Are we finally liking logic?

 Are things finally looking up?

Or is it all just a flash in the pan?

This is an opinion piece. If you like it, that’s great. If you don’t that’s good, too. Leave a comment regardless of your stance. You are entitled to your opinion.

Travis Tritt 2022

Kid Rock 2022

I was beginning to think we might not see a demonstration of intelligence ever again. But finally, someone has made a stand for logic. Hopefully that action, though it might cost them a small amount will grow and expand so that we can all get back onto a productive, sustainable track to success for the majority.

I’ve been getting very tired of courts creating legislation. Laws that govern the interaction of the diverse members of society should, to my mind, be created for the people by the people. That is, a majority of the population choose representatives  (definitely NOT “leaders”) to create laws which ensure development, (growth or progress) and safety for a majority of the population in a way and for a result or goal that the majority envision and desire.

Not legislation from a body who’s whole reason for being is administration of legislation created by legislators representing the majority.

If a governing body did not receive a majority of votes cast by the populace they DO NOT have the support to create any new legislation that is not supportive of laws/legislation that already exists. Any attempt to create such legislation is counter to  the countries creation or constitution and thus a treasonous act.

If a governing body amalgamates with other elected officials who had not been completely supportive of their expressed/advertised policies in the lead up to and during the election in order to achieve a governing majority they DO NOT have the support to create NEW LEGISLATION but can only manage through existing legislation. Anything else should be considered destructive to the constitution and thus treasonous.

There are very few governments in the world today – barring of course the disgusting, inhumane dictatorships that claim all manner of benign governing methods such as Russia, China and North Korea – who have the backing of a definable majority of the population. Therefor there should be very few new “laws” enacted in those countries.

Having made statements that I hope shine a light on the disgusting actions of many so called “enlightened” governments I’ll now turn that light on the general populace.

There seems to be a strong belief that the primary focus of “western” governments or democracies is freedom.  I don’t know if this is because of the often quoted, “It’s a free country” or because no one was paying attention in school during social study classes. The freedom was never intended to be complete or without restrictions.

Individual  ”freedoms”  of democracies  are only meant to extend to the point where the actions of the individuals do not interfere with the safety or lifestyle of the majority. This includes religion, managerial methods and life-style. Religion would include cults that have members “drinking the Cool-Aid.” Managerial methods would include minority governments amalgamated with some peripheral body. Lifestyle would include so called “trans gender” persons competing in sporting events against those who have always belonged to their “newly acquired” gender.

There have been court decisions stating that those who have not reached
the “age of majority” and thus are without the right to vote, consume alcohol or even be licenced to drive on public roads, can never the less legally make a decision about their own gender. The primary reason they are not given those rights is because the majority don’t think they have the knowledge or experience to make such decisions without guidance. Perhaps the court decision that they can make a decision about their own gender was the result of some legal student’s reading of poorly worded legislation. Perhaps it was in response to a case that should not have been presented to a court of law. There is absolutely no question that it is one of the top five stupid judicial decisions ever handed down.

Another one of those top five dumb decisions is related and pertains to the sports world. Apparently someone who has competed as a male in a very physically demanding sport can undergo gender transition therapy and/or surgery and then compete with women in the same sport.

Legally that is; certainly not morally.

And if that is true the legal system needs to make serious efforts to incorporate morality. Without it, they aren’t doing that for which they are required.

And if you were six or seven in that aforementioned sport you can very well become number one in the new endeavor because the competition is no longer a competition. Perhaps you even leave the “competition” far behind because many in the sport, those who have spent years working toward the top, may just QUIT IN DISGUST.

If the playing field isn’t level, why even have the sport?

 

It is time we all made our voice heard. It is time to stop this destruction of our society. Make a statement before today’s society goes the way of all those societies that succumbed to an absence of morality and increased indifference

In the instance where a few have now spoken out it was a transgender influencer, Dylan Mulvaney and Anheuser-Busch who started the back-lash. Anheuser hired Mulvaney to be a spokesperson for their “March Madness” promotion and put her (?) picture on Bud Light cans.

First it was Kid Rock who spoke out then it was Travis Tritt who said, “enough is enough.” Since Anheuser-Busch is a sponsor for many concerts and jamborees it will undoubtedly cost those entertainers who have taken this stand (There are more than just two).

You can find this story at Country Rebel .com/ Bud Light Boycott Explained

 But how much should it cost to save society?

How much is logic worth?

Is there a way to reward hard work, intelligence and talent, perhaps by issuing top marks or rewards?

Is there a way to reward a good effort by demonstrating that more effort might result in a higher mark?

Is there a way to demonstrate that no effort will result in no reward?

And why would any company support a kids show featuring drag queens, a trans-gender person regardless of their past accomplishments, an unrepentant thief and liar (including politicians),  or anyone who incites violence.  It might – might – garner attention for your “brand” in the short term but history shows that it’s all destructive to society and in the long term, destructive for you