Politics

John Lambert

     First, I want to say that my politics are probably not in line with many of my friends and family and my party affiliation is quiet unpopular where I reside: I'm a democrat, but first, I'm a Christian.  This creates conflict for a lot of people close to me.  Even though my views are probably unpopular, I still love my God, my Savior (and they are one and the same) my family, my nation, state and community.

     Next, let's clear something up from the start.  I'm not conflicted, I simply don't believe that my personal view point should be crammed down the throat of the nation; unless legislation becomes so restrictive that it crosses the only moral line of modern government and try to frame how I'm supposed to think.  You read it right, the only moral line of modern government is the infringement on how to think.  Governments exist to control how people co-exist together by setting behavioral bounds, things that we do or cause to occur that have a direct affect on others.  If that affect of a person's or corporation's actions are bad for others, then it likely needs to be controlled by our government.  No arguments so far?

     Apply this to hot topics like Pro Choice and Pro Life.  Remember I said that first, I'm a Christian so I am by choice, Pro Life!  It is internally hateful to me to consider the destruction of the unborn, but also the helpless, the aged and the wrongfully convicted.  Not to mention the sterilization of more than 2,000 North Carolinian's.  As hateful as that is to me, I also do not believe that women who make the decision to engage in that behavior, be treated as criminal.  To go a step further, I don't like the idea that tax dollars are used to fund them either. But women's health has to take a precious priority in our society and such procedures while horribly detestable, the health of those who engage in them must be protected.  To be indifferent to any persons health and well-being is as equally hateful.  I realize the numbers; 40+ million potential lives since 1973.

     Why can't we as a nation be as equally committed to supporting (fully fund) a persons choice to protect and sustain a life through a four year degree as we are to allow ourselves as a nation to be so deeply divided over something like this?  I really don't feel those who are Pro Choice think about the impact this has on a nations youth (long term) and economy, but I also don't think those who are staunchly Pro Life truly care about the future of the indigent, the socially outcast, those that somehow don't fit in to their definition of what society should be.  And what should society be?  Exactly what it is!  A society of all peoples, having a system of laws to protect the weak, oppressed and unaware; one that tries to lift every person to their fullest potential and in return requires from that person helped the obligation to carry on the same for those who come next.