Random Thoughts
Today I simply wanted to address my last posting and number of other topics that have been cycling through my mind (in a Tom Sowell fashion).
Partisan games are a detriment to government at any level. This last week games have been played by liberals both the National Government and SSFC. Whether it be shutting down public government sessions to the media or repeatedly asking for role call, immaturity and devious actions are uncalled for even in the harsh environment of politics. Representatives that serve the public should be ashamed when their motives are to taint their opponents, distort the truth, or scheme other unethical actions. Conservatives have been guilty in the past (ie Bill Clinton Impeachment Trial) so “no holier than thou” attitude should be held. Instead of playing games, groups of any part of the political spectrum need to be focusing on the issues and working efficiently for change.
Brad Vogel has a list of good ideas on how to reform SSFC and the SEG fee system. I do not know which I prefer but I do know that the system is flawed. The current system is leading to progressively higher SEG fees and higher budgetary requests from GSSF groups. The issues revolving around VPN, mandatory participation, and an unlimited pot of money make my blood boil. My stance within the given system has been to be consistently fair with each group and stand for steady financial principles (even when others do not).
All week I have been pondering the issues revolving around what role values have in determining social policy. Dennis Prager writes in many of his columns of secular, Judeo-Christian, and Muslim values as the main core value systems here on earth. In the US, the battle is clearly between Judeo-Christian and secular values. I would like to propose values that are neutral but I am unsure whether that is essentially the same as secularism. Values and therein laws that are strictly based on science may often lead to policies and societies that are Godless and cold. If we start to place our faith in science alone, human life is devalued, animals can be placed on the level of humans, it is okay for humans to be selfish, and materialism/experience reigns as the central reason for life. Whether the government though should be run according to a particular value system is up for debate? Yet, the government ultimately does have to choose a value system or a mix of value systems when constructing law and order. I am talking in circles but the reason for my last posting was to test where the government’s underlying values when creating social policy. One can argue that with the United States often Judeo-Christian values have been central to law and order. The ACLU disagrees and prefers not only values that irreligious but are extensively secular. I am not sure about where our country is headed in terms of values/norms but I do feel if people’s right to prayer, speech, gun ownership, and privacy are starting to be constrained, we are definitely headed the wrong direction.
Partisan games are a detriment to government at any level. This last week games have been played by liberals both the National Government and SSFC. Whether it be shutting down public government sessions to the media or repeatedly asking for role call, immaturity and devious actions are uncalled for even in the harsh environment of politics. Representatives that serve the public should be ashamed when their motives are to taint their opponents, distort the truth, or scheme other unethical actions. Conservatives have been guilty in the past (ie Bill Clinton Impeachment Trial) so “no holier than thou” attitude should be held. Instead of playing games, groups of any part of the political spectrum need to be focusing on the issues and working efficiently for change.
Brad Vogel has a list of good ideas on how to reform SSFC and the SEG fee system. I do not know which I prefer but I do know that the system is flawed. The current system is leading to progressively higher SEG fees and higher budgetary requests from GSSF groups. The issues revolving around VPN, mandatory participation, and an unlimited pot of money make my blood boil. My stance within the given system has been to be consistently fair with each group and stand for steady financial principles (even when others do not).
All week I have been pondering the issues revolving around what role values have in determining social policy. Dennis Prager writes in many of his columns of secular, Judeo-Christian, and Muslim values as the main core value systems here on earth. In the US, the battle is clearly between Judeo-Christian and secular values. I would like to propose values that are neutral but I am unsure whether that is essentially the same as secularism. Values and therein laws that are strictly based on science may often lead to policies and societies that are Godless and cold. If we start to place our faith in science alone, human life is devalued, animals can be placed on the level of humans, it is okay for humans to be selfish, and materialism/experience reigns as the central reason for life. Whether the government though should be run according to a particular value system is up for debate? Yet, the government ultimately does have to choose a value system or a mix of value systems when constructing law and order. I am talking in circles but the reason for my last posting was to test where the government’s underlying values when creating social policy. One can argue that with the United States often Judeo-Christian values have been central to law and order. The ACLU disagrees and prefers not only values that irreligious but are extensively secular. I am not sure about where our country is headed in terms of values/norms but I do feel if people’s right to prayer, speech, gun ownership, and privacy are starting to be constrained, we are definitely headed the wrong direction.
posted by Tim at
1:42 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home