Save the GOP!

Marijuana Legalization – Will It Really Happen?

Posted in Legalization of Marijuana by htbaird on January 15, 2009

My political hero, William F. Buckely, founder/publisher of the National Review, former host of the popular TV debate program “Firing Line”, and true conseravtive has long supported the legalization of marijuana. His ability to discuss the topic (which would easily provoke rage in the average debator) in a calm and always gentlemanly style has earned him the respect of millions.
However, this is the one issue on which Mr. Buckley and I part ways.
His argument – which carries a lot of validity – is that our prison system is over-crowded with violent criminals, who are too often parolled to make room for more recent offenders, including reapeat marijuana “offenders.” He also note in his argument that marijuana is not a drug that causes violent behavior in the user, and that the only violence associated with marijuana stems from the fact that it is illegal and trafficked through the “drug trade.” His beleif is that if marijuana were legal, it would vastly decrease violence, and that the ones who would suffer would be the illegal drug traffickers.
While I understand his argument, I am afraid that the legalization of pot would do more harm than good to decent, law-abiding citizens. Legalizing it would be tantamount to inviting people to use it…including those who never would have considered it otherwise, or known how or where to get it.
As far as sending marijauna users and non-violent dealers to prison, however, I beleive that is crossing the line. I think that heavier and heavier fines for those frequently caught in possesion is the answer…not parolling murderers and rapists to make room for marijuanna smokers.
I have seen the effects of marijuana on those who have a penchant for it and and have become long-term users. Over time, they become slow-witted, and often paranoid. This bizarre behavior wrecks relationships, ruins families, and ultimately takes away the life-potential of the user.
While I understand that the same thing could be said about alcohol, it is an entirely different matter. Jesus drank wine, and considered it a gift from God to bring people closer together. While there are those who have adverse effects from it, the majority of people who drink it do not abuse it. Even if you are of the opinion that alcohol is just as dangerous as marijuana, it has been around and legal for much too long to take it away. Good or bad, it is long-entrenched in the fabric of Western society. Let us not make marijuana another substance for easy access to abuse.

Advertisements

The Death Penalty: Whom Shalt Thou Not Kill?

Posted in The Death Penalty Quandry by htbaird on January 15, 2009

Let’s examine one of the primary comandments of all major religions: “Thou shalt not kill.”
First, we must assume that this applies to killing other human beings…not cutting down trees, planting and reaping grain, killing animals for meat, or stepping on disease-carrying cockroaches. This is the dominant view of Westerners.
As for the GOP, I beleive we are curently in a quandry of contradictory stances. Is it okay to kill a convicted murderer, but not okay to kill a fetus? Is only innocent life sacred? If so, is Brittany Spears is asking for it when she sings, “I’m not THAT innocent!”? Of course, there are varying degrees of innocence. Where do we draw the line?
Is it alright for the government to execute criminals from an objective standpoint? If so, we must question the difference between one individual killing another out of vengeance or greed vs. a third party pulling a lever or pushing a button.
I am mystified by this quandry, and have considered it for years. On one hand, I beleive it is wrong to kill. But if a loved one were murdered by a criminal, I would want that person dead quicker than you can say, “Die, bastard!” By the same token, I also beleive that abortion is justified in certain circumstances.
Consider the idea that “Caeser shall do what is unto Caesar, and God shall do what is unto God.” It is a fairly convincing argument against the death penalty. My interpretation is that we may imprison, but not kill. In fact, in my mind, life in prison – especially for men – is a harsher punishment than death.
I beleive the GOP needs to address this issue, rather than simply taking a “pro-death penalty” stance. We need a more detailed and public account of what that atually enatails and to whom it refers.
I invite you learned folks to opine!

Gay Marriage – Fair or Wrong?

Posted in Uncategorized by htbaird on January 15, 2009

The belief that marriage is a sacred bond between man and woman has been a widely held view around the world for tens of thousands of years. Marriage has always served the purpose of keeping individual men and women bonded together – legally, religiously, or both – in order to “protect” the family unit, especially when the union is blessed (or,some might say – especialy during teenage-rearing years – “cursed” with children 🙂
However, epecially in today’s Western society, marriage is no longer as widely considered “sacred”. As divorce rates climb, we must consider the reality that not all marriages are treated as sacred…too many involve abuse, adultry, and so on. However, not matter the “sanctity” placed on each individual marriage by man and wife, the legally married couple still recieves governement benefits, the two most important of which are tax breaks and shared insurance benefits.
While I am a conservative who still beleives in the sanctity of marriage, I also sympathize with gay couples in committed relationships – legal, tax-paying citizens – who are not allowed in most states the government and insurance benefit of married men and women.
Now – while I do not beleive in “gay marriage” – to me the term is an oxymoron – I do beleive that gay men and women should have the right to legal unions in this country. If the GOP were to support this cause, I beleive we would see a significant increase in conservative gay voters.
Please opine!

Save the GOP!

Posted in GOP by htbaird on January 15, 2009

This blog is an arena in which Republicans, Independents, and Democrats can share views on social issues such as abortion, the death penalty, gay marriage, and other social issues taking votes away from the GOP, whose common goal is to protect our homeland, allow it to thrive fanancially, and retain the satus of the U.S.A. as world leader.

Women CAN Save the GOP!

Posted in Pro-life v. Pro-choice by htbaird on January 14, 2009

Abortion: Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice
I have spend numerous hours in discourse with members of the National Review, and was stunned by the wide variety of opinions among the members on this topic. All of these folks consider themselves Republicans, yet their definitions of “pro-life” and “pro-choice” vary as widely as the Grand Canyon.
The effect of this confusion of definition has a more devastating impact on the GOP than any other issue, according to my research. The GOP nearly 35% of women voters in the 2008 Presidential election to the Democratic party, simply due to this issue.
Here is the problem: A vast majority of women who think they are pro-choice are actually moderately pro-life, as am I. For the purpose of this blog, I will label myself pro-life, although I believe the 1st trimester abortions are acceptable, as well as later-term abortions in cases of possible physical harm/death to the mother or rape.
I believe that an enormous number of “pro-choice” women also share this view. But when they hear the term “pro-life”, it rings of Nazi/fascist tones. The term “pro-life” is also often offensive to women, in that implies that if they sanctify any type of abortion at all, they are “pro-death”.
I have a solution to this problem that could pull these female voters – all otherwise conservative – back into the fold. I believe a new label is necessary for those with MILD leanings towards both sides. A compassionate standpoint that makes it clear that the GOP is not “out to control” women, but gives a sympathetic view on this matter, both to mother and unborn child. If the GOP were to incorporate this more moderate “party line” by 2012, we would benefit tremendously by gaining back our conservative to moderate women.
Here’s a challenge for you: the person who can create the best (most accurate and catchy) new “compassionate stance” party line will recieve a $50 reward from this author, my personal guarantee. I will wait until I have at least 10 entries, then put them up for a vote on this blog. Happy cogitating!