Stubborn Woman Responds

A most reasoned letter that warrants a reprint here, if for no other reason than I am flattered that Free Will's rants evoke such passionate (albeit, wrong) justifications that parse moral code - more on that at the end of SW's post;

Actually, we are spending too much time talking about abortion. We need to talk about abortion prevention. To me this means giving young women and young men a reason to wait. It means honest sex education, including the emotional and legal aspects of engaging in young sex or sex outside of marriage. Birth control information does need to be available--because otherwise pregnancy becomes a "punishment" for breaking the rules instead of the blessing God intends it to be.

However, to answer your question, I believe every abortion is a tragedy. I wish I could be anti-choice, but every time I get near there, I have to pull back because I believe it violates a woman's right to determine the use of her body and I believe this is a violation of the 14th amendment. No one else, not a man, not a child, can be forced to donate use of their body to another, even if the other would die. I cannot be forced to even give blood to my born child, even if I am the only match and the child will die without it. I cannot be cut into without my consent even to donate a kidney to my born child, yet courts have forced women to undergo c-sections against their consent for the "good" of the child. Therefore, while I believe abortion is nearly always the immoral choice (excepting only for life and physical health of the mother--when it comes to moral I would not excempt rape or incest), but I believe it must be a legal choice, no matter how repugnant. Having said that, I believe partial-birth abortion is barbaric and I still haven't seen a convincing reason why a child could be seconds away from being a born child and killed just to avoid it being a born child. I don't like 24-hour-waiting periods, but I don't see them as unsurmountable barriers for those determined to get an abortion. I don't have a problem with parental consent laws, but do believe we need judicial override.

As far as war. I was born while my father was serving during the Korean conflict; my son was born while his father was serving in Vietnam (he enlisted with my support while we were engaged). When my 17-year-old son wanted to join the Marine Corps reserves, I signed. When he was ordered to active duty and sent to the Gulf during the first Gulf war, I supported him--though you haven't lived until you have discussed with your 20-year-old whether he needs a will before going to war. I hope and pray my grandsons will not have to go to war. However, since they are growing up in privelege, I don't see them enlisting.

I believe that every politician has one job and one job only. To get re-elected. Principles are nice, but they don't seem to last long in the face of that reality. Both Democrats and Republicans spend too much--the difference is what are they spending and how are they raising the money?

Why let them off the hook with TABOR? In fact, in Colorado, the Republicans lost seats after TABOR because with the tax issue "taken care of" there was no need to vote them into office anymore. And of course the argument that you raise taxes if you can get citizens support in a referendum is based on a hope that any referendum will be voted down--no matter what the circumstances.

Oh, in answer to your question, I have voted both for and against school referenda, looking at each question on its merits. In the last Madison election, I voted against all four questions, because I believe the school board was arrogant and lazy and did not even come close to making its case. I think the Middleton referendum was obscene, though I didn't vote because I don't live there. I voted in favor of the last Madison referendum.

I am favor of civil unions for gays with all the legal benefits, responsibilities and drawbacks this entails. In fact, I'm in favor of civil unions for everybody. I don't know why churches are so willing to tie their definition of marriage to the state's definition. Churches should bless the marriages that meet their core beliefs and should feel free to reject any that don't--for whatever reason. The state, on the other hand, should get religion out of its definition of marriage and see it for what it is legally--a contract between adults that specifies certain responsibilities of each--to each other and to any children that may come into the home.

So you tell me. Am I a yellow line or a dead skunk? Whether you agree with me or not, these are my values.

First off, I always enjoy reading a well-written piece from those who are not afraid to throw their thoughts into the public arena. That's why I respect everyone who chooses to run for public office, whether their local school board or the U.S. Senate. It is only after they earn a record of service that I denigrate them for the flip-flopping, gone native , fakes they eventually become.

But alas, Stubborn Woman has mistaken her opinions for values. Values are indeed based in a moral, aka religious, truth of right and wrong. And their place in a political discussion is well established; since the beginning of time politics and religion have been inseparable.

Ancient Roman philosophers said opinions are arrived by self-interest. Galileo Galilee said Man cannot be taught anything, but can only be lead to discover the Truth.

Machiavelli said men live so far removed from the way they ought to live, that we pursue our downfall rather than our preservation. Nietzsche acknowledged how difficult human struggle with values are for Man; how much truth can a spirit bare, how much truth can a spirit dare?

In God We Trust is printed on our money; The Founding Fathers signed-on to the notion that we are endowed by our Creator. Thomas Paine, in the Age of Reason, said there is but one God. One Truth; a code shared by John Wesley to Martin Luther King, from the Torah to the Koran. George Washington said morality cannot be maintained without religious principle.

In more contemporary times, Ayn Rand said we are only truly happy when we achieve our values.

Thus, values is not about appealing to the mainstream line of thinking, that's what opinions do. Values should take us to a higher plane of being, beyond applying the 14th Amendment to a woman's desire to abort an unwanted pregnancy.

At the end of the day, the value that I strive to live is to not judge people.