The news shows have been talking a lot about the fact that “moral values” ranked at the top of the reasons why people voted for George Bush. This could lead into a discussion of, “What exactly are moral values?” Because some liberals will argue that they voted against George Bush on the basis of their “moral values,” and they will try to add moral significance to liberal stands. It’s not so difficult to impart morality to environmental concerns, anti-war views, and civil rights concerns. But I can foresee some liberals trying to make a moral view out of a woman’s right to choose abortion, a gay couple’s right to marry and thereby proclaim lifetime fidelity to each other, tolerance for alternative lifestyles, the search for cures for disease through stem-cell research, and other issues.

When you have opposing definitions of “morality,” you must then head into a discussion of moral absolutes. Because if one side claims abortion is wrong and another claims it’s okay, and both craft their views in terms of morality—then something has to give. You must ask, “Is there a moral absolute at play here, which would then veto one or the other view?” And it’s hard to find a basis for moral absolutes apart from the Bible.

So, it might get interesting. It might also get ludicrous, as you have secular (non-religious) commentators debating the meaning of morality and trying to explain why people voted as they did. I caught a glimpse of that last night on one of the channels: some guy was talking about moral values, but it was clear that he didn’t understand it the same way people in the fly-over, red states understand it--people with deep Christian convictions.