Most Americans have a “live-and-let-live” attitude toward morality. “Does it hurt anyone else?” Americans ask. If the answer is no, then the action is morally acceptable.

We see this moral code play out in many current U.S. cultural debates: sexuality, abortion, marijuana. “My body, my choice,” people say, or “love is love,” both statements which are founded on the idea that the exercise of personal liberty is the highest virtue, and that decisions regarding your own body affect no one else and therefore cannot be morally wrong. “If it doesn’t affect you, why do you care?” individuals commonly ask.

Americans Look Down on the Morality of Their Fellow Citizens

Because of this laid-back attitude, it’s reasonable to assume that Americans should be among the most accepting people on the planet. We have the freedom to form our own codes of ethics and, provided they are not harmful, act according to what we think is right without interference from others. As such, the reasoning goes, we should support each other’s right to adhere to our own moral code, whether religious or secular.

But if that’s true, why did Pew Research Center recently find that Americans are “especially likely to view fellow citizens as morally bad”?

After surveying 25 countries across six continents about morality, the United States was the only country “where more adults … describe the morality and ethics of others living in the country as bad (53%) than as good (47%).”

What happened to “if it doesn’t affect you, why do you care”? What happened to “live and let live”?

It’s one thing to disagree with a neighbor’s politics or moral code. It’s another thing to regard your general fellow citizens’ morality and ethics as “somewhat bad” or “very bad.” But that’s what more than half of Americans did.

It’s important to note that this black-and-white look at morality is drawn across political lines for both parties, although 60% of Democrats rated fellow Americans as morally and ethically bad, compared to 46% of Republicans. Likewise, between 2016 and 2022, Pew found that members of both parties grew more likely to assess the opposing parties as “a lot” or “somewhat” more close-minded, dishonest, immoral, unintelligent, and lazy than other Americans.

By objective measures, the study found that the United States is a fairly accepting country, holding middle-of-the-road views on the morality of divorce, abortion, homosexuality, and alcohol. Other countries have far more strict and far more lax views on these issues.

Even so, it seems that individual Americans are the farthest thing from moderate when they regard those who hold opposing views as morally bankrupt by default.

Where does this hostility come from?

Naturally, social media comes to mind. Algorithms and endless content have created the most impenetrable echo chamber we’ve ever seen. You’ll never come across diverse viewpoints on social media unless you search them out – and let’s be honest, most of us aren’t doing that. And the less you know about the other side, the easier it is to demonize them.

Online clickbait is also becoming increasingly popular as attention spans shrink. Most of us look at headlines, which are often gross oversimplifications of the whole story, without reading the full article. But in an online era where sensationalist media thrives, headlines themselves are functioning even more like clickbait rather than an accurate description of the story in question.

Second, it feels better to disagree with someone when you can do it from a moral high horse. By debasing the quality of someone else’s moral code, we protect ourselves from any arguments they may have, however reasonable. We can avoid the real question at hand by dismissing someone else’s code of ethics as morally inferior, thus absolving ourselves of the necessity to engage in thoughtful and respectful debate.

Let me be clear: I do not believe that all moral codes are equal. As a religious person, I believe in objective morality. But we must not use a sense of moral superiority as an excuse for never listening to opposing viewpoints, nor should we instantly dismiss an entire political group as unprincipled and unvirtuous by default.

People will be wrong about moral questions. That is unavoidable. But the best way to address this is to assume the best of intentions and to seek to understand rather than to be understood.

—

This culture article was made possible by The Fred & Rheta Skelton Center for Cultural Renewal. 

Image credit: Pexels