show their ignorance on the issues.(such
as the abortion one).–
by taking sides. As example, the pro abortion position could be forced
upon those against it, who may have to pay for what their conscience is
The pro lifer's
position could be forced upon those against it, forcing them to comply
with what they feel they should have the freedom of choice for.
The whole issue
should be subjected to 6 months or so of public debate and discussion.(a
truly, open government), where, thereafter, the will of the
majority of people would prevail as determined by referendum.
are elected to govern all, but according to the will of the majority.(ideally) ;
and hopefully only after a long period of discussion covering all aspects
of any proposal.
making major decisions it deems best for the electorate, is treating the
electorate as if they hadn't yet grown up, as well as alienating those
not in agreement with any proposal in question. And any electorate allowing
yet matured, and deserves to be ruled by whatever majority will be
would be wise to get as many decisions as possible off their shoulders,
and covered by the will of the majority, as long as the majority's will
doesn't violate set down concepts.(a
constitution, again determined and/or ratified after much input by the
on the ten commandments.and
of love). That way all criticism for decisions is circumvented,
having been effectively dealt with by the manners and ways approved by
the people for instituting such things. No government can be intelligently
criticized for that, and their continuance would be assured!
body or corporation would be wise to.examine
Sampler_List of Topics_Search