Monday, November 27, 2017

Just thinking, throwing about stuff

I am struggling with the rights of an individual compared to the rights of the society within which they live, and the right of the society to force behaviors and/or beliefs onto others. In the US there is separation of church and state in one of the amendments, but that is being ignored now by many. Not so in Canada. There is no formal separation, but evangelizing just does not fly in politics either. 

There is sexual decorum, which is also being ignored by many, and many in positions of authority. Slavery is still alive being practiced in the halls of power. There is the opioid addiction issue, the GMO labeling issue, early vaccination vs autism, fracking vs water supply, climate change, the religious zealots vs reality, abortion vs religious, and a number of other social issues that have one thing in common; someone is trying to impose a belief or behavior onto others.

The only way to make such choices is to lay out all the statements for and against for all the choices and then to make a rational selection of the best, but also be aware that those against the decision may be quite vocal. Ultimately, the right choice may allow a great deal of personnel choice; force an action onto someone against their will cannot fly without issues; or allowing freedom of choice will arouse those that feel such action is wrong on religious belief system basis. These are not rational people anyway. Some will object, so what.

I use "forcing beliefs" as a term, forced as in not reasonable choice, as onto a child, and belief of statements without evidence, anything is a belief. When the evidence goes against our current beliefs, it takes much more evidence. This ties together two concepts, zero choice, and a belief as a concept without a evidence base. Neither is a "good behavior", but both are standard practice in religious indoctrination. Children, who are totally dependent on their parents, do not have the mental or moral/ethical fortitude to resist something without evidence. They have no choice but to accept whatever the parent is shoveling. That is indoctrination, which is not right. It is parental abuse, or some other form of enslavement.

Does the government have the right to decide what the child should learn or be indoctrinated with?  Ultimately, it is the child/young adult that should decide,n when they get old enough, and they should be trained with the tools to make such decisions, in their youth. By the age of reason, say 14, they should be free to choose, and to bear responsibility for their decisions. It is responsibility, clear responsibility, that make a person good.

No parent is going to stand for their child going against the parents wishes, where the parent feels strongly. If the parent is wish-wash on the situation, or even irrationally the other way, there will be less conflict, typically. There in lies part of the problem. Too many people are just not rational.

Too many decisions effecting people are being made for economic reasons, or convenience. not for sound science. We are, as a population consuming too much carbon, but that is not the problem. After we have extracted the energy, we expel Co2, and that is not the problem. We are expelling more Co2 that the earth can fix back as carbon, and as a result, the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is rising. That will be a problem soon. As a result of the higher amount carbon dioxide, the amount of solar energy captured is rising, causing rising temperatures in the atmosphere, and the rising temperatures is causing more severe and erratic weather, which is the first problem/issue we see. The heat is improving living conditions in cold areas. But the methane hydrate trapped in cold areas is melting, and that is a major problem; methane hydrate really contributes to warming, and it is not good for humans, mammals, and the like.

So where is this all going? The government is only partly correct, but thinks it is right all the time. That is a problem, unless they are willing to look at there errors, and correct them. But we do not know what is the correct solutions are. 

So what about the areas where we feel that the government has overstepped their authority? Without respect, they cannot govern. Prohibition was one example. Weed is another. Opioids is the next, but that is a belief based issue. It will require a philosophical solution; once you start with chronic pain, you have it for life. Get use to dealing with the pain without mediation, or prepare for addiction and a short life. It is your choice. The medical profession has nothing to offer, long term.


No comments:

Post a Comment