Standing Up For Morality And The Family Was Necessary On This Occasion.

This is an original essay written by Edward fagan. 

Standing up together for a common cause is something that both government and opposition politicians should do more regularly. One occasion when all politicians should have taken this bipartisan approach was following a particular action which occurred in 2013. On this occasion, the Supreme Court of the United States struck down a section of the Defense of Marriage Act.

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) struck down Section 3 of the Defence of Marriage Act (DOMA). This section relates to such topics as (for federal purposes) government employees insurance benefits, social security survivors’ benefits and bankruptcy. These laws apply to heterosexual couples only.

The section also relates to immigration, filing of joint tax returns and a scope of other laws. This scope of laws includes protection of (heterosexual only) families of federal officers.  It also includes financial aid eligibility laws, and federal ethics laws applying to heterosexual spouses only.

Those seeking to redefine marriage and the family, obviously, would want to have SCOTUS struck down this section of DOMA.

Standing up for DOMA

This bipartisanship was very evident in May 1996 when both government and opposition politicians voted for the same cause. The Defense Of Marriage Act (DOMA) passed Congress and the Senate by large majorities. This bipartisanship thus contributed to the DOMA being signed into law in September, 1996 by President Bill Clinton.

DOMA defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman. It also defines “spouse” as a partner in a legally recognized heterosexual marriage.

Four out of the nine SCOTUS judges voted in favour of upholding Section 3 of the DOMA. Their position is the correct one, and very noteworthy. The other five judges, clearly, misinterpreted part or all of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

All elected office holders who favoured upholding the DOMA should have highlighted the voting position of those four judges. They should have upheld the voting position of those four judges locally and nationally. They then should have considered using that voting position as the rallying cry for their upholding it in practice. This would be a very good case of the ultimate bipartisanship. It would also be a valid case of the end justifying the means.

By Edward Fagan

       

Mental Health Of Some Leaders Needs To Be Checked 

The state of mental health of our politicians, statesmen and other public figures is very important. The need for an optimal standard of mental health among our national leaders can not be over emphasized. This is so given the nature of the decisions they are required to make, and given the nature and extent of the tasks they are required to perform.

normal_aussie

This relatively small group of people who run our countries have much of our fate in their hands. In a certain country, the president, about 435 congressmen and about 100 senators together decide the fate of the populace.

The populace of this country exceeds three hundred and twenty million people; and the land area of this country is more than three million square miles. This shows the power and responsibility of our political leaders, and the importance of their being of sound mind.

dog_tongue_out

It used to be the case, since the end of the second World War, that mentally unstable politicians, statesmen and other public figures holding office were mainly to be found in the third world.

Even in the third world, mentally unstable politicians were only expected to hold the reins of power following a military or other coup d’état, or a popular uprising.

face_drawing

Second world countries, perhaps, might be expected to produce the occasional unstable political leader (the former Bosnian Serb leader, Radovan Karadzic, is a good example of this point). Such a despotic leader could never be expected to come from a first world country in the post World War 2 era.

The world thought that it had seen the last of the first world’s mentally unstable politicians, following the demise of Hitler, Mussolini, General Francisco Franco, Stalin and General Hideki Tojo. Leaders of a similar mental state to these were not supposed to hold political office ever again in the first world.

doctor_blue

First world countries have been vigilant since 1945 in keeping persons of unstable mind out of high political office. The good reputation earned by the first world countries for civilized behaviour in high political office and other areas of public life, since the end of the second World War, has so far been cherished and well protected.

This situation, however, might be changing soon. There is now a person who seems to be of a very unstable mind seeking election to the highest political office in a prominent first world country. This person is their party’s nominee for the country’s highest political office in the upcoming general election.

man_posing_small

This person’s speech and behaviour remind us of the speech and behaviour of the Axis powers leaders during the nineteen thirties and nineteen forties. This person speaks and behaves like a despot, and ignores rules and conventions in their quest for power. This person shows no regard for others, relative to the consequences of this person’s speech and actions.

This person is considered by some medical experts to be mentally unbalanced. Dr. Drew Pinsky, Physician and radio talk show host, told CNN’s Don Lemon that this person seemed to be suffering from multiple mental illnesses.

Maria Konnikova, New Yorker science and psychology writer, writing on the website Big Think, suggested that this person might be suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder, NPD.

alert

One expert, Dr. Robert Geffner, President of San Diego’s Institution on Violence, Abuse and Trauma, says there are three aberrant disorders psychologists look for: Narcissistic Personality Disorder, or NPD; impulse control disorder; and anti-social personality disorders. Dr. Geffner says that the presence of these disorders along with bullying, existing in the same person, is a “dangerous and frightening combination”.

What happens if this person is elected to their country’s highest political office? What domestic and foreign policy principles and practices will this person pursue after the general election if they are successful at the poll?

flying_ghost

Mentally unstable persons and persons who are, otherwise not mentally well, should not be allowed to contest elections for any level of political office. All applicants to such elections should be required to undergo medical tests to verify their mental health status. Periodic mandatory checks to determine the state of mental health of prospective and actual political leaders should be a necessary requirement during their stay in office. Such checks and testing should be easy to implement. Strict psychological examination of suitable applicants to the Secret Service is standard procedure. This psychological examination can be used as an initial example module for the psychological examinations of our political leaders. The list of persons to be routinely checked should include, the president, the vice president, congressmen, senators, governors and mayors.

by Edward Fagan

Prose writing experiences are immeasurably Joyful to many of us who love writing prose.

Prose writing experiences of deep and lasting joy are had by those of us who write and love writing prose. Since I write a little but have a lot of love for writing, and since my love for writing far exceeds my ability to write, I’m forever grateful for the immensely joyful prose writing experiences which I get. (Prose is the form of writing referred to in this passage.)

headphones_dj

 

I’m grateful to writing for its peculiar and joyful experiences, which it only grants to those of us who write. One factor in writing which aids such joyful and wonderful experience is that of writing to a standard.

It brings immense joy when one successfully writes a passage that meets, in several areas, an idealistic standard toward which one aimed, from the beginning. This standard will include values relating to: writing technique, as well as esthetics and morality as they relate to writing.

man_head

There also is great joy to be had in the experience of writing a fictional passage. The author here is lord of this fictional world. He has and exercises the powers of creation, sustenance and destruction of this world. He exercises such powers over its: details, contents and events; its characters, their thoughts, speech, actions and the conditions of their existence.

Another source of joyful experiences is nonfictional writing. A world of joyful experiences is available to the writer of nonfiction who upholds certain principles in his writing. These principles include, truthfulness, objectivity, empathy, sensitivity to others feelings and the practice of writing in good taste.

happy_lady

Other experiences that can result from the practice of writing include: improved spelling and vocabulary and improved orderliness and clarity of thought. The following experiences also, can result from one’s writing activity: improved comprehension of both written and spoken language and improved general reading and speaking ability.

handsome_guy

We experience joy, satisfaction and fulfilment whenever we successfully write fiction or nonfiction. This results from our timeless love for fictional or nonfictional writing, and the application to actual writing tasks, of our natural writing ability, knowledge, and any other relevant skills we might possess.

When we write fiction, we naturally apply our creative writing ability to this task; when we write nonfiction we also do a similar thing. In both instances of writing, we also draw on knowledge, other skills and abilities to improve the outcome of our effort. In the case of creative writing, we ensure that the supportive information we give is accurate because this is important to a good end result of our effort. In the case of nonfictional writing, we ensure that the following qualities, as mentioned above, prevail through out our written work: truthfulness, objectivity, empathy, sensitivity to others feelings and the practice of writing in good taste.

By Edward Fagan

 

 

 

 

A sensible approach to campaigning between rival politicians, we should welcome. 

A sensible approach to campaigning is leading to unexpected but welcome action in the areas of financial backing and other support that are taking place in the presidential campaign of a certain political party, let’s call it Party X. Some of the traditional billionaire and multi millionaire donors of this party are refusing, in this election, to back the party’s presidential nominee.

boy_smiling

They have vowed instead, to back the other party’s presidential nominee. Let’s call this other party, Party Y. Some Congressmen and Senators of Party X, also have vowed to support the presidential nominee of Party Y.

Unexpectedly, the number of rich donors, congressmen and senators of Party X who are committed to backing and supporting the presidential nominee of Party Y continues to grow.

Why are some of the wealthy donors and prominent members of Party X refusing to back and support their own presidential nominee? Why are they choosing a sensible approach by refusing to back their party’s nominee? This candidate seems to be saying what they consider to be the wrong things, and saying them in the wrong manner.

In their view also, this candidate is committed to the wrong domestic and foreign policy goals, or none at all. This candidate too, displays an unwillingness to become involved in bipartisanship for the good of the country.

happy_lady

On the other hand, the super rich donors, congressmen and senators of Party X who’re backing and supporting the presidential nominee of Party Y, expect that this candidate will practice bipartisanship.

They know that goodwill and cooperation between both parties are necessary, and that only through such bipartisan effort can solutions be found and applied to solve the many problems facing the country.

black_curly_hair_man

A prominent member of Party X who is supporting Party Y’s presidential nominee wrote the following in the Washington Post: “When it comes to the presidency, I will not vote for [my party’s nominee], I will not cast a write-in vote. I’ll be voting for [the other party’s nominee], with the hope that [this person] can bring our people together to do things necessary to strengthen our economy, our environment and our place in the world. To my party friends: I know I’m not alone.”

brown_haired_boy

The future looks bright for cooperation on capital hill, if the position expressed in the above quote is shared by the majority of members of both parties. This changing of the prevailing approach of the last eight years should be welcome. It should be good for the people and the country because important domestic and foreign policy problems can now be dealt with in a bipartisan way. Such bipartisanship has been successfully practiced in the past; and there’s no reason why it can’t be practiced now and in the future with equal or greater success.

By Edward Fagan