Skip to main content
On the Benefit of the Doubt, for Countries and Catholics

For the past 50 years I have given a pass to average citizens when it comes to the actions of their governments.  I will continue to do so for the citizens who live under monarchies or dictatorships, because they have extremely little voice in public policy, and dissent can be very dangerous, if not fatal.  However, citizens of democracies I now hold more accountable.

The events of the past two years have caused me to change my thinking.  During that time when the actions of the Trump campaign and administration were abhorrent, I first blamed them.  Then, gradually I began to give a considerable share of the blame to Republicans in Congress, who have allowed it.

But listening to the comparisons to the Nixon administration gave me additional insight, things I didn't remember or was unaware of dispite living through the Watergate era.  Namely, Republicans then did not act until the polls showed that the disapproval of their constituents threatened their reelection.  That puts the ultimate responsibility on the average citizens.  It's a little cynical to think that politicians will frequently only do the right thing when threatened by removal from office, but, on the other hand, that's exactly what representative democracy is about.

So, we, the people, might consider complaining a bit less, and demonstrating and voting a bit more.

Similarly, I would not hold Catholics accountable for the actions of their priest, bishops, cardinals, and popes in the past, but now I do.  Even though a church is certainly not a democracy, members are not compelled to support any church philosophically or monetarily.  They can vote with their feet and their pocketbooks, but seldom do.  Incidentally, there was reporting in Mother Jones magazine, I believe, of similar sexual abuse and cover-up among the Jehovah's Witnesses, and, I have heard, many other religious groups. 

I appreciate that organizations like Catholic Charities do wonderful work.  But many, many groups do wonderful work in many areas, but do not use that to justify allowing and covering up abuse.

Ultimately, we average citizens are at least partially accountable for ignoring or rationalizing horrid behavior.

- PeteBarkett.blogspot.com
09/02/18

Comments

Post a Comment

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

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.   (...
Post a Comment
Read more
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       ...
Post a Comment
Read more