Skip to main content

David Paterson

David Paterson, the first black governor of New York state, was sworn in this morning and made a few interesting comments as he was being welcomed into office:

"This transition today is an historic message to the world: That we live by the same values that we profess, and we are a government of laws, not individuals."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't our government supposed to be "of the people, by the people, for the people"?

There's something wrong with the way Paterson said what he said...and I'm still not quite sure why he said it. I mean, I know he was trying to provide a contrast between the actions and words of Eliot Spitzer, and to communicate that no one is above the law...but he went too far.

On the one hand I see his call to a sort of community spirit idea. Which is fine.

On the other hand I see a tendency to spew rhetoric without actually thinking about its meaning. Any rational citizen would assert that government is not composed of laws. Laws do not enforce themselves. Laws do not answer the phone when you dial 9-1-1, or deliver the mail, or make arrests, or decide the outcome of a criminal trial. People do that.

There are plenty of laws out there that are very silly, but the fact that they're there doesn't mean that we have a government.

What do you guys think?

Comments

Eric said…
In his defense, I think he meant that this shows no one is above the law. The law applies to government officials just like it does to all of us.

However, I think you're onto something I would have missed. We think that if we just have the right set of laws our country (or state or city) will be better. We try to "fix" courts by making stricter laws (e.g. CA's three-strike law). In doing so we forget that laws cannot cover all situations and that we need good judges to properly apply the law.

We Christians also try to help God by sticking to strict moral laws. It sounds good and holy but usually turns out hypocritical and oppressive. Jesus brought righteousness apart from the law. Likewise our country was founded on the idea of protecting individual freedom and rights. Too much focus on laws wrecks such freedom.
March 18, 2008 at 8:25 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Focus on the positive

I've been trying to focus on the positive instead of the negative, to seek out the ways in which the imperfection of the world is not keeping it from getting better. To this end, I wanted to share this:
3 comments
Read more

Personal Statement, draft 5

I would appreciate any feedback you all may have :) I have wanted to be a lawyer for a very long time. I have experienced some things in my life so far. I draw on these experiences with each new endeavor. I think about these advantages as get ready to start law school. I am a member of the United States Army National Guard. I took 20 weeks of mentally and physically rigorous initial training, which I completed with highest compliments from peers and supervisors alike. One Drill Sergeant commented as I left the training facility, that it is a shame that such an excellent soldier is National Guard and not full-time Regular Army. I beat out 21 males and 6 females for the top spot in the 10-week vehicle maintenance course I took. I spent the whole of 2004 in Iraq with a transportation company of 120 soldiers; only 14 were female. I know how to thrive in a male-dominated environment. My job in Iraq was to liaise with and supervise groups of Iraqi w...
3 comments
Read more

Gattaca

I was reading the LA Times today and there is a story that I heard about yesterday on NPR about a bill that’s in the senate that establishes that HMOs cannot discriminate against people based on their genetic makeup, specifically genes that are known to predispose them to certain diseases like breast cancer and Alzheimer’s. Of course, this immediately reminded me of the movie Gattaca with Ethan Hawke, Uma Thurman, and Jude Law. It also reminded me of another phenomenon that we studied in my race & ethnicity course this semester, called “redlining.” It’s a practice whereby racial minorities are denied access to housing opportunities in certain neighborhoods because their presence there could drive values down. It’s interesting because the practice doesn’t necessarily reflect prejudice on the part of the agents themselves, only a recognition of the fact that in neighborhoods where black residents live, white residents can have the tendency to move away, thus creating a risk...
2 comments
Read more