The current issue(s) of restroom access is trivial

The current issue(s) of restroom access is trivial compared to the greater or graver issue, where majority and morality are seen as one and the same by the left and right as well moderate.

To clarify...

As some are asserting themselves per their chosen gender, others are feeling imposed per their given gender. Setting legalities and polities aside, are not intimate matters ones of most concerned uniquely individual, thus each person reveals to or conceals from others those matters for an array of reasons disclosed and undisclosed. Are not these reasons of a personal nature, therefore do not necessitate revelation nor justification. Is not one's discomfort, however minute or subtle, enough to say "no" without explanation regarding other intimate matters. insomuch, enough to elicit others' respect.

To particularize...

Are not those asserting, do so to gain an additional option for managing these intimate matters according to their preferences. Consequently, are not those feeling imposed, do so by lost of their only option for managing these intimate matters according to their preferences.

To conclude broadly...

The greater or graver issue is the popular trend to impose so to assert, to take so to have, justifying even moralizing solely by sheer force of the many over the few. That is, politics have become alleys, and voters as gangs, reducing laws as forcefully acted (ie. legally enacted) upon covetousness, where majority and morality are seen as one and the same.

Come let us Reason. Peace is always a Choice.

Unhappy With Donald Trump Or Hillary Clinton? Let Markets Fix The Problem, by John Tamny, Forbes Magazine

Frustrated with current politics as is, we are not without options as Mr Tamny of Forbes Magazine suggests. As implied by his piece, the dollar in our pockets is the loudest voice we have. For what the dollar represents is not superficial materialism as some would like to retort. Instead, the dollar represents our time spent to earn it, therefore an exact, quantified expression of personal preference, symbolic of one's choice (no matter the reason) to expend personal property in favor for something else.

Unhappy With Donald Trump Or Hillary Clinton? Let Markets Fix The Problem, by John Tamny, Forbes Magazine

http://www.forbes.com/sites/johntamny/2016/03/27/unhappy-with-donald-trump-and-hillary-clinton-let-market-forces-fix-the-problem/#3a1722bd1203/

The gravest of notions...

Economies can be better molded, shaped, directed towards a particular common goal, when determined by an intellectually and/or spiritually insightful thus ethically empathetic elite, with the support of many or most of course for democratic therefore moral justification, on behalf of each and every person for their general well being... Thus the gravest of notions, exacting more destruction and death throughout history than any other.

Come let us Reason. Peace is always a Choice.

Mr Obama is the father of the US Drone Wars, yet Mr Cruz's proposal to carpet-bomb is "inhumane"...

Mr Obama is the father of the US Drone Wars, perpetuator of the Bush-Obama Wars, yet Mr Cruz's proposal to carpet-bomb is "inhumane" according to the President's comments today from Argentina. Apparently, the 2009 Nobel Peace prize recipient's own warmongering during his two terms in the Oval Office are not quite as excessive as the presidential candidate's plan. Such trite bickering, over methods of mass warring on foreign soil, is cold and heartless to the those effected abroad, if not equally inhumane as the acts implicitly and questionably compared.

Come let us Reason. Peace is always a Choice.

https://www.facebook.com/FoxNews/videos/10154164680001336/

Censorship, legally or socially imposed, distorts the greater context of discussion

I am not a supporter of any presidential candidate, and certainly not of Mr Trump. However I support his prerogative and right, as well of others, to speak regardless the ignorance, offense and lunacy expressed or perceived as such. It is by this tolerance of speech of what is agreeable or disagreeable, even what is sensitive or insensitive, that we can best know the true character of an individual pubic or private, thereby make informed choices. Censorship, legally or socially imposed, distorts the greater context of political/electoral discussion or debate, or confines the broader gathering of general information.

As a personal example and of late, I am often advised to "be quiet" (to put it quite politely) by Republican neo-conservatives when I critique government's political/military interventions beyond US borders. Likewise and equally, I am told the same admonition by Democrat neo-liberals when I critique government's economic/social interventions within US borders. Many interventionists of either sort of course will share the same issue and posture thus retaliatory often abusive retort to mine or anyone else's suggestion of government doing less or nothing, compared to their usual but empirically-failed argument "government must do something (or more)". Yet, the issue here is not the clash of opinions on interventionism, but that one must "shut up" if so told by most, many, some, few or even one.

My point is this. This country have made the long, subtle and dangerously never-ending transition from the right to speak regardless the opinion, topic or mode of expression, to the right to hear only opinions, topics or modes of expression compatible to one's preference or sensitivity. While courtesy and sensitivity may encourage certain choices for conversation, law or violence should not. Educate, repudiate even, but do not dictate by forceful threat legally or illegally, else the ignorance expressed by some today will be superseded by ignorance pressed upon us all tomorrow.

Come let us Reason. Peace is always a Choice.

FAIRness and CONSENT

To break down further the issue(s) of fairness thus consent, that is, beyond particulars like taxes (see post FAIR versus UNFAIR Taxes), comparatively consider "consensual" sexual activity per these videos' metaphoric use of tea...

Tea and Consent (English)...

Tea and Consent (translated to American :-) )...

... Now, over the next few minutes, hours, days, weeks, months and years (literally), apply this same principle of consent to ALL activities public, private, group/club, economical, social, academic, religious, even political/legal, until you cannot think of another.

Simply...

SEX engaged without mutual consent is violent therefore rape.

EXCHANGE conducted without mutual consent is violent therefore theft.

WORK imposed without mutual consent is violent therefore slavery.

TERMINATION executed without mutual consent is violent therefore murder.

Simply and conversely...

SEX engaged with mutual consent is no longer violent therefore entertainment, friendship, relationship, marriage, etc.

EXCHANGE conducted with mutual consent is no longer violent therefore barter, buy/sale, loan, gift, benevolence, etc.

WORK imposed with mutual consent is no longer violent therefore employment, voluntary/charitable labor, etc.

TERMINATION executed with mutual consent is no longer violent therefore assisted suicide.

Regardless how one prioritize sexual activity among nonsexual activities, the moral considerations are quite high nevertheless. Though each of us may draw different lines for limitations or allowances, none of us would exclude the ethical necessity for mutual consent. If this is true for something of this importance, would not logic consistently dictate the same consideration for those things of lesser and greater importance as well. By making exceptions, are we not questioning the very nature of truth or principle; consistency.

Come let us Reason. Peace is always a Choice.

FAIR versus UNFAIR Taxes

The only FAIR exchange, barter, sale, employment or tax is one WITH unanimous CONSENT among the two or more parties directly involved, regardless of the terms and conditions accepted.

Conversely...

The only UNFAIR exchange, barter, sale, employment or tax is one WITHOUT unanimous CONSENT among the two or more parties directly involved, regardless of the terms and conditions accepted.

The popular notion for "fair tax" requires legislation without unanimous consent, then imposition by force of law under threat of government's gun and prison. Show me one "fair tax" advocate/supporter who accepts the terms for more "fair taxes" (levied upon others of course), while accepting these same terms and conditions for his/her next purchase of a cup of coffee, concert tickets or pair of jeans, or their next swap for vintage vinyl records or used furniture. There isn't one aforementioned advocate/supporter that would be agreeable to those arrangements, that is, under force or threat of another legally or illegally, for it is quite contrary to their (mine too) daily decisions, actions as well natural sense of ownership, freedom and ethic.

The matter of greed or self-interest is of no concern here, it is a matter of consent, thus running starkly counter (if we were honest) to our passion at least, reason at most, for what is "fairness". The inconsistent application of any definition of fairness should be and is indicative of the blatant unfairness.

Come let us Reason. Peace is always a Choice.

ObamaCare versus SandersCare versus TrumpCare

With Mr Trump's announcement of TrumpCare to replace ObamaCare if elected, I am curious how the "ardent" critics of the latter among the Trumpsters will respond. I am sure a list of "improvements" or "differences" will be promulgated by Mr Trump of course, cheered by his acolytes, while dissing ObamaCare as well SandersCare. How different are the three programs, let us consider the characteristics. All three are socialistic programs as objectives. All three employ fascist methodology (mandating, regulating and subsidizing from "top down"), oppose to communistic methodology (owning thus mandating, regulating and subsidizing from "ground up"). It follows, all three inevitably push upward prices and wages within the healthcare industry, as result of the mandating, regulating and subsidizing. Before some pine for freer days of old, current/past social programs are of the same dynamics as previously described, but are no longer viewed negatively per a broad range of delusional sentiments; Medicare, VA benefits, Social Security, and more. These latter programs, as acceptable they may be to many who oppose the current healthcare proposals, are of the same unfortunate nature and consequence.

As a footnote or two...

Is the adjective "fascist" extreme, not at all. Fascism is not defined by police statism, militarism, mass execution and/or genocide, and neither is it's close cousin Communism. Rather, these are results of complete control of economies by the two Isms, with Fascism and Communism differing only in methods (as mentioned above), the top-down regulating of private property/production versus the ground-up regulating by eliminating private property/production, respectively. So it is quite logical thus accurate to say, Fascism and Communism oppress and kill to obtain and maintain control of the economy, not to control the economy so to oppress and kill.

It is by this understanding, Crony-Capitalism (or Corporatism) is another fascist-esque methodology, that runs the risk of becoming full bloomed into Fascism over decades of time (i.e. the preceding 100 years of German history up to the rise of Hitler per John T. Flynn's book As We Go Marching). With that said, the US economy is a blend of sectors or segments of the economy under communistic "ground-up" methods (ie. nationalization of libraries, roads, public works, etc), some (or few) near capitalistic (ie. a nearly free-market in comparison), with the bulk of the economy under fascist "top-down" methods.

Come let us Reason. Peace is always a Choice.

Governor Bryant Proclaimed April as Confederate Heritage Month

Yesterday, Governor Bryant of Mississippi (my adopted home state) proclaimed April as Confederate Heritage Month. I retorted on Clarion-Ledger's page...

The confederacy was a very small portion of Mississippi history. Was it an era to be proudly noted, no more or less than any other era of this state's history, or of other states and countries. Therefore, merely refer to April as Mississippi History Month for all state citizens.

No one era can be so lifted above others for human history is littered with continual confluences of moral, amoral and immoral intentions and deeds. Rightly viewed, societies and eras are not singularities but of many individuals of all sorts of character and action. As an example, of course Mississippi had the right thus the will to secede from an oppressive union, to reject the intrusion of a corrupt federal government. At the same time with equal emphasis, Mississippi had NO right to impose an oppression in the form of slavery upon a whole segment of society. Thus an era of Liberty regarded and exerted as a state, while Liberty disregarded and forcefully, horribly taken from many individuals. Such paradoxes fill human history to the brim.

Likewise, just as the month of April should be a time to learn of all of Mississippi's history, not just a few years of it, there should a flag that similarly represent the sentiments common to all citizens. It also a time to consider a flag without symbols of "all" violence against humanity, including those of war. That is to say, a flag without symbols of a particular era, and without swords, muskets, cannons, generals, soldiers and such. Rather, I propose a flag with symbols of unrestrained industry, free commerce, farmers in fields, assemblers in factories, builders on lots, transporters on roads, technicians, accounts, managers and investors at desks or...simply beauty in bloom.


PEACE IN MISSISSIPPI


Come let us Reason. Peace is always a choice.