I had a brief text session with a friend recently and it reminded me that my last post did not address the larger issue. Specifically, my last post was about politicians playing games with the sole intent of 'gumming up the works.' in Washington. What I failed to note was that it was the political drive for 'Universal Healthcare' that brought us to this point.
Ms. Fluke's testimony regarding contraception was not really about contraception. No, it was about free access to a 'service' since the service is now being provided by our government. I have heard numerous arguments regarding women's healthcare as opposed to men's healthcare and why the disparity in the services provided. This morning I stumbled across the article that highlights my concerns from the beginning. The article is all about access to men's ED medications and vasectamies.
I think the combination of Ms. Fluke's testimony and the lawmakers trying to manipulate the public's consciousness regarding healthcare is serving as the perfect example of what I feared would happen. The government is no longer talking about providing healthcare to the citizenry - instead they are focused directly on how to manipulate the masses. You don't believe me? Prior to Universal Healthcare (even though it still has not been implemented), we did not have discussions of forcing citizens to undergo additional procedures if they wanted access to a specific drug/service. Now that the government is the only supplier - we see the unintended consequences of such a plan. Unintended is being nice as I personally believe this was the plan all along.Very directly the government can tell us what steps we must take to receive the medication or service that we need. We must meet certain criteria before being allowed to have the procedure or drug and our ability to argue or disagree has been muted.
Let me be clear - I am opposed to government run healthcare. I am opposed to the government providing for ED medication and services. I am opposed to the government providing for contraceptive services. I am fully in support of private companies building products and services and inviting private citizens to purchase and subscribe to those. Please remember - the Patient Protection and Affordable Care act is not about providing healthcare it is about access to healthcare. What discussion would we be having right now if the government was not taking over access to healthcare? The economy? Education? Defense of our nation? Immigration? Drugs? Safety of our children?
Showing posts with label rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rights. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Who moved my cheese?
I have been thinking a lot about the short book "Who moved my cheese?" by Dr. Spencer Johnson. Specifically, I am continuing to evaluate my life and the world around me and I am having difficulty coming to grips with which character represents me the best. At work, I am a very adaptive person - able to adjust to the changes of the business and customer climate (yes, they are different). At home, with my family, I have readily adjusted to the changes that occur when your children reach the teen years. On both accounts, I consider adaptation not only a reality of growth but I have been able to adjust and move prior to many around me. I am the hunter - looking for the next stash of cheese and doing the necessary things to provide for myself and my loved ones.
However, when it comes to the rest of the world we live in - apparently I am the mouse who is left watching, waiting and confused - "Who moved my cheese?". There are but a few cornerstones that I rely on that helps me stay grounded as I move through life. Unfortunately, it seems more than one of those foundations is becoming unmoored . Specifically, the second level of my foundation is crumbling which begins to change the structure above it. This country that I have been blessed to be born in to, and continue to believe is the best country man has been so graciously gifted with, is losing its way.
In the United States, there was a time - not so long ago, that the morals of the masses was the way of the land. The country was comprised of an overwhelming majority that believed we were free to fail or prosper on our own and that the government was there for very specific purposes. Specifically, as the United States Constitution's preamble reads "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America". Now, we live in a time that growing minorities pit 'rich' against 'poor', religions against religions, races against races, and constituents against representatives. I am not so naive to believe this is a new construct - differences have existed long before this great republic. What is disheartening to see is the acceleration and evergrowing conflict between the citizenry.
Many have lost sight of the facts that (this is but a very short list but have been a source of conflict for me in just the past few days) :
I don't have time at this moment to finish my thoughts - but wanted to start the dialog.
However, when it comes to the rest of the world we live in - apparently I am the mouse who is left watching, waiting and confused - "Who moved my cheese?". There are but a few cornerstones that I rely on that helps me stay grounded as I move through life. Unfortunately, it seems more than one of those foundations is becoming unmoored . Specifically, the second level of my foundation is crumbling which begins to change the structure above it. This country that I have been blessed to be born in to, and continue to believe is the best country man has been so graciously gifted with, is losing its way.
In the United States, there was a time - not so long ago, that the morals of the masses was the way of the land. The country was comprised of an overwhelming majority that believed we were free to fail or prosper on our own and that the government was there for very specific purposes. Specifically, as the United States Constitution's preamble reads "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America". Now, we live in a time that growing minorities pit 'rich' against 'poor', religions against religions, races against races, and constituents against representatives. I am not so naive to believe this is a new construct - differences have existed long before this great republic. What is disheartening to see is the acceleration and evergrowing conflict between the citizenry.
Many have lost sight of the facts that (this is but a very short list but have been a source of conflict for me in just the past few days) :
- 'Tax cuts' for a given class is nothing more than permission to keep more of what has been earned.
- Freedom of expression is for all to participate in, not just specific classes.
- Your rights stop when you impact the rights of your neighbor.
- To whom much is given, much is expected.
- Without a foundation of rights for all, not a single individuals rights are worth the paper they are written on.
I don't have time at this moment to finish my thoughts - but wanted to start the dialog.
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Change: Not for everyone
Why do people and organizations move or change their affiliations from something they apparently believe in, only to join a new organization or location and work to change that org/location to match what they left?
There is a mindset that I continue to be confronted with that I just can't understand. Perhaps that is due to my nature of being logical and reasoned and I just can't comprehend this alternate view.
A few years ago, we met our new neighbors who moved 'to the country' from a much more populated area. They said they looked forward to the open fields, safe environment, lower property taxes, well-respected school system and 'easier way of life'. Shortly after they finished un-boxing their earthly possessions they began complaining about the lack of service. The young couple started complaining about trash service - you need to contract for your own service, that we needed sidewalks for strollers, that the police should routinely patrol the area. The neighborhood in question resides on an old horse farm with 20 MPH speed limits and 1-10 acre home sites and I can't remember any crime being committed since I moved in 11 years ago. This same couple were the first to contact the county and complain about the increase in their property assessment and demanded it be reduced as they did not wish to pay any more than what they were already paying. How exactly did they think the county would pay for the existing services - let alone the new ones they were asking for?
On a related note, I have been a part of youth sports in the area for several years. First, as a parent and coach and then on to the administrative side (league coordinator, coaches training, authoring policies ....). On two separate occasions, neighboring sports programs have had difficulty maintaining their programs and deferred families to our programs. As soon as we enrolled the new players and the seasons began to start - the former programs started making demands that 'our' program change to reflect the existing of 'their old' program. From 'adding a patch on the sleeve' to show the heritage from the older program to demanding that we change the guidelines for how teams are formed - WE NEEDED TO CHANGE TO ACCOMMODATE their wants/needs.
A friend of the family moved to a very nice, convenient location in the area. The convenience of the area did have a price and that was it is difficult to get out of the neighborhood at certain times of the day due to the amount of traffic that passes the entry. I recently heard them complaining that a traffic light should be added to ease the flow in and out of the neighborhood.
My children attend private school. Specifically, they attend a Catholic school. We, as a family, made the decision to invest time and treasure to insure the best (in our eyes) for our children. Others have made that same decision and I applaud them for it. There are those (and I have heard them loud and clear) that are offended that their child must attend religion class ... IN A CATHOLIC SCHOOL. I respect that they are not of the catholic faith but they did elect to send their child to that very school.
Lastly, when we moved in to our home we sought out the opinions of our neighbors prior to any projects. There was no law that said we had to do so, and the county I live in is very much a proponent of property rights. We had never had a conflict with any of our ventures until very recently. I hand carried a letter to my neighbor (newly moved in to the area) explaining an upcoming project. I respectfully requested any feedback on our plans and that we would listen to any/all concerns or questions but that the project was on a short timetable due to demand in the market. After a week of no feedback, I contacted the contractor and proceeded to start. Immediately, I received the call requesting a work stoppage until they could verify concerns they had with the county office. We (my family) had been to the county 3 times on permits and restrictions to insure there were no legal issues with what we had planned. Other than informing us that she did not want us to execute the project - there were NO comments regarding what our plans were. Nope, it was 100% about stopping the project and no 'middle ground'. In the end, the county backed us up and said we still have some rights in this country and county.
So, what to do? Why is it that new organizations or people moving in to a functioning society/group/area are free to dictate that the existing functioning group must change to adapt to the new tenants? Why is it that it is wrong to request and/or expect others to conform to the area they are moving to?
There is a mindset that I continue to be confronted with that I just can't understand. Perhaps that is due to my nature of being logical and reasoned and I just can't comprehend this alternate view.
A few years ago, we met our new neighbors who moved 'to the country' from a much more populated area. They said they looked forward to the open fields, safe environment, lower property taxes, well-respected school system and 'easier way of life'. Shortly after they finished un-boxing their earthly possessions they began complaining about the lack of service. The young couple started complaining about trash service - you need to contract for your own service, that we needed sidewalks for strollers, that the police should routinely patrol the area. The neighborhood in question resides on an old horse farm with 20 MPH speed limits and 1-10 acre home sites and I can't remember any crime being committed since I moved in 11 years ago. This same couple were the first to contact the county and complain about the increase in their property assessment and demanded it be reduced as they did not wish to pay any more than what they were already paying. How exactly did they think the county would pay for the existing services - let alone the new ones they were asking for?
On a related note, I have been a part of youth sports in the area for several years. First, as a parent and coach and then on to the administrative side (league coordinator, coaches training, authoring policies ....). On two separate occasions, neighboring sports programs have had difficulty maintaining their programs and deferred families to our programs. As soon as we enrolled the new players and the seasons began to start - the former programs started making demands that 'our' program change to reflect the existing of 'their old' program. From 'adding a patch on the sleeve' to show the heritage from the older program to demanding that we change the guidelines for how teams are formed - WE NEEDED TO CHANGE TO ACCOMMODATE their wants/needs.
A friend of the family moved to a very nice, convenient location in the area. The convenience of the area did have a price and that was it is difficult to get out of the neighborhood at certain times of the day due to the amount of traffic that passes the entry. I recently heard them complaining that a traffic light should be added to ease the flow in and out of the neighborhood.
My children attend private school. Specifically, they attend a Catholic school. We, as a family, made the decision to invest time and treasure to insure the best (in our eyes) for our children. Others have made that same decision and I applaud them for it. There are those (and I have heard them loud and clear) that are offended that their child must attend religion class ... IN A CATHOLIC SCHOOL. I respect that they are not of the catholic faith but they did elect to send their child to that very school.
Lastly, when we moved in to our home we sought out the opinions of our neighbors prior to any projects. There was no law that said we had to do so, and the county I live in is very much a proponent of property rights. We had never had a conflict with any of our ventures until very recently. I hand carried a letter to my neighbor (newly moved in to the area) explaining an upcoming project. I respectfully requested any feedback on our plans and that we would listen to any/all concerns or questions but that the project was on a short timetable due to demand in the market. After a week of no feedback, I contacted the contractor and proceeded to start. Immediately, I received the call requesting a work stoppage until they could verify concerns they had with the county office. We (my family) had been to the county 3 times on permits and restrictions to insure there were no legal issues with what we had planned. Other than informing us that she did not want us to execute the project - there were NO comments regarding what our plans were. Nope, it was 100% about stopping the project and no 'middle ground'. In the end, the county backed us up and said we still have some rights in this country and county.
So, what to do? Why is it that new organizations or people moving in to a functioning society/group/area are free to dictate that the existing functioning group must change to adapt to the new tenants? Why is it that it is wrong to request and/or expect others to conform to the area they are moving to?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
