Morals, old and new

[felis_ultharus]

Among whom principally to challenge [the value of poetry], step forth the moral philosophers; whom ; whom, methinks, I see coming toward me with a sullen gravity..., rudely clothed, for to witness outwardly their contempt for outward things, with books in their hands against glory, whereto they set their names; sophistically against subtlety, and angry with any man in whom they see the foul fault of anger.
-- A Defence of Poesy, Sir Philip Sidney, written in 1583

So I'm plugging away, trying to get myself out of the late 16th century before the month ends. I still have Marlowe, Ben Jonson, and Shakespeare to cover before I reach the 17th.

(Fortunately, there's very little to cover in the 17th, especially since the Cavalier Poets have gotten short shrift on the reading list. It's basically just Donne, Milton, and Pope holding the fort -- I guess people were too busy fighting, what with the Civil War and the Commonwealth and so on.)

Meanwhile, here in the 21st century, Montreal played host to an international conference that brought activists together from six continents to trade information, run workshops, and hammer out a statement -- the Montreal Declaration -- that will be presented to the UN. The goal is to have the UN take LGBT equality as seriously as anything in the UN Declaration of Human Rights (also written in Canada).

And this will be difficult not only because a lot of countries are run by extremist bigots. And because even many of those that aren't are dangerously infected with absolute moral relativism (Postmodernism's most vile and disgusting spawn), which is proving a very popular philosophy with those politicians who don't want to be bothered with such messy things as fundamental human dignity.