To paraphrase a spiritual speaker I once heard, moral outrage should be reserved for the outrageously moral; in other words, only he who is unsurpassed in the morality of his thought and practice is entitled to be outraged at others' moral failings.
Moral outrage is one of my favourite pastimes; unfortunately so, as it is also one of the most pernicious.
Its rules are simplicity itself: find a single value or cluster of values, and assess everyone and everything thereby. Whine. Squawk. Condemn. Retaliate. Punish.
There is an ideology for everyone: no on need feel left out. Really any cause will do, left or right: feminism, LGBT rights, environmentalism, Christian values, socialism, independence, nationalism, the AA programme. I've hijacked them all.
Leaving aside the question of the utility of value systems and ideologies, I am in deep water when I let the value system or ideology define how I assess the world, each person, and each situation.
Firstly, such assessment is predicated unquestioningly on the righteousness and preeminence of the values I espouse, on their outranking all others. This is not intellectually sound: the mind is closed before the assessment, and the assessment will naturally adduce only the evidence that supports the preformed conclusion and reject all that undermines, blurs, or nuances it.
Secondly, the real purpose is to elevate myself to the role of supreme adjudicator and moral authority. It is that satisfaction that is the real driver.
Thirdly, I never achieve anything of tangible use by approaching the world, a person, or a situation in this way, positioned as the chief critic rather than a humble participant. Sitting in the judgement seat, I am usurping God's role and thereby confounding God's will.
Fourthly, the assertion that my outrage stems from a heightened moral sense is questionable: unless I myself am superlatively displaying all moral virtues (e.g. patience, tolerance, understanding, compassion, temperance, self-restraint, pragmatism, and equanimity), this argument rings hollow.
Fifthly, when I am morally outraged, the outrage is invariably accompanied by fear, a sense of threat, and a sense of my own victimhood at the hands of the venal malfeasors. I am entirely concerned with how the world, the person, or the situation is affecting me. I am not remotely concerned with understanding the world, the person, or the situation holistically and dispassionately.
Sixthly, I am blinded, primed for one purpose only and sensible only to one sensory input. Like a mousetrap waiting for a mouse, like a smoke detector waiting for smoke, I scan the world for misconduct, and the mousetrap snaps, the smoke alarm wails, and off I go, ranting indignantly.
What is the solution?
The only solution I know is the humility of dropping all attachment to my own ideas, my own intellect, my own questionable reasoning, and instead seeking God's will for me right now: God, what would you have me do today, what would you have me do right now? In quietly, humbling serving, sanity is gradually restored, and, if called upon to assess the world, a person, or a situation, I am called upon to do so by examining the situation from all perspectives, without judgement, without condemnation, and entirely impersonally. Only then will the result of my assessment reflect the reality before me, and only then will that assessment bear as its issue right action.