Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Newspaper contacts | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Losing traditions

January 9, 2013

A recent Sun-Gazette editorial stated, "We have become a society that has lost some of its traditional roots, hatching a more frequent possibility of people without a traditional conscience....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(34)

wwhickok

Jan-09-13 7:00 AM

To a degree I agree with you, personally, I think we need a 'melding' of all the era's. Obviously with slavery and such not included. Because years ago businesses were booming, aside from perhaps the mob, America was safer, costs were lower.. Say what you want but the only reason 'costs' go up on things is because the government demands that they do. Higher taxes = higher costs. We could still be living under the costs of the 50's would still be possible if not for Greed. EVERY cost is based on that principal, all that greed starts with government.

9 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Jan-09-13 8:04 AM

I liked your letter. You will find that traditional means different things to different people. Often times that tradition has been soften and smoothed over time.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

SteelerFan

Jan-09-13 8:29 AM

Bross: "We have become a society that has lost some of its traditional roots, hatching a more frequent possibility of people without a traditional conscience."

Mostly because of the breakdown of the traditional family and along with it, respect for others.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Jan-09-13 8:40 AM

"Perhaps losing some traditions is a good thing." - David Bross

*

Whew...a World without those traditional-"absolutes"??!!!

That could easily make it much-too-difficult for most "conservatives" to get-outta-bed, each day!!

Hmmmmmmmm.....never mind.

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Jan-09-13 8:45 AM

"Say what you want but the only reason 'costs' go up on things is because the government demands that they do." - wwhickok

*

THAT'S why 5-cent candy-bars (during the '50s/'60s) are 85-cents, now??!!!!

Gee...I always assumed that was one, more, o' those "benefits" of Capitalism!!

2 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

philunderwood

Jan-09-13 9:15 AM

David, you sound like you’re reading from one of our progressive Social Studies textbooks. There’s no doubt that values once in place prevented or at least curtailed much of the behavior we witness today, and I’ll add that you can’t make judgments about people’s beliefs and behavior using today’s standards when they lived in different times.

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wwhickok

Jan-09-13 9:28 AM

I'm not convinced voting Republican would have helped our situation right now. I see a lot of people attacking each other, using derogatory statements toward the other side, going back and forth but accomplishing nothing. Everyone thinks they're right, no one ever thinks their wrong. Is Obama the right answer? Not in my opinion, but was Romney? Not in my opinion.

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wwhickok

Jan-09-13 9:30 AM

If you're curious...I totally posted that comment on the wrong article..lol..

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JohnZook

Jan-09-13 9:41 AM

Well, the First Lady informed us that we would have to change our history, our traditions, ..so on and so forth.

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DavidBross

Jan-09-13 9:43 AM

Phil, a few thoughts. First, the "values once in place" you refer to allowed for slavery and subjugation of the native population. That makes them limited in value to admire or emulate. Second, the "values that were once in place" really only applied to a fraction of the population that lived in the US. So, for those who weren't fortunate enough to be born in the proper racial and/or gender pool, such values were nothing to admire. Third, my point is not to blame past generations for living in the times that they did. They did the best they could. I'm sure we would have done much the same if we were living back then. My point is that we, in our time, should know better than to say that a "Golden Age" that only ever existed for some, is a model for us to follow now.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

spike2

Jan-09-13 10:02 AM

Nice letter.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

philunderwood

Jan-09-13 10:38 AM

David, I’m only saying that you’re highlighting traditional values from other times that we consider less than admirable, while ignoring traditional values that curtailed behavior we consider less than admirable today.

As a libertarian, I place individual rights above all, but behavior is most certainly affected by the values predominate in any society at any given time.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CHayes

Jan-09-13 10:53 AM

Nice letter David.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Jan-09-13 11:51 AM

There you go Phil parsing what David wrote into political ideological talking points.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Jan-09-13 12:08 PM

Traditions are nothing but a concept from a previous time. As with anything that was conceived by humans it beomes altered over time. What defines family has been altered over time. What defines faith has altered overtime due to scholars, religion and worshippers. Traditions that start to lose value will re-invent themselves to meet the interests of the current generation. They are not celebrate as they once where. Tradition is define differently for every person as it is for every society and generation.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DavidBross

Jan-09-13 1:24 PM

Phil, I agree that there are values, practices, traditions, that were useful in the past and are useful now. What got my nose out of joint about the editorial was that it presented a view of the past that didn't acknowledge the garbage that was just as much a part of the past as the admirable aspects. So, I guess that what I am saying is that there is value in the past, but there are enough despicable aspects about the past to not venerate it in as glowing terms as the editorial did. As you have guessed, that editorial really annoyed me. In fact, it took a number of drafts of my letter before it was civil enough that my editor/spouse thought it was ready to send in. Hopefully, we are all allowed to "pitch a fit" (I do love Southern phrases) once in a while.

Charles, I enjoyed reading what you wrote in the 12:08 post.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

philunderwood

Jan-09-13 1:40 PM

David, I don’t remember the editorial you addressed in the LTE, but let me say that the same goes for emphasizing the less than admirable parts of history while ignoring the admirable parts. History should be addressed objectively as a whole, warts and all; with the emphasis on all.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DavidBross

Jan-09-13 2:42 PM

Phil, here is the title and date for the editorial: 2012 leaves a message: We live in a fragile world December 28, 2012 I had sent in the letter about 11 days ago so I can see why the editorial would not ring a bell.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

enigma

Jan-09-13 4:20 PM

David, Love the sweeping generalizations. Slavery was never universally accepted and was a bone of contention during the founding. Yes there were things that needed to be changed, but overall the traditions which founded this country were good and should not be lost. Unfortunatly, thinking like yours is what is allowing the tradition of freedom to be lost. Old is not neccessarily bad and new is not neccessarily good. Many of the trditions of the past are things that were found of many years or even centuries to work. Discarding those ideas will only lead to hardship. When you're headed for destruction, "Forward" is the wrong direction.

9 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

philunderwood

Jan-09-13 6:25 PM

David, I get just as angry when I hear our founders and other historical heros placed in the category of evil old white men.

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DavidBross

Jan-09-13 7:59 PM

Here are some quotes from the Preamble to the Declaration of Independence; "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." This traditional value does lose some of its punch when compared to the lives led by those many folks in our early days who weren't male WASPs(White Anglo-Saxon Protestants)

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security." This certainly gives the native population the justification to rebel against the "long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism" that was inflicted on

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DavidBross

Jan-09-13 8:01 PM

Now, the words of the Declaration and the Preamble to the Constitution are stirring and are a valid guide at any time. What must be acknowledged it the hypocrisy displayed throughout our history when it came to who benefitted from these stirring words.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

enigma

Jan-09-13 9:08 PM

David, I think you have your history mixed up. The Native Americans were not treated badly by the founders. That actually happened much later under some of our more "Progressive" administrations. It was not one of the traditions of the founders. You're quoting a lot of revisionist history.

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DavidBross

Jan-09-13 9:29 PM

"David, I think you have your history mixed up. The Native Americans were not treated badly by the founders." I agree the worst abuses came later. After all, it takes time to create a long train of abuses. Now, when did the "Progressive" administrations begin this abuse?

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CaymanJim

Jan-10-13 12:39 AM

Probably gonna catch a lot of negative flak about this, but here it is. As US foreign policy goes, one has been in place for so long, it probably could be called a tradition. I'm speaking of this country's boycott of Cuba. For more than 50 years we have treated that country with disdain. In trying to punish Castro for his Communist policies, we have also punished his citizens. They have been condemned to live in poverty for five decades. The ensuing generations have been indoctrinated to live and breathe Castro's dogma. It can only get worse as more years pass. I believe, before it's too late, talks need to begin, embassies to re-open, and negotiations to discuss resuming trade and travel between the two countries. Our treatment of Cuba, steming from the late 50's, has lost it's usefulness. Both countries could greatly benefit from a change in attitudes.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 34 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web