Some fifteen or so years ago, as a friend of mine prepared to move from the Los Angeles area to Virginia, I kidded her that she was about to be required to once again deal with these "ilities". She replied that, having been raised in that portion of the U.S. she was very much looking forward to getting back to just that situation and circumstance.

What happened?? Have they disappeared? If so, where did they go. Are they hiding? Is there any chance that we can recover and re-install them in our national life?? Do we want to?

What happened is that law overtook common decency and common sense. Before the reader gets the idea that the author has completely "lost his marbles", please allow me to set out the case.

I can remember a time when every mother on the block was responsible for every child out on the block. "In loco parentis" was the watchword. A mother was a mother. Children were the responsibility of mothers and fathers. Therefore, pretty much, all the mothers in the neighborhood (as well as the fathers, when they weren't off elsewhere earning money) took responsibility for all of the children present on the block. Sort of an "international" thing. It mattered not one's religious views or dietary habits. The idea was that protection of the children was so important that it was a universal responsibility so that if Mrs. Smith saw Mrs. Jones' children misbehaving or sliding into danger, she had not only the right but the duty to, at the very least, call Mrs. Jones and apprise her of the situation. Actually, as I remember it, there wasn't a mother on my block who had any problem not only going out and insuring that the "rules" were observed and kept, but also that every child was in a safe environment. What has this to do with civility? Without civility, the aforementioned arrangement would never have been thinkable, let alone implementable.

Back in the seventies when I worked in radio, the station at which I was employed wanted to hire a high school student to "clean up around the station", earn a few bucks, and perhaps learn the business. This became my assignment. I called the principal's office at the local high school and inquired as to the availability of such a young person.The biggest shock I got in my life was when I was informed that I had called the wrong place. That I needed to call the "campus security office" to make any such offer/arrangements!! Being from a time when "security" meant Mrs. Baxter kept an eye out for us through her kitchen window as she did the dishes, and had the authority and responsibilty to stop any misbehavior, I was aghast that a high school needed an entire police force to maintain order and insure security.

Contrast this with "Mrs. Baxter". She never "packed heat", but we all knew that when she spoke we had jolly well better listen or suffer (and I do mean suffer, cuz we knew that it would be our backsides which would become very hot when we got home, if not sooner) the consequences.

What once was a normal and reasonable expectation of society began to erode when everyone (and I do mean everyone) began demanding their "rights" without even the slightest concern or regard for the "rights" of others or even their own duties and responsibilities. A whole bunch have had to be reminded that "your rights end at my nose" meaning, "Any personal rights which you may think you have do not exist/are not enforcable if they trample on my personal rights".

We have replaced this attitude in our society with, "political correctness". We have abandoned the training of our children. We have replaced the practice of allowing others to think and feel as they wished as long as they did not disturb or inconvenience others and that nothing illegal became of their thoughts or actions with a whole raft of persons and organizations pushing laws which seek to control, guide, and dictate our daily actions, even our very thoghts. Now not only is it totally expected that one "protected" group can trample on the rights of another group with impunity, but also we must "understand". There is no understanding on the part of the author. Yet that is exactly what many of the laws which we have seen passed do. They put the "rights" of "protected groups" above those of those groups which are not so protected. If you follow the logic (??) of these laws, it is more of a crime to kill or injure a member of one of these protected groups than one who is not. That is so bogus that it does not require (or deserve) any discussion whatever.

Civility allowed for acceptance (or at least forbade public condemnation) of the reasonable religious practices of others without requiring (as is the case today) it. Children were taught, beginning in the cradle, that there were certain (unwritten) basic immutable rules to our society. And that these immutable rules were to be followed without modification or excuse by everyone involved. That perhaps the child's own family did not believe as the family down the street did, but that both families had the same right among themselves to believe and practice their separate religions and cultural heritages as they saw fit. That it was the duty of that child to respect that right no matter how much s/he might disagree with those practices. And finally that it was forbidden for a person to insist that all others must act/think/speak as that person did. This is no longer the case in an increasing number of homes as well as our general public society. Children are now taught that they have "rights". Many times, the fact that they also have "responsibilities and duties" is glossed over or totally ignored so that their "little psyches" are not "bent". When they grow up, they go out to picket and demonstrate so that the"view/action" of their little group or organization should become the "view/action" of the entire public. Further we have seen that "understanding" is constantly demanded (not requested, demanded) whenever a criminal is brought to the "bar of justice", that we must consider and allow a whole raft of "mitigating circumstances" of which the defense (and certain "rights" groups) further demands that we take action based upon those mitigating circumstanse. That these circumstances fully explain and excuse everything from robbery and rape to murder.

Remembering back, I constantly reminded a young man whom I assisted in raising that

1. Even when one might not have "rights" that responsibilities and duties still remained, that

2. These responsibilities and duties superceded any rights he might have, and

3. Actions have consequences.

It is time that we "got a grip" on our social fabric. It is time that we turned things around. It is time to begin instilling the old values. And please don't start in about how some groups were "mistreated" under those old values. We are not talking about that. That sort of thing was wrong then. It is wrong now. And besides, that argument is a "red herring". A misguided attempt to cloud the issue.

Let's get serious. If only because we have no other choice in the matter. Let's get down to the real business of creating a decent society in which we can all live in equality and peace, not just co-exist.

vurdraak@pacbell.net

Opinion Piece 12

MEANDERINGS ll - WHAT'S IN A NAME ?

Click to Read

Home / List of Topics