Except from: The Flying Shingle
Thursday, May 15 2008
Democracy requires debate
Which brings me to the topic of informed decision. What became abundantly clear to me while I was investigating this issue, is the level of fundamentalist fervour among the fans of the clinic.Among the many questions the Shingle received about the GHCS project, came comments about the discomfort folks felt about asking questions about it. Some said they were treated disparagingly, were subjected to sarcasm, or treated like pariahs for not immediatley jumping on board. Others simply found it hard to ask questions about such a “motherhod” issue.As I was given less than subtle invitations to drop the subject after the last edition of the Shingle, I have no problem believing this is true.
Forget the fact that such responses are a signal to any semi-decent editor that deeper investigation is necessary. Let’s consider the harm this does to any legitimate enterprise and democracy in general.
What does it tell community members about a project when queries and/or doubt are met with snideness and hostility? And what good advice does the Board miss out on when those who counsel caution are frozen out of the conversation? In many ways this project appears to have been the victim of being loved unwisely and too well, and that has done no favours to the GHCS Board.The Board, on the other hand, has answered the Shingle’s questions (many of which were both blunt and pointed) civilly and quickly, and have welcomed the opportunity to clarify their project and intentions. Hopefully others will take instruction from this.
Online source: www.FlyingShingle.com/cgi-bin/coranto/viewnews.cgi?id=20080530084590900622
No comments:
Post a Comment