Every week and a half, I start to stress out over what topic to write about for my column. I seem to ponder over the same mind-aching question: Should I write about international issues, local problems affecting Binghamton or something in between?

When this type of stress is avoided, writing becomes so enjoyable. The words seem to flow from my fingers; I don’t feel like I’m forcing sentences for the sole purpose of reaching a 500-word minimum.

This week’s inspiration came as I left Glenn G. Bartle Library.

As I walked toward the exit facing the Union, a nice woman representing the Sierra Club stopped me and asked if I was interested in signing her petition.

My first reaction to her question was the obvious one. Of course, I’d love to help her out; it seemed like the right thing to do. As I grabbed my pen to sign, I felt I had one moral obligation to perform before gracing the Sierra Club with my signature.

I thought it might be important to inquire as to what I was actually signing.

The woman began to explain that the petition would be sent to President DeFleur to advocate the use of clean energy on campus, as well the removal of non-renewable energy.

This seemed like a good enough cause to me. I uncapped my pen and started to write, until I hesitated once again.

I was still not convinced. I still felt that I had a certain moral obligation to inquire as to how these things would actually be instituted. I turned to the women and asked her a few simple questions, which I assumed she would have answers to.

How price-effective would these new measures be? What were the benefits to this idea, what were the cons? And how exactly would these plans be implemented?

Each questions yielded the same response: a blank stare.

I felt bad, but I told the women that I could not sign her petition because I was not convinced that the effort was even possible, or that there were any benefits to the petition.

Some might think I’m a heartless, soulless monster, but my reasoning is as follows.

The right to petition the government is embedded in the First Amendment of the Constitution. It states that Congress shall make no law abridging the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. While this certainly is true, and I by no means intend to contradict this right, I believe a certain responsibility accompanies it.

Surely everyone has the right to petition the government, but what possible good would come of it if no solutions are offered to solve the problem? A particular responsibility must accompany this right if anything is ever going to get done.

I think Thomas Jefferson put it best when he said, “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free … it expects what never was and never will be.”

I must concede that many issues affecting us today do in fact have clear limitations, but more can always be done. Governments are instituted by the people; they derive their power from the consent of the governed. Funny, that sounds familiar. There is no excuse for complacency to exist when injustices remain.

If an issue is truly pressing, more must be done to accomplish your goal and reform the inequalities. Protest the administration. Use the media. Call for boycotts of non-renewable energy sources. Go crazy, folks! But simply handing out a petition, without having any knowledge of implementation, costs or any general knowledge? Give me a break.