America, this is what I'm thinking

This is a response to the comment made by Stan on the post in which I vented my post-election angst. First off, that post was not meant to stand as my final intelligent analysis of the cultural downturn this country is going through. While I stand by what I said, it was, in fact, a rant of sorts and meant to be somewhat inflammatory. Well, Stan, you were certainly inflamed.

Ok, now a response to your second through fifth paragraphs (the environment). What we have here is a difference in worldviews. Thank you for bringing this subject up, because I had been meaning to talk about it since the beginning of the school year. I'm currently taking a course in Environmental Science, so each day I'm understanding more and more just how screwed the earth is if we keep our present behavior up. First, oil. It's nice that you feel so secure in your frontier science (aka yet to be proven) and in your conservative version of the truth, but the fact is that our current known reserves are going to dry up completely within my lifetime at the current rate of production. Even if exploration reveals new reserves, I'd like to see you try to enjoy breathing when we all drive SUVs. I believe it is safe to say that your worldview is that of planetary management, as my course would call it. This worldview says that humans may manage the world to their own maximum benefit and will be able, by their superior intellect, to solve any negative environmental repercussions that their actions will create. It views the world as a tool to be used by humans. The worldview I would like to put forth is that of environmental wisdom. In this view, we understand that the earth would be just fine without us (actually, better off) and therefore strive to live sustainably (as in not using up all of a nonrenewable resource such as oil). Unfortunately, the exponential growth of the human population is not sustainable. We are overshooting the carrying capacity of the earth, and we will eventually have a population crash similar to the Black Death. Technology can only prop us up for so long. But people who continue to abuse the earth with their planetary management worldviews are only shortening the time before that happens. There is a reason for environmentalists to be radical. They realize fully the urgency of the situation and are like unheeded prophets in the desert.

Ok, spoiled malcontents? Yes, Kerry is rich. He is an elite. He belongs to Yale's Skull and Bones club. Bush is all of those things as well! I know that Kerry isn't much better than Bush, but I would have taken what I could get.

On to the pro-life issue. Abortion is an evil. It is intrinsically evil, I agree. But it cannot be as black and white as I wish it could be. In cases of rape, incest, or the mother's life being threatened by the pregnancy, the government cannot take away the woman's ability to choose. However, if it were a hypothetical (woman) "me" in any of those situations, I hope that I would have the courage to at least have the child and give him or her away through adoption or to give up my life for my baby. Those decisions are based on moral judgements that our government cannot force everyone to have. It cannot be legislated, or at least not easily. So while I personally believe that no abortions are morally correct, it is not my nor the government's place to judge that for everyone. While I would love to only look at the issue from the perspective of the innocent baby's life, there is an unfortunate gray area in which one must consider the rights of the mother equally with the rights of the unborn (and unfortunately unrepresented) baby.

I'd also like to address gay rights, even though Stan did not bring that topic up in his rebuttal. The Republican party effectively used the public's fear of homosexual people getting married to get more conservatives to the polls (and vote for Bush while they're there voting for gay marriage bans). As much as I despise the term objectively disordered, the homosexual act is just that. Marriage within the Church is both unitive and procreative. Obviously, the homosexual act cannot bear fruit, unless one considers adoption to be equivalent with procreation. So the Church will never allow homosexuals to marry. Civil marriages have no requirement of procreation, so there should be no reason why homosexual couples cannot be married by the state. I see no distinction to be made between civil marriages and civil unions. Marriage within the Church as an institution cannot be threatened simply because homosexuals can (or should be allowed to) marry through the State.

Finally, the issue of pacifism. Violence begets violence. It is as simple as that. Islamic fundamentalist terrorists may want to attack us now, but continuing to exert our power over them isn't going to stamp out terrorism. That is because we aren't dealing with a limited number of terrorists who we can all eventually kill and solve the problem. We are dealing with an insurgency that will only continue to grow under present conditons. Just as with the economic root of many abortions, we have to treat the anger of terrorists at its root, not violently react to the visible outbursts of that anger. The position of pacifism is a scary and dangerous one. I would argue that it is the more courageous one, the more revolutionary one, as well.

Yes, I am continually learning. But I believe I am more free to receive the truth that I learn without the blinders of selfish concerns. These are my intelligent opinions, and I invite debate.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

The Bone has a wonderful post as to where to go from here that I invite you (the general public, not Stan) to read. (it is the second post on Nov. 6, if confused) It lifted my spirits after being kicked while already down by aforementioned Stan. The poem If, linked to in the post, was especially inspiring for this post. Thank you, Stan, for challenging me to mature, not into your conservative point of view, but in being able to take criticism as constructive and replace my rant with clear-headed opinions and arguments.


I've actually realized recently just how conservative I am with regards to my own sexuality. While it is obvious from my positions on abortion and homosexuality that I do not judge others by my own standards, the standards of chastity I hold myself to are pretty darn high! I realize this as a result of my theology class. I'll hopefully post more on this later.