By Tom Rhodes, 5/31/2013
In USAToday Linda Valdez wrote an opinion piece titled "Border Wall Causes Serious Injuries." This article is hart felt rhetoric that concludes that we should take ownership for these injuries. This is typical of the feminist emotionalism that permeates our statist society. That we must do something so nobody suffers the consequences of their life choices.
The basis of the entire article is that it doesn't matter that the people in question are criminals, they are people who are suffering from falling from the wall that separates the US and Mexico. The fact that they are breaking the law and the injuries come because of the voluntary risks they choose to take is not relevant. Her interview with Dr. Lynn Gries, emphasizes that the results of risky illegal behavior is "awful to watch," ignoring the voluntary nature of the risk taking.
The article says that "The wall is a constant source of injuries." This is a rhetorical lie, the wall is an inanimate object, the source of the injuries is the voluntary risky and criminal behavior of individuals who choose to attempt to climb over the wall. If you crash your car into a telephone pole and are injured no reasonable person would say that the source of the injury was the telephone pole or even the car, the source of the injury was the failure of the driver to maintain control of the car.
Valdez's whole position is like saying it's the fault of a homeowner for not having a night light that the burglar slipped and broke his arm. The general sentiment is that it is more important that nobody suffer consequences of bad decisions then be responsible for their own actions. Typical of feminists, they want to be able to make any choice and never suffer the consequences of that decision, they also don't want to see anybody else suffer the consequences of their decisions (unless it's a WASPM).
This is a root problem in the USA and world. The entire premise of this article and viewpoint is diminishing and eliminating individual responsibility. Her article clearly is using emotions to override logic and reason, those in power are capitalizing on emotions not truth. In essence she is saying that it is more important that criminals don't suffer the consequences of their actions than holding them responsible for their criminal acts.
Of course this is the same thinking that removed monkey bars, tall slides, big swings, etc. from our playgrounds. I remember when slides were a thousand feet tall and falling off the top would result in certain death, it took forever to climb to the top and you were going 100mph when you hit the bottom so there was no way you could stay on your feet and avoid the mud bog as you tumbled off the end of the slide. The slide was a scary adventure; of course I was 5 so the size may be relative.
Don't forget giant teeter totter's that could propel you miles high, and the jungle gym (monkey bars) went up 4 or 5 stories, was made of metal, and bolted to concrete, falling from the top meant certain death, therefore climbing them was and adventure and risky.
The signs read PLAY AT YOUR OWN RISK. Feminist - mommy - thinking has lead to today
there is no risk involved or allowed, children aren't taught the consequences of taking risks; rather are not allowed to take risks, and if they get hurt it's somebody else's fault. The playgrounds of old are gone, because rather than assuming the parent and child as being responsible for the risks they take, it was assumed the school or city who put up the park was responsible. We traded liberty for security, made the government responsible, thus in control, so now playgrounds are nice save secure and relatively risk free.
Mommy logic prevailed, it's better that no child suffer than have challenging and exciting playgrounds. Next thing you know we'll be arresting kid for riding their bike to school.
The greatness of this country came from risk taking, not risk aversion. We have become so risk averse, that we now want to protect criminals from their risky behavior, rather than let them suffer the consequences of the risk they take. This is the irrational thinking of feminist logic, it leads to giving every kid who competes in sports a trophy, even when they lose. Of course if we are not allowed to suffer for risks, then we also accept the idea that nobody should benefit from the risks they take. Risk aversion is the giant slide to tyranny, where the government assumes all risks, and lets everybody suffers for the risks government chooses to take, and nobody is allowed to benefit from individual risks.
It's about Security vs. Responsibility. Right now all the PLAY AT YOUR OWN RISK signs have been taken down.