- I updated my profile, so now if you want to stalk me, you won't have to do so much work.
- For the two (three?) of you who come here and actually read those episodes I write, I really am close to finishing the 10th. I'm just really having a hard time transposing it from the notebook to the computer. And I don't know how to end this one...
- So, my Marxist Soc prof keeps going on about how the social right and the economic right are fundamentally opposed, and the social right keeps getting hosed by the economic right. "They vote pro-life and get tax cuts for the rich" is the phrase he keeps using, borrowing from Franks' What's the Matter with Kansas.
As far as that goes, I think I have to agree with him. Really, what progress has the social right made over the last 40 years? Society has become progressively more and more liberal.
That being said, I still vote Republican, and always will, barring some unforeseen shift in politcal outlooks. First of all, Franks' whole premise in Kansas is that Kansas is worse off economically now that they vote Republican, when in fact there is substantial evidence that shows dramatic economic growth since they began to vote in conservatives.
But that's side-bar. I vote Republican because I'm a social conservative, made so by my "religious" beliefs. If you see each life as created and given by God, then abortion can never be right.
1) Say there is a man who is going to cut off your right hand if you don't kill an innocent by-stander; are you then morally free to kill that innocent?
Yet many would argue that it is morally right to take the life of an unborn child in cases of great trauma against the mother. And the even bigger problem is that they use this "justification" as grounds to argue for completely free-range abortion practices.
2) The other side: The biggest weakness my argument has? That a young, well-off white guy is making it.
Not that I would give any ground on this, but the fact that I'm a guy makes any argument I propose on this issue much less substantial in the eyes of people who are undetermined on the issue, regardless of the argument itself. The fact that I come from a middle class background further weakens my ability to debate this.
And that leads us to point three.
3) Politics are not decided by logic, as much as I think they should be. No, instead, we get politics by emotion. "What about in the cases of rape and incest?" tugs on the emotional strings, and then anyone who says abortion is still murder is made to look like a barbarian (Devos, first debate) by the media and the opposition. And what about those cases? Those cases that make up maybe 1% of all the abortions that are carried out daily in our nation? I take you back to point 1.
And then we go back to point 2. I can never be in that position, so it's easy for me to be detatched emotionally, and argue logically. Murder is murder, plain and simple. Well... that doesn't mean much coming from a guy who will never have to worry about it.
The second reason I vote Republican? Because while they aren't making much progress, they are at least stemming the tide. If the Democrats ever get total control again, you'll see what I mean. Yes, the Republicans are giving ground, and yes, most of them only give the social right lip-service. It's better than having the other guys in there.
And, lastly, their fiscal polices work. Reganomics work. Bush's tax cuts are working. So there you go.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Yes! Finally something I completely agree with. Granted, I tend to be more economically conservative policy-wise, but I certainly am socially conservative as far as the moral issues are concerned. However, your points are very valid, and I agree with all of them. If only politics were decided simply with logic!
Post a Comment