Legitimacy?

In a world long ago and lost into the midst of time, people and their government were concerned with consistency.  By consistency, I mean people were concerned when the law worked differently for one group of people then for another group.  Even when the group was one they did not like, these very same people knew that they might be the ones on the wrong end of the inconsistency at a later date.

Examples

slavery – abolished by white and black Americans – so now, more or less all men are afforded equal opportunities (not that they all take advantage of that opportunity)

voting rights for women– laws were amended (19th amendment) by men (as women could not vote) to give truth to all men ( meaning people) are equal

Originally gun rights were only for whites.  Over time with the agitation of black and white citizens, gun rights were made universal for men and women of any color.  The Second Amendment was made consistent to all honorable citizens (non-felons …) (excepting DC, Chicago, Maryland…)

Inconsistent

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/9/miller-how-a-senator-got-her-guns-for-a-dc-show-an/

A story of how a police chief assisted a senator bypass gun laws she favors, so she can assault 2nd Amendment rights with “assault weapons” by bringing them into a location that bans them from mere citizens.  A few other inconsistencies show themselves in this article.

http://newsok.com/obamacare-remains-mired-in-inconsistencies/article/3869321

Do I really need to point out the rash of inconsistencies in the ACA?

http://www.humanevents.com/2013/10/08/shutdown-theater-take-a-hike-war-heroes-weve-got-an-immigration-rally-to-hold/

And then there is the way “we” treat US combat vets when they attempt to view monuments and memorials dedicated to them, compared to how an illegal immigrant rally is treated on that same location.

I would submit that inconsistency leads to questions of honesty.  Questions of honesty lead to questions of legitimacy .  Questions of legitimacy lead to questioning obedience.  Questioning the need to be obedient leads to counter authority movements.

If things go far enough for enough people, things that start out as inconsistencies of application could become the solvent that breaks the binds keeping our society civil.  A non- civil society is what we had in the 1840-1880 time frame in this country.

You have been warned.

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Dirty Pool, politics, silly politicians, Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s