the air

This is part I of a series of posts designed to introduce you to me on a more intimate level. It is my intention to help you learn more about me and my views. It will also give you some insight into my own beliefs and what I hope to accomplish through this blog and in life. Please feel free to comment or use the contact form.

Part I of the series introduces my political views in some detail.

What are your political views?

I am strong supporter of the Democratic Party. I consider myself a liberal and I fully support abortion rights, stem cell research, and same sex unions. It would not be out of line to declare my views as those of a strong liberal. Ideally, I would prefer a society that would be powered by utopian socialism views. However, I would like to point out that I am not a supporter of faith-based politics. In my opinion, religion should have absolutely no role in politics. I think that religion powered politics is a fundamentalist point of view and removes calculated logical guidance and promotes views that are supportive of only a few. Hence, I feel that most of American politics for the past few years have been influenced greatly by Christian views and give the image that it is unfriendly to those who do not share the same beliefs.

Why do you support abortion and same sex unions?

I am a strong supporter of abortion rights for women because there are countless cases throughout the year in which women are raped or become pregnant against their will and must suffer the consequences. For example, if a woman is raped, and abortion is declared illegal, then she must suffer nine months of pain and give birth to an illegitimate child who may end up neglected, part of the foster child care system, or adopted. However, why should the woman suffer 9 months of pregnancy that would always remind her of the traumatic rape? In addition, if a couple is practicing safe-sex and the male condom or birth control system fails, why should the woman endure the pregnancy that was never intended? So the other obvious question is, what if a woman becomes pregnant by choice and then decides against it and wants an abortion? This question is extremely legitimate since it implies that the woman would abuse the privilege granted to her by the law permitting abortion. Maybe I find it immoral to become pregnant and then cancel the pregnancy because she changed her mind. However, this is an issue that I leave to be decided later on since I am no politician and I really do not have a better answer at this time.

So now let’s talk about same sex unions. The only reason why this is an issue that bothers anyone is because of religion. This is another great reason why politics should never tolerate itself being influenced by religion. Religion should not dictate what is right or wrong for all citizens of a country. As such, I feel that same sex unions would do no harm to any nation. In fact, it would encourage more harmony among people. On this point, I would like to bring up another issue. If religious views prohibit same sex unions, why is it that these same religious values are more tolerant of divorce? On that note, I think politics driven by religion should also address pre-marital sex, drug abuse, unabated violence, rampant delinquency, and much more However, very few of this issues are hotly contested as the issue of same sex unions. Hence, my argument that the Republican Party is unimpressive is supported by the fact that they are just as hypocrite as their own religious views.

What about stem cell research

This is another issue that many politicians are debating. Embryonic stem cell research supports the idea of using cells that are being developed in the womb for possible generation of skin. Being a strong supporter of cutting edge science and technology, I support this form of research. However, I do not fully comprehend the complexities involved, however, I do believe in choosing a medicinal avenue that improves the health of humans and prolongs life.

Other Comments?

I am against the war in Iraq. I was always against it and I strongly believe that President Bush misled the American public when he declared that Iraq was harboring weapons of mass destruction. I am also a firm believer that America has done more harm to Iraq than good. I believe that Iraq will descend into a civil war soon and American soldiers will be caught in the crossfire.

I support environmental issues, however, I am not a supporter of hybrid fuel technology (e.g. Toyota’s Synergy System and other current hybrid systems) in vehicles and ethanol based fuels. Rather, I strongly support fuel cell technology and I believe the government should force companies to find ways to drastically reduce the cost of fuel cells and encourage mass adoption of fuel cell powered vehicles. I feel that fuel cell technology is the way of the future and completely eliminates the need for fossil fuels for automobile use. The primary reason why I do not support hybrid technology is because it still relies on fossil fuels and the price of the vehicles are at a premium when compared to their gasoline counter-parts. In addition, the US Government does not provide adequate benefits for consumers who purchase hybrid vehicles. The ideal theory would suggest that hybrid vehicles be sold at the same price as their gasoline counter-parts along with the government offering larger tax incentives for consumers to encourage higher rates of adoption. It is surprising to note that the lobbyists for the oil companies do not encourage hybrid technology and further encourage the government to ensure that they stay in business. I think it would be more beneficial to the oil companies to look for alternative fuels as a source of revenue rather than continue to encourage high gasoline consumption.

I support the cause for lower higher education costs and increased health-care coverage for all US citizens. I think that the cost for attending college is spiraling out of control. My student loans, personally, are hovering around US$62,000. And let us not forget that these loans have an interest rate attached to them as well, albeit its a low one. In addition, I think the US government should find a solution to ensure that all citizens have basic health care available to them at no cost. Let’s face it, the pharmaceutical companies charge US consumers a premium price-tag even though consumers in India, Pakistan, and other third world countries pay only a fraction of the price for the same medication. Not only that, Canadians can find the same name-brand medicines cheaper than Americans and the pharmaceutical companies are fighting back to ensure that it stays that way. Maybe it’s time we fixed the government so that it discriminates the businesses and ensures that consumers are always the winner, just the way I always want it.

No Comments » | Random Post