A Democrat On The Defensive
What makes a Democrat a Democrat and what makes a Republican a Republican? Throughout the history of the United States people have argued about this issue. Even your's truly has an opinion on this. For the record I am stead-fast Democrat but more than once I have had people mistake me for a dirty Republican (Sorry to all you Republicans out there- I have many Republican friends but it doesn't mean I agree with their views all the time. But, to be fair, I could be called a dirty liberal. :) ). Why do mistakes like this happen? After much observation and listening to people on both sides debating I've come to the conclusion that how we perceive the political stands of others relies heavily on what we believe the characteristics of a particular party are. This may seem like a logical conclusion for anyone to make but I never gave the issue of political orientation much thought until I found myself defending my liberalness. It was then that it struck me how judgemental people can be when you don't fit their idea of what Democrat or Republican or whatever should be.
Why am I going into this now or even at all? Well, for the second semester in my Advanced Placement Problems of Democracy class our teacher, Mrs. Rogers, has us seated according to how we fall on the political spectrum. As I took a seat in the second row of "Liberals" I couldn't help but get the feeling that some might not think that I really belonged there. The second row is the area for those who consider themselves solid but not 'extreme liberals'. This is exactly how I view myself.
I would be out and out lying if I were to say that I am an 'extreme liberal' (By the way, 'extreme liberal' is a term that I've come to use when describing those who agree with all or almost all standard liberal or Democratic views.). I do not believe that abortion is right and I disagree with some aspects of affirmative action. I am also against assisted suicide. I actually sometimes wish that I could count myself among the farthest left. I think its admirable to be one of the firm believers and stand up for all things liberal in the face of, an often, unreceptive public. But this is where the question comes in- can a person who agrees with most of the views of a particular party or political view still call themselves a definte member of that party or political ideology? I believe that they can. The following are point by point explainations for my beliefs and reasons why I consider myself a liberal. This is the defense of a misunderstood liberal.
Now someone may ask, "How can you consider yourself a liberal if you disagree with one of their basic views- abortion?" Well, let me ask a question in response- how can a true liberal justify abortion? Liberals are seen as champions of civil liberties and the defenders of the powerless (Debatable definition? Yes, but for the sake of discussion I'm going to use it.). Abortion is the taking of innocent life. Thats right- life. You can not tell me that a human fetus is not a living thing for nine months and then magically comes to life when Mom pops it out. It is an illogical way of thinking, no matter how you spin it. That the U.S. Supreme Court says abortion is okay does not change my mind, either, for I have found that the law rarely takes into consideration common sense. The Supreme Court once stated that "seperate but equal" was okay- did that make the practice right? Of course not!
For all those who favor abortion, I'd like to propose the following situation-
How is the killing of puppy fetuses for convenience any different from the killing of human fetuses for convenience? What does it say about a society that values the life of a dog fetus more than the life of (or existance of, if any of you like that better) a human fetus? And it might be argued that the mother dog has no choice in the matter of her fetuses being aborted while a human mother does but then we are giving a dog more rights than a human fetus. We will not protect the human life in its earliest stage but Heaven help the person that proposes the idea of dog abortions to control animal over-population.
I love animals- for God's sake, don't call me a puppy murderer. But I just think that if we can justify the murdering of helpless human fetuses then we should have no problem applying the same views to all other creatures on Earth. Fetuses in your way? Thats okay, just kill'em. Doesn't sound quite right, does it?
How do we, as a society, define "life?" Does life begin at conception? Does life not begin until the child is out of the womb? As I pointed out before, you've got one hell of a case to make if you want to say that a fetus is not a living person until it is out of the womb. And who determines what "living" is and what "nonliving" is (aside from that oh so pesky test of checking for a pulse)? Is something living only when we believe it is living? Is something not living just because we say it isn't? If this were true we'd have a lot more dead people in this world and more living dead. Again, it is neither logical nor sensible to believe that our word alone makes something alive. On the contrary, this sounds extremely arrogant and self-righteous. The human ego is far too inflated as it is without the the added power trip of thinking that our mere words give life and importance to something.
The only times that I might be able to see abortion as being an option of any sort would be in the cases of incest; if the mother is put in mortal danger by having the child; if the child is going to die anyways (i.e. the baby's brain is outside its skull and as soon as it comes out its dead); or rape. Any other time- hon, you decided to have sex (in many cases, unprotected) now deal with the consequences. There are other options to killing the fetus- give birth to it and then put it up for adoption. Don't make that child pay the price for your stupidity. If you can't afford to get pregnant then don't have sex at all or if you do, protect yourself. Thats what condoms are for, Dearys. To kill something just because you don't want it cheapens the value of life. I know that, realistically, we are never going to get rid of abortion. People were having abortions long before they were made legal. They are a part of the culture in places like China. But there should be some restrictions put on them here in the United States. Even a required 24-hour waiting period before having an abortion performed would make me (at least) feel better about things. The idea of being able to walk into a clinic and just have it done and be okay in about a week seems wrong to me. People should be forced to stop and think before they act. Carrying another life within one's self is an enormous responsibility that we as a society can not afford to take lightly.
Those of you who know me personally know that I am a devout Roman Catholic. I can hear half of you out there already groaning. Tough tinkles. I am what I am and I'm proud to be what I am. But that is not to say that I rely on the Church alone for my views. I probably wouldn't be a fan of a lot of things even if I were not Catholic. I do not use religion to base my beliefs on for I know that it is difficult to make a valid arguement for something if you are constrained by religious doctrine. You need to have more than religion to support your ideas when you go debating with a non-religious person. I believe that to be taken seriously a person has to be able to see an issue without the religious slant- you should be able to support your side with facts and understood concepts. When I take a side on something I like to step back and look at it from the point of view of a non-Catholic or a non-religious person. This allows me to see all views and construct an arguement that has a chance at surviving an attack from the opposing side. I do not follow rank and file with everything the Church says. I see how it sees an issue and why it sees it that way and then I think for myself. Those of you out there that ignorantly believe that all Catholics are stuffy prudes who are brain-washed by the Pope have obviously never had a serious discussion on religion with me. One, I don't think the Pope is trying to brain-wash anyone...and two, I make up my own mind on things. The Church proclaims that condoms are wrong but I say, hey, its better than having an abortion. The Church does not approve of the alternative (gay, lesbian, bisexual) life styles but I say as long as you're not hurting anyone or infringing on someone else's rights what you do in your bedrooms is your own business. I don't have a problem with gay or lesbian marriages either. In addition, I don't think we should be wasting police resources on trying to stop prostitution. Its the world's oldest profession, people. I really don't think we'll ever be able to get rid of it and to waste police time and money on it seems a little dumb. Along those same lines, sex outside of marriage is not something we should punish people for or anything like that. True, its not the most moral thing in the world but as long as you're not raping someone or having sex with a minor, why is the rest of the world getting involved? People have been having sex outside of marriage and affairs since time began. It is not the job of the government to try and make people virtuous and good. A goverenment that tried to do that would be far to powerful. Let people deal with it within their homes- the wrath of a wife or husband scorned is far worse, I think, than any punishment from society or the government. The government has no right to act like the Sex Police.
I do firmly stand behind my Church on matters of war, though. War is not an answer. There is no such thing as a war for peace. In a society as advanced as our own we should be able to find better solutions to problems than making parking lots out of countries. I also believe that we as a country are wastful and stupid. We keep all our resouces and money to ourselves while people in this world are dying. We are buying multi-million dollar houses and $60,000 cars and yet we won't lift a finger to spread our wealth around. As the richest nation in the world it is our job to try and help as many people as possible. As they say, to whom much is given much is expected. More to come...
I've always been a little left of center...
Abortion
Say a person has a female dog (or cat or whatever). Now this person is a reckless when it comes to the well being of their pet and allows it to get out and the animal, as a result, becomes pregnant. This owner want nothing to do with puppies- they don't want the responsibilty of taking care of them or finding them homes. Heck, this person is so lazy they don't want to even dump them or take them to a shelter. SO...they decide to take the dog to the vet to have the puppies aborted. Now can you think of ANY self-respecting vet who would perform an abortion on an animal? I doubt it. If we started ripping dog fetuses out of their mothers there would be so many animal rights groups and government officials screaming bloody murder you'd lose your hearing. They would call it animal abuse and evil, among other things. They'd call for a ban on the practice.
Religion And The Liberal
