Freedom and Anger, two topics that don't really go together, but two of the thoughts I've had over the weekend. The things that got me thinking about them are very similar though...
First freedom. I've been thinking about freedom a little, and I've realized that it's a coin with two sides. If you want the freedom to excel, you have to accept with it the freedom to fail. What got me thinking about this, was reading up a little on the Libertarian candidate for governor in Utah. I'm going to post more on him, but my opinion of the man, is that he is a complete nut-job - but with that said, he's got more balls than me, to actually even consider running. The thing is that he is a huge supporter of government taking steps to eradicate options for abortion, which seems to me to be in conflict with his running as a Libertarian.
Here's my thoughts on the matter: I'm not a fan of abortion, I think there are serious ramifications for our society because of it, but at the same time, I can't make that decision for everyone. I'm opposed to abortion, but I'm also opposed to having laws which ban it. I think it's a personal decision and choice that each person needs to make. I'm not in favor of promoting it as an option, nor in forcing doctors to perform it. My opinion is that if someone chooses to exercise their freedom to have an abortion performed, and can find a doctor who is willing to perform it, then who am I to impose my views on them... Like gay marriage, it's an issue which has far too many facets, and should really just come down to an individuals choice without interference from the government. The Libertarian candidate doesn't see it this way. He's very against abortion in any form and upset that the current governor hasn't done enough to eradicate it. Definitely not a true Libertarian.
Secondly, I teach 15 and 16 years old kids in my Sunday School class every week. Now Utah is a very Republican state, since many confuse being part of the dominant religion here, to include being Republican. I've seen open Democrats completely shunned in some congregations, purely because of their party affiliations. Anyway, I have a couple of kids who have become very angry about Obama, and obsessed with ensuring that they do everything to prevent him from winning. Thanks to Mr. Glenn Beck, they have gotten the idea, that Mr. Obama is the Anti-christ (I know Mr. Beck didn't specifically say this, but when you have an audience of ignorant fools, they'll pick up on stuff like this). They're also convinced he is a terrorist, due to his middle name and African background (Guess that makes me a terrorist too) and convinced that he will remove all guns from the country and usher in communist rule.
I'm saddened most at the ignorance and anger of these young men, and the disservice that their parents and other role models have done them, in propagating these thoughts of anger and hatred towards others. I try where ever possible to get them to consider that they may have been the target of lies and deceptive tactics, and to look at the situation objectively, but when you believe in politics, like you believe in religion, any chance at rational thought is eliminated.
As I see it, while on the one hand a woman's decision about her body is of course a civil liberties issue, the problem with a strict Libertarian approach to the question of abortion is that those who are most likely to need one for a variety of reasons (health, rape, incest, inability to care for a child, etc., etc.) are precisely those women who are least able to exercise their right to have an abortion.
ReplyDeleteWhen abortion is not made available through social services funded by the government, then women with money, mobility, and access to premium health care -- precisely those who would be far better able to deal with the ramifications of an unplanned pregnancy (setting aside issues of health, rape, etc., for the moment) -- will be the only ones able to get abortions. This does not seem right.
In addition, the best way to minimize abortion is through comprehensive sex education and access to birth control, etc. -- again more available to wealthier women than poorer ones unless social services are funded.
So, IMHO, this is a case where what initially might make sense from an ideological point of view really doesn't work out in a practical sense -- particularly if the goal is to in fact minimize abortions...
That's a very valid point... I guess living in a society where government provided service are taken for granted - that was something I neglected to consider - Oooops!
ReplyDeletePerhaps in a perfect world, rape, incest and other horrendous things wouldn't happen, but I don't see that happening anytime soon.
As much as it is conflicting with my preconcieved ideas of limited government, perhaps some kind of Universal Health Care system would be the best approach, thus allowing everyone the same opportunity for treatment. Travel Vixen would be proud!
I do agree that the best approach to minimize abortion is to focus on education and access to birth control. Banning abortion appears to be a band aid approach to a problem which really needs to be addressed at the source.
Well, banning abortion isn't even a band-aid, because it just has the effect of increasing illegal abortions, which have much more devastating consequences.
ReplyDeleteEven now - totally aside from a smaller government scenario - there are many, many poor women in isolated areas who do not have access to abortion, and don't have the money to travel. Social services are not by any means something to take for granted even now.
And throughout the country, we have a situation where the unwanted children who are born are more likely to have health problems, to be born addicts, etc., etc., and thus to be even less likely to be adopted if their mothers can't take care of them. (Totally setting aside the racial angle.)
As an aside, until the foster care and adoption system in this country is completely overhauled, so that a child born to a mother who can't take care of it can be placed into a family that wants it and can take care of it, making any kind of anti-abortion argument based on the "rights" of the unborn child (as people do - though I think in no case would those rights ever trump the rights of the mother to do as she wants with her body until the baby is viable outside the womb, without extreme hospital care) is, I believe, ridiculous. The recent news item about the bodies of the two foster children found in a freezer here in DC is testament to that...
I'm thinking I need to take some time to figure out where I should be standing politically. I like the Libertarian ideals, but as you have clearly show, the implementation fails to consider certain aspects.
ReplyDeleteI think my original intention in writing was that those who espouse freedom need to allow it to be given across the board, not specific freedoms in some area's but not in others. While abortion may have been a bad example to use to illustrate that, clearly it has shown that my idealogies need some work.
Thanks for giving me some valuable considerations to work with!
Well, I try ;-)
ReplyDeleteYeah, that's why I seem to end up in the Democratic camp. There are definitely aspects of the party platform that I don't agree with -- in some ways I'm more conservative(particularly, I'm not a fan of unemployment benefits), and in some ways I'm way more liberal -- but if, as someone or other (Aristotle?) said, "Politics is the art of the least bad," then the Democrats seem to me to be the least bad party.
That's why I'm not a fan of political parties in general - seems ideology always ends up trumping common sense and practicality, whichever group you're talking about. Why can't we just elect the person with the most common sense??
I, too, have been shocked at the anger and hatred aimed at Obama. But then, all transformational and inspirational leaders engender such fear. Look at MLK, JFK, Gandhi, John Lennon even. Sadly, many of them end up getting assassinated, but let's hope that history will not repeat itself.
ReplyDeleteThis election is more about competing and mutually exclusive world views that it is about the issues, I think. And the McCain camp has really entrenched itself in us vs. them, kill them before they kill us. Fear is powerful, and is often expressed as anger.