A President's Decision:
For the People, By the People, Of the People
When I listen to a President argue his case and his comments continually circle
about "moral" issues as founded in his religious beliefs, I worry about the "fall" of the
Nation that my forefathers fought for.
My forefathers left countries where one man decided how they should act, speak; what amount
of taxes they should pay and how the monies would be spent; what they should believe or not
believe; and to what extent they must surrender their bounty to the church. The people coming
to this country often fled from Kings, Military Leaders, and Secular Oppression. When the
Constitution of their new country was written the influence of religious beliefs was minimized
to allow all citizens to practice their beliefs, to eliminate barriers, and to alleviate
oppression for even the smallest group of non-conforming citizens. Separate branches
of government reduced the influence of a single entity.
When a decision must be made for The Nation, I expect a President to make that decision free
of undue influence. His decision is not called for based on His personal secular teachings,
nor should secular entities attempt to influence such a decision! If various secular sects
define the moment of life differently based on their beliefs, teachings, or the dictates of the
head of their Sect, and their practitioners then carry that argument into Governmental decision
making, we have lost the principle of a government for all the people, of all the people,
and by the people. We give up the right for all citizen's beliefs to incorporated and all citizen's
to receive the benefits of the rich diversity of this country's citizenry.
In a country of Buddhists, Lutherans, Jews, and others, who hold different detailed views of life,
why should the decision making process be so heavily weighted with discussions with religious
leaders, Scientific Moralists, personal soul searching, and the esorterical? Why should the
decrees of a Pontiff in Rome, Italy, attempting to set a definition for supplicants, be a major
consideration point? This person hardly represents the average citizen of the USA. He is "appointed
to an office." He must be male. He is selected from a college that consists of almost entirely
non-Americans? More than 50% of the population of this Country is female. Citizens of this
Country fled His Sects domination and helped to establish a government that was minimally
influenced by Churches.
What I expected to hear from our President was an admission that the Government had collected
$200 Million/Billion/Trillion/ or Quadrillion dollars from the citizens. That the President had
examined the use of this money and decided 1) the best use of it was to give it back, or
2) that investing in the subject science would be a worthy use of the monies collected
for all citizens.
In making that decision I expected to hear that the President had examined the worthiness of the investment.
That his decision was based on the positive answers to these types of questions or limited or
declined by a negative response to these questions.
- Was there a reasonable expectation that the whole populace would benefit?
- Did the President have a means of relating the expenditure to actions and activities?
- Did the President have a timetable for reviewing the investment and making a continue or stop decision?
These were not the issues the President discussed!
First he discussed his own soul and religious searching? Then he talked about meetings and
discussions with key religious leaders. He didn't weight the selectivity of his meetings with
a reference to ALL Religious Sects having to submit a response. The President intimated that
he talked with those that had an objection.
While some mention of the benefit of the research method was given, the President did not delineate the
Government function of funding basic research where our "free" economic system would not fund
such research. The President did not discuss the social, governmental, and economic benefits of
the faster solutions to health problems that could be derived from scientific methods being
discussed or the huge costs of forestalled, delayed, and more random or inexact methods that
would have to be used if this technique was not funded.
Again, I felt that the President's decision was primarily based on His personal religious
beliefs and the "noisy" Religious Sect with a special interest. In short, the decision was made
to please one man, and to mollify a large electoral block. The decision was not made in the
best interest of citizenry!