Questioning is a core prerequisite of critical thinking, especially in the current global climate where untruths and alternative facts come to become mainstream opinions. It can prove to be the difference between coming up with an informed opinion and following blindly what is imposed upon us by certain people of authority. One such individual who tries to make his opinion count and a majority mindset is Ohio’s Congressman Jim Jordan.
Although at first glance Congressman Jordan appears to be just another politician, the peril of never questioning what he says stems from his particular set of beliefs. Namely, he is a man of strong religious values and conservatism, which controls the decisions he makes. During his tenure in the House of Representatives, he has been no stranger to controversial decisions, of which many have been weaponized to further his agenda – and that is why it is important to re-evaluate what he proposes, and why.
Jordan has been found at multiple points to peddle various micro-agendas, such as his staunch anti-immigration stance and his refusal to accept refugees from countries like Syria. He also has been labeled as an antagonist of LGBTQ+ rights and has gone on record as being a purveyor of “traditional values”. These claims are inherently dangerous, as they have divided Americans into different camps and made political discussion hostile.
The largest peril of not questioning what Jim Jordan says is the accepted notion of a single-mindedness espoused by some in his party. He strongly advocated for the invasion of Iraq without considering its economic and political implications, and he also has been a major player in the congressional debate of the Trumpcare bill.
The risks posed by not looking beneath the surface of Jim Jordan’s words and decisions have real implications, both domestically and internationally. It would be a mistake to accept what he says at face value without looking beyond his rhetoric to assess what the actual ethical and moral implications of his proposals are.
By questioning what Jim Jordan is saying and why, we can more carefully evaluate how his decisions may impact the nation and the world. This may help us uncover any underlying motivations behind his words and, in the process, make more informed decisions about which policies, individuals, and factions to support. Ultimately, never questioning what Jim Jordan says can lead to dangerous results if not dealt with early on.
Questioning is a core prerequisite of critical thinking, especially in the current global climate where untruths and alternative facts come to become mainstream opinions. It can prove to be the difference between coming up with an informed opinion and following blindly what is imposed upon us by certain people of authority. One such individual who tries to make his opinion count and a majority mindset is Ohio’s Congressman Jim Jordan.
Although at first glance Congressman Jordan appears to be just another politician, the peril of never questioning what he says stems from his particular set of beliefs. Namely, he is a man of strong religious values and conservatism, which controls the decisions he makes. During his tenure in the House of Representatives, he has been no stranger to controversial decisions, of which many have been weaponized to further his agenda – and that is why it is important to re-evaluate what he proposes, and why.
Jordan has been found at multiple points to peddle various micro-agendas, such as his staunch anti-immigration stance and his refusal to accept refugees from countries like Syria. He also has been labeled as an antagonist of LGBTQ+ rights and has gone on record as being a purveyor of “traditional values”. These claims are inherently dangerous, as they have divided Americans into different camps and made political discussion hostile.
The largest peril of not questioning what Jim Jordan says is the accepted notion of a single-mindedness espoused by some in his party. He strongly advocated for the invasion of Iraq without considering its economic and political implications, and he also has been a major player in the congressional debate of the Trumpcare bill.
The risks posed by not looking beneath the surface of Jim Jordan’s words and decisions have real implications, both domestically and internationally. It would be a mistake to accept what he says at face value without looking beyond his rhetoric to assess what the actual ethical and moral implications of his proposals are.
By questioning what Jim Jordan is saying and why, we can more carefully evaluate how his decisions may impact the nation and the world. This may help us uncover any underlying motivations behind his words and, in the process, make more informed decisions about which policies, individuals, and factions to support. Ultimately, never questioning what Jim Jordan says can lead to dangerous results if not dealt with early on.
