There still may be reason to be hopeful. The problem is not the idea of a Republican president. The problem is that Donald Trump is president. Any good politician can guide this country provided we are not at war. Compromises will be found which explains the success of Bill Clinton in spite of a Republican congress and impeachment and Ronald Reagan's best detractors being the underground punk scene.
Do I have a favorite yet? I would probably pitch a Biden/Booker card. Nothing to wild and at least one of them can trade with Trump. But I may be overlooking the best politician in the field. A new face who can attack Trump at every turn with success. That person is Beto O'Rourke, the man who nearly defeated Ted Cruz in Texas, a state that I think is generally regarded as a bad idea. Aside from oil, the nothingness is so vast that regardless your diverse metropolises, there are enough racists that have area codes between them to vote down progress.
If O'Rourke can fare well there, he should not have any issues uniting the left. He keeps it up with rhetoric like this, he may win me over.
From "The Huffington Post:"
Beto O'Rourke Says Late-Term Abortion Should Be A Woman's Decision: I Trust Her.
I believe everybody with common sense and decency (those lacking either are voting Republican) knows that late-term abortion has to be allowed in the event of rape and risk to the mother's life. Otherwise, it just seems cruel to terminate something that may be able to survive on its own provided it had the innate sense to scavenge. If its heart beats and lungs breathe, that seems to be a human. You cannot terminate a human until they threaten the space of a gun-toting coward.
Notice I am not using the term kill. Why? Because killing requires life. I am an existentialist, hence I do not believe my life began until I was aware of it via experience and memory. My memories are pretty scarce before three years of age. The earliest memories are watching "Star Wars", "Chip 'n Dale" cartoons, and "Flash Gordon" and singing to the film's chorus. At best, I was two when I became sentient.
Too bad I did not have the knowledge at that time to determine mankind was the enemy. I am just saying, a little patience instead of panic may have prevented Judgement Day. It is a question that I can try to sneak into the Matt Smith panel at C2E2 this weekend.
Now, if we could change our mind about Skynet in the 25 days before it became self aware, no body would take issue about it being taken offline. Republicans would be upset. They would end up losing a new military toy and potential tax breaks that went with it. At least that proves that they believe all life matters.
But I think conservative thought is what is destroying this country. Perhaps not the thought, but the money behind the propaganda. It all seems to be about white people money. More child births, more doctors who are needed. The medical field still favors the people who can afford to enter. In other words, white people. So pro life is about making money for white people. This explains why they want to cut welfare off to the nonwhites who need it. Once they quit providing product, the conservatives deem them useless. Why pay for something with no use?
To get back on track, I will ask that in terms of children. They are a lot of work and until they put a few sentences together, are pretty useless. We all know the world is overpopulated when compared to the accessible resources the rich will allow, hence we could do with fewer people of them. Why not be allowed to put down children within 15 trimesters, those who are not fully formed people?
There are plenty of my retail brethren who would appreciate parents who cannot handle their spawn deciding to look after the rest of the world, and more importantly the ears of the underpaid. It may benefit the eyes of those in customer service as well. I know I hate having to be resist being judgmental at all the blatant abuse some parents put their kids through when they become aware of themselves. Less aware people would produce a more tolerant world.
You can say children are lovely, cute, beautiful, fun, etc. I will respond with so are cats, and we allow there to be shelters that kill them indiscriminately in the name of housing. If we terminate the cute in one group of people (cats are not domesticated, they fend for themselves and if that means using people, fine), why not allow for us ending a few in another group?
If anything, I am suggesting parents to be better parents. If you can teach your kids how to be toddlers faster, everyone benefits. There would be a greater need for early childhood advocates creating jobs. Ideally, society would be more accommodating of parents knowing they are trying better humanity.
Anyhow, what I am suggesting I not mandatory, something conservatives automatically assume. If you cannot support a child, why make that decision's time frame only six months at the most. After that, they may find that they still cannot handle it.
For the sake of resumes, I will stick it out through an awful job for a year. But when I know that I had been grinding my teeth through that year, I know I cannot handle another. If it is all misery from conception to 18 months, can I pass judgment on a suffering parent?
As a feline advocate, I am hope adoption for all those furballs to be adopted even though euthanasia is allowed. What I am calling for is that we treat our offspring the same way. They should all be adopted, but if you can kill a cat who becomes aware much faster, how can you feel bad about offing something else that takes a little longer when it comes to poop as a toy?
As I proofread the paragraphs above, I realized that the decision should not be with the parents. They should not be allowed to decide if a baby should be terminated. That thought should belong with the orphanages. Miss Hannigan might have had a better disposition knowing that she was operating the dome from "Logan's Run" instead of the Municipal Girls Orphanage.
As I proofread the paragraphs above, I realized that the decision should not be with the parents. They should not be allowed to decide if a baby should be terminated. That thought should belong with the orphanages. Miss Hannigan might have had a better disposition knowing that she was operating the dome from "Logan's Run" instead of the Municipal Girls Orphanage.
Most people know murder is not an option, but with offering it as one, people become more aware of their fellowman and step up to make sure no child who has experienced a moment in this world.
This world is beyond the womb, so a fetus is not a child. It may just be plight waiting to happen if you do not allow women the option to prevent birth. Plight should not exist. An unwanted child should not exist.
No comments:
Post a Comment