I have many issues with people defining what's best in life as "what makes you happy".

As a society happiness seems to be the end all be all of life. It's seems if anyone does anything questionable, specifically challenging the traditional and conservative standards, we are not allowed to judge them because they're doing what makes them happy. This is an extremely touchy issue seeing as much of what these statements apply to is related to sexual identification and orientation. So let me clarify exactly what I take issue with.

I specifically I take issue with the idea that the pursuit of happiness is the best way to live your life. And that once you find happiness you have found what is truly "right" for you.

This is a heaping bowl of bull.

I find that today's young people including my generation the millennial and even the generation before me, have resorted to using happiness as the end all be all of existence. And that if you have been placed in an unhappy circumstance it's not only great that you found happiness, but also a sign that you beat those unhappy circumstances and the trials and are a better person for finding happiness. Even more so if you were born in happy circumstances than what is best for you is to continue to maintain and create a world around you that makes you happy.

Here's why this is a problem: being happy becomes the absolute for a moral compass. Meaning right is what makes you happy and wrong is what makes you unhappy.

Anyone mad yet? Because I find this infuriating. It might be hard to understand why I feel this way (since I haven't explained myself fully) but let me try and illustrate with a story.

I was volunteering at a Sunday school for children in 3rd and 4th grade. We had at any given day about 20 kids, but one little girl that kept coming was a spoiled brat. One day we had a coloring book play period every table received pages from various coloring books and crayons and were allowed to do whatever they wanted even color the table. But the spoiled brat after 10 seconds of coloring asked for help because it was "too hard". When I asked what exactly was too hard her answer was simply "I can't do it it's too hard, do it for me." ( referring to the coloring itself) Shocked I told her she didn't have to color if she didn't want to, but her reaction was that she wanted to color but she wanted me to do it,. When I told her I wouldn't and it was up to her to color or not color she threw a fit and pouted about it for the rest of the day.

Here's why I use this illustration: would it have been right for me to color for her? No. Why? Because by doing so I would make her happy, but I would also encourage her spoiled and bratty behavior. (which hopefully you agree that spoiled and bratty behavior is a negative otherwise this illustration is not convincing) In this instance what would have made her happy was not what was right.

My point is that is that your happiness is not what is right and your unhappiness is not what is wrong. You can apply this to any person in history and see that this true. If Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis got what made them happy, we would have two country's existing in our current United States and one would still have slavery. I think we would all agree slavery is wrong. (hopefully, if not... well that's an issue I can only partially cover right now)

This is an extreme circumstance, but just think in a minute level. Would eating cake all the time make you happy right now? Of course. Do you think being obese to the point of being unable to function would make you happy? Probably not. ( again I don't know you, maybe that would make you happy) But what makes you happy and thus what is right for you changes. How can we encourage people to chase what makes them happy to reach what is right, when what makes people happy changes? How can something always be right if that something is inconstant?

Essentially the problem that is raised by disagreeing with this and saying that "everything is okay if it makes you happy" in everything from what you eat to what you fight for like slavery or Hitler, is this: apathy.

By saying "whatever you do is ok as long as it makes you happy" is an apathetic and I would say pathetic worldview. It essentially means that you are afraid, afraid to judge and afraid to form your own opinions on what a person is doing. It is an excuse to stop forming your own individual point of view and instead conform to total relativism. And trust me when your alone at night pondering the great questions in life and where your life is headed (because admit it we all do this) one of the most fearful places your mind can wander is that place that tells you "no matter what you do, it doesn't matter and has no relevance on you or your surroundings just as long as your happy it'll be ok." Total relativism is that voice in your head that says "it wouldn't be so bad if I ended this person's life right now, it certainly would make me happy to kill my ex-boyfriend" or "is it really so bad that ISIS is beheading and killing so many people when they're pursuing happiness?" See that's the issue I can't get over, this apathy does not work when you take it to the wall, just try to live it out. It means you can't take issue with how anyone behaves as long as they're happy. It's k that man stole from me, that money will make him happy.

You can't live your life believe that what makes people happy is what is right, just like communism it works on paper but not in reality.

So I urge you to find another reason to approve of someone's actions than "if it makes them happy good for them". Because I am disgusted by how often I've heard of that. I have no problem with being happy I have a problem with it being a justification for sexual orientation, or killing someone, or stealing or not doing homework. If you're going to make these choices please respect me enough to not appeal to an absolute standard that in actuality is never constant, and instead give me a thoughtful and engaging justification that will allow you to form your own worldview that I may in turn respect.