The Absolute Rule of WHATEVER:

Something To Think About, WHATEVER:

Roger Olson uses a word near the end of his excellent commentary on today's American culture--"anomie,"  A simple definition I found for the word is: "lack of the usual social or ethical standards in an individual or group."  I tend to agree with Olson.  Some of our culture is already there; much of the rest appears to be following.  We are rejecting any norms that go beyond personal interests and desires, which leaves only personal interests and desires, and leads to the one standard that appears to be rising to absolute dominance in our public behavior and discourse--whatever.   Whatever your decisions and desires, whatever lifestyle choices you make, I should respect those.  Not only should I tolerate them, I need to embrace them.  It is the absolute standard of Whatever.   There is one caveat to the rule of Whatever.  No one should do anything that hurts anyone else.  But even this amendment has been severely narrowed for those who find Whatever to be a rule of life that is lacking.  In broad terms, personal freedom, and opportunity for individual expression trumps all broader societal concerns.  In the world of Whatever when one side of an argument is "This is what I want."  and the other side is, "This is where these personal decisions will lead."  the now and personal will always win.  It's like the old playground basketball standard, "No blood, no foul."  Unless it can be clearly demonstrated that one person choosing Whatever, will bring clear and immediate harm to another--and violated religious standards don't count--then the Whatever choice should stand. Olson raises the question of whether such a social order can stand. But since that question cannot point to any blood on the pavement, SCOW (the Supreme Court of Whatever) declares that the objection has no standing.  The Main Street Journal, in a recent one-word op-ed piece summed it up well: WHATEVER! Again, I refer you to Roger Olson's excellent article. It's STTA.