So, how do you like ultimatums?
By: Steve Trubilla
When someone threatens you if you do not do what they want, does it anger you? It is one thing to work out differences; it is another to be bullied into submission.
I routinely read accounts of people saying if Mr. Trump is elected President they are going to leave the country, most say they will go to Canada. I wonder how most Canadians feel about this. If that grass is not greener I guess they will be moving again.
This is not a new thing. Others have made the same overtures during other elections. In fact some of the same people said the same thing when President George Bush was running. Yet they are still here. What are they waiting for? Are they so self-absorbed they think anyone cares if they leave?
Threats and ultimatums are tools in the bully tool box. My experience is best to face down a bully, most will just fold. Sometimes a bloody nose is in the offing. In the end, you generally feel better for it.
Most people try to avoid confrontation and are willing to compromise when faced with it. If you are dealing with a reasonable person, compromise is a path to resolution. The operative word is, "reasonable." Those that assert it is either my way or no way are not reasonable. Giving them what they want is not compromise, it is submission. In the end it resolves nothing and just adds to the conflict.
Many words are synonymous. I find this to be the case with reasonable and common-sense. This brings to mind North Carolina House Bill 2. It is reasonable that men and women should use different facilities, and doing so is common sense. This is where the argument should end.
One is born with their gender. Legislation can be written and medical procedure can be employed, nothing changes this. Identity as Transgender by definition is choice. The human condition is complex; it is neither reasonable nor common sense to define the social norm for the majority based on what identity someone chooses.
People identify in many ways seeking acceptance. I guess an argument can be made one's disagreement with them is discrimination. Not all arguments hold merit.
"You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time" -- John Lydgate.
Sexual orientation, I have come to believe, may not be choice, and for this reason I feel the social norm should afford protection. I suspect there are those who will challenge me on this. Well, even in our now enlightened world, it is difficult to be different. Most people would not choose a difficult path if they had a choice. I do not know what the answer is to this. My reasoning tells me education will lead us to it.
I know that threats and ultimatums in conflict lead to more conflict. Things are said and done that place resolution in the distance. Think of arguments that destroyed families and friendships because of threats and ultimatums. In the end, was it worth it? I feel most will say no.
The federal government has now issued our state the threat of withholding funding to force its will.
Attorney General Loretta Lynch has stated: "We retain the option of curtailing federal funding to the North Carolina Department of Public Safety and the University of North Carolina as this case proceeds." Who is the "we" she is referring to? Clearly it does not include the majority of the people in North Carolina. "We the people" of North Carolina elected our governor, the most honorable Pat McCrory. He did not pick this fight for North Carolina; he resolved to take a stand against it. There are many that praise his moral courage, I am among them.
We did not elect Loretta Lynch, she was appointed. Yes, confirmed by the Senate, but she is a political appointee. We did, however, elect two senators to represent us in Washington. I have not heard a word from either of them on this. So just who are they representing?
The United States of America was configured as a confederation of states with States' Rights and enumerated powers. We are not the State of America.
There is an arrogance to this that is palpable. She is saying if you do not comply "we" meaning they, will compromise your safety, and destroy your schools. As an individual citizen, how do you feel about this ultimatum? Those advancing this agenda are willing to destroy our state's economy to get what they want.
What was the spark the tore our country apart on April 12th 1861? It was rooted in threats and ultimatums. The lessons of history are worth remembering, is this the road we are going down? Many believe that it is.
By: Steve Trubilla
When someone threatens you if you do not do what they want, does it anger you? It is one thing to work out differences; it is another to be bullied into submission.
I routinely read accounts of people saying if Mr. Trump is elected President they are going to leave the country, most say they will go to Canada. I wonder how most Canadians feel about this. If that grass is not greener I guess they will be moving again.
This is not a new thing. Others have made the same overtures during other elections. In fact some of the same people said the same thing when President George Bush was running. Yet they are still here. What are they waiting for? Are they so self-absorbed they think anyone cares if they leave?
Threats and ultimatums are tools in the bully tool box. My experience is best to face down a bully, most will just fold. Sometimes a bloody nose is in the offing. In the end, you generally feel better for it.
Most people try to avoid confrontation and are willing to compromise when faced with it. If you are dealing with a reasonable person, compromise is a path to resolution. The operative word is, "reasonable." Those that assert it is either my way or no way are not reasonable. Giving them what they want is not compromise, it is submission. In the end it resolves nothing and just adds to the conflict.
Many words are synonymous. I find this to be the case with reasonable and common-sense. This brings to mind North Carolina House Bill 2. It is reasonable that men and women should use different facilities, and doing so is common sense. This is where the argument should end.
One is born with their gender. Legislation can be written and medical procedure can be employed, nothing changes this. Identity as Transgender by definition is choice. The human condition is complex; it is neither reasonable nor common sense to define the social norm for the majority based on what identity someone chooses.
People identify in many ways seeking acceptance. I guess an argument can be made one's disagreement with them is discrimination. Not all arguments hold merit.
"You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time" -- John Lydgate.
Sexual orientation, I have come to believe, may not be choice, and for this reason I feel the social norm should afford protection. I suspect there are those who will challenge me on this. Well, even in our now enlightened world, it is difficult to be different. Most people would not choose a difficult path if they had a choice. I do not know what the answer is to this. My reasoning tells me education will lead us to it.
I know that threats and ultimatums in conflict lead to more conflict. Things are said and done that place resolution in the distance. Think of arguments that destroyed families and friendships because of threats and ultimatums. In the end, was it worth it? I feel most will say no.
The federal government has now issued our state the threat of withholding funding to force its will.
Attorney General Loretta Lynch has stated: "We retain the option of curtailing federal funding to the North Carolina Department of Public Safety and the University of North Carolina as this case proceeds." Who is the "we" she is referring to? Clearly it does not include the majority of the people in North Carolina. "We the people" of North Carolina elected our governor, the most honorable Pat McCrory. He did not pick this fight for North Carolina; he resolved to take a stand against it. There are many that praise his moral courage, I am among them.
We did not elect Loretta Lynch, she was appointed. Yes, confirmed by the Senate, but she is a political appointee. We did, however, elect two senators to represent us in Washington. I have not heard a word from either of them on this. So just who are they representing?
The United States of America was configured as a confederation of states with States' Rights and enumerated powers. We are not the State of America.
There is an arrogance to this that is palpable. She is saying if you do not comply "we" meaning they, will compromise your safety, and destroy your schools. As an individual citizen, how do you feel about this ultimatum? Those advancing this agenda are willing to destroy our state's economy to get what they want.
What was the spark the tore our country apart on April 12th 1861? It was rooted in threats and ultimatums. The lessons of history are worth remembering, is this the road we are going down? Many believe that it is.
RSS Feed