I wrote the majority of this post a week or so ago and didn't post it because I always hesitate to get involved in the political debacles and debates that become so inflamed and in the end do no good and just make people mad, but that wasn't my intent at all.
I wrote this mostly for myself to separate in my mind what I really thought and believed from the dogma and rhetoric fed to me by family, friends and the media. It was amazing to me as I really considered a few things to realize that what I really felt was actually different than what I'd been assuming were my view points. It was a rewarding endeavor and I'm going to post this in hopes that it doesn't inflame. I'm not seeking to change anyone's opinions or beliefs, nor am I seeking affirmation that my views are correct. What I'd really like is for people to REALLY consider their own opinions, listen to others' and have their minds opened to another view point rather than just clustering down in defense behind the barracks of dogma that's been fed to them. I believe you can respect and understand another without agreeing. I'd love to read similar posts from my friends regarding their views so I too can better understand where others, especially those who don't share my same views are coming from. I'm no political scientist or super informed news junky and as you'll see in several areas I'm not at a definite conclusion, yet. (Another reason I'd love to hear other view points, to help me reach a conclusion.) I'm just a layman American citizen who thinks it's important to think for yourself and this is where I'm coming from.
National Debt and the current debate:
From what I've heard I don't feel that either the Dems. or the GOP have plans that are either real or sustainable. I'm all for a small government, but slashing government expenditures to the lowest levels since Eisenhower courts serious risks, especially for an economy on an already rocky recovery road, but I don't like tax increases either. I'm still deciding if I'm OK with big, successful business and rich Americans shelling out to cover tax increases. (I don't think I'm OK with it at all actually, but am trying to grasp at a feasible solution to the problem) The capitalist in me feels like that's a punishment for success and will stunt economic growth long term too. Definitely tough choices, but I think a balanced approach between the two party's agendas will truly be the best choice which is why I'm grateful for the Gang of Six. Not that I love or agree with everything I've heard about their plan, but to me it's the better alternative to the gridlock. I also think defaulting because either party is too prideful or prejudiced to concede a little is incredibly and insanely selfish. I think defaulting carries serious short and long term economic risks.
In the end the Dems are going to have to swallow cuts to their dear entitlement programs and the GOP is going to have to deal with tax increases, the end.
Welfare (the government provided sort) in General:
I have to tell this story because it's just so absurdly, but sadly, funny to me. I was talking to someone about politics and they were professing how Republican and Conservative they were, decrying everything Pres. Obama has done and ever will do and tooting their horn for Tea-Party Republicanism. Then in the next sentence they were telling me how great government programs are, that Medicare is so much better than paying for private insurance, you can get so much free stuff through WIC and it's too bad Food Stamps have a time limit on the program. SERIOUSLY?!! That nullified any credibility they had in their previous arguments. I'm not implying every Conservative or Tea Party Republican is like this, but it's just an example of how blind our prejudices can be.
Back to the welfare question. I really have to swallow hard on this one to choke back the economist, free-market, capitalist advocate in me. In a perfect world we wouldn't need welfare. People would see the needs of their neighbors and through their own efforts, or through the efforts of religious or civic groups they would help out. Unfortunately we're not a perfect world and I do see the need for government programs to help the disadvantaged, under-privileged and those who have just been dealt a bad hand and need help getting back on their feet. BUT I do think that the majority of the programs in place today do a very poor job at all of the above. They breed dependency and are severely abused. I recognize how tough these programs would be to reform, but to me that's no excuse for letting programs that bleed a country's finances dry and don't do a whole lot of good stand as is.
Along these same lines I read a comment from a respected friend of mine the other day that said, 'charity before economics' in regards to the debt talks. Honestly, that scared me to death and, as I understood it, is illogical and unsustainable. I know as a Christian that sounds terrible that I'd be so afraid of an approach that put charity first. In an individual's life charity before economics is the best approach, but not in the running of a business or a country. A country has to have funds to provide any charitable service. With a charity before economics approach soon the hand dealing the hand-outs will be empty with nothing to give. Very unsustainable. I'm hoping I just misunderstood my friend's intent and meaning.
Gay Marriage:
I stand conservative on this one!! Gay Marriage should NOT be legalized in my view. I feel traditional families (married Mom, Dad and kids) are the bedrock of a healthy society. I think any attempt to legalize and therefore imply to society that the gay lifestyle is normal and acceptable will be severely damaging long term. BUT I have several gay friends and I honestly don't think, like many of my ultra-conservative friends, that having gay attractions is a conscience 'choice' for most gays. Acting on those attractions and living the lifestyle is a conscience choice which veers quite far from my moral compass. (Yes, to me it's morally wrong.) BUT many gay people whether they act on those inclinations or not are still wonderful, good, contributing members of society so I do support domestic partner benefits etc. and obviously I think gays should be treated as civilly and kindly as anyone else.
While we're on the subject, Don't Ask, Don't Tell:
Tough call. I don't like the idea of my husband, brother or son serving in an openly gay military environment - that's for sure! But I'm not sure Don't Ask, Don't Tell was Constitutional and although I'm not thrilled with the repeal, I understand it. I feel it was a little discriminatory. I wouldn't like it, if to serve my country I had to hide something I felt was part of who I am (as I think most gays feel). To me, it's more of a moral issue than a government/military issue which makes it tricky. Morals and government decrees don't often mix well (along the lines of separation of church and state). I'm still a little up in the air on this one. I definitely see both sides and honestly don't know that repeal will change functionality in the military a whole lot anyway.
2nd Amendment, Right to Bear Arms:
I believe an armed public is a safe public. I see the point that law-abiding, sane citizens should be able to have as a big a gun as their crazy criminal counterparts, yet America does have a significantly higher murder rate than other first-world countries with tighter gun laws so there is definitely more to this, but I'll probably always stand firm for the Second Amendment. I think often in people's zeal to defend the 2nd Amendment the 4th Amendment, which guards against unwarranted searches, seizures and suspicions, is overlooked which to me is equally as important.
Illegal Immigration:
Have you ever been to Mexico? I mean the non-touristy parts. I have so much compassion for those people and understand why they'd risk everything to cross the border. It's illegal, which is wrong, yes, but is it more wrong than staying in a town where the drug lords are demanding your sister as a prostitute? That's a true story of one of my Dad's friends who's family illegally crossed the border probably 30 years ago when he was a child and conditions in Mexico have only deteriorated. That child who came in with his family as an illegal immigrant sought citizenship and is now a very successful, contributing member of society. I support an approach that allows illegals to work toward becoming legal without immediate expulsion, but don't necessarily believe in 'free' amnesty. I in no way condone illegal behavior, but I really feel for these people and know it's a tough political question. I think it's a crying shame that the Dream Act failed.
Abortion:
I do NOT support legal abortion. Pro-choice to me is poor excuse. I think the choice to run the risk of getting pregnant was made when she slept with him so please don't take an innocent life in defense of personal choice to avoid consequence. There's always concessions though. I do support abortion in cases of rape, incest or other VERY select instances. Abortion as a form of birth control is a moral abomination to me, a moral concern that affects others through no choice or fault of their own and degrades society to an extent that I do feel the government has as much a right (and obligation) to be involved and prevent it as they do for prosecuting those that take innocent lives in other ways.
Wars:
I hate war. I hate the atrocities, the suffering, the heartbreak at home, everything about it, but do I think it's worth fighting sometimes? Yes. When Libya's president started gunning his own people down in the streets something needed to be done by any country who professed to defend freedom and human rights. Reading A Thousand Splendid Suns (by the same man who wrote The Kite Runner) made me feel a little differently about Afghanistan too. I don't like that the U.S. has become embroiled in a incredibly long, tough and seemingly unwinnable conflict, but I think there has been some good accomplished in Afghanistan by our troops and there had to be some kind of defensive mounted against terrorism. I only hope the withdrawal plan isn't too hasty to undermine that good, although I admit to wanting our troops home safe. The war in Iraq I honestly don't know enough about to form an opinion. From what I do know, it seems like a conflict over something that wasn't even there in the first place and has simply served as a fiscal drain, but again I don't know very much and I understand everything in the Middle East is far more intertwined than appears at first glance.
I do recognize that there are other human rights atrocities just as severe (if not more so) in the world as Libya and Afghanistan where the U.S. isn't involved. The resources to be used in defense of freedom and human rights are finite and battles have to picked and chosen (usually picked with economics in mind, which honestly I can't fault too heartily from a purely logical standpoint). I guess I see both sides to the war debate and need to be little more informed to take a real side.
Those are a smattering of the things I've been thinking about as the presidential field begins to solidify. I hope that I haven't incited too much riot and like I said I'd love to hear your views. Along with criticism though, I like to hear solutions. Personally I think if you're going to spend the time to criticize and nitpick everything that's wrong with one party's plan, you better spend the time to come up with a better solution. Most discussions among citizens I've seen seem to be all criticism with few solutions. It's interesting how that appears to be the same matter of course in Washington. Food for thought, our elected officials may 'represent' us as a people in many more ways than we've considered. I'd propose we curb the criticism and blame of either side in Washington and change the way we lead our own discussions and lives. Just a thought. I look forward to hearing your thoughts!
No comments:
Post a Comment