Few things are as fraught with risk as the topic of morality.
We all seem to agree that a distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior is necessary.
But determining what those limits are can be a source of friction.
One thing is clear, moral clarity isn’t limited to any particular group or class of society.
Even inmates in prison have a strict moral code of sorts where the abusers of children are viewed as having crossed the line.
Much of the conflict we see culturally over issues of morality stems from the shift away from personal morality to positional morality.
As Robin Koerner puts it, personal morality is what constrains our own thoughts, speech and actions.
Positional morality, on the other hand, is concerned with regulating the views, speech and actions of others.
Personal morality respects the moral agency of others to peacefully make their own choices.
Positional morality denies or discourages that agency by coercing compliance with its positions.
For something to be moral or virtuous, it must be freely chosen as a matter of conscience.
This requires us to treat others as we would want to be treated and to show our integrity by example in how we live.
Coercing others into compliance with our standards is not the same thing as being a moral person.
That’s something that requires living with individual integrity.
Moral courage is the essential quality that allows us to live by personal rather than positional morality.
Two Types of Morality