by Rev Dr Doe West
I was reflecting on Kathie MM’s post on “You don’t have to be Martin Luther King Jr.” (to be morally engaged). As she explained in an earlier post, “Moral engagement requires moral courage–that is, a commitment to behaving morally in regards to others despite social pressures to participate in or passively comply with policies and actions that are hurtful to others.”
The concept of moral engagement was one that drew me to my work as a social justice activist. My initial belief was that moral engagement was readily achievable and I just needed to be a good student and learn about it so I could function consistently as a morally engaged person!
Then I learned about ‘dual process theory’ concerning human moral judgment—a theory holding that humans have both emotion-based and rationality-based cognitive subsystems that compete in a manner that would, in essence, thwart any attempts at consistent moral engagement. Of course, I was morally indignant at that idea. Then I sat down and thought through all the forces that make it easier to morally disengage (by separating moral beliefs from conduct so we don’t have to sustain self-condemnation when we’re hurtful to others) than to morally engage, which constantly calls for moral courage.
Being a social justice activist does require moral courage. It requires faithfully looking for opportunities to do good even when hatred, prejudice, and violence dominate the headlines. It means opening your heart to the suffering of others, and endeavoring to reach out even when dealing with the inevitable pain and suffering that attacks all of us at times.
I believe fervently that in a democracy, moral engagement presses us to get out the vote–and more than that. It presses us to look for, support, and promote candidates who have the potential for moral engagement themselves if they have the backing of enough people striving for peace and social justice. Be one. Please.