Skip to main content
On Past Judgements

Don't it always seem to go
that you don't know what you've got til it's gone.  - Joni Mitchell

In the 1976 Presidential election, I voted for John Anderson.  I was then, and still am, a liberal.  So, Gerald Ford was not a consideration, especially after he pardoned Nixon, which was unforgivable.  But I didn't trust Jimmy Carter, who claimed to be honest.  I didn't know much about the Southern Baptist Convention, but what I did know was that they opposed most everything that I supported.  Carter was a Southern Baptist, so Carter was out.  Four years later, I had changed my mind, and I enthusiastically supported Carter against Reagan, and over the years I grew to appreciate him more and more.

Carter turned out to be much more honest and thoughtful than the average politician.   And he was open to change.  He recently left the Southern Baptist Convention after 60 years due to their belief that women should be subservient to men.    

 Here is an example of some prescient thoughts, from a 1979 speech by then-President Jimmy Carter:

"Too many of us now tend to worship self-indulgence and consumption. Human identity is no longer defined by what one does, but by what one owns. But we’ve discovered that owning things and consuming things does not satisfy our longing for meaning. . .
"You see every extreme position defended to the last vote, almost to the last breath by one unyielding group or another. You often see a balanced and fair approach that demands sacrifice, a little sacrifice from everyone, abandoned like an orphan without support and without friends. . ."

Carter warned the nation against following the “path that leads to fragmentation and self-interest”, for “down that road lies a mistaken idea of freedom, the right to grasp for ourselves some advantage over others”.

We have lost our way … because we have exalted “a mistaken idea of freedom"; our self-indulgence had led us to assert every right as absolute, every form of compromise or regulation as inimical to freedom, and … to elevate the very avatar of self-absorption to the highest office in the land.

- Pete Barkett, August, 2017

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

 Bannon Up! This analogy is far from perfect, but it represents to me a futile mindset.   A sacrifice bunt in baseball involves giving up an out to advance a runner into a better position to score a run.   Occasionally, a pitcher tries so hard to throw pitches that are difficult to bunt, that he ends up walking the batter, which moves the lead runner into scoring position, gets no out, and puts another runner on base.   I’ve heard former coaches and players announcing games cry, “He’s trying to make an out.   Let him!”   I believe Steve Bannon wants to go to prison, to make himself a martyr and hero to the right-wing nuts who support him.   I say, let him.   I’ve heard some pundits worry that convicting him would further infuriate the right-wing nuts.   I think it’s time to abandon that type of thinking.   We have seen time after time that making concessions to appease these people is completely unproductive.   They see conces...

Musings

  Right-To-Lifers Don’t Go Far Enough       I was pro-choice, but I’ve changed my mind.   The problem is not that the State should govern what a woman does with her body, the problem is that the State has not gone far enough.   The argument is that to protect the life of a fetus, the State must overrule a woman’s privacy and bodily autonomy and regulate her body for her.   Fine.   If we want the State to be in the business of protecting life through bodily regulation, then go all in.   Stick to the prime directive.   Protect all life.   The State should govern both men and women to protect life.   The State should tell any healthy person what to do with their body in order to protect life.   So, if someone needs a kidney, liver, or any organ transplant to save their life, the State should find someone and take whatever parts are needed to save that life.   If not, then we are allowing organ-icide.   (...
Inspired by "Is religion a force for good in the world?" - the debates with Christopher Hitchens Let's compare general religious tenets with general humanistic tenets: I assert that to be a good humanist you must follow the rules.   To be a good religious person you must break the rules. Religious:                                             Humanistic: love thy neighbor                                   love thy neighbor do good works                                       do good works live according to the scriptures              live according to what can be drawn from evidence (science) try to follow the dictates of god       ...