Concepts America Needs to Let Go

[Asonokirk V 2.0]

1. We can protect everyone from themselves by passing laws to do that.

2. Allowing the innocent to be punished for the crimes of the guilty.

3. Standing in long lines for services is acceptable.

4. Advertising is the only way to pay for television, and other media.

5. The most valuable members (highest paid) of our society play games, or serve to entertain us in some way.

6. We must respect the rights of the criminal. (Like the criminal respected the rights of the victim.)

7. We must allow people freedom of expression, even if that expression is only for the purpose of shocking, scaring, or disgusting people.

8. We should try and understand and sympathize with people who hate us.

9. It is ok to injure, kill, or permanently cripple if it is for sport.

10. An elected official cannot be human.

[neglet]

10. An elected official cannot be human.

I like this one best! Let's overthrow our robot overlords and put real people back in charge!:lol:

[Intelligent_Design]

I like this one best! Let's overthrow our robot overlords and put real people back in charge!:lol:


Destroy the Bushbots !!!!

[Asonokirk V 2.0]

I meant we are going to have to accept that no one is perfect. To expect elected officials to live up to expectations NONE of us would be able to live up to, or have lived up to, is just not realistic. What we've done to ourselves is create a situation where the only people running for offices are career politicians who've had to spend so much time and energy in making sure they can survive any accusations of wrong-doing, that they don't really understand the issues and how to address them.

When is the last time you heard any politician actually give a straight answer? Have you ever heard one actually provide specific solutions to anything? I haven't, and I know why. They have to spend most of their time and energy saying what they think people want to hear in order to get elected, so don't really have a clue as to how to actually accomplish something in office.

There was a movie that summed it all up: "The Candidate." Think about it, most of our politicians are just "candidates," who don't have any real understanding of any issues, or any ideas on how to resolve any of them.

[tstone]

Good list, but...

6. We must respect the rights of the criminal. (Like the criminal respected the rights of the victim.)

>>>>The criminal's attitude is irrelevant, first of all. Civilized society is supposed to be better. Second, it's less about protecting the rights of the criminal, rather it's about insisting on a certain standard across the board. So that ALL of society is protected.

7. We must allow people freedom of expression, even if that expression is only for the purpose of shocking, scaring, or disgusting people.

>>>>Absolutely. Sometimes people NEED to be shocked, scared or disgusted. Being offended doesn't invalidate the artistic expression. Sometimes that is what validates it.

Perhaps this should actually be, "We must stop pandering to those of sensitive sensibilities. We must insist that they don't have to watch, listen, read, or participate. And get a thicker skin, you baby."

8. We should try and understand and sympathize with people who hate us.

>>>>Works for Jesus.

[Asonokirk V 2.0]

Good list, but...

6. We must respect the rights of the criminal. (Like the criminal respected the rights of the victim.)

>>>>The criminal's attitude is irrelevant, first of all. Civilized society is supposed to be better. Second, it's less about protecting the rights of the criminal, rather it's about insisting on a certain standard across the board. So that ALL of society is protected.

7. We must allow people freedom of expression, even if that expression is only for the purpose of shocking, scaring, or disgusting people.

>>>>Absolutely. Sometimes people NEED to be shocked, scared or disgusted. Being offended doesn't invalidate the artistic expression. Sometimes that is what validates it.

Perhaps this should actually be, "We must stop pandering to those of sensitive sensibilities. We must insist that they don't have to watch, listen, read, or participate. And get a thicker skin, you baby."

8. We should try and understand and sympathize with people who hate us.

>>>>Works for Jesus.

Regarding respecting the rights of the criminal, I should have continued with my thought. Add: ... "rights of the criminal," without consideration of any context within which a criminal act is committed. If a man walks up, out of a crowd of 100,000 people, onto a stage where someone is performing or delivering a speach, and shoots this person dead, right in front of 100,000 people, then it is universally recognized that this person has committed murder. He has taken the life of another human being without consideration. Our legal system allows this person rights once he has been formally arrested by authority. Because of the laws, this obviously guilty individual can work the system to be declared legally innocent of his crime.

We need to apply common sense to our conventions and laws. No law or statute should be defined in absolute terms. There is always a context within which an act defined by law as criminal occurs. The laws need to be applied with consideration for that context. Making a law that has no binding authority over someone by creating another law that disputes that authority, isn't rational. Law A: If you commit murder, and if found guilty, the crime is punishable by death. Law B: If charged with the crime of murder, you have the right to remain silent, as anything you may say or do can be used as evidence against you. You are entitled to legal representation. If declared legally insane, your sentence may be commuted to treatment in a mental care facility for a time to be determined. Etc. In short, Law B is qualifying Law A.

We have allowed ourselves to overlook or ignore a greater good. We have allowed ourselves to lose sight of what happens as a result of a criminal act. We have allowed the victim to be further victimized. I think that there is an overriding moral imperative that MUST be the first consideration. WITHOUT ANY EXCEPTIONS, we must all be accountable for our actions. This means I cannot be released from accountability for shooting someone, I can only be punished for my action. That punishment should be as so deemed appropriate by the context within which the action occured. If I shoot a robber shooting at me, I am not guilty of murder. If I'm a robber shooting someone, I am guilty of murder. As the person being shot at by the robber, I am not going to be held accountable for the crime of murder, because my action took place within the context of the most fundamental ethical and moral right to self-preservation. Therefore, my punishment is to be declared innocent of any legal wrong doing, and then spend the rest of my life with the knowledge that I killed another human being, something I never ever wanted to do.
As an ethical and moral human being, I feel compassion for others, even those guilty of crimes. My desire is that everyone have a chance to redeem themselves, but not at the cost of being released from accountability.

7. About freedom of expression. There have to be limits, for ethical and moral reasons. It is up to society as a whole to determine what those limits are. It is not a right, under any moral code, to allow someone to express themselves in ANY imaginable fashion. I can't, for example, display a piece of performance art that results in the death, by design and by mutual consent, of one of the performers. Again, my point is there is a context within which this ideal exists, and we must heed that context.

8. As for having sympathy for our enemies, I should have included "without regard to the best interests of ourselves, and our contributing constituency."

[Lavoruis]

The pushing of useless technology I pods, palm pilots cell phones that take pictures etc.
The way commercial media pushs these things, they act like your looser without
one these silly things

[Stephen]

Or how about the concept if you smoke a little pot or sell some to some friends, you can get numerous years in the slammer, But if you're an older man who sleeps with 12 year old girls or boys you can get little jail time, if any at all. I've heard a lot of cases of this creeps getting off with just probation, or just having their names added to the offender list.

[Asonokirk V 2.0]

What you are alluding to is my point in a nutshell. Our legal system has its priorities out of whack. There are lots of other things out of whack, too. Common sense can't be tossed aside, yet it is in too many instances.

Why is that?