Could the fall of morals from the 1960s to now have been avoided?

[timothyu]

Interesting claim, what makes you think there has been a freefall of morality? I'm currently reading, "The Better Angels of Our Nature" by Steven Pinker and evidence points to this being the least violent, least oppressive time in human history.

Yet since e the early 90's with the fall of the cold war looming, plans were put in place to destabilize nations in on going wars we see today that are far from over. War has become once again a profitable industry for the military-industrial complex. "least oppressive time" indeed. I guess that means only at home.

 

[Sparagmos]

Do you think the relative freefall of morality that started around the 1960s could have been avoided? How in what kind of way?

I also don't believe we should go back to before the 1960s in all ways, but I believe the traditionalists and conservatives have a point sometimes.

I think we are far more moral than we were in the 60’s. The treatment of blacks then was horrendous, and women were discouraged and/or prohibited from career advancement. Violent crime has been decreasing for years. We have better protections in the workplace. Sexual harassment isn’t just part of any job like it was when I entered the workforce years ago.

 

[timothyu]

I think we are far more moral than we were in the 60’s. The treatment of blacks then was horrendous, and women were discouraged and/or prohibited from career advancement.

You forgot discrimination against anyone without a bean shave. ( of course oddly 30 yrs later a shaved head was 'in' for those whose ego was suffering from balding)

 

[ViaCrucis]

Do you think the relative freefall of morality that started around the 1960s could have been avoided? How in what kind of way?

I also don't believe we should go back to before the 1960s in all ways, but I believe the traditionalists and conservatives have a point sometimes.

I would disagree with the assumption that things were "more moral" prior to the 1960's than today.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Chesterton]

If immoral people knew about that, why couldn't moral people? Why do only immoral people get to be in those fields? That's another crazy thing I think isn't fair.

I have a theory that it's because we were too willing to turn the other cheek and be non-agressive.

I agree, there needed to be people with more backbone to resist. But I think there's also the fact that decent people didn't realize the extent to which a culture war was beginning. Decent people don't think in terms of fighting for power on a daily basis. It was kind of like getting sucker punched when you're not expecting it.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Drugs came into America via the Vietnam war. This is where innocence started to diminish.

Except not. "Drugs" existed well before Vietnam.

What we did see in the Vietnam era was an American government that didn't take seriously the sending of America's children off to a meaningless war and the resulting mental trauma which led to many turning toward substance abuse to self-medicate their problems away.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[timothyu]

I agree, there needed to be people with more backbone to resist. But I think there's also the fact that decent people didn't realize the extent to which a culture war was beginning. Decent people don't think in terms of fighting for power on a daily basis. It was kind of like getting sucker punched when you're not expecting it.

The recent decades and especially the internet have given voice to the minorities, giving them the appearance of being larger than they actually are. Before that time the lines were clearly drawn in numbers, whether for right or wrong. Whether we should all be acting as one (even though we are al human) is a matter of speculation. The results of Babel gave God's view on like thinking.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Except not. "Drugs" existed well before Vietnam.

What we did see in the Vietnam era was an American government that didn't take seriously the sending of America's children off to a meaningless war and the resulting mental trauma which led to many turning toward substance abuse to self-medicate their problems away.

-CryptoLutheran

Story Map Cascade

 

[hedrick]

Story Map Cascade

[note: this was a story about drugs among US military in Vietnam]

A note on this story: One of the contributing factors to the overprescription of opioids was the impression a lot of people had that when soldiers returned from Vietnam, they generally didn't continue drug use here. That led to an impression that addiction was a less serious problem than it actually is.

I can understand why drug use would come up in a discussion on morals, but it's not always, and maybe even not normally, primarily a moral issue. Much of the opioid problem started out with legitimate prescriptions. We now know in retrospect that there was too little concern about addiction resulting from prescription use, too little monitoring of use, and not enough resources available to deal with the resulting problems. There was also a misunderstanding of the advantages and disadvantages of various categories of pain treatments.

 

[timothyu]

Much of the opioid problem started out with legitimate prescriptions.

There were more stoned housewives in the day than youth compliments of prescription drugs, even made famous in 'mother's little helper'. Even 'bennies' (speed) was common in the trucking industry and as a diet pill. More harmful then the two-three common street drugs of the day but of course legal because pharmaceuticals held the monopoly.

 

[stevevw]

Do you think the relative freefall of morality that started around the 1960s could have been avoided? How in what kind of way?

I also don't believe we should go back to before the 1960s in all ways, but I believe the traditionalists and conservatives have a point sometimes.

I think it was inevitable with the age of enlightenment. This has led to modernism which ironically rejected enlightenment but also religious belief. This has also led to postmodernism where people have become skeptical and everything is relative and subjective. But I think as a result religious belief is one of the big casualties because overall there is still a tendency towards atheism and materialism.

 

[jayem]

I would disagree with the assumption that things were "more moral" prior to the 1960's than today.

-CryptoLutheran

Absolutely. The "good old days," for the most part, never really were. Any unbiased study of history will confirm that. A few examples: I have an antique medical textbook from 1902. It's over 700 pages. A quarter of the book is devoted to discussing the various manifestations of syphilis that were extremely common in the pre-antibiotic days. Like syphilitic lesions in the lungs, eyes, and skeleton. Which hardly ever occur today. It was estimated that at least 10% of the American population was infected. That's a far higher prevalence than was ever seen with HIV. And that doesn't include countless people infected with gonorrhea, and all the other STI's like chlamydia, herpes, trichomoniasis, HPV, hepatitis C, and others that weren't yet recognized. The high prevalence of syphilis was why many states required premarital blood tests in an attempt to prevent congenital syphilis. Sexuality in popular entertainment may not have been as open as it is now, but inappropriate contentographic literature and artwork had been widely available for 100s of years. It's been said that Ben Franklin had an extensive collection of erotica. Prostitution was rampant. Brothels were present in most every city of any size. And in some places were fully legal. The "Blue Books" published in New Orleans were guides to the working girls, and brothels in the Storyville district in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Divorce may have been harder to get. But it wasn't unusual for men (and sometimes women) to just abandon their families, especially during hard times. Abortion was secretive, and often dangerous. But the abandonment of newborns was common enough that many larger cities had "foundling hospitals." Where babies lucky enough to be discovered before dying of exposure were taken for care. (Child abandonment typically increased during economic downturns. Boom and bust cycles were fairly common before monetary policy was regulated by the Fed.) There may not have been gay rights demonstrations. But in the 1920s, several thousand Ku Klux Klansmen marched in Washington, DC.

An objective study of history clearly indicates that on balance, we are no less moral today than we ever were. Moral values have changed. As they always have done, and always will do.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Absolutely. The "good old days," for the most part, never really were. Any unbiased study of history will confirm that. A few examples: I have an antique medical textbook from 1902. It's over 700 pages. A quarter of the book is devoted to discussing the various manifestations of syphilis that were extremely common in the pre-antibiotic days. Like syphilitic lesions in the lungs, eyes, and skeleton. Which hardly ever occur today. It was estimated that at least 10% of the American population was infected. That's a far higher prevalence than was ever seen with HIV. And that doesn't include countless people infected with gonorrhea, and all the other STI's like chlamydia, herpes, trichomoniasis, HPV, hepatitis C, and others that weren't yet recognized. The high prevalence of syphilis was why many states required premarital blood tests in an attempt to prevent congenital syphilis. Sexuality in popular entertainment may not have been as open as it is now, but inappropriate contentographic literature and artwork had been widely available for 100s of years. It's been said that Ben Franklin had an extensive collection of erotica. Prostitution was rampant. Brothels were present in most every city of any size. And in some places were fully legal. The "Blue Books" published in New Orleans were guides to the working girls, and brothels in the Storyville district in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Divorce may have been harder to get. But it wasn't unusual for men (and sometimes women) to just abandon their families, especially during hard times. Abortion was secretive, and often dangerous. But the abandonment of newborns was common enough that many larger cities had "foundling hospitals." Where babies lucky enough to be discovered before dying of exposure were taken for care. (Child abandonment typically increased during economic downturns. Boom and bust cycles were fairly common before monetary policy was regulated by the Fed.) There may not have been gay rights demonstrations. But in the 1920s, several thousand Ku Klux Klansmen marched in Washington, DC.

View attachment 260630

An objective study of history clearly indicates that on balance, we are no less moral today than we ever were. Moral values have changed. As they always have done, and always will do.

One of my favorite things is looking at ancient people deriding the "loose morals" of the time, or talking about how the youth of "today" are so bad but "back in my day". These kinds of statements can be found going back literally thousands of years.

"The indecent foreign dance called the Waltz was introduced ... at the English Court on Friday last ... It is quite sufficient to cast one's eyes on the voluptuous intertwining of the limbs, and close compressure of the bodies ... to see that it is far indeed removed from the modest reserve which has hitherto been considered distinctive of English females...[Now that it is] forced on the respectable classes of society by the evil example of their superiors, we feel it a duty to warn every parent against exposing his daughter to so fatal a contagion." - The London Times, 1816

"...I find by sad Experience how the Towns and Streets are filled with lewd wicked Children, and many Children as they have played about the Streets have been heard to curse and swear and call one another Nick-names, and it would grieve ones Heart to hear what bawdy and filthy Communications proceeds from the Mouths of such..." - Robert Russel, 1695

"The young people of today think of nothing but themselves. They have no respect for their parents or old age. They are impatient of all restraint. They talk as if they alone know everything and what passes for wisdom in us foolishness in them. As for the girls, they are foolish and immodest and unwomanly in speech, behavior, and dress." - Peter the Hermit, 11th century

"Our young men have grown slothful. There is not a single honorable occupation for which they will toil night and day. They sing and dance and grow effeminate and curl their hair and learn womanish tricks of speech; they are as languid as women and deck themselves out with unbecoming ornaments. Without strength, without energy, they add nothing during life to the gifts with which they were born — then they complain of their lot." - Seneca, 1st century

"I see no hope for the future of our people if they are dependent on frivolous youth of today, for certainly all youth are reckless beyond words. When I was young, we were taught to be discreet and respectful of elders, but the present youth are exceedingly disrespectful and impatient of restraint." - Hesiod, 8th century BC

"Our Earth is degenerate in these later days; there are signs that the world is speedily coming to an end; bribery and corruption are common; children no longer obey their parents; every man wants to write a book and the end of the world is evidently approaching." - Assyrian clay tablet, ~2800 BC

-CryptoLutheran

 

[timothyu]

 

[Hazelelponi]

Well, if the church had any standards, we might use those.

God is the standard.

 

[CharismaticLady]

Madalyn Murray O'Hair (née Mays; April 13, 1919 – September 29, 1995)[1] was an American activist supporting atheism and separation of church and state. In 1963 she founded American Atheists and served as its president to 1986, after which her son Jon Garth Murray succeeded her. She created the first issues of American Atheist Magazine.

O'Hair is best known for the Murray v. Curlett lawsuit, which challenged the policy of mandatory prayers and Bible reading in Baltimore public schools, in which she named her first son William J. Murray as plaintiff. Consolidated with Abington School District v. Schempp (1963), it was heard by the United States Supreme Court, which ruled that official Bible-reading in American public schools was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court had prohibited officially sponsored prayer in schools in Engel v. Vitale (1962) on similar grounds. Through American Atheists, O'Hair filed numerous other suits on issues of separation of church and state.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Do you think the relative freefall of morality that started around the 1960s could have been avoided? How in what kind of way?

I also don't believe we should go back to before the 1960s in all ways, but I believe the traditionalists and conservatives have a point sometimes.

I was born in the late 60's so I've never known any different - I have no romantic notions of my youth to pull from, but I do think there's been a decline in morals that seems commiserate with the rise of atheism and the removal of religious practices like prayer from the public sphere.

It's possible that we are looking at history a little too romantically, but this country has always been predominantly Christian, and in my lifetime that has changed drastically, to where Christianity is now the minority.

I absolutely disagree with the church mixing with the state, or forcing non-believers at heart, to follow the edicts of the church at large because then you have to decide which church rules and remove people's freedom and the whole thing becomes a satanic institution, and not Godly - and on the news (if not closer) everyone's seen how that plays out elsewhere, (In other faiths) and not here is definitely my mantra where that is concerned.

Here's the deal though. Having a predominately Christian nation that was free has been a net benefit for the world, to the world. Horrible government systems have been dismantled due to the existence of America, and the power of her size. Also, people in danger have had a place of safety to flee.

We are the only ones who could have stood against the dictators of this age, and none of us can even imagine a world where those dictators weren't defeated.

We've also made some mistakes as well, although nationally I think we do learn from them, and repent.

But now we are the minority, and I see that we are, and that will affect us going forward as a nation, perhaps even drastically as it could allow for the rise of some pretty horrible things.

But what caused it.. I don't really know. It may be as simple as God's true people pulled back from prayer and we didn't realize it nationally... but something changed... Maybe we had a few like Lot and his family here praying and they died on us..

I'm not even sure we can speculate. I think all we can do, is work on changing our hearts, and if not already doing it, put on sackcloth and ashes and repent, fast and pray..

We have to focus on what's before us, and do what God would have us do with a pure heart.. and trust Him.

 

[KCfromNC]

Madalyn Murray O'Hair (née Mays; April 13, 1919 – September 29, 1995)[1] was an American activist supporting atheism and separation of church and state. In 1963 she founded American Atheists and served as its president to 1986, after which her son Jon Garth Murray succeeded her. She created the first issues of American Atheist Magazine.

O'Hair is best known for the Murray v. Curlett lawsuit, which challenged the policy of mandatory prayers and Bible reading in Baltimore public schools, in which she named her first son William J. Murray as plaintiff. Consolidated with Abington School District v. Schempp (1963), it was heard by the United States Supreme Court, which ruled that official Bible-reading in American public schools was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court had prohibited officially sponsored prayer in schools in Engel v. Vitale (1962) on similar grounds. Through American Atheists, O'Hair filed numerous other suits on issues of separation of church and state.

Yep, another example of morality improving. I'm still not sure exactly what the OP is referring to.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Yep, another example of morality improving. I'm still not sure exactly what the OP is referring to.

Making it illegal to read the Bible and pray in school is NOT an improvement in morals.

It's what likely began the decline in the country, as the overal decline began at that same time period.

I'm coming from a more non-Christian viewpoint, because I've not been saved very long..

But, for most people's in this country reading a Bible verse that says to honor mother or father or that there's a God who loves us and will forgive us isn't harmful to society, and it's not specifically immoral.

If no one is forcing you to follow the edicts thereof, or asking you to do more than bow your heads for a minute of quiet while others pray, there's nothing wrong with it, even if it happens in school.

Voddie Baucham did a sermon on the difference between secular humanism versus the Supremacy of Christ and Truth and what kind of an impact secular humanism actually has on society or youth.. it's actually good to sit and listen to

 

[KCfromNC]

Making it illegal to read the Bible and pray in school is NOT an improvement in morals.

Maybe, maybe not. But it's kind of irrelevant since it didn't happen.

It's what likely began the decline in the country, as the overal decline began at that same time period.

Ignoring the problem of it not actually happening, your fallacy is Logical Fallacies » Post Hoc Fallacy