Ban More Books!

With Tolkien-esque providence, I stumbled across this article only a few days after having a similar conversation with some friends. The article's parting shot hits upon an important principle in the discussion:

If you want to fight some perceived cultural barrage against conservative, Christian values, then write your own creative children's story or exciting, best-selling novel that teaches good morals. Don't try to censor and censure the rest.

I realize this author is a junior polital science major, but welcome to Relativism 101. The author sets the starting point of any discussion at all ideas being presented as equal, with public opinion determining what is right. If you don't like a book, then write another one; present them both equally, without saying anything negative about the other, then see which one is better received. To me, this is the end of the debate.

Imagine a debate between a relativist and an individual who believes in absolute truth. The absolutist(?) argues that a certain position is right and anything contrary is wrong. The relativist states that the absolutist can not say this because in order to have an informed discussion, we must have access to all information to decide what feels right for each of us individually. If the absolutist concedes, then the relativist wins, because even if the absolutist convinces the relativist of whatever point is in contention, the resulting sentiment would be, "I agree with you and I think that this is right, but who am to tell anyone else my opinion if they feel differently." And we have ended the discussion squarely rooted in relativism.

If one cannot criticize and censor that which does not comport to the truth, then the lie has conquered. Finally, in an effort to keep Chesterton in as many posts as possible, this GKC quote seems like the right place to end the post:

"Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions."