Two great European narcotics, alcohol and Christianity

Kevin Drum links to a Gallup poll about the moral acceptability of various behaviors or practices.  He comments that there are only four things on the list he finds unacceptable.  Is he just a relativist?  Here’s the list and percentages:

The things I consider morally wrong are: fur, animal testing, the death penalty, and affairs.  But that’s a bit of a strange way to think about it, actually.  Because ‘morally wrong’ doesn’t necessarily mean there’s a strong interest in regulating them.  Affairs are immoral, but millions of people have them and, of course, they shouldn’t be illegal.  Animal testing is immoral, in my opinion, but there’s also obviously a strong moral argument FOR it.  So even though I think it’s immoral, I think there are certainly cases where it’s justifiable.  Fur is pretty indefensible in my mind (at least when it’s purely a matter of fashion), but again is not something that I expect the state to regulate anytime soon.  The death penalty is really the only unequivocal ‘no’ on there.

For the yeses, there are plenty of things that I think deserve serious regulation.  Which means ‘morally acceptable’ need not correspond all that closely to ‘socially advantageous.’  Things like gambling, porn, cloning, and polygamy all have issues.  But they’re not immoral on face.  They may be a serious problem in certain contexts but may be a social good in others.  And then there’s abortion, where the act in a vacuum might be morally difficult, but having ACCESS to abortion is a clear moral necessity.

The lesson I draw from this is that ‘morality’ is a weird concept.  It meshes somewhat with law, concepts of the social good, beliefs about a virtuous life, and squeamishness. Basically, trying to use the information from this poll to draw conclusions about culture and politics is a sketchy proposition at best.  How people answer probably reveals more about their conception of the concept ‘morality’ than anything else.