Saturday, June 8, 2013

The Inverted Two-Part(y) System

There seems to be a cruel joke being played in American politics.

Whether this is the result of an Illuminati conspiracy, or an alien TV show, our two main sociopolitical stances seem to be locked in a bizarre death struggle that defies all logic. The best example of this is how two main topics that are the subject of bitter debate (abortion and religion) each generate directly opposing approaches by the Republican and Democratic parties, resulting in a stalemate.

Republican opposition to abortion on what they consider to be moral, ethical, and religious grounds are fairly well-known. While some groups have slightly different views on the topic, it's pretty safe to say that right-leaning political affiliations are generally pro-life.

On the flip side of this debate, left-leaning political views generally hold the stance that abortion is a polarizing view with many different aspects to consider, but ultimately believe that it is up to the woman to decide. This leads to a more pro-choice stance being adopted by the Democrats.

Fair enough; reasonable people can disagree. However, this just happens to be a vitriolic, pumped-up, sometimes violent "discussion" that generates some very extreme reactions from both sides of said debate. "Hands off my body", and "abortion is murder" are not phrases that suggest an interest in learning a different pint of view.

So regardless of the motivation, let's boil this down to a simple "Republicans want to outlaw abortion; Democrats want a hands off approach". However...this approach is completely reversed when it comes to the conversation around religion in public.

Republicans and right-leaning affiliates believe that as this country was founded by people of a certain religious faith, and religion has been a significant part of this country's moral fabric for a few hundred years, that it should not be an aspect of life to be swept under the carpet and out of public life. Call this a "pro choice" when it comes to seeing how people express their faith publicly.

On the other hand, Democrats and left-leaning affiliates generally adopt a zero-tolerance, no public use of education, government, or other support (official or implied) for religion. They often view it as a personal choice that should be kept out of the greater public discourse. Call that a consistent "pro-nontheistic" approach, if you will.

So here's a situation where each group has a policy they believe should be the law of the land, and another policy they believe should be left up to individual mandates and choice. The problem is, these stances are reversed between the two main political parties. What's tragically hilarious is that this completely shuts down debate on the subject.

"Those damn baby killers are contributing to the moral decay of this country."

"Those damn religious nuts won't stop pushing their views on society as a whole."

Or, let's combine the two statements:

"Those people should think the way I should, or we'll make them do so through laws."

You can't have it both ways. If you think a moral imperative drives you to criminalize a medical procedure, the you have to accept that your self-expression may be similarly legislated against. If you think a "hands off" approach is warranted with regards to abortion, then you need to accept that a similar "hands off" mentality may need to apply with regards to religious observances.

Do you want things to be hands on with regards to is legalized, or hands off? Because each party has claimed to be the voice of freedom from government intervention for decades...all while using that intervention to stop things they don't agree with.

Blog Topic #4

No comments:

Post a Comment