GOVERNING SENTIMENT: WHY LEGISLATING FEELINGS IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA

Image result for US CONGRESS

“I feel therefore it should mean something.”


In the United States today, we are constantly in these debates on what you can and cannot say. No matter if it’s in a public space or in private; we tend to disagree with the language. But are we just attacking the language, or is it something more? I have come to the conclusion that it’s not the language per se, it’s more so the sentiment. And then we get into the debate in how one should feel in regards to dealing with other people in society. But you can’t have a country where there is a governing of sentiment. Because whose to say how you feel is the right way when feelings can be so ambiguous.

I posted a recent article pertaining to the differences and similarities between former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick and political commentator/author Anne Coulter. How sentiment forced both of them to be locked out of career opportunities because of their stance. Only difference is that Colin was employed on a team and Anne is self-employed. But neither one of them broke any laws. And both were compliant with how they expressed themselves; staying in alliance with their first amendment rights. But the actions of people and how they felt is what effected Colin and Anne. Although people might argue against my point on why Anne said what she said, Colin did what he did, it doesn’t matter. The right to take an action that is within the law was infringed upon.

But what about people in our society. We are so dishonest on how we really feel, and we also are quite selective in what makes us upset. Someone on the left and the right will say their rights are under attack. Yet they are willing to stand in the way of each other’s rights because of how it makes the person/people feel. My real reasons why people are so willing to go against what they feel is wrong is because of how they look at their own lives. The less satisfied you are with your own life, the more willing you are to infringe upon someone else’s life. Anything so someone knows what it’s like to be you. Also, the changes in people’s lives creates a moment to moment sentiment. Which is a main reason why legislating feelings can cause so many problems. Laws are supposed to be resolute, and changed only under drastic measures. The following examples is why you can’t govern sentiment.

I am a Conservative Christian, who believes Gay marriage is wrong. Allowing Gays to marry goes against my Christian beliefs. So therefore we should legislate against Gays ability to get married. Gays state that this is wrong to legislate for this person/people because of the sentiment under a belief that is based around faith, not fact. But here is a flip side example. I am a Liberal Gay man, and the fact that you would say Gay marriage is wrong, you should lose your job. Now anti-gay sentiment is not illegal, but you should lose your job from the sentiment alone. Both examples at the top is why government can’t legislate feelings. Because in the end, whose to say how you feel is always right. As a matter of fact, it might be just as dangerous. Another main reason the government shouldn’t legislate feelings is because feelings shift so much. Law should be more resolute, and not constantly changing. So for now, as it pertains to discussion, everything is on the table.


https://www.facebook.com/groups/1777548702458281/

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/freedomless-speech/x/11885908#/

https://faheemjackson.squarespace.com/ (PERSONAL WEBSITE)

https://www.facebook.com/fjacks063 (FAN PAGE)

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_nr_n_0?fst=as%3Aoff&rh=n%3A283155%2Ck%3Afaheem+jackson&keywords=faheem+jackson&ie=UTF8&qid=1492966094&rnid=2941120011   

@fjackson12345 Instagram

@2320howe Twitter

TOMI, OH TOMI: HOW AGENDAS ARE MORE FAKE THAN WE KNOW

Image result for TOMI

“Which side are you on?”


Conservative talk host of The Blaze’s Tomi Lahren was suspended this past week amidst comments she had made while on air. They weren’t her usual conservative views, but views that swayed a little in the opposite direction. These views got her suspended from The Blaze. Now, people on the left would see this as a good thing. I myself lean a little more left than right, yet I had to take a closer look at this one. Tomi Lahren has been outspoken for quite some time regarding her political viewpoints. But now she’s suspended for statements regarding pro-choice on abortion. Hmm, I find it odd, well why odd.

We live in a country where you have to pick a side on a particular issue. If you pick that side then fine. But if you question something from that side which goes against the side you will lose big. It’s because agendas in America are about not crossing the viewpoint line. As long as you’re down for what I’m pushing, I’m fine with you. But the moment I disagree, I become the biggest piece of garbage around. It’s because we have factions, and a disagreement means a divide in the faction. This is a main reason why I can’t watch the news. They’re places where people fight for ratings, not necessarily seeking the truth in what they report.

What do I mean by the news, I mean both liberal (CNN) and conservative (FOX). And anytime I talk to people, they tend to have one station they patronize. But, since when is it rational to have one viewpoint in the world. How do you not challenge a belief system instead of blindly following. Yet if you challenge the belief you can lose a job. So what should you do in this world? Should you speak up and speak out, or shut up and fall in line? Are you going to take the righteous road or the say what’s expected of you road? Tomi Lahren honestly thought she could speak from her own morale. When in reality, you speak by way of who makes your career.

She received what amounted to a career assault on her person. Someone walked by groped her, and when she turned around to swat them away, the person had long gone. Now who do you complain to regarding this assault? But is it all the conservatives? My answer to that is absolutely not; it just happened to Tomi. There are plenty of liberals that are phony in their agenda. Men and women in the fashion industry ostracized Tiffany Trump at a runway show for the comments her father made. But let’s be clear, he is supposedly disrespectful toward women, yet they have spent years degrading women on their physical appearance. Trump is supposed to be bigoted, yet fashion designers use hundreds of models at fashion weeks, but when it comes to Black women their comment is same, “It’s not my astatic.”

Not my astatic has been used so much when describing working with Black people, that it has become subject for much debate. Hollywood actors stand and criticize, yet would never throw a Hollywood executive’s name under the bus for excluding minorities from acting roles or women from directing jobs. So the left is just as bad as the right. In the end, there is no real side to take. Now the book 48 laws of power speaks against standing alone. Yet standing with a group is just as dangerous in society. I guess agendas will always be apart of our world. In that case, there will always be a constant rotation of Tomi’s being ripped for showing that divide in the faction as well.

PROSTITUTION: THE BUSINESS OF SEX

Image result for SEX FOR SALE

“Should it or shouldn’t it?”

With marijuana slowly being legalized across America by way of dispensary ownership; you have to ask another question. What else will the United States consider in the future? Well, what about prostitution? Will there ever come a time where sex will be legalized for sale? I mean, we already have the porn industry well men and women have sex on camera for pay. Why not having sex via brothel? But wait a minute don’t we have a few already?

We do have a few brothels already in the state of Nevada. But they reside deep within the desert. One of the most remote is known as the Moonlight Bunny Ranch. Not only is it remotely located in the desert, but also the most famous. Men from across the country and around the world come to visit the Bunny Ranch in Nevada. The hoops the owner had to jump through and continue to jump through is constant. But what about other regions of the country?

Will the United States meet some time in the distant future regarding men and women having the opportunity to have sex for money. Because the controversy of porn was seen as that in the beginning. As a matter of fact, porn walks this weird tight rope as it pertains to legality. But we look at it as perfectly fine in today’s society. If the conversation comes up, it will be shot down immediately. Why, what is wrong about legalizing two adults having sex with each other? One of my first guesses is the morality aspect.

We see prostitution is morally wrong, and capitalizing off of it as unethical. For the government to regulate men and women having sex for pay is considered morally wrong. But if that’s the case what about porn, strippers, and women who openly admit they sleep with men for money. Which by the way is an odd way to justify one legal and the other illegal. And for the most part I am not talking porn or stripping; but more so women sleeping with men for money. If a woman says I sleep with men and they give me money, she’s considered promiscuous. But if she says I charge men money for sex, then it’s illegal. Where is the line drawn.

When a woman says she sleeps with men for money, isn’t that prostitution? No because there has to be an agreed upon amount, and an exchange of currency form one hand into another. Well, that qualifies as prostitution also. That has always stuck out to me when I’ve heard women make statements like that. The other moral issue is the concern that young girls will seek to sell their bodies for sex when all else has failed or a quick way into money. The corruptibility it could have on the lives of females is feared to be devastating. Then what about the other aspect which is marriage.

Marriage is a reason also why prostitution is feared in America. We already have cell phone apps which allow you to meet people for random hookups. Think if there was a place to have sex for pay. It would really effect monogamy in this country. And it also leaves women at a great disadvantage. Men would outright ignore a lot of women because why work for your attention if it’s so quick and immediate. Now with that said, is it still good?

I think in my opinion, prostitution is the oldest profession, but it will be more so international than domestic. Because let’s assume women rally for the freedom to be a sex worker, other women would fight it. Plus, I don’t think America is the right place for this type of profession. Yes other countries have it, but they also have a lot of criminality in it as well. So in the end, even though there are some people who walk a fine line when it comes to sex for pay, it should still be illegal in America.