|
The problem with relativism is that if we adhere entirely to its basic assumptions, we will never interfere no matter how bad a situation is. Evil doesn't exist, therefore there is no problem and nothing to fix.
Equally problematic is the realist viewpoint. Are we expected, then, to be completely selfish and never invest our time or effort in any conflict that doesn't directly involve us? Sectioning ourselves off from the rest of the world may save us money, but not only will we lose our allies and our reputation as a "leading nation", but we can't be expected to have help when we ourselves need it.
I don't believe that we need to constrain ourselves to either of these ideas. We need leadership we can trust to make these decisions on a case by case basis and not based on a single ideology. This matter is not a "go in or not" simplicity. In short, we need to pick our battles, and make the difference where it can be made, rather than where is politically advantageous.
I'm not saying that those women do not deserve the same rights that are given to every female citizen. However, if it takes destroying the country to "moralize" their culture, I believe there are better ways of influencing the world. Why don't we invest this much effort in other countries that practice genital mutilation? I would argue this is much worse than being covered from head to toe. It is important to put this all in a spectrum and help wherever it will make the most difference, not wherever will do the most for our country.
|