Truth [the first blog]

(Stolen from my own facebook. Published 9/19/08)

-

This particular paragraph of this note has nothing to do with political figures I do or do not support, or a war I do or do not support. But I would like to tell you a bit about what I think. I prefer a smaller government- a government which enables people to care for themselves. I believe it is the responsibility of the government to protect its citizens from outside threats. I believe that, because an unborn baby is a living individual, it ought to have the same rights as any other citizen of this country: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I believe that, if you wish to live in this country, you must follow our laws for becoming a citizen. I believe that people living here who have broken these laws should not be recognized as citizens, or given the benefits of citizens. There are a lot of things that confuse me, or that I don't have a strong stance on- such as particulars regarding health care.

And the reason I tend to like or dislike the policies of a political figure results from if they believe the same things I believe. It's very simple, really.

-[-QUESTION: If Barack Obama and John McCain were to switch bodies--- would all of their supporters stick with the policies....or stick with their bodies?-]-

-

I just wish people would t h i n k. I just wish politicians would explain to laymen. I just wish the reporters would report.

How simple is truth? Sometimes it's not. Sometimes it really is. I'm inclined to think that MOST of the time is really is.

PROBLEM: Abortion. Murder? Woman's choice?

ANSWER: Yes- currently it is both.

TRUTH: Everyone who is not a blind fool knows that an unborn baby is a real baby. Yes, it feeds off its mother, but it is a separate entity. You can easily find out when brainwaves begin, when the heart starts beating, when fingernails grow. People have no excuse to be uneducated about it. People KNOW. Several of my friends were significantly premature when they were born. Chances are, you know someone who was, also. The ISSUE really is not "is it a baby?" anymore- which is desperately sad. The issue is now,

"Should women have reproductive freedom?"

How sad that we use such nice-sounding terms. How sad that we reduce a growing, dependent life to a matter of convenience.

You know what's reproductive freedom?

Girls- keep your pants on. THAT's reproductive freedom. THAT is choice. Abortion is simply cowardice and an abandonment of responsibility.

But we teach this irresponsibility as an inalienable right. We treat this delicate matter as a matter of personal privacy. Privacy! Ironically enough, if a woman intentionally smashes in the skull of her newly born baby, she's going to be behind bars- and face the outrage of millions.

A late term abortion, taking place at, say 24 weeks, aborts a baby which has a fully developed inner ear, and listens to its surroundings. Skin translucency is fading away, and it looks like a "mini" version of what it will look like at birth. It has developed fingers- it sucks its thumb. It has hair, tastebuds. If the baby is a girl- HER uterus is already fully formed.

That's what 1.4 percent of abortions destroy in the US.

(stolen from Wikipedia)

"In support of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, a nurse who witnessed three IDX[Intact dilation and extraction] procedures found them deeply disturbing, and described one performed on a 26½-week fetus with Down Syndrome in testimony before a Judiciary subcommittee of the US House of Representatives, where she states "[t]he baby’s little fingers were clasping and unclasping, and his little feet were kicking," right before the procedure.[37]"

26 weeks means the baby has fully developed eyes, and can recognize its mother's voice.

-[-QUESTION: How can any politician say that they believe abortion is wrong, but they support a woman's right to choose?-]-

The last bit for today is taxes.
I
am
so
tired
of listening to "Bush's tax cuts for the rich."

GIVE ME A BREAK. Let's go back to basics, shall we? I'll try to type slowly, so you all can understand. If someone earns more money, they are going to pay more taxes. If someone pays more taxes, they are going to get more tax cuts. Simple, right? Easy to understand, right? What? No?

Let's try a second example. There is a certain presidential candidate who wants to increase taxes "only" for companies and individuals who make over $250,000 I believe (I could have the numbers off, forgive me). Now, for wealthy individual HERMITS - that's a great idea. What do they need with the money anyway? Let's look at a realistic example. Say, a business (oh no, not the Big-Bad-Business). A business sells things to good ol, middle-to-lower class folk, right? And if that business gets taxed even more, its prices will go UP even more. Causing consumers to PAY MORE MONEY.

It trickles. You can't charge businesses without charging everyone. Sorry to bust that bubble.

The problem is, I don't know who I'm more fed up with.
-The politicians who believe or pretend to believe that their logic is great- and preach it to the people
-The politicians who KNOW that the logic is bad, but can't seem to talk straight policy that's understandable to the common man
-All the people who aren't smart enough to figure out the bad logic.

That last one might be the worst.

But maybe that comes from living every day in school trying to match up to every other school, standard, and student in the country- instead of thinking individually and questioning popular, fluffy ideas.