me what those are. Hell, it’s Alabama, maybe everybody in the crowd was on the same sheet of music. Maybe those are the values of Judeo-Christianity.
No?
But are you sure?
How do you know and can you prove it?
No?
Well, what then?
What are Judeo-Christian values?
Donald Trump seems to know:
We are stopping cold the attacks on Judeo-Christian values. They don't use the word Christmas because it is not politically correct. We're saying Merry Christmas again.
Is that it? Is that one of them? A Judeo-Christian value is saying Merry Christmas?
Jews for Christmas?
Really? I admit to being a little fuzzy on the finer points of Judaism, but I’m pretty sure that’s not how it works.
But, there it is. Judeo-Christian values again. That’s what the president said.
Undefined.
Unexplained.
And the crowd once again cheered.
I mean, we’re just supposed to know. Right?
That is the inherent assumption whenever this term appears. Otherwise, they’d explain what they meant. Trump was speaking to the Value Voters Summit, a convention of hardcore religious nuts hosted by the Family Research Council. They define all kinds of things from traditional marriage to what constitutes “life” to what makes a real American. But they don’t bother to define Judeo-Christian values before people like Trump take the stage. And they don’t ask people like Trump to define it either.
And that – that right there – tells you something important.
We’re all supposed to know.
How about this?
Dr. Richard Lee, who according to his bio, is the Founding Pastor of the Atlanta, Georgia, First Redeemer Church. He is also the Editor of The American Patriot’s Bible:
THE ONE BIBLE THAT SHOWS HOW ‘A LIGHT FROM ABOVE’ SHAPED OUR NATION. Never has a version of the Bible targeted the spiritual needs of those who love our country more than The American Patriot’s Bible. This extremely unique Bible shows how the history of the United States connects the people and events of the Bible to our lives in a modern world. The story of the United States is wonderfully woven into the teachings of the Bible and includes a beautiful full-color family record section, memorable images from our nation’s history and hundreds of enlightening articles which complement the historic King James Version Bible text.
Lee also authored God’s Promise to the American Patriot and The Coming Revolution, among other works.
So you figure, if anybody can describe Judeo-Christian values in detail, it’s got to be the guy who edited the Bible and slapped an American flag on it.
Right?
Right.
Lee says there are in fact seven Judeo-Christian values, or principles. To wit:
Principle #1: The Dignity Of Human Life
Lee cites Exodus 20:13 "You shall not murder” and Matthew 22:39 "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."
Oddly, he doesn’t reference Jewish text anywhere – and looking back I likewise see only a reference to the King James Bible in his book blurb. That seems an odd omission right out of the gate, Judeo-Christian values wise, I mean. But hey, I’m sure he’ll get to it. Eventually.
So, dignity of human life. No murder. Love your neighbor. Sounds reasonable. I mean it does, doesn’t it? Respect human life. Not really exclusive to just Jews and Christians though, is it? And I bet you can guess where he goes with it, can’t you?
Can’t you?
See, that bit about “murder,” that’s the kicker. That’s the weasel word. Thou shalt not murder, not kill, murder. Words matter. Language matters.
Abortion, of course, that’s what we’re talking about here. Murder, you know, that’s what guys like Lee call abortion. Murder. We’re good with other kinds of killing, war, the death penalty, letting people starve to death, so long as there’s no abortion.
And respect for the dignity of human life? The dignity of human life forsooth, well, that only goes so far.
As you will see.
Principle #2 - The Traditional Family
Again, a Christian reference: Genesis 2:21-24 "And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the LORD God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. And Adam said: "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man." Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh."
Lee says “The biblical view of marriage and family is the basis of our society and serves as the backbone of a healthy social order.”
So, the biblical view of marriage as defined by Genesis 2:21. Got it.
- God creates Adam artificially from non-living ingredients, i.e. mud. Essentially life in a lab.
- Then God makes Eve by taking a biological sample from Adam and genetically engineering it to produce a cross-sex clone (see the reference: bone of my bone, flesh of my flesh, taken out of a male, transformed into female. God could have created a completely new person from scratch, but he didn’t. Pretty clear what we’re talking about here).
- Adam then marries what is for all practical purposes his fraternal twin.
- Adam and Eve then proceed to break the law, become felons, and are exiled from civilization for their crimes.
- While on the run, they produce two sons – presumably without the assistance of artificial laboratory aids.
- At which point one of the sons murders the other – which may or may not have something to do with the fact that their parents were, genetically speaking, brother and sister.
- A few generations later, the world is populated with Adam and Eve’s descendants, which God wipes out because they are all insane murderers, rapists, drunkards, and deviants. And you’d think God would have seen this coming given the limited gene pool.
I gotta be honest with you, maybe this isn’t the best example.
Lee goes on to say, “Since the joining together of Adam and Eve, marriage has been defined as a holy union between one man and one woman.” Except, the very reference Lee uses, i.e. the Christian Bible, provides numerous examples of marriages that are not just one man and one woman.
Numerous.
Principle #3 - A National Work Ethic
Another reference to the Christian bible: 2 Thessalonians 3:10 "For even when we were with you, we commanded you this: If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat."
We didn’t even make it two values past “Dignity for Human Life” before we got to the part about why poor people should starve.
Also, how is a national ethic a personal Judeo-Christian value?
I’m going to speed this up and give you the last four without commentary.
Principle #4 - The Right To A God-Centered Education
Principle # 5- The Abrahamic Covenant
Principle #6 - Common Decency
Principle #7- Our Personal Accountability To God
You can read the whole thing for yourself here at Sermon Central. Again, note that Jewish text isn’t referenced – though I suppose Lee would weasel out by suggesting his Old Testament references apply. Still, seems that if you’re going to use the term Judeo-Christian, Jews should maybe get equal time. Just saying.
Well?
What do you think. Are those Judeo-Christian values?
Are those the Judeo-Christian values?
I suspect many people in Trump’s audience last Friday would agree that they are – even if they couldn’t name them off the cuff.
But … they can’t be.
Words matter. Language matters. Context matters.
“We are stopping cold the attacks on Judeo-Christian values”
Which of those values are under attack?
For those to be the values Trump was talking about, they’d have to be under attack. By definition. That’s what the man said. That’s what they all said.
So, show me a single Jew or Christian in America who was prevented from respecting the dignity of human life.
Go on. Do it. I’ll wait.
Show me any Jew or any Christian who was denied a traditional marriage license.
Show me any Jew, any Christian, who was prevented from working hard or was prevented from attending the religious school of their choice.
Show me a single Jew, a single Christian, who was prevented in any way from adhering to some supposed contract with their deity – a covenant, I note, that was specifically between the Jews and their God and nobody else, an agreement that Christians are apparently attempting to horn in on.
Show me a single Jew, a single Christian, who was attacked for Common Decency, right after you explain why one group of Christians gets to define what “common decency” means for all of us.
As to that last one, your personal accountability to your god, I would love to see Donald Trump explain how exactly anybody would go about waging an attack on that.
None of these values apply to the other examples either – though I admit to a chuckle at the thought of Lee attempting to explain to my Boy Scout troop how Adam married his Sister (I learned to drink and swear in the Boy Scouts, skills that served me well in the Navy. We would have gotten a good laugh at Adam’s expense. Alone. In the woods. Far from the distraction of girls).
I’m afraid I don’t buy it, even if Dr Lee did write his own bible.
No. After weeks of research, I don’t have any idea what those values are.
And I bet you don’t either.
So, I asked.
A quarter of a million people follow me every day across various social media platforms. Jews. Christians in various and assorted flavors. Muslims. Non-believers. Sort of believers. Atheists. Some that don’t fit well into any category. So, I asked. What are Judeo-Christian Values? What are they? Give me a list. It doesn’t even have to be exhaustive, just give me the top three.
Now, you’d think that a quarter of a million people could come up with something.
Three Judeo-Christian values. That’s all I’m asking.
Far and away the most common answer was: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. I got hundreds, thousands, of responses that said that. That’s THE Judeo-Christian value.
That one, right there.
The Golden Rule.
Apologies, but I can’t accept that.
Treating people decently is hardly a uniquely Judeo-Christian value and …
You again? What is it this time?
Oh, I see, you’re upset by the qualifier “unique.”
You feel that’s unfair. You think I should have specified that up front.
I did.
And I mentioned it up above, you should have seen it coming.
Language matters. Precision of language matters. Context matters. Judeo-Christian values. It’s right there in the label. And that specific label matters.
See, if we were just talking about values, human values, universal values, those values defined and enumerated by Schwartz up above, well, then you would have no need for the qualifier. Would you?
But there it is: Judeo-Christian values.
That’s what those examples up above were talking about.
President Donald Trump vowed to end leftist attacks on Christian values that threatened the United States
The Boy Scouts of America stood for over a century on its strong foundation of Judeo-Christian values […] This is what the Left does best: target and destroy everything good in America […] they have to eliminate everything that makes us who we are.
The Democratic Party doesn’t care about the Judeo-Christian values of America, nor the Constitution. They’re the party of globalism, and they’re anti-American, anti-sovereignty. They use people and causes to promote the godless agenda of the global elitists.
…The Ten Commandments [are] the basis for the Judeo-Christian West.
We are stopping cold the attacks on Judeo-Christian values. They don't use the word Christmas because it is not politically correct. We're saying Merry Christmas again.
Seven Principles of the Judeo-Christian Ethic
They were quite specific about it. Go back and look, follow the links, read those words in context. Look for your own examples. The people who use that term, Judeo-Christian, use it to highlight that those values are special, unique, and specifically foundational to the United States itself. This is clear from the context.
Just as those same people and media outlets define “American values” as uniquely American and by definition not something you’d find in any other country.
That’s what “exceptional” means.
And we are exceptional, America, are we not?
If these were universal values, human values, we wouldn’t have to caveat it.
This term, Judeo-Christian values is used purposely by conservatives to identify values specific to their religious and their political ideology.
But more importantly the term Judeo-Christian directly and deliberately excludes all other political and religious beliefs – and this is the point where I remind you that the people who use this term are also the people who daily denounce multiculturalism and diversity, racial mixing, cultural dilution, and often going so far as to insist that everybody speak the same language. So, by definition, by context, by omission, when these people say Judeo-Christian values, they mean values that are exclusive to their ideology and that specifically exclude all others – which is why you don’t see these values labelled Judeo-Christian-Islamic values, or even just referred as American values, or human values.
The exclusion is on purpose.
So, when I asked the question, I set specific limits on the answers. Because when you say that your values are unique – and moreover, that uniqueness specifically makes you better, exceptional, correct, righteous – but when asked to describe that uniqueness, you proceed instead to describe the same values that can be found universally and that are not in any way exclusive to your political party or religion or nation, well, then you’re full of shit.
So if you insist on using the term “Judeo-Christian” to identify your values as superior to others, then I will require you to show your work.
And so I set limits on the question.
- The value must be uniquely Judeo-Christian, it cannot be common to any other value system, secular or non-secular
- The value, whatever it is, must be common to both Jewish and Christian belief systems, i.e. it must be Judeo-Christian.
- Be specific. Show your work. Don't make vague hand-waving pronouncements.
And out of a thousand answers, from Christians, from Jews, Muslims, atheists, agonistics, from Rabbis, from Preachers and Shit Shakers and Holy Rollers, I got … nothing.
No definitive answer, not even a vague answer.
I got bible quotes and guesses and a lot of sarcasm and a bunch of hand waving. I got links to Wikipedia articles – an article, I’m at pains to point out, which does not in any way provide any kind of definitive list of Judeo-Christian values.
I would like to note that I got a polite and reasoned discussion among thousands of people on my various Facebook pages, which is either a testament to the personal values of those particular people or a testament to my screening criteria. Maybe both.
But for a list of values that we’re all just supposed to know, that we all assume everybody else knows, that our leaders insist are the very basis of our country, well, there’s absolutely no consensus at all.
None.
Many responders threw their hands up in the air and said given the limits I placed on the question, an answer was impossible. Some of them got angry about it. One person left the Stonekettle Station Facebook Group in outrage, thinking that I was mocking her religious beliefs because she could not answer the question as asked.
But…
Words matter.
Definitions matter.
Concepts matter.
Precision matters.
Because that language, the words we use, defines how we see the world around us. How we relate to each other. Words can build a society, or tear a civilization apart. Language is information. And information used as a weapon can bring a dictator to power, topple governments, start wars (or end them), or shape the worldview of a nation.
When the president of the United States tells Americans that their values – their Judeo-Christian values – are under attack, it matters.
The limits matter. Because these are the conditions set by those who would use their values as a weapon. As a club. As a flail. As a cudgel to beat the rest of us about the head and shoulders.
These are the conditions set by those who would claim that their values are exceptional and thus should be the values of the nation and us all. By force, if necessary -- even if they themselves are unable to detail exactly what those values actually are.
These are the limits set by those who would use some imagined martyrdom to justify theocracy and fascism and to put their boot on our throats.
And so I asked.
But the answer, given the limitations placed on the definition by those who use the term, is impossible.
And that – that right there – was the point.
One thing I didn't understand in life was that I had $100,000,000 in the bank and I couldn't buy happiness. I had everything: mansions, yachts, Ferraris, Lamborghinis, but I was depressed. I didn't know where I fitted in. But then I found family and friends and I learned the value of life.
-- Vanilla Ice
