The big issue on the ballot this year in Utah is referendum 1 in regards to vouchers for students attending private schools. Both sides of the issue have been quite heated. Salt Lake City is voting for a new mayor, but the voucher debate has been more publicized and more contentious. I don't want to use this venue to discuss the pro's or con's of the issue, but rather to discuss the proper forum for the discussion of such topics.
One of my friends works at a large local business. The owner of the business sent out an email to all the employees stating his position on the referendum and reasons for his position. He invited whomever wished to "reply to all" if they wanted to support his position or offer a counter position. He opened debate for all without work repercussions. Many employees responded back on both sides of the debate. Feelings were hurt and contention was high, creating an atmosphere that was not very agreeable. My friend that works at the business felt that it was inappropriate for the owner to send out the email. She referred to the employee handbook that states that work email can only be used for work purposes. She also expressed the feeling of uneasiness at work for the remainder of the day.
My opinion on the matter differs from my friend's. I'm actually ok with the owner of this business stating his opinion and inviting an open discussion at work. Its his company. He can do with it as he pleases. I think it would be inappropriate for an employee to use work property for the debate without the owners consent, but I think it shows some civic and social responsibility to allow public policy to be debated where we work. There might be legal ramifications if this were a publicly traded company or if pay or advancement in the company is influenced by a persons opinion. But a private business can be a good forum for public debate.
In regards to the ill-feeling at work, people need more debate in their lives and the chance to stand up for what they believe in. Many people are too easily offended if someone else doesn't agree. If the debate is rational, focused on the topic at hand, and does not include personal attacks or labels, then it is good for the people involved. More debate could influence the way people handle controversy and facilitate more open discussions on minor issues, ones where people usually stay silent to "avoid confrontation". This George McFly like change could be a good thing.
Related to this discussion is the question 'Where are the proper forums for debate?' In the LDS culture, every election a letter is sent by the first presidency and read to the congregation that encourages its members to vote for who they think is right. It explicitly states that the church does not advocate any candidate over another. Occasionally the church will speak out against certain issues, but the congregation is at liberty to vote for whomever or whatever they want. An example of this is President Heber J. Grant, who was was a strong advocate of the 18th amendment, but despite his urging, Utah helped ratify the 21st amendment repealing prohibition. Many times in public fast and testimony meetings or the occasional Sunday school class, a member of the congregation will introduce public policy/controversial topics into the lesson or talk. And while I agree that is inappropriate to use testimony meeting for something other than testimony, I don't thing its inappropriate to discuss politics in church. Maybe a fireside or a ward activity would be appropriate. But I think discussing politics with people who have the same values and beliefs as you is a good idea. The United States has demonstrated over and over that is more of a Republic than a Democracy. Protecting the rights of the minority takes precedence over the ruling of the majority. A church group is a powerful special interest group and should be united in its political stance.
This is an odd choice for a first discussion considering I have never much cared for politics. But please share your ideas or thoughts.
- Locke
Showing posts with label referendum 1. Show all posts
Showing posts with label referendum 1. Show all posts
Friday, November 2, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)