What is Norming?

Two words to add to your lexicon of societal philosophies are “norming” and “synthetism.”
They go beyond tolerance.
Norming is a word Europeans often use in reference to what America needs to do. It is the concept that our national decisions should be based on international consensus rather than our long standing commitment to constitutional democracy. This process has emerged in our Supreme Court in a decision which one jurist stated he based his opinion on a European law. This was done to the exclusion of our own Constitution.
Norming is a word for lets all get together for an international group hug. It is a ploy to do away with national sovereignty. The hot bed for this is the United Nations. While advocating many norming regulations contrary to American standards they can’t even agree on a definition of terrorism.
It has been suggested that in the insect world norming would involve putting lipstick on a caterpillar and calling it a butterfly.
Synthetism in the legal community is the process of compromise requiring the blending of long held Constitutional legal norms with trends of the times and international law. An example is one jurist who voted for the ban on prayer in public schools saying if his decision was based on a religion it was the religion of paganism.
Syncretism in the faith community involves the blended the traditional norms of faith with what has been known as heresy, scepticism, apostasy, heterodoxy, even cultic or occult. It is an amalgam forming an eclectic faith. It is a “go along in order to get along” view. The consequence is a theology that is a mile wide and an inch deep.
Traditional tolerance, now known as negative tolerance, has long held that every person is entitled to his or her own beliefs. This allows for person to disagree without being disagreeable. Though a person’s beliefs may be unacceptable the person is acceptable.
Positive tolerance states one belief is as good as another and no one should disagree with another’s. In this school of thought it is improper to contest an opposite belief as wrong. If this is true Hitler is due an apology and a commendation should be give Timothy McVeigh.
College professors are now finding some student given to positive tolerance are showing up who are advocates of Nazism and others as proponents of slavery. Why not, if one idea is as good as another.
Introspection is often painful. Socrates said, “The unexplored life is not worth living.” Therefore, engage in self-examination. What is your world view? What sources are helping influence it? Do you have a norm, a standard other than your own likes and dislikes, by which to determine wright and wrong? Is there right and wrong?
In a textbook used at Florida State entitled “The Roots of American Order” author Russell Kirk makes a case for Bible based concepts being the norm used by the founders of our nation. To this day many find the Bible a reliable standard for faith and practice. In matters of law our Constitution is still unexcelled.