I was thinking today about a statement I’ve heard more and more often over the last few years. “You shouldn’t have to…” or “I shouldn’t have to…” It’s then followed by something unpleasant or annoying. “You shouldn’t have to carry that.” “I shouldn’t have to clean this up.”
Now, if the statements were about something horrific. “I shouldn’t have to go to war and kill people if I’m morally opposed.” That I could understand. But it’s just small stuff. “My neighbor whistles off-key while she’s gardening. I shouldn’t have to hear that.” People seem to feel that their perfect world is their right. I have a right to silence outside. But I also have a right to play any music I want outside. Too often, it boils down to whatever I want is what should happen.
The problem is, sometimes my perfect world collides with your perfect world. I want a big fence so I can have a big dog. My neighbor doesn’t want a fence so that breezes will blow freely by his door. He might say, “I shouldn’t have to have a fence.” But I might say, “I shouldn’t be kept from having a big dog.” And present culture-philosophy has a lot of trouble seeing someone else’s point of view. So neither of us would be likely to compromise.
“I shouldn’t have to listen to someone talk about politics.” But freedom of speech isn’t freedom not to hear what someone thinks. It’s freedom to announce what you think, without fear of retribution. That doesn’t mean without someone disagreeing. Being able to disagree vocally is part of freedom of speech. But so often, people today think that to disagree means to shout someone else down. People have lost the ability to debate coherently.
And since it’s late, I’ve lost the ability to carry a thought coherently. So I better stop before I start to ramble. (Too late).
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Sunday, May 13, 2007
First Message
Yes! This IS the first message. Aren't you excited? Okay, that's about as exciting as this gets for today, until I've had a chance to work with it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)