I posted this as a comment on a PJ Media story (sometimes my comments are apparently offensive, I have no clue why but it’s their site they can do as they like. I’m open minded like that. ; P). So I thought I’d repost here. I know the owner of this blog and she’s pretty easy to get along with. Wink,wink, nudge, nudge, say no more, say no more!
One of the realties of life is that a majority of citizens are not conservative or liberal. There are always going to be folks in the middle that are for example fiscal conservatives and socially liberal or who are moderate on some issues and not on others. They are and will always be uncomfortable with the “if you’re not fer us, you’re agan’ ust” attitude parroted by both parties. They see that while there are standards reality must by nature be addressed.
Let’s take abortion for example. Fact there are lots of people having unprotected sex, there are rapes, incest and times when the life of the mother is in danger. For some of these events there needs to be a procedure to address a wrong perpetrated by someone other than the woman (apart from the criminal aspect). Both sides of the debate seem to forget this is a medical procedure and should have stayed just that. It is not nor should it be, used as birth control or for the convenience of the parties involved.
The lefts stand of it’s a woman’s body and she gets to decide what happens to it is fallacious and the rights stand that no matter the circumstances the procedure should never be done is just as ridiculous. As with zero tolerance policies they fly in the face of logic and reason and have entered the realm of Kabuki theater. Our Judio-Christian legal system operates one case at a time and while I understand it is easier to lump all similar things together and make draconian decisions for all, it just isn’t right.
The President has to be the president for “All Americans”. He has to stand even for those he disagrees with. If he doesn’t he will eventually stand for no one. We on the right should now be able to understand that, given political agenda of the current resident of 1600 Penn. Ave. Does he represent us, NO! Does he respect our opinions, beliefs and desires? Seriously? So this is a good way to govern?
But I guess to some of us, as long as our side is the perpetuator, that makes it right (pun sooooooo intended).