Blog#2

Why are so many people uncomfortable with the idea that many problems don't have a single solution? Give an example of a current controversy in which there are different factions arguing that theirs is the one RIGHT answer and explain why there is in reality no one right answer to the issue.
　
　
Throughout mankind's history, one will always find differences of opinions to various topics. This is due to the fact that man's diversity is based on his socio-economic, educational, political and religious values. It is easy to understand why many people feel uncomfortable that various problems don't have a common single solution. Agreement among people would make life easy, uncomplicated and would avoid many conflicts. I feel man strives basically to achieve a coherent, congenial, peaceful and rational lifestyle. However, thru history, due to man's basic individuality, we will always incur differences of opinions and different solutions to problems.
We only need to consider the current controversy related to universal healthcare. The Democrats of Congress are supporting a massive government takeover of the healthcare industry at the taxpayer's expense of trillions of dollars. Individuals and doctors will be subservient to governmental bureaucrats making their healthcare decisions. Senior citizens will be at a serious disadvantage for services due to a governmental cut back of 500 billion in federal Medicare funding. This plan is strongly supported by Liberals and Leftists in our society. In opposition to this proposal are the Republican Congress men who support reform of healthcare but prefer a revision of the present system. This includes, oversight of insurance company premiums, insuring people with existing medical conditions, tort reform, ability for individuals to buy insurance across state lines, and no cut back in Medicare funding. The Republican proposal would not increase costs into the trillions of dollars and would maintain a non-socialized medical system for the USA. The Rightist and the Tea party movement are in favor of this ideology (Fox news nightly reports). Both opposing sides feel their plan is the right way to go. The previously stated are just a few of the issues involved. We cannot discuss the details of an approximate 2000 page legislative bill in this paper. Obviously, a compromise is needed, as both sides do have some valid arguments. There is no one right answer to this issue.
One can look back into our American history to the Philadelphia convention, now known as the constitutional convention of 1787. Fifty five delegates, with George Washington presiding, designed and passed our present U.S. Constitution ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_Convention ). During this process, there was much disagreement. Benjamin Franklin gave the members an analogy. He, in essence told the delegates to imagine 3 pieces of wood that don't conform to a solid concentric surface. Therefore, you shape each piece to fit together and make a solid, concentric, strong and durable surface area. He effectively brought 55 delegates together to form The House of Representatives, the Senate and Constitution of the United States ( http://www.constitution.org/constit_.htm ). In conclusion, I must state, "we are all different......we have always been different, we will always be different. The diversity of mankind will never be conquered by national governments or by religious leaders. Our diversity is the reason we exist. We exist to be individuals; we exist to be different.........." ( http://wahiduddin.net/views/diversity.htm ).