Since I forgot...

I forgot in blog 6 and 8 to post on my blog.

For blog 6, I answer Kris' devil's advocacy question on my own blog, F*** Obamacare.  I further expounded on my original argument of the unconstitualism and complete travesty that is the so called Affordable Healthcare Act.  Affordable my ass.

I also commented on Matthew Schultz's article on the up coming elections, where he explained his views on Trump and Clinton.  I agreed fully with him that Clinton was an untrustworthy, "politics as usual" b****, and that Trump is just, well fucking nuts and offensive.

For blog 8, I commented on Nicole Arnold's article on why birth control should be free.  I really like this one, agreed with every point she made.  Birth control should be free, sex education needs to be better, and religious needs to stop messing with politics, especially on an issue like this where science actually has answers.  I liked it as well because it relates to my blog 7 post on abortion and why making it illegal is unconstitutional and just plain stupid.

Sorry for the language.  This class is getting me a little jaded.  I usually ignore politics and most of what is on the "news."  Thank goodness I didn't have to pay attention to Hollywood too, or I might have lost my mind completely.

Pro-choice is the real pro-life... quality of life for all.

I’m about to speak on a topic that may truly piss some of you off. If you can’t stomach a “pro-choice” view, then stop reading now. Please do not make any comments that are religious based, or emotionally charged without substance to back them up.

Why is this even a debate? What someone does with their body, as long as does not endanger the well being of another living, breathing person, or animal, is their business. Simple as that.

Let’s briefly look at some scientific facts.

The heart beat starts around the end of the 6th week. Not 18 or 21 days like some pro-life propaganda and billboards (like the ones that line the highways in FL) will try to have you believe. The sex differentiation and the development of the pituitary and pineal glands happen during the 7th week. So before then, you have a sex-less, endocrine gland-less, lump of cells with no heart beat. So any abortion before the 6th week, possibly even the 7th, is merely an interruption of biology, using science to get a desired result, just like we do with so many other things. For this reason, all abortion clinics and doctors will preform abortions up to the 7th week, which is where some draw the line and go no further.

When it comes to brain wave activity, pro-lifers like to spout off a 1962 medical journal article that said that it starts around 42 days. In 1962, the scientific instruments we used to measure brain activity were crude, and couldn’t tell the difference between electromagnetic activity from the heart and the brain. Modern neuroscience is showing that NORMAL brain activity, especially things like sleep and high voltage medium wave activity starts much later, possibly as early as 19 weeks, or as late as 32 weeks. If we debate that someone in a vegetative state with no more brain activity than what keeps their heart beating isn’t alive, why do we blanket statement the “aliveness” of an embryo? Why does “life start at conception” when it is nothing but cell division for several weeks, and there is no higher level brain activity till much later?

I believe myself to be a true pro-lifer. Not in the sense that I blanket statement that all abortion is wrong, and that all conceived babies must be born or it is murder (btw, anyone who actually believes that rape victims should have no choice but to have the baby because it is “fate” or “God’s will,” deserves to be swiftly, and squarely kicked in the face and stomach). I believe in the miracle that is life. I believe in the quality of life. I believe that one should have children only when they are financially and emotionally capable of providing a high quality of life to the child created.  Yet every year there are women who bring children into this world that they are not financially or emotional ready to take care of. Why? Because religion or misinformation has convinced them that abortion is wrong. I believe it is wrong to bring a child into this world when you can not fully support it, or when you are too young or immature to realize how much responsibility and work is necessary to properly raise a child in this world, and DO SO.

Abortion is not something I believe should be used willy nilly. No, this goes back to making wise decisions, like using condoms, and using medical contraception like birth control pills or patches, or IUDs. Yet, if a person can’t be smart enough to make these decisions, then why are we all so ok with them having a child, sometimes multiple children? I know abortion is not an easy decision to make. I’ve watched a handful of friends make this choice, and it took an emotional and mental toll. Yet all of these friends have gone on to finish their bachelor’s, one has a master’s, and they are all leading productive lives. This progress may have been slowed or stopped had they had children (which at the time they could not have financially supported, and one was not physically healthy enough to care for a child). Oh yea, and 3 of them have gone on to have children, which are now healthy and happily cared for since their mothers are more stable and healthy in all ways.

I’m not even going get into the religious debate. Let’s just say that my spiritual beliefs say that whether or not abortion is right or wrong is between you and the Universe, and that right and wrong are a very gray area with no absolutes. Judging people based on your belief in something being a sin is inappropriate, and goes against what most religious teachings teach, especially those of Jesus. Passing laws that prohibit abortion based on religious beliefs is stupid, unconstitutional, and close minded. Stop teaching abstinence and maybe teenagers won’t need abortions, at least as often. Psalm 127:3 says “Children are a gift from the Lord; they are a reward from him.” I agree. So starting treating them like such. Every day I see parents treat their kids like burdens and do abusive things in public, they use the TV as a baby sitter instead of spending quality time with them, and do many other things that show they are not emotionally mature and/or mentally stable enough to properly raise a child. We have approximately 31 million children on Medicaid and other welfare programs. How is this treating children like a gift? Just because your body can combine genetic material, doesn’t mean you have the ability to treat another life with the respect and care it deserves. Maybe that pregnancy is a gift from God in the form of a wake a call, a chance to make a wise, yet difficult decision, to have an abortion, then improve yourself and your quality of life so that one day you can treat that life with all the blessings of love and happiness it deserves.

Nothing is this life is black and white, at least not every single time. There are no universals. There’s even places in the bible where God kills people or endorses people to kill. When it comes to this issue, a good bit of the so called “facts” are just wrong, misinformed, or based on out dated research. If you are coming from a “one size fits all” religious point of view, that is totally ok, I just ask that you stay in your church, and practice acceptance, forgiveness, and love (which are core values of almost every religion last time I checked) and let the rest of us do what we feel is appropriate and best. It is time we started letting science have it’s due place in this debate and stopped ignoring things that make us think or dissolve our arguments. It is time we started looking at “quality of life,” and not “is it a life?” Really, we need to give each individual the right to make their own informed decision, and get out of everyone’s business. It can still be a moral/ethical issue without being a political one. Once and for all, let’s decide to let women have freedom with their reproductive system, their whole body for that matter, and let it be at that.

::dismounts soapbox::

F*** Obamacare

This year when I filed my taxes, I had to pay $260 (or 1% of my income for 2014) as a "Individual Mandate Penalty".  The reason for this was that I did not have health insurance.  I looked into health insurance, it was around $175 a month, with $50 copays, that barely covered anything.  Not something that makes sense to pay for considering my income, and that fact that I've made one visit to the doctor since 2000.  I'm the healthiest I've ever been at 32.  I don't believe in yearly check ups.  I'm a naturalist, and prefer to have modern medicine as an "ace in the hole" if ever anything were to go terribly wrong.  Yet, in 2016, I will be forced to pay a fine of 2% of my 2015 income, in 2017, 2.5% of my 2016 income, and in 2018, it will cap out at 3% of previous year's income, every year, until Obamacare is repealed.  So, in essence, I'm being forced to pay taxes for something I chose not to participate in, that truly only effects me.  Wait, isn't that very similar to what the Revolutionary War began over?  Taxation without representation?

Did you know that many of the Senators and Representatives that passed Obamacare didn't even read it?  Nancy Pelosi, House of Representatives Minority Leader and California district 12 representative, said "But we have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy."  WHAT? Ron Paul, ex-representative for Texas' 22nd district had his team read the whole thing, and they believe it is unconstitutional. 

That money that those of who wish to not participate in the sham, and those who can't afford to, pay as a "penalty" goes to fund the system, that pays for subsidized health care for those below a certain income level.  Yet, wait, don't I already pay a medicaid tax out of my pay check?  YUP, 1.45% of every dollar I work hard to make.  So now I get to pay more to fund health care that I don't agree with or have for myself (or want/need).  And I don't get a choice.  Isn't this suppose to be the "Land of the Free"?

When I have voted, I've usually voted Democrat. In 2008, I voted for Obama. However, if Obama and the rest of the Democrats would have said that they were going to force me and other hard working, healthy Americans, to pay for a system we don't agree with, or at least, don't want to be a part of, I would have told them to go have sex with themselves in a not so delicate manner. In the 2016, I support the Republicans taking power, because I see that as the only way that Obamacare will get repealed.

Obamacare favors the big insurance companies. It requires the young and the middle class to fund a system that from which they have little to nothing to gain. It does far more to hurt the American public and the economy, than the little it helps. I believe in socialized medicine, yet it needs to be optional.

Obamacare is tyrannous and unconstitutional. It has to go. The sooner the better.

Guns vs Mental illness + Trump being an idiot, per usual

Guns, Trump, and Mental Illness

This is an article talking about Donald Trump's recent response to the recent shooting on the community college campus in Oregon.  The article quotes Trump from a recent MSNBC interview that didn't get much publicity (probably because Trump's PR people paid for it to be silenced) yet it was reported on by NewMax.  The general gist is that Trump cited mental illness as the cause for the shootings.  He also insinuated that people with mental illness choose isolation, instead isolation being forced upon them by the stigmas attached to mental illness by our society and individuals.  The author goes as far to insinuate that Trump would like come up with a way to visually profile people with mental illness, much like what happens with black people.  The author overall argument is that Trump is an idiot, talking about mental illness like he's an expert on the topic, and makes a fool out of himself by doing so.  I agree with the author on this.  Maybe not to the extreme the author did, yet that's probably because I'm a moderate and the author is quite liberal.

The author's second, and bigger argument, is that Trump's argument is invalid, that mental illness had nothing, or little, to do with the shooting, and that the real culprit is our country's lack of gun control and our over inflated gun culture. "the plain fact is that the Chris Harper-Mercer, the Oregon shooter, didn’t shoot 9 people because he was mentally ill, he shot them because of the ready availability of guns and the general habit of using violence to solve your problems as modeled for the nation and the world by the US government."  This is where I can not agree.  First off, nobody of sound mind goes into a school, a movie theater, or anywhere else, and shoots people at random.  So yes, mental illness is to blame.  Yes, our country has an over inflated gun culture that might give some mentally ill people add "fuel to their fire".  Second, strict gun control isn't going to solve anything, as much as uber liberals like this guy believes it will.  Point in case, Switzerland and Australia.  In Switzerland, all citizens of a certain age must own a gun and be trained on it's use, however, historically, Switzerland i one of the most peacefully nations with one of the lowest violent crime rates worldwide.  Australia on the other had has much stricter gun laws than the US and in the 90's confiscated guns of certain varieties, and yet still suffers from violent gun related crime at a rate about equal to the US.  I don't have an answer to all this.  Yet, I am a pacifist, and a buddhist, and have a concealed weapons permit, and own a hand gun.  Guns and peace can coexist.

The author is Ben Debney, a Ph.D candidate in International Relations at Deakin University, Burwood, Melbourne.  He is studying moral panics and the political economy of scapegoating.   I feel this makes his opinion on Trump's scapegoating valid and well presented.  However, I feel his opinions on gun control and the amount that mental illness being a cause of tragedies like this is based off of his super liberal political leanings, and therefore are nothing more than unsupported opinion.

I hope you enjoy your Republicans scrambled...

House speaker Boehner resigns, can Republicans unite?


In this article the author addresses the recent announcement that House speaker John Boehner will resign in October, instead of waiting till the end of his term in January 2017, which will leave behind a diverse and some what divided republican party which currently holds the majority in the House and Senate.  The author's target audience appears to be the general public, or USA Today's general readers, which according to this article, are of mixed political leanings.

The author claims that the resignation comes as no surprise since there has desires to oust Boehner since late 2010.  He reasons that this is because Republican numbers in the House rose to their highest numbers since the 1920's in 2010, yet there has been no progress on priority issues, like overturning Obamacare, passing pro-life policies, or "getting tough of immigration".  Boehner did not get enough votes in his last re-election as speaker from Republicans, and made up the deficit by soliciting votes from Democrats.  Top conservatives feel that Republican leader ship can not offer strong enough opposition to Obama's agenda, that voters will stop voting Republican when they are seeking change.

The author's argument is that House Republicans are divided going into a presidential election year, and the future of the Republican leadership and what the party can get done on Capitol Hill is uncertain.  He reasons that the party is divided into establishment figures and mavericks, and that it is questionable whether or not a nominee for Speaker will be able to unite all factions.  I agree with him on this.  When one takes a look the current Republican presidential nomination race, the field is quite diverse, and no candidate seems to be garnering wide spread support.  In my lifetime, I have not seen a presidential candidate race with half as many candidates as the Republican party is now fielding.  The republican party seems to be severely fractionated and split over key issues and leadership.  This seems to apply across the board to the Republican party, which leaves me to question whether or not strong, uniting leadership will be able to be established in the House after Boehner's departure in October.


The author of this editorial is Brett M. Decker.  He is a director at the White House Writers Group.  He has experience as editorial page editor of the Washington Times and a writer and editor for the Wall Street Journal.  He served in the G.W.Bush administration as senior vice president of communications at the Export-Import Bank of the United States.  He is also an adjunct professor of government at John Hopkins University.  I feel this gives him adequate experience in national politics to write well informed editorial/opinion articles about this subject matter, and most anything else pertaining to national politics and governmental affairs.

10K Syrian refugees coming to US in 2016

     Since the beginning of the conflict in Syria, the United States has given about $4 billion in aid money and supplies.  Now, a plan has been established to bring 10,000 of the 340,000 Syrian refugees requesting asylum to the United States in 2016.  The UK has stated they will accept 20,000 refugees, and Germany's Prime Minister has said they are ready to accept 80,000 refugees, of which 45,000 are already within their borders.  The White House Press Secretary, Josh Earnest, stated that it is not possible to provide asylum to all those who seek it within the US, and that the initial number is only 10,000 because of the desire to meet basic needs like shelter, medical care, and food.

     The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees has registered 4 million Syrian refugees.  It has asked world governments to provide asylum to 130,000 Syrian refugees by the end of 2016.

For more details, see the full article.

Aloha :-)

Hello to all my fellow students and Prof. Seago.

I look forward to all we will learn this semester, and the facts and opinions we will share with each other.

**insert witty quote from famous person here**