Posts Tagged ‘abortion’
The Same-SEX Marriage Debate: How to Deal with The High Cost of Political Morality Play
Posted on: May 4, 2013
One of the big debates going on at the state level in many states right now involves the decision to legalize “same-SEX marriage.” One side thinks legalization of “same-SEX marriage” is only fair for those who choose an alternative lifestyle and the other says it is immoral or against religious values. Then of course there are those who really had no opinion on the matter, which is where I resided until something occurred to me.
If you read my essays and observations regularly or have signed up to receive my updates, you will have concluded by now that I am a conservative, more conservative than that political party which often attempts to ally itself with conservative measure but is frequently no more conservative than the other side of the aisle in the comparison of many nowadays. Many conservatives believe that same-sex marriage should not be legal. That is not my sentiment, even though many believe my political or belief system falls within the realm of “true conservatism.”
Instead, I approach the subject of “same-SEX marriage” from the same perspective as I approach that of abortion, which I believe as a “true conservative” should be legal. “What?” You inquire? “How can that be, “same-sex marriage” and abortion are not even closely related?” Well, it is not that they are closely related, which as you will see later that they are in a way very closely related, it is that I view “same-SEX marriage” and abortion using the same method I use to view whether or not I believe as a “true conservative” that abortion should be legal, something many in the conservative hall are opposed to with vigor.
I believe that abortion should be legal because a woman can’t raise a child on her own unless she is independently wealthy or has government support, with government support being money from taxpayers, which by default means larger government and more taxes, something to which a “true conservative” is opposed, particularly now when taxes are approaching all time high levels and more people receive government entitlements than ever before.
“OK, so you are for legal abortion because you believe it helps to keep the size of government in check, what’s that have to do with “same-SEX marriage?”” You are asking.
Well, instead of approaching the subject of same-sex marriage from the perspective of whether it is a moral issue, I believe we should apply a certain approach to the subject that merely asks the question, “Will “same-SEX marriage” raise taxes for the taxpayer?” If the legalization of same-sex marriage results in an increase in taxes to the taxpayer, then perhaps it should be reconsidered. But if the legalization of same-sex marriage will result in a decrease in taxes, then perhaps it should be considered. You see, like abortion, you have to examine the behavior. The two, “same-SEX marriage” and abortion are indeed very closely related because they involve the subject of “SEX” and the product of “SEX!” In the case of “same-SEX marriage,” the subject of discussion is the subject of “SEX,” sex by people of the same “SEX!” And if legalization of “same-SEX marriage” results in an increase in taxes to pay for the legalization of a type of sexual activity, or “SEX,” then by the definition of any conservative, not just a “true conservative,” it should probably not be considered for legalization. Just like abortion, which deals with the result of “SEX,” or a fetus, “same-SEX marriage” deals with the subject of “SEX!” And in America we are already dealing with the substantial cost of “SEX” from unwed pregnancies at an alarming rate. Just in 2011 forty-one percent of children born were born to out-of-wedlock mothers who almost all certainly obtained a substantial amount of support from the taxpayer to enable such sexual inequity.
It is by the same method then that I believe we should approach the subject of “same-SEX marriage” as that of outlawing abortion, asking the question, how will it affect the burden of taxation upon the taxpayer? If legalization of same-sex marriage increases taxes for the taxpayers, then perhaps it should not be legalized as it is believed that outlawing abortion would increase taxes, substantially.
I think this same method, asking the question, “What burden will it place upon the taxpayer?” should be applied to all such similar circumstances, particularly those involving sexual behaviors. They are consensual behaviors generally and don’t harm anyone until they become issues which affect taxation when then they directly impact the taxpayer. I think the method I discuss here is an excellent way to deal with the political morality play, the political theater and misrepresentation that goes on with such matters of consensual behavior. And though I recognize the biblical origin and position of religious leadership on the matter of “same-SEX marriage,” I don’t think it is as much of a religious matter as it is an economic issue.
Why?
Because it is time American taxpayers should be free from having to pay for others to have sex on a bed made of taxpayers’ dollars.
Copyright © William Thien 2013
Sign up to receive updates. It’s easy and safe. Just go to the upper right hand corner of this page and add your email address.
An Addendum to: Republicans Are Missing the Point on Abortion and Birth Control
Posted on: April 29, 2012
Twice now I’ve written on Republicans and how their position against abortion and birth control is diametrically opposed to that of a “True Conservative.”
I concluded that if Republicans were truly for smaller government they would not argue against abortion and birth control because a single woman more often that not is unable to raise a child on her own from birth. Consequently she often falls back on government support which by definition means larger government. Therefor if you make it illegal for a woman to have an abortion or to use birth control then she will have to have the child whether she can afford to raise it on her own or not and the public will end up financing her indiscretions.
I add that I am the only one who has publicly taken that stance on the matter from the very beginning.
I wanted to add that following the Roe v. Wade decision which determined that an abortion should be legal under the right to privacy clause, crime went down significantly over the following years. In other words, the legalization of abortion also had a definite effect on decreasing crime in The United States.
So, if Republicans who claim to be true conservatives want to see smaller government they would not work so hard to see abortion made illegal once again and birth control difficult to obtain. It is as simple as that.
I ask, what person in their right mind would want to increase crime in The United States and increase the size of government making it more expensive? Because that is exactly what will happen if you outlaw abortion again. The Republican position on the matter is untenable.
We see commercials now on television stating the obvious, that “an abortion stops a beating heart.” There are billboards up from time to time showing aborted fetuses. And anti-abortionists seem to think that people, women in particular don’t agonize over their decision to have an abortion. Perhaps the anti-abortion crowd funding would be better spent on teaching teenagers and young adults the risks of having sex, such as GETTING PREGNANT!
Sometimes I wonder. People are going to have sex. When people have sex, women often get pregnant. That’s how that works. Should we outlaw sex?
The Republicans have a lot of positions I agree with but if they maintain their stance as a party against abortion they are not by definition “True Conservatives.”
Because there is just one thing Republicans seem to forget about time and time again about men and women, they forget about human behavior.
Copyright © William Thien 2012
Sign up to receive updates. It’s easy and safe. Just go to the upper right hand corner of this page and add your email address. We will never give your contact information to anyone.
William Thien 
On Catholicism’s “No Birth Control” and “No Abortion” Policies and Those Such Corresponding Policies by Some So-Called Political Conservatives
Posted by: William Thien on: March 7, 2014
It is my opinion that those policies instituted by The Catholic Church and certain so-called conservative elements of a particular political party outlawing abortion and birth control, such as any religious edicts of which we are all aware, are contrary to the social and economic health and well-being of The United States, because those same religious institutions and so-called conservative elements of society do not also provide the necessary corresponding financial support for the result of those policies and instead said institutions and the aforementioned so-called conservative elements of society attempt to relieve themselves through the tax code of financial responsibility for the resultant progeny and/or are unable to care for them and as a result are no different from “deadbeat dads.” Hereon in I shall refer to any such policies and positions as “deadbeat dad” policy.
Copyright © William Thien 2014
Sign up to receive updates. It’s easy and safe. Just go to the upper right hand corner of this page and add your email address.
Share this: