Society Of No Responsibility

ResponsibilityExcuse me while I go off the normal, beaten path of Political Realities. Today’s post is so different, I had to create the new category of society to properly define it. It’s more than a little safe to make the following statement. The society we live in today is not the society we grew up in. By we, I mean those of us who are middle-aged, possibly 40 and older. Today’s society has changed so drastically, it is almost unrecognizable. The most glaring example of that change is the lack of responsibility that is displayed by so many people. No one wants to take responsibility for their own actions. They are always looking to blame someone, or something else, for what is happening in their lives.

To see an example of this, we have no further to look than the results of the recent elections. No, this is not a post about politics, but the lack of responsibility in our society has led directly to a second term for Barack Obama. Otherwise, more Americans would have been able to realize our country was on the wrong path and would have voted to correct our course. As it stands, many Americans failed to display enough responsibility to even get out and vote. But, that rabbit trail is for another day and another post.

At the risk of raising the ire of those who may be less socially conservative than I, this lack of responsibility is one reason abortion is so rampant in America. It is also one reason so many people fight so strongly for the right of a woman to kill her unborn child. They want the pleasure of sex, without taking the responsibility of making sure they do not get pregnant, or the responsibility of raising and caring for the children that is the likely result of their actions. If the people of our society felt more responsibility for their actions, we would have fewer abortions, fewer broken families, and less crime. Am I judging by proclaiming this? Yes, I am, and I will stand by that statement.

What happens when the people of a particular society fail to take responsibility for their actions? That depends, but if those people are teaching those same traits and habits to their children, then we have a second generation coming up with total lack of responsibility. If there is one thing I have learned in my life, from observing what goes on around me, it is that children usually act like their parents after they are grown. Therefore, if a father refuses to work and make a living for his family, his children, especially his sons, are apt to have that same character flaw. Passed on from generation to generation, this leads to each one having a greater lack of responsibility about them.

Feel free to disagree with me in the comments, but it seems to me every generation gets a little worse. When the going gets tough, when a job doesn’t go right, when family problems arise, far too many people believe it is okay to just walk away. They take no responsibility for the situation they have had a part in creating. Don’t like your job? Just quit and find another. Never mind your children and spouse at home who are needing food, clothes, and other necessities. The society we live in today believes it is okay to do just that. That’s one of their excuses for such a large government, which is needed to take care of those who have such a lack of responsibility.

I know it may seem like I am harsh as I write this post. Before someone goes off on me and starts explaining how so many people are victims of circumstances beyond their control, I realize that. Sometimes, things just happen. Some of them are out of our control. What we can control is how we respond to them. Even if life’s problems spiral out of control, we are responsible for how we respond to the hand we are played. Life’s ups and downs do not negate the responsibility we bear for our response to the negatives and positives we face every day.

Our society can not continue on its current path. As each generation comes up, more and more individuals bear less responsibility. How much longer can our society bear that kind of load, before it collapses under the pressure. I’m afraid that collapse may not be as far in the future as we would like to believe.

About LD Jackson

LD Jackson has written 2038 posts in this blog.

Founder and author of the political and news commentary blog Political Realities. I have always loved to write, but never have I felt my writing was more important than in this present day. If I have changed one mind or impressed one American about the direction our country is headed, then I will consider my endeavors a success. I take the tag line on this blog very seriously. Above all else, in search of the truth.

In Case You Missed It...

22 comments to Society Of No Responsibility

  • This had been abetted by the GOP, so we all share the blame in enabling the fantasy of something for nothing

  • Jim at Conservatives on Fire

    I couldn’t agree with you more, Larry. You are not so much making a judgement as you are noting an observation. This all started I think in the sixties and seventies. We saw it first in the inner-cities and then it spread from there. Is it the result of unintended consequences of government policies or was it more intentional. that is an on going debate. My own opinion is that it will be decades, if at all, before things can change for the better. That is why when I look at a photo of four generations of my blood line, it is the very youngest that I feel an obligation to keep fighting for so they have some chance of seeing a better America than they will if their first decades of life. It is the children for whom our greatest responsibility lays.

  • Jack Camwell

    “It is also one reason so many people fight so strongly for the right of a woman to kill her unborn child. They want the pleasure of sex, without taking the responsibility of making sure they do not get pregnant, or the responsibility of raising and caring for the children that is the likely result of their actions.”
    Stop. Right. There.
    That is an utterly false assumption. So few people who actually fight for pro-choice want abortion simply because they want to be able to have pre-marital sex. Do you really think that an abortion is easier than, say, wearing a condom? Or taking birth control?
    The pro-choice argument has absolutely *nothing* to do with a degredation of personal responsibility. I’m pro-choice because I believe that the government has absolutely zero business poking its nose in such a supremely private matter. And it gets even more ridiculous when you consider that if the GOP had its way, women wouldn’t even be allowed to get an abortion in cases of rape.
    This is what you want? You want the government telling our daughters that they have to keep their rape babies?
    What’s next? Should the government also never allow for DNR orders? I mean, there are some religious people who believe that a human should be kept on life support forever, because letting the body die is such a terrible thing. So does that mean we don’t even have a choice as to whether or not we live or die?
    Have you ever considered that there is personal, moral, and ethical responsibility that one assumes when she decides to have an abortion? Or do you think that no woman in her right mind would ever get one? Like, only the sociopath promiscuous women get abortions? You can’t legislate God’s judgment, or whatever you THINK God’s judgment would be.

    • I’m more ambivalent than some when it comes to abortion issues, but in all fairness, the decision we’re talking about here is not whether the decider lives or dies, but rather if someone ELSE does. If we weren’t concerned about this, Jack, we wouldn’t be much of a society. While I’m sure there are moral people who grapple with such a decision, there are certainly those who are neither moral nor responsible who make these decisions, too. And it’s another person who loses life. I’m always struck that a young woman who has an unwanted baby and strangles it at birth (gruesome, but it does happen) is prosecuted for murder, but in some states if she does the same thing via abortion just before birth she is a rock-star for the liberals. Tough issues and I don’t pretend to have all the answers, but it’s not as simple as you make it out, Jack.

      • To your point about the young woman strangling her child at birth and being prosecuted for murder, I would also bring up the case of Scott Peterson. He was convicted of killing his wife, Laci, and their unborn son. If abortion is not murder, then why was he convicted of two murders?

        • Jack Camwell

          Let’s say someone is in the hospital and they’re a vegetable, and that person is shot and killed by some armed assailant. The assailant is charged with murder. But on the flip side, a family member who makes the call to pull the plug is not charged with murder.
          Why?
          Because the murderer was not in charge of whether or not that person lives or dies. The next of kin was the sole person who was allowed to make that call. Just as in an abortion, the woman is the only person who is allowed to determine whether or not the baby lives or dies (up to a certain point, of course. I’m not a barbarian).
          Up to a point, the baby is completely dependent on the mother to sustain life, just as the vegetable is completely dependent on life support to sustain life. Since the mother provides that “life support,” it is her decision whether or not she continues. Once the baby has an excellent chance for survival, then we enter the territory of legal wrongness.
          I think late term abortions are barbaric, but it’s the mother’s right to choose, not mine, and not yours. That’s the way it should remain.

          • I can not agree with the comparison you have drawn. A woman choosing to have an elective abortion willfully terminates a life that would otherwise live. She chooses to do so because she does not want to sustain that life long enough for it to be born. She makes a conscious choice to kill her unborn child. Trust me when I say, that is completely different than what happened when our family made the choice to not place Mom on life support and allow her to die. Not even close.

            • Who’s to say the baby would live? Who’s to say that the baby would have a good life living with a mother who doesn’t want him/her?

              My comparison was not to shed some sort of moral judgment on the actions, but to shed some sort of legal light on it. Not everything that is legal is moral. I don’t question your decision to pull the plug, but there are some Catholics that would. They would say you were wrong to end her life. If they had it their way, they would not allow you to pull the plug, but instead keep her on life support forever, because to some Catholics, even a life in a vegetative state is a life worth preserving.

              You don’t want them dictating that decision. You legally had the sole responsibility of deciding if/when to terminate that life, moral or immoral. Just as well, a woman has the legal responsibility of deciding whether or not to terminate a pregnancy. Like I said, I personally believe that it should only be legal so long as the baby is completely dependent on the mother’s womb for survival.

              I know, with today’s medical technology, a baby can survive way, way premature. But the more premature the fewer the chances of survival. 4-5 months would be the no turning back point in my world.

          • You’re entitled to your opinion, Jack, but your logic seems tenuous and designed merely to rationalize or justify the preconceived liberal notions about abortion. A Do Not Resuscitate order can only be made when there is no reasonable medical expectation of a full recovery: it cannot be made simply to terminate an unwanted life, like Uncle Joe in a medically induced comma from which he is expected to recover, and Nephew Bill wanting his inheritance as next of kin. With a baby, life is fully expected, not already over. Just because you SAY it should be the woman’s right does not make it so. Larry makes a good point: if the unborn have no rights, why can Peterson–the father–be (rightly) charged for its murder? And then we are to conclude the unborn has rights against being terminated by the father, but not the MOTHER? Come on now…

            Like I said, it’s not as simple as you make it out.

            Just holding your feet to the fire intellectually speaking, Jack…

      • Jack Camwell

        You’re right, it’s not simple. It’s an extremely complex issue because ultimately it involves the extinguishing of little lives. I would personally never advocate for a woman to get an abortion unless the circumstances absolutely warranted one.
        But I can’t be the one to decide whether or not she’s allowed to terminate her pregnancy. It’s for her to decide.

    • Let me explain something, Jack. You are falling back on the same argument used by everyone who is pro-choice. Time after time, I hear people bring up cases of rape or incest to justify their position of allowing a woman the choice to kill their unborn child. However, if you look at the statistics, that justification is not borne out. From a quick search to refresh my memory, I was able to determine that most statistical data tells us that abortions that are performed because of rape or incest account for only 1-2% of the total abortions performed in the US each year. Your argument about our daughters and their rape babies is simply not factual.

      Furthermore, the vast majority of those abortions are performed for no other reason than to end an unwanted pregnancy, not the result of rape or incest. If that isn’t the result of individuals not taking the responsibility for their own actions, I don’t know what is.

      I’m not trying to legislate God’s judgment on anyone. That doesn’t make abortion the right or moral thing to do to escape responsibility.

  • You could see this coming with my generation in the 90’s, the lack of responsibility was glaring. Clinton arguably made it worse. If you were a little older, you might not have been paying attention to what then young people were up to. We had four riots at Michigan State while I was there, all of them more or less over nothing. Why did they happen? One student in a class of mine said “because we could.” That opened my eyes to the lack of self control and lack of responsibility among people my age. You see that in how they vote now and it’s only going to get worse as today’s teenagers and 20 somethings because “adults.”

    Government schools share a lot of the blame here as does the church for failing to stand for the truth of scripture. But the Feds also share some blame here. Will abundant student loans, which do nothing more than increase the cost of college education, we have more kids than ever in increasingly worthless colleges and universities. With a basic college degree largely useless students get even more degrees. (to say nothing of needing 5-6 years to finish a 4 year degree) This only pushes responsibility off to the future. People get real jobs later in life, they get married later in life and they have kids later in life. People are pushing off responsibility until their 30’s and by then you’ve either learned responsibility and self reliance or you haven’t. Sadly, most haven’t learned.

    • There is a lot of blame to go around. My wife and I were very strict on our daughters and we tried to teach them right from wrong, to accept responsibility of their actions. They are doing well, but we sometimes wonder if we shouldn’t have done more.

      The idea that students were rioting, just because they could, boggles my mind. My Dad would have had my hide for doing something like that.

  • There’s no question but that there has been a steady erosion of the American values of hard work and personal responsibility that made this nation exceptional. The new culture of dependency on government is clearly moving us toward mediocrity as a people, which means less freedom, opportunity and success for the generations that will run this country after “us” (e.g. those of us over say 50–in my case WAY over). I fully understand that things change and we cannot cling to or even return to the past. But we CAN embrace and preserve core values that are fundamental to our greatness.

    I like to call to mind Greece and Rome, countries that led the world in culture, innovation, prosperity and power. Today, as their cultures eroded, they are dysfunctional train-wrecks, beggars looking for handouts to sustain them. Why anyone would want to emulate their decline is beyond me, but that is America’s direction under Obama. Now we hear the “fiscal cliff” negotiations mean to the Dems a new “stimulus” package rather than deficit reduction and fiscal responsibility. They are like lemmings racing headlong over the cliff and into the sea. Except they are dragging the rest of us along with them.

    Good post, Larry. I just hope we can find a compelling leader who can take us–post Obama–to a nation of character and values once again, and all that comes from that.

  • I am probably less socially conservative than you are Larry, I consider myself to be a social libertarian and I think that what adults do is their own business but I still think that you are right. The dismantling of the family unite and the erosion of values is a major problem in this country and one that is not easily remedied. People no longer feel they are responsible for their actions and the federal government propagates this problem by accepting it as the norm. This extends beyond the family and into the workforce as people feel the government and the corporations owe them something and they are unwilling to put in the hard work needed to get ahead.

  • What about the baby? Since it can not talk and express its feelings, does it not enter into the equation of deciding if it lives or dies? It didn’t ask to be conceived, but once it happened, it is a human life. Is it right that someone will decide to terminate that life, with no way of knowing how the baby feels? And don’t try to convince me it doesn’t have feelings. I have seen too many examples of babies trying to escape the pain and agony of an abortion to believe that.

    Honestly, you keep coming up with all of these scenarios to justify allowing women to kill their unborn children. I admit there are cases where the moral and legal ramifications are not easily discerned, but the vast majority of abortions are performed because the woman decided she did not want to carry the pregnancy to full term. It is in those cases that we should err on the side of morality. In no way is killing an unborn child the moral thing to do. It is a bane on our society that we have allowed to happen and we are not the better for it.

  • “Values” come from families. As much as I think Liberalism has a lot to do with the destruction of those “time tested” values Conservatives hold we also have to admit that Consumerism has played a huge role in the erosion of our society. Buy, buy, buy is the mantra… having money, showing it off, spending as much of it as possible even if you don’t have any have become important.

    Pink Floyd rather ironically sang:

    Money, it’s a crime
    Share it fairly
    But don’t take a slice of my pie

    Money, so they say
    Is the root of all evil
    Today

  • Dragonconservative

    Great post, Larry. I’m not going to comment on Mr. Camwell’s comment. He and I have argued over this before.

  • “America” has become a society predominated by adolescent thinking.

    The big question that I have: Is it even possible to turn around adolescent thinking once that kind of thinking has taken over the mind of someone who should be old enough to think like an adult?

    We are surrounded by pod people now. **sigh**

  • Yorkshire

    BO does not take ownership of a problem nor will he accept the blame. Everything wrong has been caused by others.


  • Trackbacks: