- Thread starter
- #241
The resolution is not intended to be 'law' but is rather intended to be a statement of principle as a first step for development of a law that will address the concepts in the resolution. If we cannot agree what we want the law to achieve, there is no chance that enough of us will make our voices heard and so direct our elected representatives so that it can be passed.
I'm supportive of any initiative that might inspire a nationwide dialog about the actual purpose of government, and think this resolution, or similar proposals, could do that. One of the biggest problems we face as a nation is that we have such wildly differing expectations of our government. We need to find some consensus on a focused "mission statement" for government. Without that, we're just thrashing about, wasting a lot of effort from all parties involved.
Exactly, and I blame our education system. We don't really teach or encourage people to think critically any more. Most don't have any idea how to look at both sides of any issue objectively. Too many are conditioned to the 30 second sound bite or sloganeering that teaches by rote. It is a form of brainwashing that prevents any from seeing any concept or point of view other than what they are 'supposed' to believe.
If the resolution can at least start a conversation and encourage some to start thinking a little outside the box they are conditioned to, then we are on our way. Too many are so fixed and polarized in their point of view they won't even allow the conversation, much less engage in it.
Last edited: