Thursday, January 31, 2013
Econtalk response
When Russ questioned the efficacy of the idea being discussed based on popular unacceptance of it, I had an idea come to me.
Obviously you boys are delusional. If what you are espousing made any sense or was even remotely practical then the world would have a couple hundred million more souls treading it surface. Men like Stalin and Mao perhaps even Hitler would have eagerly enacted the democratic principles and the fiscally economically prudent precepts that you guys are hyping.
In addition to the billions currently here, more mindless dweebs would have been inspired by the never ending examples of prudence and self-restraint. They would have naturally aspired to be contributing members of society. They would have taken satisfaction in the knowledge that their willingness to sacrifice was making their society a better place for those of less means and especially for the generations of the future. If what you were saying was true things would be different but it is not and the first world populations are living proof of that.
If what you are trying to sell made any sense to our politicians our great-great-grand children would not be faced with the so called trillions of dollars of debt but they would be willing to encourage them to subsist within their meager means as your policies would have dictated.
In fact if you two weren't caught up in your own myopic little minds you could realize that the need for money and the creation of debt is only the vestige of a by gone era. The economic giants of today know that the world is transitioning into the future where personal worth is not based on an arbitrary currency and where the responsibility for debt was simply a tool for the rich too victimize the poor. Just like religion was invented by the rich to keep the poor happy.
The thing you and others like you fail to realize is that not everyone has to be a giant for us to stand on the shoulders of giants. Giants are born and will succeed in lifting us all so this arcane notion that monetary debt is somehow a motivator of enterprise and entrepreneurialism is just so much hyperbole.
The scare tactic that there will be no one left to produce what we consume if we are all resting on our couches waiting for it to be delivered is poppy cock. There are plenty of people who live to produce and invent. There are plenty of others who are naturally hyper active looking for things to do. The advances in technology will, soon, replace our need to actually work. As quickly as we can dispense with the notions, that only those who work get rich and the fraudulent justification of investing money is reputable, the better off we will be.
The natural law that once everyone has everything they need not everyone will need everything can only be achieved when the misguided practice of evaluating everything monetarily comes to an end and as soon as everyone has everything they need.
Why harken to times of old when the future is before us?
RIP?
Considering all that is wrong with this world can be characterized by the seven sins, the nature of man to seek the path of least resistance, and the profound inequities of life and existence. Is there any hope that it will not end in chaos and disaster?
Every day the radio, television and especially the internet reports yet another breakdown of society, law, and order. Every day the disfunction of the world's systems is reported as the more disparate groups seek retribution or retaliation for the increasing minor infractions of their self-imposed sacrosanct
rights and liberties.
Every day the travesties against society and its infinite diversity of sensibilities seem to increase and become more violent and shocking. The world's population is such that there is no escaping and its technology makes it possible to propose, find allies, and export hate and discontent everywhere instantly.
The more reasonable minds are overwhelmed by the selfish and childish instincts of the immature and unreasonable expectations of the mindless. The pandering politicians, greedy, and power hungry elitists capitalize on the opportunity to enact their schemes and plans of domination and world control. All the time enriching themselves at the expense of everyone else. All in the name of humanitarian relief and good intentions.
For centuries the heartless prayed on the helpless and now the selfish, in each of us, pretend that it is okay to get ours with no regard as to the well being of anyone else especially the legitimate poor and needy or the environmental costs that come with it.
There is no one right answer and I seriously doubt that there is any real opportunity for compromise to be acceptable. Even the practice of individual responsibility and self-sacrifice is not going to work because our cultural differences, economic realities, and profound inequities are so extreme that there can be no meeting of the minds, no willingness to live and let live, and no personal satisfaction allowed.
I suppose one can say that it has been an interesting journey to the end and that many good things have been produced along the way. I suppose that one could hope that there is a salvation in store and that miraculously humanity will be saved from itself. Time will tell. Life will go on. Man's will to live and his creativity may succeed and will lead to a profoundly different future. Humanity may even figure it out but I doubt it. Can they RIP, I doubt it.
Every day the radio, television and especially the internet reports yet another breakdown of society, law, and order. Every day the disfunction of the world's systems is reported as the more disparate groups seek retribution or retaliation for the increasing minor infractions of their self-imposed sacrosanct
rights and liberties.
Every day the travesties against society and its infinite diversity of sensibilities seem to increase and become more violent and shocking. The world's population is such that there is no escaping and its technology makes it possible to propose, find allies, and export hate and discontent everywhere instantly.
The more reasonable minds are overwhelmed by the selfish and childish instincts of the immature and unreasonable expectations of the mindless. The pandering politicians, greedy, and power hungry elitists capitalize on the opportunity to enact their schemes and plans of domination and world control. All the time enriching themselves at the expense of everyone else. All in the name of humanitarian relief and good intentions.
For centuries the heartless prayed on the helpless and now the selfish, in each of us, pretend that it is okay to get ours with no regard as to the well being of anyone else especially the legitimate poor and needy or the environmental costs that come with it.
There is no one right answer and I seriously doubt that there is any real opportunity for compromise to be acceptable. Even the practice of individual responsibility and self-sacrifice is not going to work because our cultural differences, economic realities, and profound inequities are so extreme that there can be no meeting of the minds, no willingness to live and let live, and no personal satisfaction allowed.
I suppose one can say that it has been an interesting journey to the end and that many good things have been produced along the way. I suppose that one could hope that there is a salvation in store and that miraculously humanity will be saved from itself. Time will tell. Life will go on. Man's will to live and his creativity may succeed and will lead to a profoundly different future. Humanity may even figure it out but I doubt it. Can they RIP, I doubt it.
Sunday, January 27, 2013
Seedy side
Apparently two of the biggest foolish ideas are Christianity and Democracy. Why? Because the notions of Christianity to believe the best is possible in man has led to a society which embraces evil and repudiates good. The ideas that a person should forgive his enemy and sacrifice well being for heavenly rewards hasn't turned out too well for countless individual and this nation.
The notion that government by democracy some how is an enabling ideal and that the poor and wicked won't capitalize on the opportunity to enrich themselves by voting it so, is either foolishness or a lie.
The judeo-christian ethic and value system has empowered man from its inception. The ideas that honesty and integrity are critical to the success of society and that laws are essential to the well being of man and beast has served this world well for many thousands of years. However it seems to have come to an end when individual integrity is deemed worthless or negotiable.
All other systems of government have proven themselves to be destructive of the individual as well as society far in advance of democracy's failure which leaves us little or nothing to look forward too. Christianity offers nothing more than a benign dictatorship based on the notion that love for one another and consecration of all things is the best answer. Christianity acknowledges evil but offers no solution to it or for it other than to love you enemy.
All of the "-cies" and "-isims" including survival of the fittest has been tried and failed. What next? In my opinion if the second coming of Jesus Christ is not at hand then it must be the "-ologies" that are on the horizon. The future of technology seems practically limitless. New discoveries and countless inventions and developments point to a different and perhaps brighter future.
One of those scenarios is the replacement of labor by robots so that instead of a man's worth being dependent upon his muscles or intelect his worth is measured in service. The supplanting of integrity and ethics by a sentient and empathetic droid is really unnecessary, impractical, and unlikely. However, there is still the issue of good and evil which can only, currently, be dealt with ethically, morally, and by legislated law enforcement.
A second future is the reliance on technology and the enabling of the individual man or woman to deal with good and evil through information and computer aided knowledge and assessment. As technology becomes microscopic and can be integrated into our physical being we will find ourselves being made smarter, stronger, and potentially wiser. As technology becomes ubiquitous and amorphous we will able to perceive the intent of and know the history of any acquaintance.
The notion of transparency will be augmented by the ability to perceive value or threat instantaneously. Instead of reliance upon a government to legislate laws or an enforcement agency relegated to the role of investigating the crime after the laws have been broken we as individuals will be able to find and associate with like minded individuals. Instead of becoming victims of unscrupulous hooligans we will be able to reside in a place and time that is appropriate and adequate for our well being and prosperity.
It is conceivable that laws will be unnecessary because social and economic dealings will be done with the full knowledge of the individual, the infinite memory of the cloud, and the computational power of the computer.
It is conceivable that ethics, morals and rights will no longer need to be articulated or argued about but lived by the people in our association. It will be possible and probable that families, neighborhoods, communities, cities, counties, states and possibly nations will be coincidentally inhabited by like minded people who are willing to allow others to exist peacefully.
Obviously the danger of any homogeneous gathering or ideal is the likelihood that 'group think' will take over because invariably there will be one dominate idea or personality that is charismatic and influential. Throughout history that has been the beginning of injustice, intolerance, and prejudice. The interesting thing about the technological future is that the intent of one individual and willingness of others will be easily discernible. Because of our enhanced analysis and empowered decision making processes the depth and breadth of any aberrant idea or concept will be necessarily limited because more people will be revolted by it than attracted to it.
Not that bad ideas and intent can't exist because they can but that the support they receive will be proportional to those people who really want to do bad things and have bad things happen to them and not simply a bunch of dupes misled and misinformed. As a consequence I don't think the bad ideas or destructive intent will find many followers because it will be possible for the potential dupes to consider the negative consequences. Those repelled by it can quickly and easily distance themselves from it and seek better associations.
This will all be possible through applications by countless programers posting their utilities which will inform us of the various state of affairs we find ourselves in and where those people, places, things, and actions are the we are attracted to. Our own personal profiles will determine the value of each person or instance independent of big sis. because all information can be accessed and analyzed according to our preferences. It is relative only to us and affects only us and an our personal behavior. Our every actions is recorded and reported as a means of informing everyone else.
The power brokers will obviously try to maintain power but because the internet is divested and the information communal there is no simple way for them to aggregate power and influence. Because the applications are situation specific there is no easy way to integrate their collective influence. The only danger is when information is kept secret. Even that can be over come because the lack of access will trigger alarms and discount the value the people, places, or activities associated with the secrecy. In a sense a self-policing and first order transparent environment relative to personal profiles and values established not by any agency but by the algorithms each person employs to evaluate the circumstances for themselves.
The most interesting thing is that morals are individual based not institution based. Your value to me is not what someone else says it is based on their standards but how you measure up to my standards. My standards can be low but after a while I get tired of being taken and swindled and my standards naturally rise and my feed back loop becomes much more discriminatory. I all have the incentive to live up to my standards because that will be the deciding factor on how a value is reported. We instinctively want good things to happen even though we are attracted to the seedy side of things.
The notion that government by democracy some how is an enabling ideal and that the poor and wicked won't capitalize on the opportunity to enrich themselves by voting it so, is either foolishness or a lie.
The judeo-christian ethic and value system has empowered man from its inception. The ideas that honesty and integrity are critical to the success of society and that laws are essential to the well being of man and beast has served this world well for many thousands of years. However it seems to have come to an end when individual integrity is deemed worthless or negotiable.
All other systems of government have proven themselves to be destructive of the individual as well as society far in advance of democracy's failure which leaves us little or nothing to look forward too. Christianity offers nothing more than a benign dictatorship based on the notion that love for one another and consecration of all things is the best answer. Christianity acknowledges evil but offers no solution to it or for it other than to love you enemy.
All of the "-cies" and "-isims" including survival of the fittest has been tried and failed. What next? In my opinion if the second coming of Jesus Christ is not at hand then it must be the "-ologies" that are on the horizon. The future of technology seems practically limitless. New discoveries and countless inventions and developments point to a different and perhaps brighter future.
One of those scenarios is the replacement of labor by robots so that instead of a man's worth being dependent upon his muscles or intelect his worth is measured in service. The supplanting of integrity and ethics by a sentient and empathetic droid is really unnecessary, impractical, and unlikely. However, there is still the issue of good and evil which can only, currently, be dealt with ethically, morally, and by legislated law enforcement.
A second future is the reliance on technology and the enabling of the individual man or woman to deal with good and evil through information and computer aided knowledge and assessment. As technology becomes microscopic and can be integrated into our physical being we will find ourselves being made smarter, stronger, and potentially wiser. As technology becomes ubiquitous and amorphous we will able to perceive the intent of and know the history of any acquaintance.
The notion of transparency will be augmented by the ability to perceive value or threat instantaneously. Instead of reliance upon a government to legislate laws or an enforcement agency relegated to the role of investigating the crime after the laws have been broken we as individuals will be able to find and associate with like minded individuals. Instead of becoming victims of unscrupulous hooligans we will be able to reside in a place and time that is appropriate and adequate for our well being and prosperity.
It is conceivable that laws will be unnecessary because social and economic dealings will be done with the full knowledge of the individual, the infinite memory of the cloud, and the computational power of the computer.
It is conceivable that ethics, morals and rights will no longer need to be articulated or argued about but lived by the people in our association. It will be possible and probable that families, neighborhoods, communities, cities, counties, states and possibly nations will be coincidentally inhabited by like minded people who are willing to allow others to exist peacefully.
Obviously the danger of any homogeneous gathering or ideal is the likelihood that 'group think' will take over because invariably there will be one dominate idea or personality that is charismatic and influential. Throughout history that has been the beginning of injustice, intolerance, and prejudice. The interesting thing about the technological future is that the intent of one individual and willingness of others will be easily discernible. Because of our enhanced analysis and empowered decision making processes the depth and breadth of any aberrant idea or concept will be necessarily limited because more people will be revolted by it than attracted to it.
Not that bad ideas and intent can't exist because they can but that the support they receive will be proportional to those people who really want to do bad things and have bad things happen to them and not simply a bunch of dupes misled and misinformed. As a consequence I don't think the bad ideas or destructive intent will find many followers because it will be possible for the potential dupes to consider the negative consequences. Those repelled by it can quickly and easily distance themselves from it and seek better associations.
This will all be possible through applications by countless programers posting their utilities which will inform us of the various state of affairs we find ourselves in and where those people, places, things, and actions are the we are attracted to. Our own personal profiles will determine the value of each person or instance independent of big sis. because all information can be accessed and analyzed according to our preferences. It is relative only to us and affects only us and an our personal behavior. Our every actions is recorded and reported as a means of informing everyone else.
The power brokers will obviously try to maintain power but because the internet is divested and the information communal there is no simple way for them to aggregate power and influence. Because the applications are situation specific there is no easy way to integrate their collective influence. The only danger is when information is kept secret. Even that can be over come because the lack of access will trigger alarms and discount the value the people, places, or activities associated with the secrecy. In a sense a self-policing and first order transparent environment relative to personal profiles and values established not by any agency but by the algorithms each person employs to evaluate the circumstances for themselves.
The most interesting thing is that morals are individual based not institution based. Your value to me is not what someone else says it is based on their standards but how you measure up to my standards. My standards can be low but after a while I get tired of being taken and swindled and my standards naturally rise and my feed back loop becomes much more discriminatory. I all have the incentive to live up to my standards because that will be the deciding factor on how a value is reported. We instinctively want good things to happen even though we are attracted to the seedy side of things.
Dilemma
The PBS documentary about 'What Darwin didn't know' celebrating evolution actually shows that species diversity is not simply a process of natural selection but a prescribed set of genes by which the genetic material, its unique sequencing, and the on and off switching process is responsible for the adaption of all species. It did not offer convincing evidence on how the differentiation of species was any thing more than a prescription within the genenome. Even though it seems that the potential for evolutionary differentiation or the creation of the missing link would seem possible in fact probable the evidence only illustrated that species differentiation is prescribed not incidental. The potential for every possibility, in this existence, is already coded in the genes and it is the genetic material in its entirety that dictates what becomes what and when. Nothing can exist that is not already part of the genetic code. The neanderthal and jelly fish are simply variations of the pallet that is possible. The question is how can something so complex come about when it is enveloped in a state of entropy from its inception.
The real issue is what dictates the switching and sequencing to produce a human or a tree. Is it by accident or by plan. Apparently by plan because when a human woman is pregnant there is never any doubt that she might be having a horse. It must be by plan because it each and every species differentiation must be coincidental with both male and female versions. It must be by plan because natural selection seeks to limit competition not increase it. It must be by plan or the devolvement of the species would have been the normal in the beginning an not just as we are experiencing it today.
Evolutionists fail to recognize that religion has been mischaracterized for so long by its antagonists that the actual meaning of being created by God does not have to mean two chickens materializes one day to populate the world with chickens. It appears the genetic code was written by God prior to the beginning of life and from within that code comes the chicken and everything else. So the answer to the question is the egg comes first. But if that is the case then evolution would seem to be the only process by which life could come into existence. Not necessarily as envisioned by man but as dictated by intelligent design. However, intelligent design doesn't make sense in consideration of the Neanderthal, Denisovian, and contemporary humans.
Science doesn't explain how a fully functioning genome came into being at the beginning, characterized as an explosion, of life on earth and has existed for hundreds of millions of years producing one unique species after another. It is unclear to me how such a huge diversity of species, much of it coincidental in existence, is possible if natural selection is the only determinate. Species adaption is proven as a natural occurrence and species manipulation is possible by controlled intervention but species differentiation is missing the links and not currently possible even by intervention.
Creation doesn't explanation the observable time line, the natural geologic processes, or the anomalies that exist in the geologic and natural history records.
After thinking about it, it doesn't make a whole lot of difference because life is terminal and we will either not be able regret that we didn't party or behave like there was no tomorrow or we will find ourselves in an afterlife and either regret our behaviors and lack of faith or, at best, find ourselves wondering what is next. That is the dilemma.
The real issue is what dictates the switching and sequencing to produce a human or a tree. Is it by accident or by plan. Apparently by plan because when a human woman is pregnant there is never any doubt that she might be having a horse. It must be by plan because it each and every species differentiation must be coincidental with both male and female versions. It must be by plan because natural selection seeks to limit competition not increase it. It must be by plan or the devolvement of the species would have been the normal in the beginning an not just as we are experiencing it today.
Evolutionists fail to recognize that religion has been mischaracterized for so long by its antagonists that the actual meaning of being created by God does not have to mean two chickens materializes one day to populate the world with chickens. It appears the genetic code was written by God prior to the beginning of life and from within that code comes the chicken and everything else. So the answer to the question is the egg comes first. But if that is the case then evolution would seem to be the only process by which life could come into existence. Not necessarily as envisioned by man but as dictated by intelligent design. However, intelligent design doesn't make sense in consideration of the Neanderthal, Denisovian, and contemporary humans.
Science doesn't explain how a fully functioning genome came into being at the beginning, characterized as an explosion, of life on earth and has existed for hundreds of millions of years producing one unique species after another. It is unclear to me how such a huge diversity of species, much of it coincidental in existence, is possible if natural selection is the only determinate. Species adaption is proven as a natural occurrence and species manipulation is possible by controlled intervention but species differentiation is missing the links and not currently possible even by intervention.
Creation doesn't explanation the observable time line, the natural geologic processes, or the anomalies that exist in the geologic and natural history records.
After thinking about it, it doesn't make a whole lot of difference because life is terminal and we will either not be able regret that we didn't party or behave like there was no tomorrow or we will find ourselves in an afterlife and either regret our behaviors and lack of faith or, at best, find ourselves wondering what is next. That is the dilemma.
Friday, January 25, 2013
The end
The misguided GOP efforts to offer a second class Democrat agenda is guaranteed to to fail. Now that the takers are an unassailable majority in the political scene trying to be a "me too" santa clause only with an attitude that not everyone can have everything is a nonstarter. Even though that is true, there isn't enough for everyone, the Democrats don't say it they just let the king makers hand out the goodies and pretend that every one is happy. It keeps them in office and if your not in office your not any where. The problem with the GOP is that the few principled republicans can't keep their mouth's shut and insist on letting the cat out of the bag. Who wants a santa clause that doesn't give you what you want. Let's get real, even if I don't get it now I must be going to get it later.
That being said the GOP and the United States are going to end. It hasn't been, the America that we knew for decades because the takers just weren't a super majority as they have become so there was some misguide belief that we could recapture what was lost. The we could turn the ship around. That common sense would prevail and reality would settle in.
Not only can the GOP and the conservatives not recapture the political scene the economic landscape has changed to the point that America will finally have to acknowledge the role it has occupied for some time now and that is neutered imp. The environmentalist, climate change alarmists, and apologists have successively throttled back the economic engine of this country by denying it the fuel that propelled this country and the rest of the world to the levels of prosperity never before realized. Even the poor were better off.
Without the wholesale plundering of the global resources and the no-holds barred expansion of the world's population there is no hope that America and the GOP will revive its status in the world. Not being a fan of the GOP's past performance I am, however, concerned about the conservative principles they paid lip service to. Are they at an end as well? Are we really going to descend into a big global government-police state distopia?
As much as I would like to believe that the adults are somehow in charge the results give me pause. We can get by with less but the so called leadership doesn't seem to know what prudence is. I understand the need for limits but don't understand the class warfare and retribution mentality that predominates in the halls of power. I recognize the need to be a good steward of the land, water, air, and animals but don't understand how sequestration of all resources bodes well for our well-being. I wonder how only the rich and powerful enjoying the limited bounties will help the poor. Socialism and activism works great until they run out of other peoples money and sequester the last remaining natural resource which might keep us from starving to death in the dark and freezing solid in the cold.
That being said the GOP and the United States are going to end. It hasn't been, the America that we knew for decades because the takers just weren't a super majority as they have become so there was some misguide belief that we could recapture what was lost. The we could turn the ship around. That common sense would prevail and reality would settle in.
Not only can the GOP and the conservatives not recapture the political scene the economic landscape has changed to the point that America will finally have to acknowledge the role it has occupied for some time now and that is neutered imp. The environmentalist, climate change alarmists, and apologists have successively throttled back the economic engine of this country by denying it the fuel that propelled this country and the rest of the world to the levels of prosperity never before realized. Even the poor were better off.
Without the wholesale plundering of the global resources and the no-holds barred expansion of the world's population there is no hope that America and the GOP will revive its status in the world. Not being a fan of the GOP's past performance I am, however, concerned about the conservative principles they paid lip service to. Are they at an end as well? Are we really going to descend into a big global government-police state distopia?
As much as I would like to believe that the adults are somehow in charge the results give me pause. We can get by with less but the so called leadership doesn't seem to know what prudence is. I understand the need for limits but don't understand the class warfare and retribution mentality that predominates in the halls of power. I recognize the need to be a good steward of the land, water, air, and animals but don't understand how sequestration of all resources bodes well for our well-being. I wonder how only the rich and powerful enjoying the limited bounties will help the poor. Socialism and activism works great until they run out of other peoples money and sequester the last remaining natural resource which might keep us from starving to death in the dark and freezing solid in the cold.
Thursday, January 24, 2013
What Difference
Hillary Clinton as a political appointee to the state department resided over the organization when a diplomat and three personnel were killed in Bengazhi, Lybia, Africa. During a congressional hearing she responded to an accusation that she misled congress and the American people by her fraudulent explanation for what caused the US Consulate to be attacked and over run. In her response she vehemently said "What difference, at this point, does it make?
It makes a difference when the next time, the state department, reports on an event that affects americans and we have to judge whether you are lying to us again or not.
It makes a difference to our willingness to sacrifice our lives, money, and time knowing that our best interests are not really a consideration by you or your department.
It makes a difference when congress is expected to support, with tax dollars, the foreign affairs of the nation when there is no trust in and a deep suspicion that the agenda is hidden or being obfuscated.
It makes a difference if our representative to other nations is caught blatantly lying to them and is viewed as a person who can not be trusted.
It makes a difference when the arrogance of the individual selected to occupy and perform a vital role in the government of the united states is proven to be incompetent and then tries to bluster her way out of the situation after lying about her acceptance of responsibility and acting out her remorseful statement.
It makes a huge difference and it is too bad that you don't understand that or worse yet you don't care.
We don't need people like you in government. We don't need people like you representing us to the world. We don't need anything you stand for. That is what difference it makes.
It makes a difference when the next time, the state department, reports on an event that affects americans and we have to judge whether you are lying to us again or not.
It makes a difference to our willingness to sacrifice our lives, money, and time knowing that our best interests are not really a consideration by you or your department.
It makes a difference when congress is expected to support, with tax dollars, the foreign affairs of the nation when there is no trust in and a deep suspicion that the agenda is hidden or being obfuscated.
It makes a difference if our representative to other nations is caught blatantly lying to them and is viewed as a person who can not be trusted.
It makes a difference when the arrogance of the individual selected to occupy and perform a vital role in the government of the united states is proven to be incompetent and then tries to bluster her way out of the situation after lying about her acceptance of responsibility and acting out her remorseful statement.
It makes a huge difference and it is too bad that you don't understand that or worse yet you don't care.
We don't need people like you in government. We don't need people like you representing us to the world. We don't need anything you stand for. That is what difference it makes.
Wednesday, January 23, 2013
Why?
Why do I need to buy a gun that can shoot multiple rounds as quickly as I can pull the trigger? Why do I need to buy a sports car that has upwards of 400 hp and can reach speeds of 180 mph? Why do I need to drink more booze than I can handle and still have the ability to drive a car and not be responsible for the care and well being of my family? Why can I have sex and not worry about the consequences because it is legal to have an abortion? The apparent answer is because I can. The problem is that there doesn't seem to be a happy medium. It is just as easy to sponsor to many restrictions in the name of safety and security. For example the so called health school lunch menu and the ban on 32 ounce soft drinks.
Thousands of people are killed every year by guns. Substantially less than that are children. Tens of thousands of people are killed annually by cars and thousands are children. Thousands of people are killed by the affects of booze and millions of people have their lives adversely affected by the influence of alcohol. And literally 3000 plus babies are murdered every day in this country by abortionists. Tens of thousands of people die because of poor health exacerbated by bad food choices and inactive life styles.
What a joke. A few loud mouths with misplaced values, a group of pandering politicians, and complicit journalists is all that it takes to ruin a good country. As is the proverbial apple barrel which is ruined by the one bad apple. Without due diligence and a willingness to review the circumstances, set firm standards and discard the bad apples the content of the barrel is assured of being ruined.
Who gets to decide the standards and which barrels are inspected, and how are the bad apples taken care of. Unlike apples we humans, I think, can actually think for ourselves. So what is the problem? Why are so many barrels going bad? Is it intellectual immaturity? The inability to comprehend the circumstances and critical think the situation through to an appropriate solution? The inherent difference of opinion about everything and the inability to rationalize the outcome of one idea over the other? An unwillingness to compromise or even sacrifice one's position, for the good the group, because it is demonstrably the poorer choice?
The problem is us. Just because we can should not mean that we do. Just because we are does not mean that we should. Just because it is our preference does not mean that it is right. We need to grow up and act like responsible adults. I think it is possible for almost every preference to exist as long as it is tempered by responsibility and accountability. That is where the crux of the problem exists. Our disagreement on what is responsible and who should be accountable.
Thousands of people are killed every year by guns. Substantially less than that are children. Tens of thousands of people are killed annually by cars and thousands are children. Thousands of people are killed by the affects of booze and millions of people have their lives adversely affected by the influence of alcohol. And literally 3000 plus babies are murdered every day in this country by abortionists. Tens of thousands of people die because of poor health exacerbated by bad food choices and inactive life styles.
What a joke. A few loud mouths with misplaced values, a group of pandering politicians, and complicit journalists is all that it takes to ruin a good country. As is the proverbial apple barrel which is ruined by the one bad apple. Without due diligence and a willingness to review the circumstances, set firm standards and discard the bad apples the content of the barrel is assured of being ruined.
Who gets to decide the standards and which barrels are inspected, and how are the bad apples taken care of. Unlike apples we humans, I think, can actually think for ourselves. So what is the problem? Why are so many barrels going bad? Is it intellectual immaturity? The inability to comprehend the circumstances and critical think the situation through to an appropriate solution? The inherent difference of opinion about everything and the inability to rationalize the outcome of one idea over the other? An unwillingness to compromise or even sacrifice one's position, for the good the group, because it is demonstrably the poorer choice?
The problem is us. Just because we can should not mean that we do. Just because we are does not mean that we should. Just because it is our preference does not mean that it is right. We need to grow up and act like responsible adults. I think it is possible for almost every preference to exist as long as it is tempered by responsibility and accountability. That is where the crux of the problem exists. Our disagreement on what is responsible and who should be accountable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)