America’s heart broke last week. The crack began in a small Texas town and has spread across a country which is already fragmented with strife. Yet another memorial has been erected. Yet more people weep and are enraged. More empty chairs haunt families, more fingers point, more voices pontificate, more “leaders” feign care and exploit outrage to further their political ambitions. Yet again tortured people lay awake at night desperate to wake and find it all a nightmare, desperate to go back in time, desperate to make different choices, desperate to make sense of that which seems senseless. But the clear reality is that the murders that took place in Uvalde and the thousands that proceeded it across the country are not senseless, nor are they unexpected. They are the natural, albeit horrific, manifestations of two cold, simple, incontrovertible facts: truth and character matter.
The concept of absolute truth has not only gone out of fashion, but is considered contemptible and intolerant. We declare that truth is customizable and is synonymous with “preference.” We customize our truth like we do our coffee, homes and cars. We venerate the concept of “personal truth” and proclaim it “freedom”. Past generations understood freedom to mean the ability to speak and act and take responsibility for one’s own life and choices without the interference of kings or dictators. We understand truth as personal and by no means absolute. We understand freedom not only as the right to live in a manner consistent with our custom truth, but also the right to require others to honor and embrace it. The highest evil is questioning or denying the “truths” of others. Authority is not recognized if it contradicts our will. We consider it our sovereign right to disregard the rights of others.
Salvador Ramos is only guilty of doing what we have taught him to do. He constructed his own truth and acted upon it. His truth dictated that two fourth grade teachers and nineteen children deserved to die. To be consistent with our cultural values, rather than be derided for “following orders” and sitting by while Ramos shot the teachers and children, should we not instead praise the police for respecting his “choices”?
If you find that sentiment outrageous, why? If personal choice is the ultimate good, and authority is an oppressive social construct, who are we to judge if someone wants to murder other people if that his or her desire? If you protest that it is not “fair” or “just” to the teachers or the children or their families, are you not imposing your beliefs and standards upon others? Didn’t Ramos have an absolute right to his beliefs and choices? Why should he have subjected himself to authority that contradicted his will?
If you believe Ramos’ actions were reasonable, then you are a monster. If you do not believe they were reasonable, then you have encountered the iceberg of truth. When confronted with evil, humans invariably and incessantly focus on concrete variables they consider “controllable.” For example, many people rivet on certain instruments of death as if by controlling them we will somehow control evil. Would these murders be more acceptable and palatable if Ramos had stabbed the teachers and children? Or strangled them? Or blown them up? Or poisoned them? Or drowned them? Or run them over with vehicles, beat them to death, or set fire to them? While it is true that these methods vary in their ease and economy of scale, the common denominator is the motivation to murder. The typical, opportunistic screeching for “better laws” began before the bodies were cold. But laws are effective only if people will honor the laws. Laws rely on respect for authority. Respect for authority originates in character. Character is rooted in our concept of truth. If we do not agree on truth, then our character will not allow us to honor or abide by laws. The true issue is character.
Our character is defined by what we value and believe to be true. If we believe that our will and desires are more important than those of others, we will seek to dominate, exploit, intimidate, suppress and yes, even murder anyone who dares contradict our “personal truth.” Our culture used to couple personal freedom with personal responsibility, but personal responsibility has been jettisoned in favor of enshrining “personal choice.” Ramos is the poster child of our cultural values: he purchased and aimed the gun, but we taught him to pull the trigger. Evil people create and approve such a culture: we are those evil people. The only shred of hope that remains for us is that dead children and grieving people somehow still touch us for a few days, so perhaps we can still change.
But how would we change? The answer is simple but uncomfortable. Change would require us to agree on the definition and application of objective truth. It would require subjugating our personal wills to the greater good. The simplest statement of truth that would transform our diseased, dysfunctional society into a culture of hope and justice is this: “do unto others as you would have others do unto you and love your neighbor as yourself.” How different would our country be if we pledged to abide by this single simple truth? Although this is a biblical concept, it is not necessary to believe in God to live by it. It is a simple and transcendent truth that could provide a foothold for us if we ever truly desire to escape the pit that we have dug for ourselves.