Friday, January 02, 2009
Worries about the future still haunt
From the RoundTable blog
Read the latest entries
Jerome Schleifer
Schleifer is a retired businessman living in Roanoke.
Having arrived at an age when the end is close enough that few events will have an extraordinary effect on my lifestyle (i.e., global warming, gay marriage, Iraq, al-Qaida), it remains a mystery why political and social controversies continue to haunt my conscience. At 82, having endured the idiocies of mankind -- mine included -- I should have arrived at a state of cynicism, or at least stoicism.
I can only guess why, instead of having evolved into a sardonic, I-don't-give-a-damn phase, I'm beset by a condition aptly penned by H.L. Mencken: "I believe in only one thing: liberty; but I do not believe in liberty enough to want to force it upon anyone." And, "It is inaccurate to say that I hate everything. I am strongly in favor of common sense, common honesty and common decency."
It's Mencken's former quote that roils the gonads; that keeps me from throwing in the towel. My temperature soars whenever I hear of, or witness, the tampering of one's legal rights, either by government or by individuals. Amendment I of the Constitution empowers us to attack another's beliefs and actions with virtual impunity, whereas my personal Amendment I allows me to attack only those whose concept of liberty demands that others follow their rules and believe their beliefs.
Human nature relegates the average person to the category of "follower," freedom of creative thought being enigmatic to an overly busy, television-addicted population. Hence, we have a content, but not necessarily happy, populace, one unfamiliar with the joy inherent in the search for knowledge and new ideas.
It is this lack of curiosity that guides the cerebrally lazy to the political talk show host, and not to dinner table discussions or, heaven forbid, the library.
Every election cycle enforces the maxim "we believe what we want to believe" even when facts run counter to our convictions. As an example, gun owners, cringing at the possibility president-elect Obama is going to commandeer their weapons, voted against him on that one issue.
In actuality, the infamous Amendment II, the right "to keep and bear arms," was designed to assure a readily available civilian militia due to the lack of a viable government armed force. Today, our government maintains adequate armed forces.
Another idea running rampant through my cranial maze is the assumption that Christian ethics are the basis for our national morality. Morality begins with the law, not vice versa. The Jews, beginning with the Ten Commandments, knew this, as does Islam; the Quran is its law.
Christian morality is based on the entreaties of Jesus and comes with a codicil: Sin, if you must, but confess your transgression, believe in Jesus and all will be forgiven. Claiming our country was founded on this basis as opposed to secularism is dangerous; it bodes Talibanism. Ironically, our forefathers came to America to escape religious persecution; the government-mandated religion of England allowed no intrusion or competition.
Religion is -- or should be -- intrinsically personal, by its nature having no public forum in a country governed by secular law. Political and religious charlatans cause irreparable harm to a society by pushing an agenda that intrudes upon both secular law and the personal convictions of both believers and non-believers.
Yes, even believers suffer from demagogues who would bastardize the intent of their Master in order to achieve personal stature. The mega-church, with its mega-entertainment, is the antithesis of mega-belief.
Is it any wonder why political and social controversies continue to haunt my conscience? They should haunt yours as well.
