Reblog: Why Does It Have To Be This Way?

Once again, Jill Dennison has written a post that is reblog-worthy. She poses the right questions that we Americans need to ask ourselves and to answer not in an ideological manner, but in a common sense, human manner. Please read her excellent post, think about her questions and what she has to say, and then ask yourself why it has to be this way.

Please leave you comments on Jill’s post.

We in this nation, around the globe in fact, are so divided that families have crumbled, friendships dissolved like a candy in hot water, marriages …

Why Does It Have To Be This Way?

21 thoughts on “Reblog: Why Does It Have To Be This Way?

  1. jilldennison June 12, 2022 / 7:20 pm

    Thank you so much, Fandango, for both your very kind intro and for this reblog! I greatly appreciate it!

    Liked by 1 person

      • jilldennison June 13, 2022 / 6:01 am

        Sometimes I just sit down and let my fingers go where they will, let my thoughts go where they wish, and this was one of those. From the heart, so to speak. 😊

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Richmond Road June 12, 2022 / 11:22 pm

    I tried to comment on Jill’s site, but it seems beyond me. Essentially I am in agreement with her but I find it difficult to place gun ‘rights’ on an equal footing with abortion rights, religious rights and LBGTQI rights. Whilst my own view of any sort of ‘rights’ is that no such things exist in an ultimate sense. Rights governed by law are entirely man made, of course, and are, as such, open to change and reinterpretation.
    That said, I think personal views on religion, abortion and sexuality normally have a basis in ethics and morality and are very much a matter of right vs wrong in a higher sense, even though opinions may differ. To put them on the same level as one’s ‘right’ to have a gun trivialises them. If someone doesn’t believe in the right to abortion I might strongly disagree with them, but I do respect that their view may be ethically based. Id probably take issue with Jill’s expressed view that choosing whether or not to have an abortion somehow equates to choosing wether or not to eat a biscuit.
    On the other hand I think that anyone who seriously thinks that letting just about anyone wander about with deadly firearms is a morally well thought out position is probably just a moron.
    Perhaps I am displaying my own bias too vividly.
    I also wanted to take issue with a lady who seemed to believe that the world is populated roughly 50/50 by good people and bad people. I’m fairly convinced that worldwide the good people vastly outnumber the bad people. She based her belief upon the amount of intolerance that is displayed around the world, but the nature of tolerance is that it is a fairly silent activity. Intolerance, on the other hand, tends to be shouted loudly. We tend to express our opinion about what is ‘wrong’ than about what is ‘right’.
    Likewise I think Jill’s observation that she knows many LBGTQI people and they are ‘without exception, great’ is not really the point, though it is no doubt correct on her own limited sample. I think it is important to acknowledge that some LBGTQI people are perfectly horrid – simply because they are ‘people’, and therefore both good and bad, just like the rest of us. It’s a bit like saying ‘some of my best friends are gay’ or ‘I absolutely love black people’ …. it says more about me than about ‘them’.

    Perhaps the truly tolerant thing to say might be (and I’m willing to say it here) is that ‘actually, some of my best friends can be complete arseholes.’

    Liked by 1 person

    • Lolsy's Library June 13, 2022 / 3:00 am

      Which is it Richmond, if you agree that the majority of people are good people. Then the likelihood of her LGBTQIA friends being good people, is probably correct. It’s true of literally any group, that there are terrible people in that group. Why don’t you tell us, of your expansive sample, then.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Richmond Road June 13, 2022 / 5:17 am

        Jeeez Loisy! Maybe I didn’t explain that well. Of course the likelihood of her LGBTQI friend being all good people is probably correct. I think I said that. I wasn’t questioning her judgement. My bet is that her non-LGBTQIA friends are probably all good too.
        I really wasn’t trying to take a snipe at Jill. I only meant that to say that to point that out is not really all that informative. I’m not trying to say most people are good (but some of them aren’t) AND most LGBTQIA people are good (but some of them aren’t) because to do so is to say the same thing twice.

        So let me be clear …. most people are good, but some people aren’t.

        I genuinely apologise if I have somehow previously caused offence with my lack of clarity.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Marleen June 13, 2022 / 8:03 am

          I do like the tolerant stance that some of your best friends can be “arseholes” 😓

          Liked by 1 person

        • Marleen June 13, 2022 / 8:38 am

          And this is food for thought:

          That said, I think personal views on religion, abortion and sexuality normally have a basis in ethics and morality and are very much a matter of right vs wrong in a higher sense, even though opinions may differ. To put them on the same level as one’s ‘right’ to have a gun trivialises them.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Marleen June 13, 2022 / 5:15 pm

          Jill’s observation that she knows many LBGTQI[A] people and they are ‘without exception, great’ is not really the point, though it is no doubt correct on her own limited sample.

          There’s also the question of what “great” is. Perhaps they all live up to the same criterion she has for any other kind of person who she accepts as a friend. Anyone can have any measure; a friend could need to like and supply purple popsicles in July. 😜

          Liked by 1 person

          • Richmond Road June 13, 2022 / 6:35 pm

            Thanks for the reminder. I must prompt my friends about next month’s popsicles …..
            But all I meant was that peoples’ gender and sexual preferences were not intrinsically connected to their ‘goodness’ or ‘badness’ in any way. I really think that Jill was saying the same thing. The ‘limited sample’ reference was only in respect to it being the friendship group of one person. Loisy seemed to think I was implying that I had a larger group to sample. I don’t.
            I could, perhaps, report that I have a lot of blue-eyed friends and, without exception, none of them smoke cigarettes. It may be a valid observation but it really doesn’t reveal much about blue-eyed people or smoking.
            I think I may be over complicating an issue upon which we all, more or less, agree.

            Liked by 1 person

            • Fandango June 13, 2022 / 9:57 pm

              I have blue eyes and I don’t smoke cigarettes, so clearly your observation must be completely accurate.

              Like

          • Richmond Road June 13, 2022 / 6:39 pm

            But, Marleen, I admire the philosophical approach you take to it all. Before we can all declare something as ‘great’ we do need to agree upon what ‘great’ actually means.

            But I should go back into my little hole and keep my mouth shut, I think.

            Liked by 1 person

            • Marleen June 13, 2022 / 10:17 pm

              I don’t think that you should go back to your hole. I think we’re in a mutual admiration of philosophers set.

              Liked by 1 person

    • Fandango June 13, 2022 / 6:37 am

      Interesting. Having an abortion is a choice, one that I believe women should be free to make. The outcome of that choice is personal, affecting no one else. What religion we practice is a choice, and people should be free to practice whatever religion they choose, or to not practice any religion at all. The outcome of that choice is personal and does not do harm to others. Being gay or lesbian may or may not be a choice. Some are “born that way,” others may embrace it as a lifestyle choice. Either way, it’s personal and doesn’t cause injury to others.

      Owning and carrying a gun is also a choice (at least in the U.S.), but there are potential consequences to that choice that can cause harm to others. And that is why laws and regulations related to gun ownership are critical. You need a license to drive and if you own a car, it must be registered. The same with piloting an airplane or owning one. These are not intended to harm anyone and their intended purpose is not to kill. But when it comes to guns, whose only intended purpose is to harm and to kill, it’s insanity to believe that having a license to use them or having to register them is an infringement on one’s personal freedom. Especially when many who feel that way, have no qualms about taking away personal freedoms when it comes to abortions, lifestyle, and even religion.

      Like

      • Richmond Road June 13, 2022 / 2:23 pm

        I think we are more or less on the same page here then, but perhaps others may put forward an argument, particularly about abortion, that other people ARE effected. But that is not the debate. I just find it a bit disproportionate to put guns in the same basket.
        In very broad terms I think we are both saying that many things SHOULD be a matter of personal choice, but guns ownership is not one of them.

        Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.