I have several thoughts about why President Obama needs to remain the President of these United States. Many of them are hinged on the fact that as Collin Powell stated when endorsing Obama on CBS news: America came up from a downspiraling nose dive thanks to the leadership of President Obama. The truth is Obama was given a &*^&* job and told to turn everything around when he stepped in the office. Once he started he was met with nothing but opposition and attack. He was met with extreme racism, degradation, and hatred and yet he..."brushed his shoulders off".
Four years later he is still brushing off the hate and the bigotry. He is still holding his head up and responding like a responsible leader. In addition to his great leadership, over the four years I have watched our President fight for health care for those of us who would be bankrupt from medical expenses, bail out business, give back stimulus money to jump start our economy again and deal with foreign threats in a way that shows strength and courage. I am proud. As I go into the booth to vote for him again, though, there will be another thing on my mind leading my charge to re-elect him. And that is his and his opponent's stance on women's issues...esp. surrounding abortion.
See, I am pro-life and pro-choice at the same time. And I am unashamedly Christian.
I do not believe in or support abortion and yes, life begins at conception. However, you cannot legislate that moral truth and stance via a deist nation built on pragmatism. It is unrealistic...and its really not fair to choose which sins are illegal and which are perfectly fine which is the issue at hand. Mitt Romney trying to do this is very scary. Consider this: his running mate, Paul Ryan, and others in the Romney camp suggest that abortion should be prevented even in rape cases AND the rapist should get father's rights. Think about all of the implications around this mindset. What makes any of these men think they can dictate how a woman understands her rape, let alone her rapist having access to her baby and to her. What makes them think that the rapist would not harm her or the child? Now think about the implications of legislating one's morality--especially when it is skewed.
Ya'll, we cannot solely vote bases on a few issues. We must know the implications behind them, and we must consider other things; poverty, hunger, immigration, job creation, paying back student loans and money for schools, health care, fair housing, security and war prevention, foreign policy, etc
I am concerned that we are not thinking things through. We take a person's stance that sounds remotely similar to our faith and belief system without analyzing the implications of such a stance and the damaging laws that will result from them.
Say word!
Four years later he is still brushing off the hate and the bigotry. He is still holding his head up and responding like a responsible leader. In addition to his great leadership, over the four years I have watched our President fight for health care for those of us who would be bankrupt from medical expenses, bail out business, give back stimulus money to jump start our economy again and deal with foreign threats in a way that shows strength and courage. I am proud. As I go into the booth to vote for him again, though, there will be another thing on my mind leading my charge to re-elect him. And that is his and his opponent's stance on women's issues...esp. surrounding abortion.
See, I am pro-life and pro-choice at the same time. And I am unashamedly Christian.
I do not believe in or support abortion and yes, life begins at conception. However, you cannot legislate that moral truth and stance via a deist nation built on pragmatism. It is unrealistic...and its really not fair to choose which sins are illegal and which are perfectly fine which is the issue at hand. Mitt Romney trying to do this is very scary. Consider this: his running mate, Paul Ryan, and others in the Romney camp suggest that abortion should be prevented even in rape cases AND the rapist should get father's rights. Think about all of the implications around this mindset. What makes any of these men think they can dictate how a woman understands her rape, let alone her rapist having access to her baby and to her. What makes them think that the rapist would not harm her or the child? Now think about the implications of legislating one's morality--especially when it is skewed.
Ya'll, we cannot solely vote bases on a few issues. We must know the implications behind them, and we must consider other things; poverty, hunger, immigration, job creation, paying back student loans and money for schools, health care, fair housing, security and war prevention, foreign policy, etc
I am concerned that we are not thinking things through. We take a person's stance that sounds remotely similar to our faith and belief system without analyzing the implications of such a stance and the damaging laws that will result from them.
Say word!
Comments
Post a Comment