Showing posts with label defend. Show all posts
Showing posts with label defend. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 21, 2009

The Irrationality Of Guilt

Guilt is so oftentimes unconscious. I notice this with people that strive so much to be “selfless”, more than likely out of a sense of obligation. At some point, they “give in” and purchase something that is “obviously lavish” to them.

Why do I say it is “obviously lavish” to them? Because more often than not they feel overly compelled to “justify” said purchase. Without any sort of accusation, they begin defending it. “Well, I consulted God and He said I can buy this because I have so faithfully contributed to many worthwhile (translation: selfless) causes,” something or other.

If somebody is doing well for himself and wants to buy a $100,000 car and/or a $2 million estate, I say go for it! Why feel guilty? “Because obviously it is excessive and therefore unconscionable given the fact that there are starving children in Africa,” or so it is more or less implied.

But will there not be starving children in Africa or wherever else regardless? I can't help but think that if wealthy people walked everywhere and lived only in ramshackle dwellings, there would still be plenty of children in abject poverty.

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

A Double-Edged Sword!

Is the President's ultimate responsibility to protect and defend his citizens from attack or to defend the Constitution of the United States?

For the naïve that assume the 2 are necessarily interchangeable, might there be situations where they are mutually exclusive to one another? If protecting and defending citizens requires the torturing of captives to gather intel, the Constitution must be subverted. On the other hand, faithfully upholding the Constitution of the United States by not torturing prisoners to extract necessary information will likely lead to the extermination of many of its citizens.

How do we approach this dilemma? There is no good answer for the idealist looking for the absolutely “right” answer! What would God do? That is impossible to answer. However, if we substitute God with ego, it is easy to see what the absolutely “right” answer is. Whatever any one person's ego says is the absolutely “right” answer. But the problem is there will never be a consensus among competing egos!

Whatever decision is made will be altogether loved, hated and viewed indifferently.