The Assassination of the Sacred and the Crisis of Public Morality

The sacred and public morality have always gone hand in hand throughout our civilizing process, leading us now to this condition of the most perfect demoralization when the sacred is murdered in broad daylight.

The question here is to understand what defines public morality when, since 1945, we have seen the rise of militarism and the degradation of public morality concomitantly with the attempt to demoralize everything that is most sacred.

This issue of the degradation of the sacred is intimately linked to the vision imposed by the rational bubble of maximum objectivity, which fails to impose public morality through the penal code, alienating centuries of traditions of moral and ethical behavior that defined morality as divine inspiration, social behavior as the restraint of sin, and ethics as the fruit of sacred texts.

As one may see, public morality enters a crisis when it comes to be defined solely by the sinless penal code, through the ethics of the gun pointed at the criminal’s head, who paradoxically commits even more crimes, since crime and punishment are exhausted in the demoralization of the militaristic regime based on social inequity, on social stratification, creating a sinless civic-military caste that descends into this dictatorship of perverse rulers; shielded by military manipulations that transform society into a political game of generals acting in the shadows of impunity, blaming everyone but themselves; the true culprits responsible for the tutelage they exercise over this military-industrial society since the end of the Second World War.

Post-1945 militarism created this society of manipulations that, little by little, through materialistic propaganda, created a society of iniquities, where the civic-military caste becomes an example of decadence and conspiracies that compromise its credibility, and that of the military-industrial system itself, since incurring the penal code is merely a matter of risk, and the greater the risk, the richer and more indecent those who occupy this power borrowed from militarism become.

In this way, militarism sinks along with the civic-military caste that sustains it, and the generals enter the game of risking being caught by the penal code, since sin has ceased to exist, and the sacred has been obliterated by the rationality and maximum objectivity in which they live, since social issues have become a matter for the police, and crime a matter of risk of being caught or not, and the prize has become this social iniquity in which we live.

The question of the sacred, in this current political and social context of rampant militarism, is a constant threat of moral accountability, since the notion of sin is inherent to our civilizing process, defining the boundaries between reason and faith.

The sacred books reflect these historical traditions of how God and public morality are associated far beyond this rational bubble of maximum objectivity imposed by military barracks as a symbol of social progress.

This observed assassination of the sacred is a militarism’s attempt to affront God, trying to demonstrate that the civilizing process has degenerated into the maximum objectivity of sex, drugs, and rock-on-roll, in addition to abortion and homosexual marriage.

To the extent that sin no longer exists within this rationalist bubble, women become soldiers and generals; and men marry each other within this military perspective of maximum objectivity and rationality to achieve the best of progress and social advancement, perverting divine creation.

This rationalist bubble then begins to cover up sin, vilify the sacred, affront God, and destroy religions that have become domesticated, leaving churches no longer belonging to prophets, becoming demoralized gray buildings; transformed into bazaars that celebrate fairs, incapable of defining public morality as they did once.

Abortion, following this perspective of the rational and objective militaristic bubble, is the symbol of the woman liberated from motherhood, who descended into the objective sexuality of the barracks where they became soldiers and generalas; with the aim of appeasing the homoerotic feelings of latent homosexuality within these organizations, thus resolving that men and women are equal, and that there should no longer be a difference between male and female changing rooms. All very logical and rational.

Homosexuality then becomes the abortion of a man who marries another man, paving the way for women to become soldiers and generalas; and the very idea of procreation becomes a violation of the rights of women who no longer procreate, and motherhood becomes a sordid arrangement of social manipulations of women without husbands, and children without fathers or mothers.

This progressive deterioration of the sacred, of religions, and the consequent elimination of sin has been happening since 1945, distorting social behavior, focusing on abortion as a form of social control of procreation, denigrating the sacred image of women, through the profanity of seeing them transformed into soldiers and generals, resulting in homosexual men, thus forming a perfect logical and rational sequence of the best example of decorum to define social behavior and sexuality today.

Islam is, still, the greatest source of public morality these days, and therefore a constant target for militarism because it is, still, capable of defining the sacred, placing sin back in the context of social order beyond the penal code.

Putin’s Russia, through the reconstruction of the Russian Orthodox Church, has also made a memorable effort in recovering the historical traditions lost by Soviet communism—scientific, rational, and extremely objective.

The United States, of the old Anglo-Saxon Calvinism, has definitively descended into the most sordid, perfidious, and malignant militarism, leading Americans to believe in the purest materialism of endless wealth, alienating themselves in luxury suburbs, ignoring social inequities, and transforming women and men into materialistic objects devoid of any reference to God or the sacred.

How would you like to be remembered by your children?

As mothers, soldiers, generalas, or homosexuals?

Remember that children cannot change the destiny of their parents, and that some will remember them through portraits of happy times when they were just children of fathers and mothers.

Others, however, will prefer to forget them somewhere as dark as hell, to never have to remember them anymore as the fathers and mothers they never were, and who never had them as children.

By Prof. Ricardo Gomes Rodrigues

São Carlos, SP, Brazil, March 3, 2026