This is my first blog. If you're not familiar with the title reference, please watch the stop motion animated classic "Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer." Hermey was a misfit, and because in this blog I'll address opinions and beliefs that do not fit nicely into any one social, cultural, political, or religious block, I can relate to Hermey. Conversations at the dinner table or at gatherings of family and friends become awkward for me when they drift into matters of strongly held opinions or beliefs. I try to remain silent, as I most assuredly will find myself in the minority at some point in the conversation, and like myself, most people do not enter these conversations seeking to be informed or enlightened.
My purpose is not to persuade or convince. I'm simply using this blog as an outlet to gather thoughts and put them into tangible forms. I don't like using social media for those purposes, and I don't want to, and will not, engage in debate here. Feel free to leave comments, as long as they are civil. I will read and consider all comments, but I will not respond, and I ask that if you do have a comment, please limit yourself to one per blog. Debate is healthy, but it's not my reason for doing this.
Thanks, Jay
I thought a good approach to the first blog entry would be to lay out an overview of my eclectic, if not dizzying, thoughts on a sampling of the things that drive social discourse in our society. Again, not to try and persuade, but just so you can see that I'm a model of inconsistency in terms of the "wings" of ideology, and from that, hopefully know going forward that when I write on a subject, my thoughts are very much my own, and not just the product or parroting of upbringing, societal influence, or the twenty-four hour news cycle.
First, let me say that from a political standpoint, I generally do not like politicians. But, I recognize that they are necessary, and I do find some to be more tolerable than others. I love to read well-researched historical biographies, and in doing so have come to the conclusion that there have been political and social leaders in the past that have, in general, shown courage and morale strength, along with civility and a general decency. Some have even shown wisdom and philosophical brilliance at times. None have been perfect; nor should we expect them to be, but some have been less perfect than others. I don't align well with either major political party in the United States. Nor do I fall easily into a conservative or liberal ideology. On various touchstone issues I find no consistency of ideological bent. For example:
Regulating and preserving land, air and water in our country (and playing as much a part as possible in doing so on a global scale) is absolutely the role of government in my opinion. While it should be the job of individuals and businesses to be good stewards of the planet without regulation, we are not. Advances in technology and industry have brought many positive changes over the past two centuries, but they have also exponentially increased our ability to wreak havoc on the things we rely on most to survive. We have laws to protect ourselves from ourselves. Laws related to environmental protection are no different. So on this point, call me a tree hugging liberal if you must.
I believe the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States was a wise addition to our Bill of Rights. I own guns that I was given or inherited, and while I don't use them, I plan to keep them. The right to own firearms for personal protection or hunting is, I believe, a valuable right that comes with responsibilities. To quote Uncle Ben from Spider Man, "with great power comes great responsibility," and firearms give us great power: power to protect, to provide, and to prevent (overreach by despot rulers and military forces). Having said all that, I should make it clear that I'm not a member of the NRA, and I do think the NRA and many guns rights activists go too far in their attempts to limit regulation of firearms. There are many forms of armaments that are illegal for the average man or woman to own (nuclear warheads for example), and no one seems to be bothered by that from a Constitutional standpoint. In the same vein, I have no problem with limiting my right to own certain smaller firearms whose capacities and lethal force far exceed anyone's need for protection. I also have no problem with waiting periods and universal background checks for gun ownership.
Our nation is a nation of immigrants...except for the people that the immigrants of the 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th and early 20th centuries killed or displaced. I believe we need enforceable laws and systems in place to make immigration more manageable. But, to do this we have to first stop promoting the narrative that the millions of immigrants currently in the country illegally sneaked across the border and started drawing government assistance the next day. We need to deal in facts. Nearly half of the immigrants who are in the country illegally have overstayed their legally obtained visa's or work permits. That doesn't make them legal, but it does tell us that our systemic problems are not just related to border management. Had I been in the Hell-hole situations that many are coming from, I'd be doing everything in my power to sustain a better situation for myself and my family as well. You see, people who migrated to America, and their descendants, have a long tradition of breaking the law in an attempt to make a better future for themselves and their families. For example: dumping someone else's tea into a harbor, or revolting against their king. So, I'm all over the place on this one, but I want to see change that makes for a robust immigration system that is welcoming, but manageable. I'd also like to see us start paying more attention to the countries that many immigrants are fleeing...you know, the one's to our south that have plenty of crime and poverty, but no oil.
Nationalism and Protectionism are easy sells to people who see their jobs and neighborhoods changing in ways that make them uncomfortable. I'll just refer you back to the pre-crash, pre-WWII 1920's and mention German nationalism, and American protectionism and let history speak for itself. We live in a world that continues to get smaller. We can't ignore it.
While debt is sometimes necessary, I belief our national debt is absurd. This was once a conservative hallmark issue, but now no one seems to care. At some point we are destined for another 1929 moment. So many parallels to that time exist today, but I'll save that for another blog. Suffice to say, we have reached a point where, as long as people with extreme agendas on either side of the spectrum get what they want, deficits and growing debt will be of no interest.
Life is precious. When it comes to preserving and protecting human life, I believe historically we have failed on many fronts. Whether it's the legal termination of a pregnancy involving a growing or viable human fetus, or the termination of the life of a convicted murderer who received less representation in his or her defense than someone of greater means, or the rush to place the lives of eighteen year old teenagers, who at the time could not even vote, into a war where thousands would be killed, our record on the sanctity of life is better than some societies, but nothing in which we should take pride. I'll be addressing this in a future blog in more detail, but for now know that I believe we should value life in all forms, and respect the finality of death. We should err on the side of caution when dealing with potential irreversible error in life and death decisions. When does an embryonic life become a human being? When is evidence of a capital crime irrefutable? When is a young person old enough to fully appreciate the risks of war? I don't know the answers to these questions, and when I'm not sure, I'd rather err on the side of life.
Still on the subject of life, I believe animals should be treated with dignity and respect. I eat meat. I also love my pets like they are my children. I wish that all animals, even those killed for food or population control, could and would be treated as humanely as possible. I struggle with animals being used for testing. I know good comes from it in many cases, but I also know that ends justifying means is a slippery slope that can lead to bad places.
Social safety nets are a popular target. It bothers me too when generations of families become dependent and complacent on a welfare system that historically has discouraged self-sufficiency. However, in a large society, social safety nets, with all their imperfections and inequities, are preferable to the alternative. We need only look to societies that do not have them. Untrained, unskilled individuals do not automatically become hard working middle class members of society when safety nets are removed, but they do still possess survival instincts that can lead in other directions that are not healthy for them or society. Do I believe we should work to eliminate the need for and dependency on social safety nets? Yes. Do I believe that eliminating them is the first step? No.
I'm going to stop here for my introductory blog. I hope the examples above help show that I don't have an agenda...just thoughts...and questions. I'll expound on some of these topics in future blogs, and venture into other topics related to religion, education, music, relationships, civil rights, and who knows what else?
My purpose is not to persuade or convince. I'm simply using this blog as an outlet to gather thoughts and put them into tangible forms. I don't like using social media for those purposes, and I don't want to, and will not, engage in debate here. Feel free to leave comments, as long as they are civil. I will read and consider all comments, but I will not respond, and I ask that if you do have a comment, please limit yourself to one per blog. Debate is healthy, but it's not my reason for doing this.
Thanks, Jay
I thought a good approach to the first blog entry would be to lay out an overview of my eclectic, if not dizzying, thoughts on a sampling of the things that drive social discourse in our society. Again, not to try and persuade, but just so you can see that I'm a model of inconsistency in terms of the "wings" of ideology, and from that, hopefully know going forward that when I write on a subject, my thoughts are very much my own, and not just the product or parroting of upbringing, societal influence, or the twenty-four hour news cycle.
First, let me say that from a political standpoint, I generally do not like politicians. But, I recognize that they are necessary, and I do find some to be more tolerable than others. I love to read well-researched historical biographies, and in doing so have come to the conclusion that there have been political and social leaders in the past that have, in general, shown courage and morale strength, along with civility and a general decency. Some have even shown wisdom and philosophical brilliance at times. None have been perfect; nor should we expect them to be, but some have been less perfect than others. I don't align well with either major political party in the United States. Nor do I fall easily into a conservative or liberal ideology. On various touchstone issues I find no consistency of ideological bent. For example:
Regulating and preserving land, air and water in our country (and playing as much a part as possible in doing so on a global scale) is absolutely the role of government in my opinion. While it should be the job of individuals and businesses to be good stewards of the planet without regulation, we are not. Advances in technology and industry have brought many positive changes over the past two centuries, but they have also exponentially increased our ability to wreak havoc on the things we rely on most to survive. We have laws to protect ourselves from ourselves. Laws related to environmental protection are no different. So on this point, call me a tree hugging liberal if you must.
I believe the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States was a wise addition to our Bill of Rights. I own guns that I was given or inherited, and while I don't use them, I plan to keep them. The right to own firearms for personal protection or hunting is, I believe, a valuable right that comes with responsibilities. To quote Uncle Ben from Spider Man, "with great power comes great responsibility," and firearms give us great power: power to protect, to provide, and to prevent (overreach by despot rulers and military forces). Having said all that, I should make it clear that I'm not a member of the NRA, and I do think the NRA and many guns rights activists go too far in their attempts to limit regulation of firearms. There are many forms of armaments that are illegal for the average man or woman to own (nuclear warheads for example), and no one seems to be bothered by that from a Constitutional standpoint. In the same vein, I have no problem with limiting my right to own certain smaller firearms whose capacities and lethal force far exceed anyone's need for protection. I also have no problem with waiting periods and universal background checks for gun ownership.
Our nation is a nation of immigrants...except for the people that the immigrants of the 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th and early 20th centuries killed or displaced. I believe we need enforceable laws and systems in place to make immigration more manageable. But, to do this we have to first stop promoting the narrative that the millions of immigrants currently in the country illegally sneaked across the border and started drawing government assistance the next day. We need to deal in facts. Nearly half of the immigrants who are in the country illegally have overstayed their legally obtained visa's or work permits. That doesn't make them legal, but it does tell us that our systemic problems are not just related to border management. Had I been in the Hell-hole situations that many are coming from, I'd be doing everything in my power to sustain a better situation for myself and my family as well. You see, people who migrated to America, and their descendants, have a long tradition of breaking the law in an attempt to make a better future for themselves and their families. For example: dumping someone else's tea into a harbor, or revolting against their king. So, I'm all over the place on this one, but I want to see change that makes for a robust immigration system that is welcoming, but manageable. I'd also like to see us start paying more attention to the countries that many immigrants are fleeing...you know, the one's to our south that have plenty of crime and poverty, but no oil.
Nationalism and Protectionism are easy sells to people who see their jobs and neighborhoods changing in ways that make them uncomfortable. I'll just refer you back to the pre-crash, pre-WWII 1920's and mention German nationalism, and American protectionism and let history speak for itself. We live in a world that continues to get smaller. We can't ignore it.
While debt is sometimes necessary, I belief our national debt is absurd. This was once a conservative hallmark issue, but now no one seems to care. At some point we are destined for another 1929 moment. So many parallels to that time exist today, but I'll save that for another blog. Suffice to say, we have reached a point where, as long as people with extreme agendas on either side of the spectrum get what they want, deficits and growing debt will be of no interest.
Life is precious. When it comes to preserving and protecting human life, I believe historically we have failed on many fronts. Whether it's the legal termination of a pregnancy involving a growing or viable human fetus, or the termination of the life of a convicted murderer who received less representation in his or her defense than someone of greater means, or the rush to place the lives of eighteen year old teenagers, who at the time could not even vote, into a war where thousands would be killed, our record on the sanctity of life is better than some societies, but nothing in which we should take pride. I'll be addressing this in a future blog in more detail, but for now know that I believe we should value life in all forms, and respect the finality of death. We should err on the side of caution when dealing with potential irreversible error in life and death decisions. When does an embryonic life become a human being? When is evidence of a capital crime irrefutable? When is a young person old enough to fully appreciate the risks of war? I don't know the answers to these questions, and when I'm not sure, I'd rather err on the side of life.
Still on the subject of life, I believe animals should be treated with dignity and respect. I eat meat. I also love my pets like they are my children. I wish that all animals, even those killed for food or population control, could and would be treated as humanely as possible. I struggle with animals being used for testing. I know good comes from it in many cases, but I also know that ends justifying means is a slippery slope that can lead to bad places.
Social safety nets are a popular target. It bothers me too when generations of families become dependent and complacent on a welfare system that historically has discouraged self-sufficiency. However, in a large society, social safety nets, with all their imperfections and inequities, are preferable to the alternative. We need only look to societies that do not have them. Untrained, unskilled individuals do not automatically become hard working middle class members of society when safety nets are removed, but they do still possess survival instincts that can lead in other directions that are not healthy for them or society. Do I believe we should work to eliminate the need for and dependency on social safety nets? Yes. Do I believe that eliminating them is the first step? No.
I'm going to stop here for my introductory blog. I hope the examples above help show that I don't have an agenda...just thoughts...and questions. I'll expound on some of these topics in future blogs, and venture into other topics related to religion, education, music, relationships, civil rights, and who knows what else?
Comments
Post a Comment