Jan. 10 at 11:22am
Lately I've seen a lot of the term sanctimony. Over at Ricochet, a site dedicated to "center/right" conversation, I've been involved in a number of knock-down, drag-out debates about same sex marriage, wherein I am routinely dubbed "sanctimonious" for defending the permanent, pro-creative bond of a man and woman in marriage as indispensable to the common good.
The other day a facebook friend (Colin, how could you?) called Rick Santorum "a sanctimonious toad." I can't understand that. Is he deemed sanctimonious for defending life and marriage? I don't see him preening. To me his attitude toward his own family life is one of manifest gratitude, not smugness.
Is defending the objectivity of moral values in and of itself sanctimonious?
I'm afraid we are taking cues from relativists. We are too concerned about coming across as prudish, uptight, sanctimonious. As a result, we don't fight openly for imperiled moral values. We don't even defend those who do. We pile on with the liberals assaults and make ourselves enables of our own societal undoing.