Further Policy Information

A couple of questions were asked, and I feel I should address them quickly, though they address among the more controversial issues...abortion and gay marriage.

Alright, well...idealistically, I am pro life. This not only means I do not condone abortion, I also do not condone the death penalty. But that's just idealistically. I don't openly oppose abortion. There are situations (rape, incest, date-rape, etc) where abortion is quite understandable. But using abortion as a means of contraception is right out. I think education is important. Oh, yeah, that reminds me, get rid of abstinence-only education. But, don't stop teaching abstinence. Let young people (and some older folks could use with a refresher course probably) know that the only way to truly prevent STDs and unwanted pregnancies is to (surprise surprise) not have sex. But remember that people are going to make decisions based on what they may want at a particular moment in time, so it's best for them to be armed with the knowledge that there are consequences to their actions, and that they can take steps to minimize these consequences. But that's sort of a different topic. Back to the issue at hand. But no, education is important there, too. And support. Alternatives should be looked at, advised; adoption is a big one, of course. So...idealistically pro-life, but politically pro-choice.

And so to Gay Marriage. Right, look...if two men (or women) want to have sex with each other (again, being responsible people who take precautions when necessary), how does that hurt me? I mean, unless they decide to do it on my couch while I'm trying to sit on it, chances are it will have no negative effect on me. In fact, if anything, it will make both of those people happy, they will feel more fulfilled, they will spread their joy through kindness, and it might trickle on over to me. I know, I know...some people experience joy through killing other people. Well, that's different, isn't it? Killing somebody is actually hurting somebody. It's, well...it's killing them, right? So there's that issue right there. Alright, fine, let them have sex, you may say, but why should they get to enjoy the same rights as a married man and woman? Well...why shouldn't they? I mean, if they're happy, healthy members who contribute to society, well...it might make them happier if they could have the same benefits as men and women. And I don't just mean civil unions, but that's a start. Right, see, two men living together in a happy, monogomaus relationship can't file their taxes jointly. If one gets sick and is put in the hospital, and is unresponsive, unless the other is listed in a legal document as having Power of Attorney, the hospital will refuse the other entrance or any legal right in the decision making process. How is this even remotely fair?

Okay, that was just a basic, preliminary run down. These are complex issues, as complex as the economy, defense, education and foreign policy, but even moreso because they are both divisive issues. Face it: nothing is more politically divisive than abortion. But I heard it summed up best on NPR last week; given the choice between a pro-life candidate and a pro-choice candidate, the pro-choice voter is more likely to weigh other factors before casting their vote, while the pro-life voter is more likely to cast their vote on that single issue.

All that aside, the Republican party will most likely never make a strong effort to overturn Roe v. Wade. They may promise it, and they may run on a strong Pro-Life platform (like our current president, who executed more inmates in Texas than the rest of the country combined over his term as Governer), but successfully overturning the Supreme Court decision means they lost their largest swath of single issue voters.

Last week, on ABC's show Boston Legal, James Spader's character suggested that perhaps the nation should vote on Abortion, that the issue should become less of a political football for the candidates to fumble around with and be put into the hands of the American People. I think that's a tremendously great idea myself. This is a democracy, let the people decide. Take one issue away from the candidates so they can focus on the business of running the country. You know?

This is all just slip-shod and unfounded political rant at this point, but I am going to tell you the truth, an average American should be able to run for president. So hell, it actually started as a joke, but I mean it. I'm running in twelve years. Watch for me.

Oh, and I've had two people request to be my running mate. Unfortunately, I'm still waiting to hear from my original invitee, Jerry. But keep throwing your hats in the ring. Annie, you show promise, you could provide a nice Liberal/Conservative balance to my Raging Liberal/Moderate Liberal political stance. And Lisa...sorry, but I already have a job for you: Speech Writer.

Oh, and one more thing: I hope you went out and voted today (if, you know, your state had an election). I know I did. And while I care who you vote for a little bit, it is actually more important that you do vote. I'd rather disagree with your vote than disagree with you for staying at home.