May 20, 2009
-
So, Hypothetically...
I'd like to find some common ground with those who oppose the legalization of rape. I mean, sure, it's preventing someone from controlling what happens to his or her own body, but surely we can find some common ground when it comes to the fact that people have needs! If you bought her dinner, she owes you, man!
Doesn't that sound absurd?
I don't want to find "common ground" when it comes to homicide. There is no common ground in that case. There is only whether homicide is legal or illegal.
He tries to sound noble, but our fearless king is full of hot air. And I find it truly frightening how easily he deceives America.
Comments (5)
Murder is already legal in the United States. Its supporters refer to it as freedom of choice, but it is more commonly known as abortion. If you look at the definition of murder, a crime which is punishable by the death penalty, abortion meets the requirements to constitute that crime. The main requirement is that the killing must be premeditated. In abortion, one can not argue that the act is not premeditated. No one gets an abortion on a whim. Because abortion is murder, doctors who perform abortion must be tried as an accessory to murder. Think about this, becuase doctors are paid to perform abortion, it should also be considered a contract killing. Another curious thing is that many states will charge someone for two murders if that person kills a pregnant mother and both mother and child die. The messed up thing is that the definition of murder changes based on whether or not the mother wants the child. We truly have one messed up legal system.
I agree completely that abortion is murder and I wish everyone the same idea but the truth of the matter is that it will go on happening regardless of any government laws prohibiting it. Even worse, if it is made illegal it will go on underground in unsanitized places by untrained people and those disgusting, horrifying stories will surface of women kabob-ing their fetuses or throwing themselves down stairs. From a disease-control point of view, this is disturbing in its implications.
More generally, what the laws are based upon in democracy is the morals of the majority. If the majority of the country feels that abortion should not be illegal, then the law reflects that. It sucks sometimes (especially with the death penalty) but I think the blame lies less with the president and more with the moral majority.
Also, it's ironic that you should call Obama a king when the most recent right-wing presidents have stronger connections to family and corporate fortunes. Stupid corporate empire. It's sad when the only way a person can get elected nowadays is to use the same commercialized tactics as the companies whose CEOs ultimately support the right wing political dynasties.
I actually don't think Obama should be talking about abortion at all, to be honest with you. I think it should be a states' rights issue. I think that Roe v. Wade should be overturned and then each of the states should decide individually whether or not it should be legal. Now, yes, this leads to the sticky business of people going across the state line to have an abortion performed, but it's an imperfect system. I just don't think it's something that the federal government should have control over.
Also, things are always going to happen whether or not they are legal. That's not a reason to keep them legal, in my book.
Finally, have you had a look at GE lately? I've heard some disturbing stuff about corporations working outside the political arena to institute big change (namely, a European Union-style North American government), but General Electric is one of those "corporate empires" of which you speak so highly, and they have no loyalty whatsoever to the "right wing political dynasties."
I always appreciate your feedback, Lori. It's wonderful discussing this stuff with you, and it's not as if we disagree on the main issue. =)
I agree with your first paragraph, and line which constitutes the second paragraph. I googled GE news articles and the only thing I could find was a fox news article about how GE was involved in promoting Obama and how they are trying to get computerized health care tracking so they can make money. Not a big surprise out of a big corporation in a rut. Is there something terribly wrong with the European Union that I am unaware of? Union sounds a lot like our country as far as I can tell but I haven't taken any political science classes and usually don't read that much about this stuff. Wanting to change some policies around in the government is not anti-American. I think the Founding Fathers had an idea about what changes are fair and necessary. Healthcare is a problem and I've yet to see a good solution to it. Also, GE, and any other big corporation, actually does have ties to right wing government in general because right-wingers tend to put less restrictions on economic growth in these businesses so of course corporations will back them. I'm not talking about an actual paper trail connection I'm talking they are supporting the same political ideal: unrestricted mercantilism/capitalism and empire. It's not the political conservatives I hate it is the idea behind all of their business deals I disagree with: the idea that all economic growth and expansion is good. Even when it clearly harms people.
Go you.
Comments are closed.