Ted Cruz announced today that he will stand for president. Already I hear people oppose him because he is too religious. Religiosity qua religiosity seems beside the point. I believe that a functioning democratic republic demands the ability to argue honestly.

I remember working with a man named Joe. [Not a pseudonym; there really are people named Joe.] Joe was not a friend. Joe’s personal life was a mess. Joe was, intentionally, a jerk. Our taste could not have been more dissimilar. I loved working with Joe. He was rational, if often wrong. He told the truth. Joe would punch your face, but he would never stab you in the back. He had integrity. That’s all it took. We could trust each other. His parents came from the same town my father was raised in. Once he told me that we may have a family feud. He told me to my face. He would look into it and get back to me. I do not know if there was a feud on his part and it would be prosecuted outside of work. Or if he found he was mistaken. Were it to be a problem he would have told me.

That’s how I feel about political discussions: I can work, or honestly oppose, anyone who is honest and integral.

I can vote for Ted Cruz because he has appeared honest for years. What I cannot vote for is a two-faced liar. In these days of kitman and taqqiya, I find an honest person a relief. Alas, also an exception.

Anyone can lie. People do in all groups. There are a few groups that teach not to lie. I have decided to only vote for people in the following groups.

Physical Scientists
Mechanical Engineers
Civil Engineers
People who repeatedly demonstrate their integrity

These are people who have it beat into their heads that they cannot lie. Any group with esoteric and exoteric literature is immediately suspect in a republic.

I am taking nominations for other people to vote for. Do I have suggestions?


2 comments on “Trustworth

  1. Dan says:

    I’m not a fan of Cruz, myself. His religious preferences, and public displays thereof, don’t sway me either way. That is not a fault of his, I am just a bit cynical when regarding both religion and politicians…

    You do make a good point about your personal criteria for voting. People raised in an environment where deliberate lies are powerfully discouraged provides an excellent initial filter. I would add an addendum to my filter, however, and dismiss religious families that are also political dynasties. I venture that politics trumps religious upbringing.

    • feralplum says:

      Touché, Dan. I am not happy with displayed, theatrical belief. I’ll go farther. The showier the beliefs, the less I trust them. Just an initial screen.

      I do like that there are places where people are trained to integrity. Some Christians are that way. It’s like that old Voltaire quote. And some people must steel themselves to do that which they think will send them to hell. Like when Huck Finn thinks he will consign himself to hell, but still decides not to turn in his friend who is a fugitive slave.

      Accountants are sometimes bad, but a CPA has the right thing to do beat into his brain.

      The sort of atheist who promotes Darwinism does not have his behavior tempered by external opinion. We must rely on his native goodness. I have little enough of that in my makeup.

      An American Sikh may lie. When he does so habitually, he must ask why he follows that hard faith only to break its tenants.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s