Bible verses on military weapons
Monday, January 25th, 2010What happened here? “Government” advertised for a gunsight. Purveyors offered item, providing examples for testing (meeting minimum criteria established). Some government representative “signed off” on the purchase of a best buy (without ever examining the hardware–dependent upon testers), and contract was let, items delivered. Gunsights carry manufacturer’s identification in order to establish corrective path for faults (fines? replacement? cancellation of contract?).
Were the gunsights indeed faulty? Should the government require replacement without the notations? Is there a “breach of contract?” Did the contract specify “No religious notations?” If government specifies replacement of equipment without the notations, the contract probably contains a paragraph about “modification,” and purveyor would receive windfall profits. If the government negates the contract on the basis of constitutional correctness, the ultimate sufferer might be the soldier in the field who has no (or less effective) gunsight, bankruptcy of the purveyor, loss of jobs, etc. All decisions have “butterfly effect,” particularly when it comes to economics. Should the purveyor be punished at the expense of the national mission?
What if every item’s serial number began with 666?
Most of the ultimate users are concerned with how the gunsight benefits, and are not even aware of the cited notations–as, indeed, was the case with the purchasing agent who approved the contract.
All actions harm/offend someone. The Libertarian philosophy–”Live, and let live”–boils down to “Each do the least harm for the commonweal.”
So, shall we cut the baby in half and give each claimant their portion?
“Laws” are G and electromagnet sureties. “Rules” (Constitutional) are guidelines–not necessarily applicable in every situation.
Does this aberration require corrective action?
What is the ultimate social consequence?
Were the gunsights indeed faulty? Should the government require replacement without the notations? Is there a “breach of contract?” Did the contract specify “No religious notations?” If government specifies replacement of equipment without the notations, the contract probably contains a paragraph about “modification,” and purveyor would receive windfall profits. If the government negates the contract on the basis of constitutional correctness, the ultimate sufferer might be the soldier in the field who has no (or less effective) gunsight, bankruptcy of the purveyor, loss of jobs, etc. All decisions have “butterfly effect,” particularly when it comes to economics. Should the purveyor be punished at the expense of the national mission?
What if every item’s serial number began with 666?
Most of the ultimate users are concerned with how the gunsight benefits, and are not even aware of the cited notations–as, indeed, was the case with the purchasing agent who approved the contract.
All actions harm/offend someone. The Libertarian philosophy–”Live, and let live”–boils down to “Each do the least harm for the commonweal.”
So, shall we cut the baby in half and give each claimant their portion?
“Laws” are G and electromagnet sureties. “Rules” (Constitutional) are guidelines–not necessarily applicable in every situation.
Does this aberration require corrective action?
What is the ultimate social consequence?