How truly sad it must be to be so alienated from one's own country, one's own city, to hate government as something other than a creature of the people. The Bill of Rights was not written to protect just the individual, it was enacted to ensure that bad government not be allowed to overstep its bounds. The courts have gone back and forth on interpreting those rights, of course, but the Bill of Rights does not relieve either government or you of our responsibility to care for the "other" in society. You don't have to like it and you have the right to vote against it, but you will, I earnestly trust, be defeated at every turn when you do.
It must be a bitter existence for any American citizen who views his republic as the enemy. The lack of participation in representative government is a free-society choice, not a creature of the government itself. The voter turnouts in Minneapolis primaries are far too low to be considered truly representative, but that doesn't mean voters can't vote. In any event, a bare majority is still a majority. What would have - election and governance by minority? Sounds like oligarchy to me. Mr. Atherton defeats his own argument when he asserts: > If you believe in the founding assumptions of this country you'd best believe > that other people are entitled to pursue happiness in whatever way their (sic) > see fit, so long as it doesn't directly impact your right to do the same. We might not agree on the "founding assumptions" of this country, especially when the founders themselves hardly agreed (Hamilton v. Jefferson, 1787); but one thing is certain, the entitlement to the pursuit of happiness cannot come at the expense of others' happiness, and that is precisely what the smoking ban addresses. In any event, of course, it's a true statement that a smoking enterprise cannot shield its employees from the smoke in which they must work. It's na�ve in the extreme to believe that employees toiling in an environment of smoke-filled air can be insulated from that air - even minimally exposed. There are no negligible levels of smoke in an enclosed environment where smoking is allowed. Anarchy is just that: the rights of the individual overwhelming the welfare of society at-large. This is a nation in which individual rights may necessarily be subordinated to the common welfare, another minor provision along with defense of the whole of the country - not just individuals. You have a responsibility to ensure everyone's health and safety even if at the expense of your immediate "happiness" or short-term gratification. In other words "Me IS We, especially if you think "We" is "Me." Andy Driscoll Saint Paul -- on 5/19/04 7:38 PM, Michael Atherton wrote: > > Andy Driscoll wrote: > >> Short of a ban, no business that allows smoking can protect employees from >> second-hand smoke. >> > I don't believe this to be a true statement. Although, it may not be > possible for businesses to protect employees from all smoke, it may be > possible to reduce the risk of smoke to negligible levels. > >> Libertarians want no "government" intrusion into private lives. "Government" >> is us. >> > Government is not us, we are us. Government is a bureaucracy that is > influenced to some degree by a democratic process (don't forget who "won" > the last election), which is itself significantly influenced by wealthy > contributors and political parties (which are not necessarily democratic). > >> We are the government. That is the truism that separates us from many other >> systems, including the dictatorships the current administration is committed >> to supplanting with "our" form of "democracy." I won't go there on this list, >> except to note irony in this argument against "government" - which, in a >> democratic republic, is representative of the majority of those voting. >> > At a minimum a democracy represents a bare majority of the electorate, which > in the U.S. is a fraction of the populous. Some of the Framers recognized > this problem and insisted on the establishment of a Bill of Rights to > protect those of us who are not part of the We. The assumption that all of > We are the government is a false one. > >> If you believe in democracy, you'd best believe, too, that public policy and >> the responsibility for protecting the public health and safety of all >> citizens, not just those who "choose" certain behaviors that threaten the >> public health and/or safety is precisely the role of the government we elect. >> > If you believe in the founding assumptions of this country you'd best > believe that other people are entitled to pursue happiness in whatever way > their see fit, so long as it doesn't directly impact your right to do the > same. > >> If you choose to open a business to the public at-large, you're licensed to >> protect that public from diseases growing out of your patrons - human waste, >> cooked and raw food, storage facilities, dispensing equipment, electrical >> codes, plumbing codes. It's all subject to inspection and citation for >> violations. >> > I agree. > >> The air is no different from anything we eat or drink, whether its pollution >> comes from owners or customers. It's up to government to protect the public >> from air contamination just as it is from contaminated food and water when >> public accommodations "choose" not to do it themselves. Air, water, food and >> drink is no different from traffic control, where traffic signs and laws and >> rules govern our behavior so those who "choose" to ignore the public health >> and safety by their operation of vehicles are cited for violations, sometimes >> jailed. We are a city, a state and a nation of laws which keep order and >> protects us - sometimes from our human failings. >> > By this argument everyone who drives a vehicle with an internal combustion > engine should be cited for polluting the air and negatively impacting those > around them. There would be no gas stations, few power plants, and very > little industry. > >> You want anarchy? Go somewhere else. >> > Who said anything about anarchy? I was arguing for the protection of > individuals rights. Me is not We. > > Michael Atherton Prospect Park REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
