You can't change the laws before you change the opinions of the lawmakers, and you can't change the opinions of the lawmakers without first changing the opinions of those who elect them.
Another horse before the cart analogy! Those lawmakers aren't supposed to be influenced by voter's opinions, they're supposed to be influenced by the Constitution and the rights of all. Lawmakers are supposed to represent all and protect everyone's rights, not just those that put them in office. Those who elect them don't represent all Americans. Half of our eligible population doesn't even vote because they don't feel that they are being represented anyway! It is all PACS and special interest groups (opinions) like MADD and HGC nowadays.
Your thinking seems so backwards to me. I guess I've not correspondedd enough with you to really know what your thoughts are after all.
Your "Democracy" and "opinion following legislators" are killing America!
I don't need to learn HTML, but thanks for the link. I just don't see the need to go overboard with it. Sufficient to suffice is my motto.
Agreed.
You don't even seem to understand that we don't live in a Democracy! How can we progress when you don't even understand the form of government we have? And please, don't give me the old "it is just an expression". As long as you and others don't recognize our form of government then there will never be the recognition of other's right to Liberty! Democracy gives others that very collective ability and power to violate others' right to Liberty you claim they are unwilling to give up. Recognizing our republican form of government forces others to recognize the right to Liberty of others.
I completely understand that the US Constition of 1789 establishes a Republic, and not a Democracy--using the terms as was common in 1789. However, in modern usage we are a "democracy" (specifically, a "representative democracy.")
But let's not quibble over terms. I understand and agree that the US Constitution does not claim to establish a dictatorship of the majority over the minority, and that even if it did, it would have no right to do so. I am quite familiar with Bastiat's "The Law," and I fully agree with it.
Another horse before the cart analogy! Those lawmakers aren't supposed to be influenced by voter's opinions, they're supposed to be influenced by the Constitution and the rights of all.
Well, that's admittedly what the Founders intended. Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way in practice. The only way I know to chastise the politicians who fail to do their duty in this regard is to vote them out of office. Unfortunately, that takes a majority vote. Hence, my contention that "you have to have the votes."
Alternatively, you could sit down with all the misbehaving politicians and argue them into doing what you think is right. The good news is that the politicians tend to be better educated than the general public, and so you wouldn't have to spend as much time on Poltical Philosophy 101 with them. The bad news is that most of them care more about getting (re)elected than about doing the right thing. And so, again, "you have to have the votes."
Understand, please, that I am not contending that "needing the votes" is the way things ought to be. I do not like this situation one bit. But it's reality, like it or not. I think part of the problem is that you are speaking from a theoretical, ideal perspective (the way things should be,) whereas I am talking about what happens in the real world (as opposed to what should happen.)
Lawmakers are supposed to represent all and protect everyone's rights, not just those that put them in office. Those who elect them don't represent all Americans. Half of our eligible population doesn't even vote because they don't feel that they are being represented anyway! It is all PACS and special interest groups (opinions) like MADD and HGC nowadays.
The PACs, the Unions, the media, Big Business all certainly spend a lot of money towards (re)electing their preferred politicians. But it's also true that the politicians extort campaign contributions from those over whom they can a) threaten with adverse laws, regulations and enforcement actions, or b) bribe with favorable laws, regulations and enforcement inaction. It often isn't easy to tell victim from perpetrator. The whole system is evil.
However, the fundamental problem is the electorate. Their ignorance, their apathy, their willingness to be bribed with bread and circuses, and their mindless voting for the same party for which their family's been voting for the last five generations is what enables the evil system to keep itself in power.
Your thinking seems so backwards to me. I guess I've not correspondedd enough with you to really know what your thoughts are after all. Your "Democracy" and "opinion following legislators" are killing America!
I really do think you misunderstand me. I'm a libertarian. I believe that the right to Liberty (the right to do whatever does not violate the rights of others) is the foundation of all other rights. To deny the right to Liberty is to deny one's own right to make any claims whatsoever.
I don't need to learn HTML, but thanks for the link. I just don't see the need to go overboard with it. Sufficient to suffice is my motto.
I wasn't suggesting that you, personally, needed to learn HTML. The reason I put the "Learn HTML" link there was simply as a service to anyone reading who might have been interested. However, if you misinterpreted it, then others probably would also, so I either won't do that, or will do it some other way that makes the intent more clear.