Sunday, January 24, 2016

Questions to Ponder in 2016

                                                   Questions to Ponder in 2016
                                                        
                                                        Published in Marietta Daily Journal Jan. 24, 2015

            For anyone who wants to learn, knowing the questions is as important as knowing the answers.  Inquiring minds can usually find answers.  The question is do we know the questions.  Here are 7 questions along with a few corollary ones that beg for attention.
            Is there such a thing as “settled law”?  Let’s grant the lawyers their lingo but acknowledge that the expression has been reduced almost to meaninglessness.  Even so, is a Supreme Court decision supreme?  Technically, maybe so, but in the minds of many, Roe v. Wade is not settled.  The issue of abortion is as unsettled and as unsettling as ever.  Will Roe v. Wade ever be reversed?  Is the national conscience absolutely settled?  Does an unborn baby have a right to life or not?  Without a doubt these questions will arise – again – during the presidential election.
            How about “settled science”?  Does anyone remember the 1974 Newsweek cover showing an iceberg and the headline, “The Coming Ice Age”?  As for global warming, columnist Charles Krauthammer, who is neither a denier nor a proponent, asserts that scientists who think they know what global warming will cause 50 years from now “are white-coated propagandists.”  For certain, global warming proponents are about as evangelistic as anybody can be.  Their evangelistic efforts are, in Krauthammer’s estimation, “a crude attempt to silence critics and delegitimize debate.”
            What stands between the Supreme Court’s decision on homosexual marriage and legalized polygamy?  Probably a decade or less.  Certainly no logical argument stands between them.  If two men have a right to marry, or two women, why can’t a man and three women?  If two men argue they love each other and should be granted a marriage license, and are now in fact granted that right, it would be totally inconsistent to deny a marriage license to any type of plural marriage one can imagine.  Harems, anybody?
            Have any liberal Supreme Court justices ever opposed same-sex marriage? Yes. In 1972 three liberal justices dismissed the claim that there was a constitutional right to same-sex marriage: Thurgood Marshal, William J. Brennan and William O. Douglas.
            What is the chief point about the same-sex marriage decision that everybody is missing or is just hesitant to discuss?  It is that re-defined marriage breaks all connection between marriage and procreation.  It re-defines family while ignoring human sexuality. Being a social construct, family can be defined any way we wish, but our sexuality is a physiological fact.  (Transgenderism challenges this, of course.)  The traditional definition of marriage is inextricably tied to heterosexual intercourse.  As though the collapse of traditional marriage weren’t enough, we now have a definition that weakens the bond between marriage and children.  Since homosexual couples cannot procreate, the Supreme Court has in effect declared that marriage has little to do with children.
            What’s wrong with allowing women in combat?  For starters the decision to allow it was a social decision, not a military one.  It was another example of using the military to achieve social goals: in this case, equality.  Even if women can shoot and fight as well as men, there are at least two things they cannot do.  They cannot change the reality of sexual attraction and the fact that it will forever be a distraction to men in the military.  They also cannot keep men from feeling protective of women, a reality that would also be a distraction in times of war.  Using the military to achieve social objectives is a huge mistake.
            What two social behaviors are contributing the most to poverty and crime?  According to sociologist Nicholas Wolfinger, it is the increase in single motherhood, particularly in the number of never-married mothers.  Research economist Robert Cherry adds that poverty and crime are increased by the number of mothers who have children with multiple partners.  One study discovered that 22% of white mothers and 59% of black mothers have had children with more than one man.  According to Cherry, children raised in such families are not only likely to be poor but are at greater risk of child abuse.
            Regarding each of these questions, some would say the horse is out of the barn.  Yes, and when horses get out of the barn they tromp things, doing great damage.  Sometimes horses need to be corralled.  Grateful we should be that Copernicus questioned the “settled science” of Ptolemy, and that the 14th amendment unsettled the settled Dred Scott decision.
            When Socrates remarked that the unexamined life was not worth living, he was referring to scientists and lawyers of his day who were claiming that all truth was known and settled.  Perhaps our own day is a time to question and unsettle a few “settled” things..

Roger Hines

1/20/16

No comments:

Post a Comment