"A cruel debate opponent" "Pagan blasphemer" "Reverse-iconoclast" "don't get pissed at him b/c he pwn yalls whiney asses"
My Photo
Location: Indiana, United States

Miscellaneous meanderings and philosophical ramblings. The title from a spiral notebook I used to jot down my thoughts on religion and other matters some years ago. I like to write, think and express my views on various issues. Robust discussion is welcome.

Chris of Rights and Charles Martin <-- Lists of debunked Sarah Palin rumors

"Lan astaslem."
I will not submit. I will not surrender.
Choose your language: Francais/French Deutsch/German Italiano/Italian Portugues/Portuguese Espanol/Spanish 日本語/Japanese 한국어/Korean 中文(简体)/Chinese Simplified

Wednesday, May 04, 2005

Moving to a new neighborhood - Issue #6

Explanation here.

March 25, 2004
OnStar and The Nanny State

As children we often look to and depend on our parents and other adults for our well being. This is all well and good. In the best families and social groups that help will be there reliably, helping the child grow into a healthy self-reliant adult who can then repeat this process with their own and other children. We see this as good and necessary, and provide laws protecting children from bad and neglectful parents. The problem is that some adults have remained childlike in their ability to be self-sufficient, and worse yet distort the idea of rights to include every want and desire they can imagine as being a need.

This brings me to an OnStar ad I heard on the radio recently. The woman calls and asks about the engine check light being on in her vehicle. The OnStar representative asks her how long it has been on and she replies that she just started the car. OnStar tells her if the light is steady she can drive to her destination but should take it to a service station soon. The light is steady and she already has an appointment for service. Cut to the end of the commercial.

Now some people may be impressed at the service that OnStar provided to their customer. On the other hand, my question is why didn’t the driver just open the glove box and look in the owner’s manual? We do still require one to be an adult or nearly so in order to be a licensed driver don’t we? Apparently, responsible adulthood is just too much effort nowadays; a condition that can be alleviated by innovative companies, for a price. Certainly, if one wants to pay for pampering that is their decision. The problem is that such a desire is being ingrained in our youth and the costs eventually forced on the rest of us. While we don’t mind paying for our own pampering or someone else paying for their own, we naturally and rightly draw the line at paying for someone else’s luxury; even more so when they try to declare as a right the enjoyment of these luxuries. In effect they are demanding to be treated as a dependent child in an adult sized body with the real adults in society paying the bill.

The problem was clearly illustrated some time ago by a grown man practically asking then candidate Bill Clinton to assume the role of the nations parent. Never mind that such childish reliance on government should indicate some sort of arrested development. I am pretty sure this was an adult and not just an extremely tall preteen with inexplicable facial hair growth. Looking back, I do wonder if the man asking that question regrets looking to someone of Bill Clinton’s character in such a manner.

The depth of the problem seems to know no bounds as the expansion of rights now includes the right not to be offended, with the matter of offense being nearly entirely dependent on the completely subjective, emotional viewpoint of the supposedly offended complainant. This creates a condition where one cannot possibly know, for example, if they have broken harassment laws, or “destroyed” the supposed wall between religion and government until high priced lawyers have dragged them through several expensive court cases. I think we can agree that most of us cannot afford expensive lawyers in addition to the risk of ultimately losing the case in court. So all we can do is acquiesce to those who are easily offended, leach off of others, or place the health of their self-esteem in how they feel rather then in what they do. Unfortunately, such people will only continue to define more and more things as rights, with everyone else not presently on their side of the current lawsuit being forced to pay for their childish wants and desires.

I rarely give financial advice but maybe one should invest in Onstar as soon as that is possible; since, no doubt, it will eventually become a government-subsidized business with a guaranteed market share. After all, how can anyone be against increasing safety for everyone? I think the more accurate statement would be – “Its for the children”.
Trackback URI                             Submit this post on! width=                     View blog reactions
<< Home

Click for Latest Posts

Creative Commons License

As defined and limited by the license, any use of work from this blog, must be attributed to Mark K. Sprengel and include a link back to this blog.

Get updates by e-mail:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Widgetize! Subscribe Social Bookmark Blogs that link here
My Technorati profile

Also, follow me on Twitter

Search this blog:

powered by Aditya

Recent Comments: