Instead of wondering about the state of the union, Courtland Milloy, in a recent column in the Washington Post, (January 26, 2011) questions the nation's state of mind. He concludes that "we are one nutty nation." Of course some of us have suspected that for some time but Milloy gives us hard evidence that removes all doubt. In spite of the nations boasted education system and the claim that we are enlightened, practical people, recent trends would draw another conclusion.
He points out that the economic system is, as he says, "wacky" in that high unemplyment is good for the stock market, layoffs bring big bonuses for CEOs and tax cuts for the wealthy promise to produce jobs. What right-thinking people would construct that sort of system?
Then there are the ones who squeek through the recession managing to hang on to their houses now complaining that they are the victims of "frugality fatigue." That is assuaged with the purchase of 51-inch TVs. But if that fails to restore their souls there is the possibiltiyt of finding solace in getting high on bath salts. The only down side to that remedy is that it randomly prompts people to do such things as taking knives to slit their skin. But with a little creativity one can find other chemicals that provide equally unpredictable effects.
Milloy ticks off additional ways we have found to relieve our fears as well as self-destruct. Pills by the ton, booze by the gallon, heroin from liberated Afghanistan, cocain friendly South America, weed by the bale from Mexico. And wonder of wonders, "Starbucks is coming out with bucket-size cups of caffeine" to get us out of bed.
One might think the nation would now be coping with all its woes with joy and confidence. Instead the National Institute of Mental Health provides a list of common illnesses that afflict growing numbers. Among them are "generalized anxiety disorder," "anti'social personality disorder" and "poor behavioral controls." You can add to that "panic disorder" and you begin to understand why there are 300 million firearms in the hands of fearful citizens.
I would echo the closing lament of Milloy in this plaintive question: "How strong can the state of the union really be if our minds are so unsound?"
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Friday, January 7, 2011
Reading the Constitution
It's big news just now that the United States House of Representatives has read the US Constitution, outloud, in public. Not a bad idea. If our representatives are to rule constitutionally they ought to know what the constitution says. It might also be observed that they ought to know what it says to even be elected.
So now they know. But knowing, alas, hardly equals doing. Right off the bat they conveniently omited one or two ammendments which they considered unworthy of notice. Further the Constitution is always subject to interpretation which means that conclusions on any issue will not be unanimous. The Supreme Court regularly divides four to five on cases brought before it. One group of law makers will advocate one law as best for the country and then accuse the disenters of being unconstitutional.
I find that there are similar attitudes toward the Constitution as there are toward the Scriptures. According to some they hold the former in such high esteem as to be as holy as the latter. They give the Constitutions framers a special relationship with God that gives their work an infaliable aura and what they intended an eternal value.
In spite of the supposed high esteem for each document both become a pretzel to be twisted into what ever shape the reader finds advantageous. For a time some defenders of the Ten Commandments worked mightly to have them cast in bronze and posted on Court House walls and in schools. For all the seeming reverance attributed to that word from the Lord, law makers as well as their constiuents went right on cheating on their wives, visiting prostitutes, taking bribes, lying, and flaunting the law, apologizing only after being caught.
What are we to expect from those who announce their loyalty to the Constitution when they play fast and loose with the Scriptures. It is clear that for the majority their decisions will be guided by whatever seems to be to their political advantage rather than a moral conviction that is formed either by a secular document or Divine revelation.
So now they know. But knowing, alas, hardly equals doing. Right off the bat they conveniently omited one or two ammendments which they considered unworthy of notice. Further the Constitution is always subject to interpretation which means that conclusions on any issue will not be unanimous. The Supreme Court regularly divides four to five on cases brought before it. One group of law makers will advocate one law as best for the country and then accuse the disenters of being unconstitutional.
I find that there are similar attitudes toward the Constitution as there are toward the Scriptures. According to some they hold the former in such high esteem as to be as holy as the latter. They give the Constitutions framers a special relationship with God that gives their work an infaliable aura and what they intended an eternal value.
In spite of the supposed high esteem for each document both become a pretzel to be twisted into what ever shape the reader finds advantageous. For a time some defenders of the Ten Commandments worked mightly to have them cast in bronze and posted on Court House walls and in schools. For all the seeming reverance attributed to that word from the Lord, law makers as well as their constiuents went right on cheating on their wives, visiting prostitutes, taking bribes, lying, and flaunting the law, apologizing only after being caught.
What are we to expect from those who announce their loyalty to the Constitution when they play fast and loose with the Scriptures. It is clear that for the majority their decisions will be guided by whatever seems to be to their political advantage rather than a moral conviction that is formed either by a secular document or Divine revelation.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
