Equality 02 11 2022

Equality 02 11 2022

Let's see if I can remember the threads of logic of this one.

Let's say that someone wins the lottery.

Let's say that I want to buy a property and make a health club out of it with an O2 system cleaned pool.  It would have solar panels that are used to create o2 and purify the pool.

Now I don't want anyone to use that pool that could potentially poop in it.  I mean ZERO instance of that.  Do I have the right to be subjective in who is or is not a member of my club?

But one would like to think that the provision of equality would be applicable.

But equal to what?  It means equal to an educated and responsible adult?  One that is putting forth that standard on his children?

Now lets talk about equality in relation to income.

Let's say that a man eats a can of beans every night and his t-shirt is filthy with them.  He wins the lottery and wants to join my club and use my pool?

When I think of equality perhaps I think of someone, a man, that earned his right of passage to adulthood.  Through maturity and education?

Lets broaden the exclusion principle as it related to what is earned income?

So lets say that there is a millionaire quarterback who swore at members of the audience.  Do I believe him to be equal?  What does it matter?

It matters for this reason.  I don't want him in my pool because of that behavior but his income puts him in the wealth class.

Somehow, indeed, I am saying he doesn't meet that standard of what equality was thought to mean because as an adult I would label that maturity immature.

What am I getting at?  One would believe that there was a straight correlation between income and equality, however it looks like income is evading right to passage to manhood?

And when the Constitution was written did we have issues like people winning the lottery or megamillion athletes and mega actors etc etc.  Not to the degree it was a problem?

So where does this go?  I can't have that pool can I.  Which really means what?  We can't have nice things and services in this country because the standard of equality is being subverted.

What I am talking about is someone who lives their life on a straight life path.  They meet the right to passage to manhood by being mature and educated.  Is it sour grapes to see people who do not live an act by that same standard make it big?  Or is it a valid complaint?  I think it is a valid complaint.

© 2022 Thomas Murphy

And I just started in the direction of some of the original issues with this thread of thought from my recent stream of conscience a few days ago.

******'

Off topic but I don't want to make it a new article.

So the other day I saw an image of a woman.  And I realized as I looked at it that my lungs were becoming more clear.  Is it a scientific trait of arousal?  Who knows?  But I say it is.

Now what if I am in the locker room and I see a male looking at me and they are googly eyed and covering their mouth.  Is that enough to diagnose someone as a homosexual?  What more do you need than that to make the diagnosis?

So some former something wanted to ban former men now women athletes.  All well and good.  But what about the above issue?  I believe it needs to be addressed.

Is it not the same issue as me a normal man sitting in the women's locker room, acting as if it completely normal for me to be there, and getting aroused because I am there?

Might be hard for you to understand this.  You might be conditioned to see the issue through milk bottle glasses.

*******'

I mean read the above and all the other stuff I ever wrote and you will see that Kennedy was right that Ivy League Universities do not benefit a democracy.  What have they been doing with the positions of power they squatted in?  Drinking the dam wine every night is what they have been doing.