New York state just passed and signed into law the right of homosexuals to marry....aka; gay marriage.
Governor Andrew Cuomo's speech used the term "social justice.".
I have heard this term of social justice attached to political/religious agendas,radio commentators, political speeches, and still am not so sure what it means....what does social justice really mean? Who benifits, if at all, from social justice? Is there really such a thing? Can we achieve social justice even though we are all of different skills, talents, and abilities?
So I did what many of us do......a Google of the term "social justice". Here is a bit of what I found (About 112,000,000 results (0.09 seconds), with sources.
than may currently exist in some societies, and to manufacture equality of outcome in cases where incidental inequalities appear
established only if it is based upon social justice."
The far left would argue that there are certain basic needs that must be offered to all. These include things like truly equal education and safety in all schools and programs that would help all children have the financial opportunity to attend college. Far left groups, often termed socialist even if they differ from true definitions of socialism, further argue that a just society cannot be had unless everyone has access to food, safe shelter and medical care. The way to achieve this is through taxation and government implementation of programs that will guarantee these things for all people.
The right political stance equally endorses a just society, but may criticize those who make poor choices and feel that while equal opportunity should exist, a government should not legislate for this. In fact it is argued that social justice is diminished when governments create programs to deal with it, especially when these programs call for greater taxation. Instead, those who have more money should be encouraged to be philanthropic, not by paying higher taxes, which is arguably unjust.
I'm not sure why I would expect the media to start searching for the truth now, when they've never let it get in the way before. The truth is this: The term "social justice" has been completely perverted and hijacked by progressives. It doesn't mean simply "help the poor" to them. It does to some people, but not to radical progressives.
And now, just for The New York Times and everyone else who thinks I hate poor people — I know your attention span is about 20 or 30
seconds, but try and pay attention — we'll set the record straight for you here on social justice. The kind I am talking about vs. the kind that they are talking about.
Here's my definition of social justice: Forced redistribution of wealth with a hostility toward individual property rights, under the guise of charity and/or justice.On my radio program, I said if your church is promoting Jeremiah Wright-type "social or economic justice," you should run from it or at least get educated on what progressives mean by this.
Here's someone who took my advice: Barack Obama.
Rev. Wright's church teaches "economic parity" and claims that God is not pleased with "America's economic mal-distribution." Progressives are good at changing words — for instance:
• "Federal assistance" has replaced the word "welfare"
• "Welfare" replaced the word "handout"
• "Subsidy" has replaced the word "self-reliance"
• "Bailout" has replaced the words "corporate accountability"
• The "stimulus bill" becomes the "jobs bill"
I found this sourse to be most interesting.....a good read
Defining Our Terms: One definition of justice is "giving to each what he or she is due." The problem is knowing what is "due".
Functionally, "justice" is a set of universal principles which guide people in judging what is right and what is wrong, no
matter what culture and society they live in. Justice is one of the four cardinal virtues" of classical moral philosophy, along with courage, temperance (self-control) and prudence (efficiency). (Faith, hope and charity are considered to be the three "religious" virtues.) Virtues or "good habits" help individuals to develop fully their human potentials, thus enabling them to serve their own self-interests as well as work in harmony with others for their common good. The ultimate purpose of all the virtues is to elevate the dignity and sovereignty of the human person
In the end I believe that social justice is from the giver as they interpret their sense of justice. IMHAOWO Economic justice is a poor substitute for social justice. Taking from one group to give to the other and trying to hide behind the "well that is fair and therefore part of social justice"is weak and wrong.
Social justice IMHAOWO means we should all be treated with individual dignity, respect, and compassion.....which cannot be a substitute for creating economic slaves and dividing us. To me it means we all have opportunities and what we do with thoise opportunities is up to us.....we can try and do our best, or we can let thgose opportunities pass and (perhaps) make some ill choices which will impact us later on in life.
Justice works when all can participate in a free and open manner....not when some feel as if their freedoms and property are being taken to "level the playing field", taking (via force?) from one to give away to another does nothing ot advance social justice, but rather creates the basis for misunderstanding and resentment.......as well as creating a class (of voters) who begin to feel entitled to more and more.
What ever is your definition, I would like to know.....
As always, subject to your review and comments,