(I wrote the following response to an opinion by Dr. Pepper Schwarz on the SeattlePI.com. Her article sought to sway the reading public that politics should play no part in deciding the issue of gay marriage. She (inexplicably) even went so far as to equate the efforts of the gay community [to get marriage approved] to the 19th century fight against slavery...I didn't touch that part. No sense in legitimizing what is clearly a poor correlative attempt)
Personally, I think that the approval of gay marriages is an inevitability. However, American society as a whole is not yet ready to accept this. Over time this will change.
Unfortunately, the gay community is seeking to literally force society to accept the idea of gay marriage. Therefore, the issue becomes a small minority of the citizenry imposing their will over the vast majority.
Founding Father, and our nation's first President, George Washington said, "Laws made by common consent must not be trampled on by individuals."
With the recent ruling in California, this very thing has happened. The people voted, the losing side didn't like it, and got the courts to overturn the common consent of the people, thereby imposing their minority will over that of the vast majority.
A society, not ready to accept change, will inevitably push back against that change; and the fight for equality will take longer than simply allowing for the natural progression of societal acceptance. Give the issue time.
Thoughts and ideas will change and progress, and everything the gay community seeks--equality, in all its various applications--will be achieved.
**As a side note: The reader responses to the article were many, and quite varied. Different responses challenged most every other response by just about every reader. However, of the three dozen + responses that have appeared after my response, there was not a single dissenting opinion to what I wrote.
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Prop 8 Follow-up: Overriding The Will of The People
Another strike against the majority of United States Citizens.
In news just released, a Federal Judge has overturned California's Proposition 8. Here's the story as reported on MSNBC:
SAN FRANCISCO — In a major victory for gay rights advocates, a federal judge on Wednesday struck down a California ban on same-sex marriage.
Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker's decision to overturn the voter-approved ban, known as Proposition 8, came in response to a lawsuit brought by two same-sex couples and the city of San Francisco seeking to invalidate the law as an unlawful infringement on the civil rights of gay men and lesbians.
Proposition 8, which outlawed gay marriages in California five months after the state Supreme Court legalized them, passed with 52 percent of the vote in November 2008 following the most expensive campaign on a social issue in U.S. history.
Attorneys on both sides have said an appeal was certain if Walker did not rule in their favor. The case would go first to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, then the Supreme Court if the high court justices agree to review it.
Anticipating such a scenario, lawyers for the coalition of religious and conservative groups that sponsored Proposition 8 in 2008 filed a legal brief Tuesday asking Walker to stay his decision if he overturns the ban so same-sex couples could not marry while an appeal was pending.
"Same-sex marriages would be licensed under a cloud of uncertainty, and should proponents succeed on appeal, any such marriages would be invalid," they wrote.
Walker presided over a 13-day trial earlier this year that was the first in federal court to examine if states can prohibit gays from getting married without violating the constitutional guarantee of equality.
Supporters argued the ban was necessary to safeguard the traditional understanding of marriage and to encourage responsible childbearing.
Opponents said that tradition or fears of harm to heterosexual unions were legally insufficient grounds to discriminate against gay couples. (MSNBC 04 Aug. 2010)
Here is yet another example of a vast minority imposing their will over the vast majority. The proponents of gay marriage put the issue to a vote; they lost. Instead of continuing their efforts to sway the majority, these folks went to the courts to solve the problem. Now, with appeals pending, the majority of California voters no longer have a say as to what they want. The gay community is seeking to literally force their agenda on everyone else.
I'm not against the gay community from receiving equal rights. I am against them imposing their singular will over the objections of the majority of citizens. The will of the people is supposed to rule the day. The people have spoken; and now the gay community is stomping and crying their way to getting what they want. This is what I don't agree with in their fight.
Thirty years ago the gay community was reviled, ridiculed and harassed. In the years since, people have become more accepting. Over time, the perceptions and fears will ease, and the gay community will end up getting everything they're after.
But, like whining, cry-baby children, they are stomping their collective feet [by way of the Courts] and demanding that everyone else accept them for who and what they are RIGHT NOW! They rail against anyone who thinks otherwise, calling them disgusting names, and spreading words of hatred towards those who oppose them. They cry "Equality!", yet fail to allow open discussion from their opponents. They asked the voters of California to have their say on the issue; then threw a harassing, destructive, demeaning, hate-filled tantrum when they lost.
What's wrong with this picture? If your children acted this way, they'd be put in time out, have extra chores to do, be grounded, etc. Yet the Courts are allowing this childish behavior to continue. So much so, that it's now looking more and more likely that the tantrum of the gay community will result in the forcing of their will upon everyone else. This is just wrong!
Federal Judge Walker has chosen to side with the minority over the will of the people. Because of this, every heterosexual American will soon be forced to accept a thing they are not yet ready to accept. And to the gay community, that is just fine! So long as they stomp their feet in a whining, temper tantrum, childish way, and they've gotten what they want, then everything is just fine. They'll have their equality, in the eyes of the law; but it will be decades before they have their equality, in the eyes of the people.
In news just released, a Federal Judge has overturned California's Proposition 8. Here's the story as reported on MSNBC:
SAN FRANCISCO — In a major victory for gay rights advocates, a federal judge on Wednesday struck down a California ban on same-sex marriage.
Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker's decision to overturn the voter-approved ban, known as Proposition 8, came in response to a lawsuit brought by two same-sex couples and the city of San Francisco seeking to invalidate the law as an unlawful infringement on the civil rights of gay men and lesbians.
Proposition 8, which outlawed gay marriages in California five months after the state Supreme Court legalized them, passed with 52 percent of the vote in November 2008 following the most expensive campaign on a social issue in U.S. history.
Attorneys on both sides have said an appeal was certain if Walker did not rule in their favor. The case would go first to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, then the Supreme Court if the high court justices agree to review it.
Anticipating such a scenario, lawyers for the coalition of religious and conservative groups that sponsored Proposition 8 in 2008 filed a legal brief Tuesday asking Walker to stay his decision if he overturns the ban so same-sex couples could not marry while an appeal was pending.
"Same-sex marriages would be licensed under a cloud of uncertainty, and should proponents succeed on appeal, any such marriages would be invalid," they wrote.
Walker presided over a 13-day trial earlier this year that was the first in federal court to examine if states can prohibit gays from getting married without violating the constitutional guarantee of equality.
Supporters argued the ban was necessary to safeguard the traditional understanding of marriage and to encourage responsible childbearing.
Opponents said that tradition or fears of harm to heterosexual unions were legally insufficient grounds to discriminate against gay couples. (MSNBC 04 Aug. 2010)
Here is yet another example of a vast minority imposing their will over the vast majority. The proponents of gay marriage put the issue to a vote; they lost. Instead of continuing their efforts to sway the majority, these folks went to the courts to solve the problem. Now, with appeals pending, the majority of California voters no longer have a say as to what they want. The gay community is seeking to literally force their agenda on everyone else.
I'm not against the gay community from receiving equal rights. I am against them imposing their singular will over the objections of the majority of citizens. The will of the people is supposed to rule the day. The people have spoken; and now the gay community is stomping and crying their way to getting what they want. This is what I don't agree with in their fight.
Thirty years ago the gay community was reviled, ridiculed and harassed. In the years since, people have become more accepting. Over time, the perceptions and fears will ease, and the gay community will end up getting everything they're after.
But, like whining, cry-baby children, they are stomping their collective feet [by way of the Courts] and demanding that everyone else accept them for who and what they are RIGHT NOW! They rail against anyone who thinks otherwise, calling them disgusting names, and spreading words of hatred towards those who oppose them. They cry "Equality!", yet fail to allow open discussion from their opponents. They asked the voters of California to have their say on the issue; then threw a harassing, destructive, demeaning, hate-filled tantrum when they lost.
What's wrong with this picture? If your children acted this way, they'd be put in time out, have extra chores to do, be grounded, etc. Yet the Courts are allowing this childish behavior to continue. So much so, that it's now looking more and more likely that the tantrum of the gay community will result in the forcing of their will upon everyone else. This is just wrong!
Federal Judge Walker has chosen to side with the minority over the will of the people. Because of this, every heterosexual American will soon be forced to accept a thing they are not yet ready to accept. And to the gay community, that is just fine! So long as they stomp their feet in a whining, temper tantrum, childish way, and they've gotten what they want, then everything is just fine. They'll have their equality, in the eyes of the law; but it will be decades before they have their equality, in the eyes of the people.
Civil Rights For Air Travelers--Follow Up
Just about an hour ago, MSNBC released a story about the images from airport body scanners being saved by federal agencies. This policy by the agencies involved goes directly against what the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has been telling the citizens of the United States. The following is the story:
"Despite claims by the TSA that electronic body scan images "cannot be stored or recorded," some federal police agencies are in fact saving tens of thousands of images, according to a report by CNET News.
The body scanners, increasingly found in airports, courthouses and other places where security is high, use an assortment of technologies. These include millimeter wave scanners in which the subject is harmlessly pelted with extremely high frequency radio waves which reflect a picture back to the device — and backscatter X-ray which measures low-powered reflective X-rays to produce clearer body shots, shots that can reveal alarmingly precise anatomical detail.
According to CNET, the U.S. Marshals Service admitted this week that it had saved thousands of images that had been recorded from a security checkpoint in a Florida courthouse.
The revelation comes at a tense time. Two weeks ago, when Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said such scanners would appear in every major airport, privacy advocates such as the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington D.C. filed a lawsuit to stop the device rollout.
The reason? Because the devices were "designed and deployed in a way that allows the images to be routinely stored and recorded," EPIC executive director Marc Rotenberg told CNET, adding that this "is exactly what the Marshals Service is doing."
As CNET's Declan McCullagh explains, it's the mystery of the devices' potential that is most unnerving: "This trickle of disclosures about the true capabilities of body scanners — and how they're being used in practice — is probably what alarms privacy advocates more than anything else," he wrote.
The TSA maintains that body scanning is "constitutional" and the CNET report notes that while the machines are built to "allow exporting of image data in real time" and provide networked "high-speed transfer of image data," the system are built with filters to "protect the identity, modesty, and privacy of the passenger."
(by Wilson Rothman, MSNBC.com 08/04/10)
The following is my brief response to the article:
"Why is Congress allowing this to happen? Why is the President NOT putting a stop to this? Why is the ACLU NOT suing the TSA over this? Our Civil Rights, as guaranteed under the provisio of the Constitution of our United States, are being attacked by a Federal Agency--and no one is asking "Why?" Write your Senator and House Rep! Write the President! This HAS to stop!"
Is this alarming to anyone? Are you reading this and say to yourself something like, "I can't believe this is actually going on?" If it is to you, please, please, PLEASE, write to your elected Congressional leaders and let them know how you feel. If the majority stay silent, then we will lose our liberties as guaranteed in the Constitution of the United States. Please, Make your voice heard!
"Despite claims by the TSA that electronic body scan images "cannot be stored or recorded," some federal police agencies are in fact saving tens of thousands of images, according to a report by CNET News.
The body scanners, increasingly found in airports, courthouses and other places where security is high, use an assortment of technologies. These include millimeter wave scanners in which the subject is harmlessly pelted with extremely high frequency radio waves which reflect a picture back to the device — and backscatter X-ray which measures low-powered reflective X-rays to produce clearer body shots, shots that can reveal alarmingly precise anatomical detail.
According to CNET, the U.S. Marshals Service admitted this week that it had saved thousands of images that had been recorded from a security checkpoint in a Florida courthouse.
The revelation comes at a tense time. Two weeks ago, when Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said such scanners would appear in every major airport, privacy advocates such as the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington D.C. filed a lawsuit to stop the device rollout.
The reason? Because the devices were "designed and deployed in a way that allows the images to be routinely stored and recorded," EPIC executive director Marc Rotenberg told CNET, adding that this "is exactly what the Marshals Service is doing."
As CNET's Declan McCullagh explains, it's the mystery of the devices' potential that is most unnerving: "This trickle of disclosures about the true capabilities of body scanners — and how they're being used in practice — is probably what alarms privacy advocates more than anything else," he wrote.
The TSA maintains that body scanning is "constitutional" and the CNET report notes that while the machines are built to "allow exporting of image data in real time" and provide networked "high-speed transfer of image data," the system are built with filters to "protect the identity, modesty, and privacy of the passenger."
(by Wilson Rothman, MSNBC.com 08/04/10)
The following is my brief response to the article:
"Why is Congress allowing this to happen? Why is the President NOT putting a stop to this? Why is the ACLU NOT suing the TSA over this? Our Civil Rights, as guaranteed under the provisio of the Constitution of our United States, are being attacked by a Federal Agency--and no one is asking "Why?" Write your Senator and House Rep! Write the President! This HAS to stop!"
Is this alarming to anyone? Are you reading this and say to yourself something like, "I can't believe this is actually going on?" If it is to you, please, please, PLEASE, write to your elected Congressional leaders and let them know how you feel. If the majority stay silent, then we will lose our liberties as guaranteed in the Constitution of the United States. Please, Make your voice heard!
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Arizona and the Immigration Debate
(The following is a post I made on MSNBC in response to a story about the current Arizona immigration law. I literally read every comment on the site prior to writing my response. The issue is obviously a hot-button topic, because many comments were filled with anger and resentment on either side of the issue.)
In its simplest, The Federal Govt. has failed to properly confront the problem; so The State of Arizona is exercising its State Constitutional RIGHT to address the issue of ILLEGAL Immigration.
Special Interest groups have flooded the media with propagandized statements about the Unconstitutionality of the law; and the media in turn splash image after image of sad looking illegals in an attempt to sway public opinion. Special Interest groups be damned if they side with people who have sidestepped the legal requirements toward citizenship.
President George Washington, one of our Founding Fathers said, "Laws made by common consent must not be trampled on by individuals." The Arizona law, passed by consent of the people, is indeed being trampled on by individuals and Special Interest Groups who seek to impose their personal will upon the majority of the citizenry. How, in any conceivable logic, can these individuals be granted such power?
The current problem exists not because of Obama, but because of President Ronald Reagan giving blanket amnesty to some 2.5 million illegals in the mid-eighties simply because no one was willing to properly confront the issue at that time. With his amnesty proclamation, the proverbial floodgates were thrown wide open, and the current immigration problem we have today was begun.
All the citizens of this country are asking is that anyone entering this country do so having used the proper legal channels, and go through the citizenship process as currently mandated by Federal Law. Anyone who screams "human rights!" in defense of those people who fail to enter legally, does not truly support the wishes of the citizens of the United States, nor the laws that govern us all.
What price do we, as a nation, pay if the problem of illegal immigration is either ignored, or swept aside in favor of "rights" that non-citizens have in this country? What possible outcome exists that benefits Americans if our public infrastructure is bankrupted by the growing tide of illegal immigration? Benjamin Franklin, another of our Founding Fathers stated, "Even peace may be purchased at too high a price." In this case, what is the price for peace if our nation's leaders turn a blind eye to, or our courts allow for the "rights" of non-citizens to prevail?
However you feel about this issue, no matter which camp you're in, the very basics of the immigration issue are about what is legal, according to US law, and what is illegal. That's it. Anyone screaming anything more than this basic definition is efforting a personal agenda.
In its simplest, The Federal Govt. has failed to properly confront the problem; so The State of Arizona is exercising its State Constitutional RIGHT to address the issue of ILLEGAL Immigration.
Special Interest groups have flooded the media with propagandized statements about the Unconstitutionality of the law; and the media in turn splash image after image of sad looking illegals in an attempt to sway public opinion. Special Interest groups be damned if they side with people who have sidestepped the legal requirements toward citizenship.
President George Washington, one of our Founding Fathers said, "Laws made by common consent must not be trampled on by individuals." The Arizona law, passed by consent of the people, is indeed being trampled on by individuals and Special Interest Groups who seek to impose their personal will upon the majority of the citizenry. How, in any conceivable logic, can these individuals be granted such power?
The current problem exists not because of Obama, but because of President Ronald Reagan giving blanket amnesty to some 2.5 million illegals in the mid-eighties simply because no one was willing to properly confront the issue at that time. With his amnesty proclamation, the proverbial floodgates were thrown wide open, and the current immigration problem we have today was begun.
All the citizens of this country are asking is that anyone entering this country do so having used the proper legal channels, and go through the citizenship process as currently mandated by Federal Law. Anyone who screams "human rights!" in defense of those people who fail to enter legally, does not truly support the wishes of the citizens of the United States, nor the laws that govern us all.
What price do we, as a nation, pay if the problem of illegal immigration is either ignored, or swept aside in favor of "rights" that non-citizens have in this country? What possible outcome exists that benefits Americans if our public infrastructure is bankrupted by the growing tide of illegal immigration? Benjamin Franklin, another of our Founding Fathers stated, "Even peace may be purchased at too high a price." In this case, what is the price for peace if our nation's leaders turn a blind eye to, or our courts allow for the "rights" of non-citizens to prevail?
However you feel about this issue, no matter which camp you're in, the very basics of the immigration issue are about what is legal, according to US law, and what is illegal. That's it. Anyone screaming anything more than this basic definition is efforting a personal agenda.
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Another Apology
I must offer an apology to my readers once again. My entries on this blog have been few and far between once again. My only defense is that, it is a reflection of how I have been feeling.
Writing on my other blog is easy when I'm simply giving info. When I have to be more journalistic (as on this blog), then it takes more mental energy than I've been able to muster up from day to day.
Hang in there with me. I've got lots of things rattling around in my head than need discussing; and I'll get to them as I feel up to it. In the mean time, please feel free to send your questions or thoughts (through the 'Comments' link) about current events. I'll answer them either there, or as a blog in and of itself.
Until then, I send my very best to each and every one of you.
Thank You.
ScottW
Writing on my other blog is easy when I'm simply giving info. When I have to be more journalistic (as on this blog), then it takes more mental energy than I've been able to muster up from day to day.
Hang in there with me. I've got lots of things rattling around in my head than need discussing; and I'll get to them as I feel up to it. In the mean time, please feel free to send your questions or thoughts (through the 'Comments' link) about current events. I'll answer them either there, or as a blog in and of itself.
Until then, I send my very best to each and every one of you.
Thank You.
ScottW
Monday, July 5, 2010
Civil Rights for Air Travelers?
I have a real issue with the Transportation Security Administration.
The TSA, created out of the fear mongering by Gee Dubya Bushie and Henchmen following the 2001 attacks in NY, DC and Pennsylvania, are ratcheting up the ante in its ongoing attack on the Bill of Rights with its installation of full body scanners in airports around the country.
An article in the Wall Street Journal is the latest in a number of media pieces that are seeking to stir up the citizenry of the United States to stand up to the TSA for its blatant supposition that every person flying has a terrorist agenda. Basically, we are guilty until proven innocent.
If I don't want a body scan, I am required to do a pat-down as if I were a criminal. What about my civil rights? Why am I being treated like a criminal without the slightest bit of evidence? Treat everyone like criminals in the name of paranoid safety concerns? It's happening right now; and most citizens don't think twice about it. Next thing you know, cars traveling across the country will be stopped at every state border crossing.
I say that the citizens of the United States start a write-in campaign to their Congressional leaders to demand a basic restructuring of the TSA (if not a complete elimination) so that they are better at identifying real threats to our airline safety, instead of targeting six year olds whose name inexplicably somehow winds up on a terror watch list; or an eight year old cub scout who also is identified as a terrorist.
Yeah...great job TSA! Way to protect us from marauding six year olds! You guys are really on the ball!
In the mean time, they force humiliating searches and pat-downs on Americans who want nothing more than to get to their intended destinations with as little hassle as possible.
Where is the ACLU in all of this? They should be screaming "Injustice!" So far, I haven't read a single reference to their involvement in the stripping of air travelers' civil rights. Why Not? The ACLU will fight vehemently for individuals whose rights are being so trampled on that they seek to enforce their personal will and thinking upon the entire country (that's another blog all together!); but they won't stand up for the majority of citizens? What's up with that? So I ask again, why isn't the ACLU all over this?
Please-- write your Senator! Write your Representative! Tell them to stop the stampeding of our civil rights! If you don't stand up and speak, nothing will ever get done about this!
The TSA, created out of the fear mongering by Gee Dubya Bushie and Henchmen following the 2001 attacks in NY, DC and Pennsylvania, are ratcheting up the ante in its ongoing attack on the Bill of Rights with its installation of full body scanners in airports around the country.
An article in the Wall Street Journal is the latest in a number of media pieces that are seeking to stir up the citizenry of the United States to stand up to the TSA for its blatant supposition that every person flying has a terrorist agenda. Basically, we are guilty until proven innocent.
If I don't want a body scan, I am required to do a pat-down as if I were a criminal. What about my civil rights? Why am I being treated like a criminal without the slightest bit of evidence? Treat everyone like criminals in the name of paranoid safety concerns? It's happening right now; and most citizens don't think twice about it. Next thing you know, cars traveling across the country will be stopped at every state border crossing.
I say that the citizens of the United States start a write-in campaign to their Congressional leaders to demand a basic restructuring of the TSA (if not a complete elimination) so that they are better at identifying real threats to our airline safety, instead of targeting six year olds whose name inexplicably somehow winds up on a terror watch list; or an eight year old cub scout who also is identified as a terrorist.
Yeah...great job TSA! Way to protect us from marauding six year olds! You guys are really on the ball!
In the mean time, they force humiliating searches and pat-downs on Americans who want nothing more than to get to their intended destinations with as little hassle as possible.
Where is the ACLU in all of this? They should be screaming "Injustice!" So far, I haven't read a single reference to their involvement in the stripping of air travelers' civil rights. Why Not? The ACLU will fight vehemently for individuals whose rights are being so trampled on that they seek to enforce their personal will and thinking upon the entire country (that's another blog all together!); but they won't stand up for the majority of citizens? What's up with that? So I ask again, why isn't the ACLU all over this?
Please-- write your Senator! Write your Representative! Tell them to stop the stampeding of our civil rights! If you don't stand up and speak, nothing will ever get done about this!
Friday, June 11, 2010
The Myth of Being Too Young To Die
Two days ago, sailing enthusiasts around the globe held their collective breaths as they awaited to hear the fate of 16 year old Abby Sunderland, who is attempting a solo round the world sailing adventure. She was in the Indian Ocean in 30 foot swells when contact was lost. Shortly thereafter, a manually triggered emergency beacon was triggered, and location overflights were launched, boats dispatched and a media frenzy ensued.
They asked, "Should a child be allowed to sail alone for thousands of miles?" What if she dies out there; alone, afraid. Who would be responsible?" and so forth. The same questions arose when 13 year old Jordan Romero summited Mt. Everest last month. He was too young, too innocent, etc.
You see, there is a myth, perpetuated constantly by nearly everyone that children and teenagers are too young to die. That it is unfair if something tragic happens. That these kids have too much life left to live. It is human nature to protect our young. Similar to nearly every species on the earth, we nurture, teach and guide. When a young one dies, we all grieve. It's a natural process for all species.
However, somewhere along the way, we have embraced the thought that our children should not die early in their lives. That it is actually unfair if they do. This misguided thinking only serves to spread fear and lay blame at the feet of parents, governments, etc. In the argument against young adventurers going out and challenging the world, there is one element that is missing...Personal Responsibility.
They asked, "Should a child be allowed to sail alone for thousands of miles?" What if she dies out there; alone, afraid. Who would be responsible?" and so forth. The same questions arose when 13 year old Jordan Romero summited Mt. Everest last month. He was too young, too innocent, etc.
You see, there is a myth, perpetuated constantly by nearly everyone that children and teenagers are too young to die. That it is unfair if something tragic happens. That these kids have too much life left to live. It is human nature to protect our young. Similar to nearly every species on the earth, we nurture, teach and guide. When a young one dies, we all grieve. It's a natural process for all species.
However, somewhere along the way, we have embraced the thought that our children should not die early in their lives. That it is actually unfair if they do. This misguided thinking only serves to spread fear and lay blame at the feet of parents, governments, etc. In the argument against young adventurers going out and challenging the world, there is one element that is missing...Personal Responsibility.
These young men and women are ready and eager to test their skills and experience in ways that would make most adults cringe. Yet, they strive and excel at doing what they love the most, and they are called irresponsible. Their parents are tagged as unfit for allowing their children to go on such dangerous adventures; and any government officials who grant permits for certain activities are labeled as careless or remiss in their judgment.
When I was a teenager, I grew to be expertly proficient at cross country hiking. No trails, no compass. A topographical map and an acute sense of direction were my only guides. Though I would almost always go hiking with a partner, I would occasionally go it alone and end up exactly where I wanted, at exactly when I said I would arrive. My parents had absolutely no qualms about my doing this because they were supremely confident in my ability to take care of myself. So it is with the parents of these young adventurers.
Does that make them bad parents? Of course not! Are these experienced, knowledgeable kids being reckless for undertaking such risks? Absolutely not!
They understand the risks involved (as do their parents), and take every conceivable precaution in anticipation of potential life-threatening circumstances. But they choose to go, fully prepared, to face the challenges and adventures that lie ahead of them, fully aware that should something go wrong, they may not survive.
Personal responsibility is the issue here, folks--NOT irresponsible behavior or bad parenting. These kids are choosing to place themselves in harm's way for a payoff that most cannot comprehend...the achievement of goals so unattainable that few, of any age, ever attempt the undertaking.
I applaud these young men and women for their vision, courage, and their willingness to push the proverbial envelope a little further. I congratulate their parents for encouraging their children to follow their passions, and pursue their dreams. To me, those men and women are amongst the greatest parents in the world!
*It turns out Abby Sunderland is alive and well. Her boat had lost its rigging and she was drifting. Rescue boats have arrived, and she is receiving assistance.
Sunday, June 6, 2010
June 6th
66 years ago today, Operation Overlord was launched.
On June 6th, 1944, American and Allied forces stormed the beaches of Normandy, France as the move to penetrate Fortress Europe was begun.
Many men died on the five beaches designated Juno, Gold, Omaha, Utah and Sword. Nearly 5300 American and Allied men lost their lives on those cold, wind swept beaches.
As I was looking through the days news, I failed to find even a single mention of D-Day. This great and terrible battle is being forgotten here in the US.
So please pause, even for a moment, to remember those brave men who lie in graves upon French soil; both Allied and German.
The beginning of the end of the war in Europe.
D-Day 06 June 1944.
On June 6th, 1944, American and Allied forces stormed the beaches of Normandy, France as the move to penetrate Fortress Europe was begun.
Many men died on the five beaches designated Juno, Gold, Omaha, Utah and Sword. Nearly 5300 American and Allied men lost their lives on those cold, wind swept beaches.
As I was looking through the days news, I failed to find even a single mention of D-Day. This great and terrible battle is being forgotten here in the US.
So please pause, even for a moment, to remember those brave men who lie in graves upon French soil; both Allied and German.
The beginning of the end of the war in Europe.
D-Day 06 June 1944.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
