The Morality of Regifting

I was driving the other day when I heard one of those short radio spots come on. You know the ones... they focus on one subject with great intensity, last only a few minutes, and are very serious. In fact, the radio spot opens and closes with dramatic music... to add gravity, I guess. To my amazement, the very serious topic of the day was... regifting. To be more specific, the very serious voice asked the very serious question "is regifting moral?" Moral?

There are a lot of moral questions and moral dilemmas in life, but regifting probably isn't one of them. Abortion and capital punishment, now those are moral issues. Employers cheating their employees, employees cheating their employers, spouses cheating on each other, voters turning a blind eye when a favorite political leader breaks the law because he/she is cool... some people may not see those as moral issue while most do. Maybe some people are overwhelmed by thinking about the big questions in life, so they focus their energy instead on non-issues like regifting and raise them to moral issues.

It does make for a funny sitcom episode, like the Seinfeld show where the term "regifting" originated. I've seen it done on other shows, and the dilemma of regifting and getting caught by the original giver can be pretty funny. But the radio show I mentioned above didn't treat it as a funny scenario. First they had an expert (presumably a "regifting expert," whatever that is) talk about how to regift properly and what can be regifted, then she concluded by stating in a serious voice, that regifting is not only okay, it's morally required. Wow! I know the great thinkers of the world are busy debating war and peace and hunger and poverty and ...regifting.

It seems ironic that the generation that shouts constantly about "choice" and free speech for all (that is, all those they agree with, and only those they agree with) and individualism is working hard to develop a strata of acceptable behavior, like regifting. It's like a social sickness that is sweeping the country. Twenty and thirty-somethings (and maybe socially slow forty somethings) seem to subscribe to a code of the "right" things to say, whether or not they live by them. If you're "socially aware" or if you "spiritual" (the New Age replacement for religious commitment) you know the right things to say and you say them and the right things to not eat and you don't eat them (at least when someone's looking) and the right terms for minorities and you use them and the right things to hate and you hate them (Wal-Mart, President Bush, Christians, conservatives, all others who oppose abortion, President Bush, SUVs, rich people who aren't liberal celebrities, President Bush, Big Oil, Big Pharmaceuticals, did I mention President Bush?). Good thing those socially aware liberals are the party of acceptance and love.

A recent episode of The New Adventures of Old Christine is a good example of the social sickness of right and wrong. It was hilarious... and telling. When Christine's car is damaged and she has to get a rental car, she goes through a long speech about what is acceptable, including "no leather." Instead of leaving it at that she adds that she does eat meat but shehas a problem with leather (her brother points out, she has a closet full of leather shoes and bags). She complains when the only rental car she can get is a huge SUV, because she cares deeply about the environment (and demonstrates by her conversation that she has no idea what the environment includes). She ends up with the SUV and loves it so much that she finds it hard to give it up. By the end of the show, she becomes what some writer thinks is a typical SUV owner... throwing trash out the car window, yelling at people for no reason, being a general slob of a person. The show is very funny and very well done, even if it is completely wrong.

I live in a rural part of the state, surrounded by mountains, lakes, rivers, and real winter weather, but I know exactly two SUV owners. They are my liberal niece and my liberal nephew, and they both live in big cities with no mountains, lakes, rivers, or real winter weather. They are also both infected with the social sickness of being terrified they will say the wrong thing. Like Old Christine, they qualify their statements with explanations like, "I do eat meat but I don't wear leather." They are nice, thirty-something kids, but they are quick to tell everyone that their SUVs actually get good mileage, even though we don't challenge them on the subject.

When liberals in this age-group talk about their children they are constantly explaining that Little Madonna and Little Elton will not be allowed to play with toy guns, because that teaches violence, and they never say "no" because that teaches violence, and they don't let their kids play with gender specific toys because they teach violence, and they would never try to instill religious values into their children because that teaches violence and they don't let their kids eat sugar (yeah, right) because that teaches violence and they don't take their kids to Wal-Mart because that teaches violence, and on and on and on... but the trouble is, nobody asked them. They just seem to be infected with the social illness of needing to adhere to the demands of their social sickness gods. That includes telling everyone every thought that comes into their heads, whether or not they are asked. My question is, if they are so certain they are right, why do they go around offering explanations for their behavior that nobody asked about?

But I digress. The point is, calling regifting a moral imperative is part of the social sickness that makes unimportant things monumental and diminishes the really critical issues, like life. Here's an idea for those worried about regifting: if you are given something that you can't use or don't like, but you think it is perfect for someone else, wait a while, then wrap it up and give it to that person. Common sense is enough to tell you not to give it to the best friend of the person who gave it to you. If you don't feel right about that, then you have three other choices. Use it. Let it take up space forever in a dark corner of a closet. Donate it to the Goodwill and let someone else get some use out of it. What you shouldn't do is make it a moral issue. Save your fretting for important decisions, like the superiority of milk chocolate over dark chocolate. (I started to write "the superiority of white chocolate over dark chocolate," because I happen to love white chocolate best. But I feared the political correctness police would find racism in my comment and Gloria Allred and Al Sharpton would demand that I pay monetary damages).