Okay is this a hot topic, which everyone has a opinion on. When I vote, it's on the person not because of the party, though most people think I am one track minded like some other people I know. I am not, especially to the violent point like that some people, who seem to be very passionate about their beliefs. I don't push mine on others. My ability to look at things from both sides, sometimes makes life a little confusing for me. I think it is okay to own a gun, for sport. I think some people need it for protection. Our family owns several guns, and on special rare occasion, we liked doing some target practice. BUT, the truth is, no matter how much training we have or our kids have, having guns at a easy access is dangerous. NRA people say people kill people, and anti-gun activists say guns kill people. I say it's both. And the more likely you show your kid how easy it is to use your gun, the more likely I believe they are going to want to get it out when your not home and show their friends. For example, a young eight year old boy, Viv's age, who for what ever reason decided to kill his dad and his dad's friend with a gun. It was in AZ, and the boy said he learned how to shoot and use a gun through his own father. If a gun is around, the more likely that at the spur of the moment, maybe out of anger that someone would use it. Another example, crazy Phil Spector. He was obsessed with guns so much so, he would wear them in a hoister around the house. He would shoot at things at random in his own home out of boredom, and finally it ended up being a person. I don't want to take the rights of gun owners but I do believe certain kinds of guns, like machine guns are not made for hunting animals. Just because someone can create it, does not mean it should be available for just anyone to buy.
Abortion. This morning I was reading about the ordering of the FDA to have 30 days to allow seventeen years to go buy the morning after pill without prescriptions. I am against that. Because it's available, it will make it a excuse to have even more pre-martial sex without consequences. The pill is only to be used within the first 24 hours of unprotected intercourse. But how are the pharmacy people going to know that? I am worried that even more people, not just teens, will use it beyond the night after. I can imagine people getting mad, or having a bad day, deciding because it's there and so easy to buy, that they will use it to kill their fetus, no matter how far along they are. I can imagine the harm it would do, if it did not kill them but made them deformed and defected some way. It would be like a horror movie.
I don't get how some people can complain about their gun rights, saying government wants to control everything but those same people want the government to control the gays ? Aren't they hypocrites? I understand their reasoning behind it. Mostly because of their belief in God. But not everyone believes in God. Aren't they pushing their beliefs on others? It's just a observation. I love our country and the freedom we do have compared to some other countries. I supposed if anyone disagreed with our core beliefs, they have a right to their own opinion and they can move out if they choose. I understand we have to have certain rules to protect the innocent. Does that include two men kissing? Chances are, most everyone has seen it already on TV. So if we deny the gay people should have rights to insurance and civil unions, shouldn't we go as far as completely taking it off the air? I mean, in other countries, like in the middle east for instance, the media is controlled by the government or/& religion in power, everyone must believe in the same thing or else. Do you know the answer? Ellen is married,so she says to a woman, shouldn't we burn her at the stake?
Geesh, this is just such a hot topic and I am just sharing some thoughts. Like anyone of them matter, to anyone who is in charge. I know what I believe in, I don't push my opinion on others, and I am trying to remember that Jesus loves everyone, so should I.
5 years ago
2 comments:
What do you think of the new law requiring doctors and nurses to provide abortions even if they believe it is wrong?
I think the anti-abortionists are pushing this because they want an excuse to be in the room and report on what is going on. But also they realize less women would go through with it if they knew people were in the room that disapproved. Can you imagine being a 14 year old having an abortion and someone flashing you a thumbs down in the middle of it!
Wow, Jennie. You just went for it in this post!
I'm with you on the guns. It's a complicated issue. I don't let my kid play at the neighbors house because I know they keep guns in a cabinet with all the ammunition that their kid can get out without trouble. I think their kid, who has been well-trained with guns isn't in much danger, but my son would be.
I am pro-life. I absolutely believe in choices. I just also believe in accountablitiy. If you know having sex can get you pregnant and you do it willingly anyway, you had your choice and made your decision and you should face the consequences. I don't mean pregnancy is a punishment, but why should a girl be able to kill her fetus because it's inconvenient? When you play Russian roulette, sometimes you get shot. Sometimes, when you have sex, you get pregnant. I think it's ridiculous that pregnant girls are so negatively stereotyped and socially punished. Their actions have been the same as all their sexually active friends, but they ended up pregnant. It's stupid to get punished for a consequence and not a behavior.
Adoption is a wonderful thing and girls who place unplanned for babies for adoption are less likely to become pregnant again. It's great for the babies, too. Neither of those things is the case for abortion. People are using it like birth control. I think that's wrong. It's just accountability avoidance. I also don't believe abortion is a privacy issue, which is what Roe v. Wade is based on.
From a more financial point of view, it ticks me off that abortions are often paid for by the government, but when I had a DNC because of a miscarriage, it cost me $4000. A DNC is essentially an abortion, but without the added cost of killing the baby first.
If you look into Planned Parenthood's financials, you'll see they profit hugely from the abortion business and it is money, not "women's rights" that is their primary motivation.
I think people in homosexual relationships should absolutely be able to visit each other in the hospital and be on insurance policies with each other, etc. That doesn't have anything to do with the government, though. The hospitals and insurance companies are in charge of those policies. The government does have power over civil unions and they seem to work fine. When Melissa Ethridge was on Oprah talking about Prop 8 backlash, she said the only real difference between her civil union with her partner and legal marriage was that it made tax issues more complex for them. Um...big deal. Marriage is a different issue from civil unions because of the legal consequences to religious groups who don't condone it. They will be persecuted and prosecuted if gay marriage is considered a civil liberty and they refuse to perform the marriages. They'll lose tax exempt status and sometimes even the right to perform traditional marriages. Gay marriage is an issue because if something is a civil liberty or right, it won't be an issue to be discussed in sex ed, where parents who disagree can opt their kids out, but included in diversity classes and included in whatever aspects of class a teacher chooses, without even having to inform parents what's being taught. (This happens in Massachusetts). Gay marrage is not a civil rights issue because marriage is highly legislated already--there are age limits, blood tests in some states, and rules about how closely related you can be to your spouse. If such a socially foundational institution as marriage could be based only on sexual relationships instead of as a conduit for growing and rearing a responsible population, then it swings the door wide open legally to rights for pedophiles, incestuous relationships, bigamy and polygamy; I'm not a fan of any of those options. (Additionally, just money-wise, our states can't afford to give the married tax status to homosexual couples). Gay marriage is an issue because if you believe in God, you should do your best to make sure the laws of the land reflect God's own laws--not because you want to force your views on others, but because it is your right as a citizen to vote for what you believe in. All our fundamental laws are based in the 10 commandments. They've been working out so far. What is righteous is also what is right. If most people share your beliefs and vote for them, that should be law. When the majority of the people choose wickedness, I believe it is their right, but there will be unfortunate consequences. If Prop 8 had lost the vote, I would've been sad, but respected the democratic process. If judges overturn the will of the majority of the people, I think that is wrong. It wasn't intended in our checks and balances system--judicial, executive, legislative--that anyone should have power over the people themselves. When judges take authority on themselves to do so, it reminds me of the corrupt judges from the Book of Mormon who lead the people to wickedness with their sophistry and conspiracy.
Post a Comment