Not such a model citizen
Because of his high visibility and position of power, our president is inevitably a role model.
President Donald Trump provides the following examples for his fellow citizens:
- He commits financial crimes and/or evades his federal income taxes. Given that two top aides have been convicted of tax evasion and that the president refuses to disclose anything about his finances, it is easy to infer that he has committed financial crimes.
- He sexually assaults women. He has bragged about assaulting women, and 13 women have come forward to accuse him of doing just that.
- He lies whenever it benefits him. Fact-checkers have determined that he has told over 4,000 lies since taking office.
- He encourages people to fear and hate each other in order to get votes.
- He personally attacks anyone who dares to disagree with him.
- He breaks laws and the Constitution when dealing with Congress to prevent congressional oversight.
- He welcomes foreign interference in our elections if it helps his campaign.
- He ignores conflicts of interest and trades special treatment of foreign governments for profit.
If our president doesn’t obey the law, why should we? Why would anyone vote for a man who sets such a bad example for us and our children?
Is the desire to act reason to do so?
Adam Briggle advocates the passage of a city ordinance banning discrimination against LGBT individuals. I respectfully suggest that he assumes his case rather than makes it.
First, he cites a UCLA study of discrimination in Texas that cites percentages, not hard numbers: An unknown number of alleged victims complain, but where is the research on the other side? Furthermore, where are the specific instances of such conduct in Denton? To what extent are these problems real or imagined?
Second, Mr. Briggle alludes to a founding premise in the Declaration of Independence, but the allusion omits a key aspect: “they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Even the deistic Thomas Jefferson recognized that these precious rights originate from a Judeo-Christian perception. Can we tolerate the possibility that the creator understands human flourishing, including sexual choices, better than we do?
Third, let us explore the common ground at the close of his letter, which is shrinking as progressives and traditionalists clash culturally. What is this ground? For example, is sex a reality from birth to be accepted or a variable emotional perception open to counseling? Similarly, is the desire to do something sufficient reason to act as though individual choices affect only one person? My neighbor might wish to shoot barking dogs, but should he? Ideas have consequences, so let us converse with each other respectfully to build upon any common ground.