Skip to content

When The Obvious Is Ignored

Posted in From The Editor's Perspective, Justice, Society and Morals, and World Affairs

Recently, I saw a story in the New York Times about an 11 year rape victim who was denied an abortion, and it struck me that even though it was Argentina, it was obvious a crime had been committed and that should supersede any other action such as abortion rights.

The child had been raped by the partner of her grandmother and was eventually arrested, so why did the authorities deny the child a termination that would not only save her life, but reduce the trauma mentally as well? It turns out that she was forced to have a c-section, which I can only imagine was traumatic, while others failed to see that she was a victim of a crime and needed immediate action. Apparently pro-life people had visited the child and her mother to convince them that abortion was not the answer. At this point, one needs to separate the right to have an opinion versus the logical reasoning that a crime was committed on a minor, who could have died carrying a child. How can these people, and those who stalled the procedure fail to see what was obvious? That the welfare of the child, physically and mentally as the victim of the crime was more important than the abortion debate.

In a supposedly developed world, it concerns me that people fail to see the obvious, and also fail to recognize that their own personal beliefs should not affect legal decisions. The impeachment debate continues in the USA as to whether #45 should be impeached or not, now that the Mueller Report in a redacted format has been released. The simple fact is that the Democrats have a duty to represent ‘The People’ and it’s not about what they think and believe. If there is evidence to bring forth impeachment proceedings, then they have a duty to so regardless of cost or the potential outcome. How can anyone predict the outcome if no action is taken? Why was so much of the report redacted?

It’s clear there is evidence that shows there are questions to be answered, and indicate some dubious acts, and that’s why the impeachment process exists. Congress have that power and if they fail to use it then the Constitution is being ignored and all those who sit in Congress are failing ‘The People’ who are the victims. They wish to see redress and Congress quite simply should impeach. Those who are against it because they think Pence is worse, or that it will do nothing fail to understand the process. If the Crown Prosecution Service or the District Attorney have evidence of a crime, they have a duty to prosecute. These days these do pick and choose which cases, but only if there is not enough evidence to indict. Congress (House of Representatives) have enough evidence to initiate impeachment charges against #45, so why are they stalling?  It makes the Democrats look weak and divided, because it’s obvious that they have a duty to impeach if there is evidence.

Andrew Johnson was impeached on very little evidence that was dubious in legal terms back then, but then again Congress didn’t expect Lincoln to be assassinated and that Johnson would be in charge. Bill Clinton was set up with evidence with conversations that Lewinsky’s ‘friends’ had helped Congress to obtain, which I thought was equally dubious and underhand. Here, the evidence is pretty clear, yet people are divided over whether to impeach or not. Let #45 answer the questions and to defend himself. That’s all the people want, and they have that right. The Constitution gave ‘The People’ rights and for Congress to represent them and by Congress failing to impeach means they have failed ‘The People’ and denied them their constitutional rights. The Democrats need to get their act together to serve the citizens of the USA regardless of their politics. This is no time for individual career moves, while the world watches a country fail at upholding their own laws. Instead we see candidates more concerned about their election campaigns and funding. That is what the old Republicans were banking on and the Democrats predictably have done what they did last time which is why they failed.

The question is not whether to impeach or not, but when and exactly who should be impeached. The Constitution gives Congress and ‘The People’ that power to prevent any abuse of power, and by failing to impeach, history can but look at a country that is not only morally corrupt, but also one that failed its citizens. While outcomes do matter, those can only arise once action has been taken. If #45 is innocent then he will have had a chance to defend himself, after all, he is a public servant and is accountable to the American public.

Be First to Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *