Free Choice, Commitment, and Due Process

In a free democratic society, individuals have rights guaranteed by law along with their preferred religious practices governing how people live their lives. Much is made in America regarding race and relationships and it gets a great deal of attention. So much that fraternal agreements and understandings regulate initiation rituals to reinforce separation. During the creation of American society, recognition of some humans as property was allowed and through enlightenment and years of legal evolution the framework was amended to grant freedoms to all. Given this development, how could any ethnic group claim ownership or violation of property rights with an interracial relationship? Even further to the point within a given racial or ethnic group? Not even the heavily referred Bible recognizes adultery without a prior marriage commitment. Neither the constitution nor the Bible identifies these relations as violating the law. Any attempts to carry out punishment or restriction are themselves liable improper judgments. Trying to keep separate 300 million people is just not practical nor socially & economically desirable. Neither is the idea of genetically re-engineering an American Black race.

My experience has revealed that the admittance of liability or wrongdoing is very hard to achieve from some groups or people. Primarily, the accused or guilty party tries to mitigate the financial punishment for such actions without establishing a legal precedent. Regarding relationships, I look for compatible personalities, matching of values and goals, and partnership more than I do race or ethnicity. I do not regard matching within your own ethnicity nor pre-arranged relationships as a personal responsibility which contradicts the values I embrace as American. History is important but not determinant. There are many groups in society that make “racial solidarity” their cause and path toward success. However, separation solidarity is neither the American history lesson nor the direction of a progressing democratic society. Choices are made when people are comfortable understanding the agreement with some future predictability of the outcome. There are common interests within ethnic groups and they do not limit choices and freedoms. Community commitment and free choice are not mutually exclusive ideals.

The use of fraternal, religious organizations to create career liabilities and family hardships for anyone that does not conform to someone’s ethnic definition is a liability increasing social costs burdening the state. It limits earning potential (tax revenues to government), committed family development, and reinforces ethnic stereotypes. An even greater threat to the democracy is the delay of due process to protect the organized, fraternal violations of law in an attempt to replace with a subjugated group belonging. So, does the American democratic experiment continue to grow or do we fall victim to the separate, (prophetic) group commitments creating its own rules difficult to globally enforce and adjudicate within the legal system of equal justice?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
update: December 2013

Integrative Social and Economic Systems

Societal behavioral norms have been shaped over time through the civilization cycles. Early civilizations were not very sexually inhibitive as evidenced in the ancient artifacts currently displayed in museums around the world. In these early Egyptian, Greek, and Roman cultures women were expected to be dedicated to their husbands. While male sexual promiscuity was acceptable behavior resulting from dominance based upon physical strength and fighting abilities.

The evolution of democratic societies as currently reflected in the U.S. has given women equal rights as men. Advanced technologies and machinery have replaced the required “brute” physical strength to accomplish tasks and placed a premium on mental and intellectual abilities. Equal recognition of ability and responsibility has progressed and eventually equal opportunity and compensation will follow. Marriage is no less important to American values than any other culture. However, the arrangement is becoming as much an economic decision as one of moral expectation. The marriage commitment comes with an expectation consistent with the politically expressed American Dream of a house with backyard and kids. The conservative social structure I briefly identify in blog posts Judgments and Character and Gatekeepers and Modes of Incorporation attempt to maintain historical segments within the society. Just for the sake of declaration, I do not belong nor do I intend to become part of the socially promoted segmented fraternal structure (particularly, any supported by Southern influenced frat collaborations with other “family” values separatists). If the objective is to create and maintain stability in society through committed marital unions, then placing restrictive boundaries and conditional exclusions are not warranted. The segmented social philosophy is a remnant of the early civil rights’ struggles and creates current day relationship obstacles.

Slides:  Married Couples in United States 2006, Updated                          2008 Per Capita Mean Income Analysis (Race and Gender)

Comparatively, the U.S. economic system is a more dynamic, evolved, and inclusive environment with substantial measurements of integrated success. Capitalist markets operate on the assumption of capital allocated to its best and most productive usage with limited restrictions. The system allows capital to flow freely around the world through all cultures and communities to find the best match of opportunities and goals successfully uniting supply with demand. So, in a segmented social group where one gender outnumbers another (more supply over demand), what should happen with the excess “supply”? Could these imposed barriers be the cause of unwanted behaviors? When women outnumber men within a segment more time is spent “rent seeking” a partner and as competition increases within the segment, male promiscuity most likely increases.

The philosophical capitalist (free market) social model allows more freedom to cross boundaries for better balancing of match opportunities for stronger, intimate commitments. Adding to the issue of segmentation are the subjective individual moral behavior judgments affecting opportunities. The impacts are somewhat reflected in national employment rates and other factors further compounding imbalances. Removing social barriers (stigmas) and allowing a free, open market for marriage selection (true natural selection) could increase the desired goal believed to create a more stable society of commitment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[update August 2014]