Most of us would quickly answer this question "yes." Whether it is big business, big government, big politics, big media or just big egos, it seems the way to the top in any endeavor is through accusation. Even an answer to this question sounds like an accusation!
To accuse, Webster says, is to find fault or blame, or to bring charges against for doing wrong. Obviously, without accusation there could be no system of jurisprudence. When laws are broken, accusations are in order! Beyond the law, what determines an appropriate accusation (if there is such a thing!)?
Back to our definition, accusation is based on wrong doing. Wrong doing in politics has become any thought or action contrary to a party line. In our personal lives, it is often the belief systems of others that differ from ours. The real question is, do these circumstances justify finding fault, blaming or charging others with wrong.
When a law is broken, a person adjudicates the violation; this person is called a judge. Our constitution established the judicial branch to interpret laws. What happens when there is no appointed judge?
When there is no appointed judge, every man does what is right in his own eyes. We become the accuser and the judge!
In America, much of public life is built on the principle of accusation. A way to avoid being accountable for our own shortcomings is to accuse others. Our president, congressional leaders, heads of business and even religious leaders have become masters of this principle to little beneficial end.
The Bible says we are to encourage one another, to bear the burdens of others and even to love our enemies! Why do you suppose? Could it be that unity brings success, even power over opposition? I struggle to do my part. How about you?
No comments:
Post a Comment