Labels don’t tell the whole story
avatar

First, I’d like to recommend a superb comic strip, Day By Day, by Chris Muir. Worth adding to your daily must-read list.

Next, the news today gave me something to think about. The Senate voted to ban partial-birth abortions, a move I think has been a long time in coming and long overdue. I’m not in favor of abortion at any point in the pregnancy as a form of birth control. I’m strongly against late-stage abortions. But in spite of that, and in spite of thinking some pretty ugly things about women who choose to use abortion as a form of birth control, I do favor keeping first trimester abortions “on demand.” While I think women should only exercise the option of abortion in cases of rape, incest, and when their lives are endangered by the pregnancy, I don’t want to see a return to women claiming they were raped to get an abortion. I don’t want to see back-street abortions and home attempts that end up with dead girls and women, either. And those are guaranteed outcomes of the policy that I would otherwise consider both reasonable and responsible, because there are a lot of women who are, sadly, neither reasonable nor responsible, but who do not deserve to die for being who they are. In my ten years as an RN, I got to see the worst that people have in them — I have no illusions. If legal first-term abortions go, the bodycount is going to rise, and unlike the radical right-to-lifers, I do not equate a fetus in the first three months of life as having equal value or equal rights with the woman who carries it.

I’m in favor of the legalization of marijuana, in spite of never having tried it — or even having tried cigarettes. We’re creating a class of criminals with this ‘war on drugs’ and creating the black market that feeds and breeds those criminals, and that’s foolish and shortsighted. Legalize marijuana, tax hell out of it, regulate it, watch it, and eliminate the profit margin for people who do drive-by shootings in school zones as a way of protecting their profits. Consider alternative methods of dealing with harder drugs — from decriminalization with mandatory rehab to some form of legalization with mandatory rehab. Stop creating a vast profit-field for gangsters and third-world druglords.

And as for cigarettes — I find the current trend to elimate the right to smoke outdoors in public places unnerving. Indoors, fine. It makes sense that only smokers should breathe the crud in cigarette smoke, since they’re the ones who want it. But outdoors? Outdoor cigarette smoke is not a danger to any passersby. A policy that would make more sense would be for the government to stop subsidizing tobacco production, prohibit the sale of tobacco in foreign countries, and require the elimination of all tobacco advertising. Tobacco is addictive, it’s deadly, so get the government out of the business of producing it, and make word of mouth the only promo it gets.

I’m in favor of the legalization of gay marriage. Well, actually, I think the government ought to get its collective nose out of social niceties like marriage entirely — it is not the business of government to subsidize or regulate the lifestyles of consenting adults. But as long as the government is in the business of declaring marriage part of its turf, I think any two consenting adults who want to get married should be able to. Or any three, or four consenting adults, or whatever. “Consenting adults” being the operative words here. I still think child molesters should be lined up and shot.

While the government has done a piss-poor job of regulating it, I do think that we as a nation need to have welfare programs for people who physically cannot work. I don’t think welfare should be a permanent income for people who are physically and mentally capable of holding down jobs. I do think that there should be financial benefits built into the system to encourage mothers with small children to stay with the fathers of their children. Children who have two parents do better overall than those who have one, and while there are always instances of fathers we could do without, I think the government policy of decreasing or eliminating benefits if a father is present (encouraging women to dispose of the fathers in favor of the bucks) has created a cycle of welfare dependence and a culture of absentee fathers that is going to be hell to break, and that is devastating for the fathers and the kids affected by it.

I think that economic subsidies to businesses that create jobs in poor neighborhoods should be encouraged; I think teaching a man to fish and providing him with a stocked pond to fish in is a hell of a lot more useful than giving him an unending supply of second-rate fish, and to that end, I’d also like to see improved educational opportunities, in the form of mentoring programs as well as college scholarships, for people in the lowest income brackets.

However, I’m strongly against quotas; if the best man for a job is a white man, he should get the job. Excellence is the best defense against prejudice — I don’t want preferential treatment for being a woman. I just want equal treatment and the chance to prove myself best. Equal opportunity means equal for everyone, including white males, not preference for everyone but white males.

I think the use of force is justified in removing an abusive spouse or parent from the spouse or children he or she is abusing and in keeping the abuser away from his victims. I don’t think spouse abuse or child abuse can be solved by more compassion for the abuser, trying to understand where he is coming from, or being lenient in the hopes that he’ll change.

I also think the use of force is justified in removing an abusive dictator from the populace he is raping, starving, torturing and murdering, and that it is mandated when that dictator is prepared to expand his operations outside his border, and is sponsoring terrorism abroad.

I am increasingly in favor of taking military action against Iraq — unilaterally if necessary. Capt. Dan Ouimette, XO of NAS Pensacola, wrote a piece called “America Wake Up.” I’ve pulled dates from the piece — I had hoped to print the actual speech, which is brilliant, but I cannot reach Capt. Ouimette to obtain permission to reprint it here.

Here is the timeline of major acts of terrorism against Americans:

  • Nov. 1979 — Tehran, Iran — students take over the American Embassy, taking Americans hostage.

  • World-wide increase in kidnappings and hostage situations involving Americans abroad following this incident.
  • April 1983 — Beirut, Lebanon — Car bombing of US Embassy. 63 deaths.
  • Oct. 1983 — Beirut, Lebanon — Truck bombing of US Marine Headquarters. 241 servicemen dead.
  • Dec. 1983 — Kuwait — Truck bombing of US Embassy.
  • Sept. 1984 — Beirut, Lebanon — Van bombing, US Embassy.
  • April 1985 — Madrid, Spain — Bombing of restaurant frequented by US soldiers.
  • Aug. 1985 — Rein-Main, Germany — Car bombing of Air Force base — 22 dead.
  • Oct. 1985 — Achille Lauro (ship) — Hijacked, American in wheelchair singled out and executed.
  • Apr. 1986 — TWA Flight 840 — Bombing, 4 dead.
  • Dec. 1988 — Pan Am Flight 103, over Lockerbie, Scotland — Bombing, 270 dead including those on the ground.
  • Jan. 1993 — Langley, VA — Shooting of two CIA agents as they entered headquarters.
  • Feb. 1993 — New York, NY — Terrorists arrested after bombing WTC with explosive-packed van. 6 dead, 1000 injured.
  • Nov. 1995 — Riyadh, Saudi Arabia — Car bombing, US military complex — 7 servicemen and women dead.
  • June 1996 — Dhahran, Saudi Arabia — Truck bombing, US Air Force housing in Khobar Towers — 19 dead, 500 injured.
  • Aug. 1998 — Kenya & Tanzania — Simultaneous bombings of two US embassies. 224 dead.
  • Oct. 2000 — Aden, Yemen — Boat bombing of USS Cole. 17 dead.
  • Sept. 2001 — New York, NY — World trade center bombing.

Terrorists and the nations who sponsor them have been at war with us for more than twenty years. It’s time we fought back.

So. What labels truly apply to me? I’m not quite a social liberal, but I’m close. I’m definitely a military conservative, but I’m not an overall government conservative — stateside, I’m in favor of less government power, less interventions, and fewer laws. And less taxes overall.

I suspect I’m typical — in that while I vote regularly, I don’t belong to a political party, haven’t chosen a party agenda or adopted a slate of causes, don’t trust a party or an organization to tell me what I ought to think, and am deeply suspicious of any group that wants to do things for me ‘for my own good’.

I think that, no matter where they stand on the issues, most people are like me in working through issues one at a time. I hope they are, anyway. If people are thinking and choosing their positions instead of just parroting the lines of organizations with agendas to push, we’ll be okay. We’re in for some real challenges in the days ahead. If we can think things through rather than reacting to hype, and if we deal with each other not as labels, but as people, we’ll get through the coming days better.


Comments

Labels don’t tell the whole story — 8 Comments

  1. I’d be inclined call you a moderate, actually, maybe a slightly left-leaning one. I recognize the symptoms, even if we don’t agree fully on all things.

    Mostly, I can’t agree with you about the war, and I’m really sad to see more and more people equating war on Iraq with actions against terrorism as there’s been no solid connection between Iraq and recent acts of terrorism. I’m not saying that Saddam is innocent of all past crimes, but I am saying I don’t think he or his country pose a current threat to us. I originally started to go into detail why, but really? I don’t want to debate it, here or anywhere. I stand by this: I can’t in good conscience support the government’s decision. All I can do is hope not too many people get hurt.

  2. I, too, am reminded of why I love to stop by here every day or two. That was marvelous.

    On abortion, I can certainly live with your position. While I think that abortion is the wrong choice, the right to choose should not be violated. Jann often told of a high school classmate of hers who killed herself attempting a coat-hanger abortion. I would hate to see those days come back, as well; though I also think (hope) that we have evolved into a society that can accept teenage motherhood and "love the sinner, hate the sin" as it were — without judging the offspring or tarnishing them with labels — much more freely than was the case in the ’50′s and ’60′s. Partial birth abortion, the abortion of a viable fetus — a rarely-chosen option, thank goodness — should, I agree, be banned.

    As for the rest, I think I would characterize you, like me, as a strong-defense libertarian. (Of course, you’re welcome to shove that label down my throat, if you wish…) Narcotics are bad, but not as bad as the rampant crime fostered by prohibition (you would have thought we would have learned this lesson in the ’20′s). The government should not regulate social intercourse or "sin" except at the interface where individual mistakes may potentially impact non-consenting individuals (e.g., driving under the influence, INDOOR smoking, etc.). On the other hand, individuals should be individually responsible for their self-defense, and society should be a help, not a hindrance, to that proposition. (The practical response to September 11th should INCLUDE an offer to any individuals who volunteer to undergo training in self defense and emergency response, with a national license to carry resulting from successful completion — AND a responsibility to always be armed on public transportation anywhere in the world and to help the authorities subdue any hijackers. That is the solution which is consistent with our national customs and practices up until about 1920; there was nothing wrong with it then, and nothing wrong with it now. The Transportation Security Administration is rapidly becoming a massive joke and is certainly the thing that I like least about the Administration’s response to September 11th.)

    Additional pernicious nonsense is being fostered on us because government, in assuming a role as healthcare guarantor, is presuming a role in mandating behaviors which, in the opinion of various "advocates" (who elected them to speak for me) results in reduced personal health and thereby increased cost to the government guarantors.

    ANYTHING which would replace the current welfare system with something sane and effective in fostering the maximum possible independence would be worthwhile.

    I’ve already had my say (Thank you again, Holly) on the subject of war in Iraq. And thank everyone for their marvelous and constructive comments. At this point, I will only reiterate: the reason the world stands opposed to us is because they perceive no threat from Iraq — because they contributed to the illegal buildup of arms there during the past decade. They helped make the mess, they are STILL helping make the mess, and I have little sympathy for any country that won’t fight with us at this moment.

  3. Thank you, Holly, for that list of terrorist activities against the U.S. It was very enlightening. I hadn’t realized everything was connected.

    And, strangest thing of all, I was at school in Pensacola. Right next door to the NAS, in fact. Strange how things work out.

  4. What a great essay, Holly!

    I enjoyed it immensely. I didn’t have to agree on all points to enjoy it that much, the points where we didn’t just agree were stimulating and made me think.

    It’s just as impossible to categorize myself politically. I’ve started saying things like "I’m a weirdo" because that same pattern of trying to *solve* the social issues with solutions that don’t make them worse is something I’ve noticed often in thinking people — and very rarely in political party platforms.

    Re: welfare — for years I’ve had the completely radical notion that if education is supposed to be free and universal in America, one way to deal with the unemployment issues and ablebodied people stuck on Welfare while looking for work is to soak off some of those people into retraining — if that principle were extended to lifelong education at the community college/vocational and four year college (state colleges, not the expensive private ones) level, what you would gain is priceless. A more educated populace, trained to think. And when people who have the training for skilled professions that no longer exist drop down suddenly into the "unskilled" bracket, they fall off the economic ladder rapidly.

    What I’d do is have the Welfare system count "going to school" as the same as working or looking for a job — because vocational schools whether that’s for barbering or computer tech usually have efficient outplacement into entry level jobs. If someone falls off the employment wagon, they have the option of "look for work again right away" or "train into a different skill."

    People in school have a completely different outlook than the Despair Pit that all the shelters and agencies I dealt with had. The few people who WERE getting into programs, like the disabled woman who got into beauty school — were not a social problem to their neighbors. One of the horrible consequences of Welfare-as-it-is creates a permanent underclass, because in order to get those emergency services at all, people get brutalized into this culture of poverty and hopelessness. This is irrespective of color or anything else. It hit across the boards. People who had bad luck in their lives get mashed into the poverty mold, down to and including a strong pressure to "dress for failure" and smell bad while going to those appointments. I noticed this tendency among the shelter residents.

    People who resisted the culture of poverty got more trouble and more delays in the emergency services they needed than those who still had some nerve and some good attitude and dressed for those appointments like they were job interviews. They called it "the shuffle" and it almost inevitably led to a psychiatric diagnosis and psych medication at the first sign of anger at the treatment they got — however reasonably that anger was expressed.

    It was a tar pit. It hit the disabled worse because the disabled can’t just walk away from it the way someone that angry who’s not disabled and still has a set of clean clothing can go out, take the anger and try to get *anything* like a job. One person I knew socially who worked for DSS explained that was unofficial policy to discourage welfare cheats. It does the reverse. It creates them, because the bureaucracy finds it easier to deal with repeat customers who know the ropes than people who just happen to have fallen into need for the first time in their lives.

    I know the education-solution could be overlaid concurrent to bleed off anyone with brains or energy or morale — it would take only very small incentives to make that program and the possibility of real work at the end of the training a whole lot more attractive. One way to make it support itself would be to include things like internships in the training programs — not long ones but anytime you get student work-to-learn labor you do get real profits in the situation.

    Just some thoughts.

    I can understand your position on abortion too… that makes sense.

    Robert and Ari >^..^<

  5. Well said, Holly. One of the sadest things about society today is its preference for the easy way out. Dealing with labels is much easier than dealing with people. So I think we’ll always have a preponderance of labels and a society that caters to them – unless we can convince the world that working hard often does pay off. And as idealistic and optimistic as I tend to be, I am very realistic when it comes to understanding whether or not the person sitting next to me will get up off his butt (physically and mentally) to do something about anything.

  6. Your last paragraph re: people thinking things through and choosing their positions carefully really struck a nerve with me. The SF club I used to belong to and now have only loose associations with has become overrun with people who, from what I can tell, only parrot the opinions they’ve heard in the media. And these are the same people who proudly shout, "Fans are slans!" To which I am becoming forced to respond, "Just because you have a brain or a few intelligence points more than the average person doesn’t mean you’ve chosen to exercise them."

    It would be different if I thought they had honestly thought through some issues and had come to those conclusions, but it became apparent after some conversation that they aren’t. Hence my loosening of associations with them.

    I encourage open and honest discussion and disagreement on any issue–after all, I could be wrong, and they might have information that would persuade me to change my opinion–but too often these days, politics has become somewhat like fundamental religion: the media said it, I believe it, and that settles it.

    Thanks for posting this essay, Holly. You reminded me just how important it is, especially in these days of probable war, to think. (I was going to put "think freely," but then realized that thinking is by definition a freeing act, and a free one.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>