America needs to fix its use of Abortion

I know I said I’d do a comparison of the presidential nominees and myself. With the crazy announcements of the Republican national convention, it’s safe to say that more surprised words will be spoken to change how Mitt is seen and his political stances. Same can go for the President. Next week, the Democrat’s will have their convention and who knows what will be said there, especially if they let Joe Biden talk.

So, I want to talk about something else, Abortion. I am not going to lecture on if it’s right or wrong, or my views on either side of the issue. I’m going to talk about the usage of the word, and how American’s have altered the term and how it is perceived.

Merriam-Webster defines Abortion as:

1: the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus

A: spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus during the first 12 weeks of gestation

B: induced expulsion of a human fetus

C: expulsion of a fetus of a domestic animal often due to infection at any time before completion of pregnancy

2: arrest of development of an organ so that it remains imperfect or is absorbed

3: the arrest of a disease in its earliest stage

Number 2 and 3 of that definition have no part of my arguments, but I left in for full disclosure of the definition. I will be focusing on the number 1 definition, as well as part A and B of the definition.

Our culture likes to use euphemisms to great lengths. For those unaware, a euphemism is creating a nicer sounding word to describe something that can be perceived as offensive. A common use is saying someone passed away than say someone died.

Abortion has been manipulated to a euphemism as well as a harsh thought. Because of media, American’s have grasped onto the notion that Abortions is when a woman electively chooses to kill her baby. This is only partially correct, as evidence by part B of the first definition.

A miscarriage is the unexpected loss of a fetus. There a numerous reasons as to why a fetus will stop growing, and unfortunately a woman will lose her child. Miscarriage is used by the media as an unfortunately and natural event, and so when it happens, no one screams murderer at the woman. If you got to part A of the first definition, you find the definition used for miscarriage.

The question then becomes, why have two words which are part of the same definition created or used when a miscarriage is an abortion. So anyone who says they are against abortions should realize that they are against miscarriages too. The issue comes from Media, and American’s using euphemism’s to give hope to some and create fear for others. In the use of politics, the term abortion has really exploded with its term as a bad issue.

I know at this point, there can be some people thinking, there is a clear reason for the separation of the terms. Miscarriage is the body’s natural reaction to a fetus that will not be able to carry to term. Where as reference to abortion are to the people who are careless unfeeling people who will willing kill a fetus that can be carried to term, a clear distinction. So then we can say if we want abortions to be legal or not, definition A versus definition B. Wrong.

In many cases, a miscarriage, as defined by part A of the definition, the fetus does not naturally pass from the female. If this does not happen, complications can arise for the female, the most dangerous, infection. If the female cannot pass the fetus naturally, the female would have to undergo a procedure to clear out the fetus. This is where an issue arises. If the procedure is needed, then you are entering part B of the definition. So if part A does not work, part B is required. Therefore, the bad abortion we are known to call it is required to treat a miscarriage.

So go back to the “clear” distinction of calling them separate names and then banning abortion and not miscarriage. If you ban abortions, you ban life saving procedures for a natural event that may not properly pass. Ultimately, a miscarriage is an abortion, just a type of abortion often referred too as a spontaneous abortion, still an abortion.

I really think the definition and distinction should be made aware to the public, and be used and clarified when people talk about such issues. When people say they are against abortions, usually heard on television, my eye twitch’s and I want to reach through the television and strangle the ignorance out of them.

It should be stated that someone is either for or against the elective abortion not due to a spontaneous abortion, or if sticking with the euphemistic language, miscarriage. But it won’t happen because we’re all happy with our simple ignorant terms.

My political party can beat your political party

One of the big things with American’s is stating your political party because as American’s what political party you’re in, really means jack squat, but we make it seem like it is. American’s are very stick and structured on what they believe and their political party. I think I’d be more scared to be in a room with one democrat and a republic than in a room with a blood and a crip. To clarify, I’d be more scared by having to listen to the democrat and republic argue like neither one can do no wrong.

Am I a democrat or a republican? Answer: neither. Am I an independent? Answer: doubtful, mostly because there have been a couple various versions of independents, and I don’t even think they know what they stood for. No offense to anyone who is an independent. I consider myself an American, not to be mistaken with the American party, or the know-nothing party. I like and support ideas from both parties, but can’t say I waver for one party over the other.

I personally think the country would be heading in the right direction if both parties understood that neither side is correct on its own. If congress would get their own heads out of their asses, the country could see some improvement sometime soon. But there is no bipartisanship happening in congress. Both sides think they are right and do not budge to even consider what the other side has to offer. It’s this thinking that’s given this congress it’s lowest approval rating in history, so far.

Now to compare what democrats, republicans, and I believe I found a good website that compared the two for me, and then I will add my opinions to them. The website I used was:

http://www.diffen.com/difference/Democrat_vs_Republican

I will keep the set up the same to make the comparisons easy to follow. If you still can’t follow along, then it’s not my problem.

	Democrat	Republican	Me
Economic Ideas:	Favor minimum wages and progressive taxation i.e. higher tax rates for higher income brackets.	Believe taxes shouldn't be increased for anyone (including the wealthy) and that wages should reflect free market.	This one I am split on. Taxes should be increased a bit more for higher tax brackets. Leaving wages as a reflection of a free market allows employers to employee more. If the minimum wage is forced to increase, employers will be more inclined to decrease hiring and possibly fire people to compensate.

	Democrat	Republican	Me
Stand on Military Ideas:	Decreased Spending.	Increased Spending.	I fully agree with the democrat’s. We can decrease our military spending. The cold war is over. Yes there have been cuts in the military. Bases have been closed. With limited threats, there isn’t a huge need to such a large military that we have. Technology has helped increase our power and help reduce casualties in the field. The budget for 2012 for the military is over 1 trillion. I think that’s a high enough number.

	Democrat	Republican	Me
Stand on Death Penalty:	Support for the death penalty is strong among democrats but opponents are a substantial fraction.	A large majority of Republicans support the death penalty.	As of right now I am in favor of the death penalty. As I was looking into the subject of costs, it seems the costs of giving the death penalty is more than someone to be in prison for life without parole. I will investigate more and maybe do another article on the subject. So my opinion can change on this issue.

	Democrat	Republican	Me
Stand on Abortion:	Should not be made illegal; support Roe v. Wade (some Democrats disagree)	Should not be legal; oppose Roe v. Wade (some Republicans disagree)	First off, abortion by definition is the loss of the fetus, by purpose or not. So a miscarriage is an abortion. A rant on a future article. Purposeful abortions should be legal, but with stipulations. Those conceived via rape should be allowed. If the fetus show signs of permanent deformations that will not allow the child to live a normal mean of life should be allowed. There can be a few more stipulations, but at this time, those two will do for now.

	Democrat	Republican	Me
Stand on Gay Marriage:	Support (some Democrats disagree)	Oppose (some Republicans disagree)	I am in support of gay marriage. I see this as a human rights issue. In a country where all men are created equal, we fail to do so throughout the years. Slavery was a huge issue. Then the rights of blacks had to be fought to win them. The current fight for rights is homosexuals. For those who say it’s an abomination against the Bible and therefore should not be made law. I refer to the first amendment of the constitution: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” Unfortunately, it doesn't mean states have to follow suit.

I think this was a good comparison to show where I stand. There are items missing that I will expand on in further articles. I think for the next article, I will do a comparison between the two presidential candidates and myself.

Does Gregoresque sound better?

I know the proper term is Kafkaesque. But if I only talk about the book The Metamorphosis by Franz Kafka, I think I should be able to call it Gregoresque since he’s the main character of the book for this section I will be talking about.

This is a common read in English classes. Depending on what school you go to, it could be various grades in which it is read. If you never read it, try it. It might interest you. Personally, if I never read it again, I would not regret it.

Short synopsis: Gregor Samson, the main character, wakes up one morning and is transformed into a cockroach. The story follows Gregor and his continuing change to his eating habits, to his behavior change. At the same time, Gregor watches his families struggle with the change that has happened to Gregor and his impact on their mental and physical state.

Now I chose to talk about this book, because this book drove me insane. Not because the book was boring, stupid, or ridiculous. I was annoyed more at my teacher with this book. Like all English teachers and stories, there are always meaning in certain parts of the story and their reflection on life. But at some point, it seems to get over the top. The point it peeked in the book was during one particular part. Gregor escapes from his room, and is spotted by his family. The dad in a fit of rage, starts grabbing from the nearby fruit bowl and starts throwing them at Gregor. A pear bounces off his back, an orange hits him in the eye, and an apple gets lodged into one of his ribs of his shell.

This is where the teacher asked us about the symbolism of the attack. After seeing the class look at him like he was speaking German. He explains the comparison to the Bible. Still confused? So were we. He explained the apple, just like the Bible, was the bad fruit. The apple ended up in the ribs of a man, in which woman was formed. In case you weren’t aware, woman ate the apple that basically got humans banned for life from the Garden of Eden.

If you’re partially like me, you would think this is a far stretch. Others would see the representation. And a select few will still be scratching their heads still trying to figure out Gregoresque. If you’re in the others that see the representation, I twitch my eye at you, and suggest you try to see things my way. Maybe you’ll think just a little bit differently.

Now, I know the Bible makes women seems like the ultimate mistake of God. With Genesis alone, the whole apple eating deal, portray woman as weak willed, ignorant, and the reason man will never get in God’s good grace to re-enter the Garden of Eden. A tad much in my opinion, but who am I to argue with the “word of God.”

So now, I can somewhat see the comparison. But I don’t like it. I think it’s just being read into waaay too much. It’s this type of example that makes me think English teachers really reach at times to make connections, when it’s very likely it was all a coincidence. My thoughts on the whole scene, Kafka was writing the story and had gotten to the point of Gregor escaping and his family seeing him. As he was decided what their reaction would be, he reached into his own fruit bowl and grabbed an apple to think. When the idea came to him, they throw fruit at the ugly bug. Since he had an apple in his hand that was the lucky one that gets stuck. And since the only place anything can get stuck in a cockroach, it ends up between his ribs. Voilà. I think that has more credibility than he’s comparing the whole scene to Adam and Eve and the evil apple of knowledge and exile.

Now I know there can be some interpretation of Kafka’s works that indicate comparisons to the Bible, but many have thought to say that too much is being read into his work to connect the two. For some more read on it I refer you to the following website.

http://www.kafka-franz.com/bible.htm

This concludes my English adventures, at least for now. Maybe in the future I will remember something from that year to share, or that stemmed either from 12^th grade or another time of learning. Since I have posted one article regarding the current political election, I shall go into that area next. So if you’ve been intrigued so far, I hope to keep you intrigued. Remember tell your friend, family, or just random people on the street or internet about me. Post the link on facebook that you’re reading my blog, who knows; maybe people will think more of you reading a blog that seems interesting and thoughtful.

Tax returns and the two evil politicians

Now I will be continuing my fun filled history. I will even get more into my political background and opinions. But I’m going to step in early with a topic that has seen annoying me during this campaign. The releasing of Mitt Romney’s tax returns. Obama’s campaign has asked he release the last 10 years of his tax returns. On Friday August 17^th, Obama’s campaign asked he only release the last 5 years. The exact quote from Jim Messina is:

"So I am prepared to provide assurances on just that point: if the Governor will release five years of returns, I commit in turn that we will not criticize him for not releasing more - neither in ads nor in other public communications or commentary for the rest of the campaign."

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/obama-campaign-romney-release-years-tax-returns-ll-call-truce-tax-issue-article-1.1138398#ixzz23pQTvkUf

My personal opinion on Romney releasing 5 years or 10 years is: I DON’T CARE!!!!! Releasing tax returns, in my opinion will have no basis on why a person should be elected president. The releasing of Tax returns has been a role in past elections. And knowing the outcomes of the elections, the releasing of tax forms seems to have no merit on who wins.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57473424/outrage-over-tax-returns-a-replay-of-past-campaigns/

Obama’s campaign is going to use the tactic throughout the campaign. Obviously their hope is the Romney is so secretive that your only choice is Obama. This in my opinion is a horrible reason for someone to win.

To say because he is hiding secrets from the public, he is unfit to be a president. Last I checked, the government holds plenty of secrets from the public. So that sounds more like a reason to have Romney as President, he can hide secrets and stand behind it.

I have read about secrets from the past of Obama that have not been released. The biggest one, in which some have said Romney should pressure Obama, is about his College years. Based on a recent contact on Sean Hannity, his sealed documents hold a new conspiracy to Obama’s past.

http://www.examiner.com/article/you-show-me-yours-and-i-ll-show-you-mine

To me, the demanding for tax returns from democrats is creating a group of democrats that are acting like the republican birther’s. I hated the still ongoing controversy of Barack Obama’s birth certificate. No matter how many people view it, people will constantly think he was not born in Hawaii. Even if Romney gets elected, and he doesn’t release his past returns. Democrats will attack that fact through his 4 year term, it’s a guarantee.

With all these “horrible secrets” that the candidates are hiding, maybe I should look to ads to help me see their ideas for presidency. Seems like the legit thing to do. But one slight problem, I can barely find any. Why? Because both sides seem to be on their way to having another big smear-mest. Both sides are attacking each other without revealing much of what they plan to do for the next 4 years. Now, I think it seems like I am over exaggerating, but 50,984 negative ads over a 2 week period seems high to me.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-07-16/obama-romney-bash-each-other-with-90-percent-negative-ads

Now, 50,984 ads do not seem like a lot, but let’s break it down:

1,529,520 seconds

25,492 minutes

424 hours

There are 366 hours in a 2 week period.

So, for a 2 week period, there was an ad starting less than every minute. So no matter at what point of time during that 2 weeks, and ad was playing for someone. What’s worse is that most ads are not played in all 50 states. They are played mostly in swing states. Those are the people I feel sorry for.

With non stop attacks ads, I don’t know which one to vote for. The rich millionaire politician who wants to destroy America with his secrets. Or the other rich millionaire politician who wants to destroy America with his secrets. Decisions, decisions. 

The story goes on

Welcome back. I know right now, I have no one reading. But it doesn’t stop me from typing up my blog with what I want. For now, this seems like a biography. I think I can get several posts just from my history before I even get close to other posts and where I could go with this blog in the future.  And now, back to my past.

I enjoyed what he did for the class. He treated the class more like a college class, to help prepare us for what we could deal with at a higher level than high school. He also set up his class with specific reading material, as do all English classes. But his was set with literature that more philosophy based. Designed to get beyond the normal way of thinking, to think outside the flow of life, and expand outside the narrow sight so many set themselves into.

The literature that I remember most and had the biggest impact on me was “Allegory of the cave” by Socrates. Side note, I still like to say his name pronounced So-crates, instead of Soc-ra-tes, for the pop culture reference. Back to the story. Short version, men chained in a cave who are fed shadows on the wall. These men believe the shadows are real. One of the men gets released. He discovers the shadows are made by real objects. He eventually discovers the exit of the cave, and the rest of the world. After seeing the world, the man returns to the cave and the other chained men. He tries explaining to them about what he saw, but they do not believe him, since all they know is the shadows. And since they can’t see anything but the shadows, they refuse to believe anything else.

It’s a pretty self explanatory message. But in case you didn’t get it; just because you are told/taught/shown something, does not mean that something you were told/taught/shown is everything and nothing else. Simpler version: don’t take things at face value. Learn to find the cave entrance and live life beyond the shadows in front of you.

I feel this is a good stopping point. Am I done with my 12^th grade English class/experience? No. I think there will only be one more post regarding that. Well, at least at this time I believe so, but only time will tell.

How do you start?

How to start out a blog? When I have never done one before. The best I figure is a giant introductory about me, with some of my views and beliefs to give a better idea of how I think. My thoughts are, if you know about the author, you can get an understanding of what you could get yourself into by reading my future posts. Hopefully my introduction post will varnish continued interest in my posts. If your one who does not see the interest to continue, then I am very sorry to lose a reader.

So, as an introduction, I think about what should be contained. I can’t think of everything that could be included. At the time of typing this, I can only think of a few points, I feel can give a decent idea of how I think. First off will be my influences into my critical thinking. Who taught me, and how they helped shape me. I also picked two other categories to start with, politics and religion.

Life experiences/ Education:

I am in no way a scholar. I do not have a complete college education. I am working on my degree in business management. With the education I’ve had, combined with the experience and teachings that have helped me be more thoughtful. While I do see myself this way, does not mean that I hold an ego thinking I am better than others, or think less of others opinions.

I have changed a lot from high school. In high school, I didn’t think about as much. I never cared what was going on in current events. I wasn’t even one to care much for the work. I felt like I was there to get through it all, with no idea what I wanted to do. It’s why I never went to college right away; I went to work out of high school. Now that things have changed, I’m now going back to school for a degree. I have been on a couple year hiatus unfortunately due to expenses and have been unable to afford the classes. I am aware of financial aid and student loans, but having issues trying to get financial aid, and I refuse to gain student loan debt.

Getting back to high school, it seems bad, but never hit a large thought of life until 12^th grade English class. Everyone called him Doc. I never asked why or found out. My only theories come down to; he had a PHD. Not sure he did, but would not surprise me if he had one. Next theory, due to his facial hair, and glasses, he resembled Doc from the seven dwarves. Only other theory is that he was a fan of Back to the Future movie. For all I know, it’s a completely different reason why. Whatever the reason, he was my teacher for 12^th grade.

Apparently, my posts for beginning will be longer than anticipated. That’s perfectly fine. Just means I’ll have more posts to get me going for awhile. So I think this will be a good stopping point. Stay tuned for my fun adventures in 12^th grade English. I know, English doesn’t sound fun, but maybe you get something to think and ponder about, similar to what I did from that class.