Agnostic.com

13 1

Is a president to be revered or challenged? Read the full question before replying.

Is a president to be revered or challenged? Do not put Trump into the question. The question is about any politician - but more specifically about a president.

Not every option is a direct opposite of another. You can choose more than one option. Simply tick those you think are appropriate.

I'm interested to see WHAT you think a president should actually be.

My choices are: 2 and 4.

Admittedly, I'm a little bothered by those who claim that "just because" a person is a president, they cannot be challenged nor questioned.

View Results
SamKerry 7 Jan 23

Post a comment Reply Add Photo

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

13 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

1

I go for challenged because authority should always be challenged. They should always have a justifiable explanation for all choices and actions.

I also pity them because they were stupid enough to get themselves a thankless job that no one in their right mind would take.

0

I would never respect anyone, 'always.' I don't disrespect someone, simply because they 'disrespected' me. I cannot pity someone simply because they sought a position, that is challenging for them. I can, appreciate their 'struggles,' however, and would not undermine, without just cause.

0

I opted for the last because abolished was not a choice. We are a progressive country at least we are supposed to be. The entire government need to be revamped to many rich making choices for everyone else. To be true balance there should be a representing figure for all people to agree on not one party dictating.

1

I did not answer because you respect the office not the person.

1

I agree..Respect when it's deserved..but mostly Challenged on all points.

0

I will not insult my President
in careless word or song:
whether I agree with him--
whether he or she is right or wrong...

We must work in peace and respect together
if we wish to “make America great”
--and so, out of respect for America
I’ll keep its stewards from the ink-spray of my hate!

I am bothered by the words, 'not insult'...'whether he is right or wrong,.' I can't see challenging a wrong, as an insult? I would not 'insult' someone because they were wrong, either. Isn't 'respect' built on truth, fairness and justice? I simply cannot 'respect' a country...it is just a 'land mass.' It is the people I care about. They could be under many 'flags,' ie, organizations, states, etc. I feel no 'hate!'

@Freedompath I'm talking about gratuitous insults, not pointing out facts. If you just stick to the facts (i.e. what has been said and done) there's more than enough rope to hang with. Nothing insulting about saying "You made a racist remark" or "That was an insensitive thing to say", etc. "Respect", to me, does not mean "sweep under the rug"; it means refraining from calling someone a "Cheetoh-faced fascist sexual predator with zero attention span and a 5th grade vocabulary". I just think it demeans everyone to bring that kind of behavior into what should be one of our most hallowed institutions. The same ends can be met; we don't have to be immature about it.

And it's just a poem. I stretch stuff to make it fit rhyme scheme, meter, or tone. 🙂

@stinkeye_yes, I am not into 'name calling' under any conitions the other person seems to shut down, when that happens. So no progress there. It seems we agree, but from different angles. Thanks...

0

the military may have to salute the rank not the person, but I am a civilian. I have zero respect for any of our political leaders, hell I wouldnt even trust the majority of our elected officials to be alone in the same room as a teenage girl. Cough...Moore...cough.

That is my bar for respect. If I can't trust you to not rape a teenager I can't trust you. Right now I don't trust any of them.

0

I disagree with 2 because one can be respectfully toxic. I also think 4 should say held accountable. To me, challenged is too negative and doesn't take into account the good things that come from the office.

Obama was the first president who actually said he would have some policies that not everyone would agree with. He also said we were a nation also composed to the nonreligious. I think this acceptance of us only added to the hatred from the rabid conservatives.

0

Gotta go with 2 and 4; and 2 applies to everyone, as far as my thinking goes.

3

2 and 4 are the only options for me. This applies to any leader.

Betty Level 7 Jan 23, 2018
4

perhaps before Obama, people revered The presidency more so but having the first african american president changed all that. I have lived through a Reagan and 2 Bush's and although i may not have agreed with them politically, i respected the office of presidency. Now look where we are as a nation.Toxic....

@AndrewL418 lol

3

The President is NOT the United States. In Nazi Germany, Hitler was characterized as being one and the same as the German state. President's occupy an elective office of our government. They must be challenged when necessary. President's are not infallible. They make mistakes and they must be held responsible for poor decisions. Presidents represent the entire country and must keep their politics in the middle. That is the only way a President can be successful.

Thank you for reaffirming my comment (challenged "when necessary" ).

3

Agree with you on 2 and 4.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:17618
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.