Because we have all become "stoopid," most people hate reading long notes, and I don't imagine many people will read all of this, but I am going to post it anyway. I'd be interested in hearing anyone's rebuttles:
So recently, I took one of those famous Facebook quizzes that try and determine, based on responses to 10-15 questions, what kind of person you are and what makes you tick. These quizzes usually have some sort of clever application that tells you what colour you are, what literary time period you are, which Hero from Heroes you are, which David Bowie identity you are, etc.
Well this quiz was supposed to reveal my political ideology, and indicate which politician I would be most like. Well, let me just preface this by saying that I acknowledge a very real difference between THE REAL and THE IDEAL when it comes to governance and politics. Most of the responses I gave on this test were what I felt I would actually vote for if the idea was presented to me in the context of today's American society. While I don't feel that all of my responses were what were IDEAL, sometimes in the real world your decisions are left between the worst of all evils (example: John McCain vs. Barrack Obama..come on, which of either of those lend themselves to an ideal campaign?).
And let me further note that my Facebook political views feature "The Conquest of Bread" and "Hamiltonian," both of which are foreign to 99.99% of everyone. I consider myself fiscally conservative (because I don't think you should run a government any different than you should run a business or a family), and IDEALISTICALLY (romantically) Socialist but REALISTICALLY Libertarian. How can this be? Well, read on and I will give some insight into my thoughts below. Anyway, long and short of it is, the result came out that I was "Very Liberal" and featured a picture of Nancy Pelosi (of all people!?) next to mine, and made allusion that I was nearing "Stalin's backyard." Ouch.
Anyway, I understand that Facebook quizzes are made by some lonely guy at home and may not represent reality, so if you care to understand my (sometimes contradictory) political beliefs, each of the questions from the test are written below, as well as my response and quick justification of my belief. I also submit that much of the error comes in the lack of "weighting" any questions, meaning issues I cared litte or nothing about were weighted the same as ones that I did care about but did have have an extreme opinion. Also, the rating system featured only 4 possible answers, and no way to skip or submit a neutral response. Rensis Likert would be ashamed.
So here goes: **********************************
States should abolish penalties for gambling, prostitution, and other victimless crimes.
I just said regular disagree here. Keep the penalties, whatever.
It is okay for the U.S. government to infringe on some civil liberties in order to keep us safe from another terrorist attack.
I said agree here. "Civil liberties" has many definitions, but I think most the time, if you haven't done anything wrong, the civil liberties that the government has "infringed on" won't even matter, or will be a small inconvenience at best. And I'd like to think that the government is privy to a lot more information than we are, and for the most part, they have our best interests at heart.
Certain literature should be banned from school and city libraries if it is determined to be improper or controversial by a review board.
Absolutely disagree. If it's controversial, you don't have to read it. But I think people should be free to have access to whatever thoughts and ideas they can, and preventing "certain literature" only serves the purposes of the preventer. If, however, the literature is literally pornographic in nature, that is a different story.
The main function of prisons should be to rehabilitate criminals, not punish them.
Though I don't really care either way, I just answered agree. I think at least SOME effort should be made to make them into better people and try to keep them from coming right back. And it's never good to make a felon bitter.
High school students should be able to hear from the Gay and Lesbian alliance without interference from school administrators.
I think the purpose of this question was to see how I felt about GLBT (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender) issues, but I interpreted it as "Should school administrators should not be able to interfere with any information available to students," to which I strongly agree. I don't care if it's GLBT issues, drug problems, political agendas, business recruitment, etc. Students should be able to hear from whatever sources they want to, regardless of the issue.
The national government should establish a federally funded healtcare program so that all persons would have access to medical services.
I actually said agree to this. I don't believe in "Socialized medicine," but I think the government should make it a little bit more of a priority to do SOMETHING about it. Should they take over 100%? NO--that would have some very serious ramifications. Should they look into some sort of solution that would be more acceptable than the position the country is in now? Absolutely. If you look at American health care by the numbers, it would probably sicken you.
Laws should be passed that limit the sale of certain types of weapons that are not used for hunting or other legitimate purposes.
Sure. If it's not for hunting or "legitimate purposes," by definition that leaves only "illegitimate purposes." And why should we have access to weapons for that? And even for crazy redneck Southerners who want their assault rifles, the question said "limit" not "abolish." I'd like to see the fine print.
Persons receiving the death penalty should be limited in the number of appeals and the sentence should be carried out in a shorter period of time.
Absolutely. The amount of appeals in the U.S. Court system is ridiculous; I see it as the judicial version of the parent trap. And no one should have to stay in jail for 15 years just to be capitally punished later. Make the decision, set a short window, and get it over with. I'm not sure how many truly innocent people actually end up in death row, but I'm sure Hollywood plays it up to be a lot more than it is. If anything, a lot of people that should be capitally punished end up getting off. In any regard, whether you are in jail for 3-5 years and then killed, or 15 years and then killed, I would guess the majority of your earthly progress (or lack thereof) is about over anyway. Let God be the ultimate judge.
City governments should be able to confiscate any materials that are deemed to be obscene or pornographic according to community standards.
Strongly disagree. If it's on public display, that's one thing. If it's just in your house, should the police be able to come into your house and take your porno videos? No way. I'm not saying obscene or pornographic things are right or acceptable, but the violation of privatization is an even worse crime in my eyes. People will make the decision of what to buy or look at on their own, and confiscating that crap will only lead them to go out and buy more to replace it, and probably lead to corruption and obscenity in the city government that is doing the confiscating.
A person should be able to use marijuna in the privacy of their own home with no legal consequences.
Disagree. As of now, illegal is illegal, so I don't distinguish between marijuana and crack cocaine.
Civil rights groups that take controversial issues to court, claiming that Constitutional rights have been violated, usually take things too far and cause greater disruption than the issue warrants. Strongly Agree. I think most civil rights "issues" are blown out of proportion and become ridiculous. I quote Arnold Schwazenegger from 'Kindergarten Cop': "Stop whining!"
The U.S. must take drastic measures to stop the flow of immigrants, both legal and illegal.
On one hand they overcrowd the population and statistically contribute to a higher percentage per capita of serious and violent crime (based on rough estimates of the number of illegal immigrants), but they also do the jobs that none of the rest of us want to do and provide us with cheaper onions. I'm not a racist, I just don't really care. Agree.
Laws should be passes that make it illegal for public employees (teachers, police, fire, etc.) to go on strike. Strongly agree.
I HATE unions. If your job sucks so bad that you need to go on strike, maybe you're working in the wrong business or industry. If enough people decide that they are and leave (making a shortage of people), I believe the natural forces of the markets will create an equilibrium, and make the job more acceptable (or at least bearable) and/or better compensated. So if you hate it, don't go on strike, just plain leave, do something else. I see a strike as trying to keep one foot on the dock and one foot in the boat. And of all people that could go on strike, public employees are the worst suited for it. Do you really want the police officers in your town going on strike because they think they aren't paid enough? Come on...
The U.S. should impose economic sanctions on any country with a history of human rights violations or racial discrimination.
Sure! We'd never ever do it, but we should. We should use whatever nonviolent means we can to persuade them to treat their people better. And by "history," I assumed RECENT history (as in, still doing it). I mean, even American has a past history of human rights violations....
Birth control information and non-prescription contraceptive devices should be made available on high school campuses.
Strongly agree. Many would claim that this will make people have sex at an earlier age, but the reality is, if kids are going to have sex, they are going to do it no matter what. The statistics and studies prove this, even if you don't want to accept it. At least if there is information and products available, they will be having sex more safely, and hopefully will reduce the use of abortion as a form of birth control (which I see as a gross wrongdoing).
Welfare programs should be sharply curtailed and/or limited because they discourage individual initiative.
Strongly agree. Notice that it's not eliminated, but sharply curtailed and/or LIMITED. I think the current system is open to getting taken advantage of, and needs tougher selection and shorter durations. Prepare yourself for the worst, just like everyone else. Not to mention that the government is in charge of welfare, and not a not-for-profit or other charity organization. And anytime you put the government/bureaucracy in charge of anything, you are just asking for waste.
Evidence that is obtained through questionable Constitutional, but honest and ethical, means should be admissible in court and used against a suspect.
Sure. The way our Constitution (or our current interpretation and/or application of the Constitution) protects wrongdoers is sickening. Let's do some good old fashioned detective work, find any evidence we can, and prosecute the criminals, not letting them off because evidence was gather "unconstitutionally."
The Supreme Court should reverse its decision abortion and make it more difficult to have an abortion except in special cases.
Absolutely. This is a big issue for me.
A person should be able to burn the flag in protest if it does not endanger anyone.
Absolutely. While I don't agree with it, and I'd want to punch someone in the nose for burning a flag, I suppose that is their right and freedom to do so.
The federal government should spend less on the military and more on health and education programs.
Weakly agree. Military spending is pretty crazy sometimes, and tuition for higher education is getting higher and higher for a weaker and weaker education, so the government should find a balance there somewhere.
The U.S. government should be able to take preemptive military action against any nation it perceives to be a threat to national security.
No way. Preemptive action only leads to potentially false accusations, loss of political capital, and human and economic waste.
The federal government should take strong steps to protect the environment, even if it means the loss of some jobs.
Agree. I can't help but think that one day we might be held accountable for the way we treated this wonderful earth and its resources. Is it a #1 issue for me? Not at all. But it does merit some consideration, especially in light of recent trends in social sustainability.
The NSA should be able to wiretap the phones and and read the emails of suspected criminals and/or terrorists.
I'm really torn here. One one hand, I like the words of Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." I did say agree because of the reasons listed above in question #2. I also don't see phone calls and e-mails as part of ones "essential liberty." And in the event that I was injured by some happening that could potentially have been prevented, I can't help but think I would be the type of person that says, "Why wasn't anything done to prevent this?"
Laws shoold be passed declaring English the official language of the United States. Strongly disagree.
First of all, a word in this question was spelled wrong by the creator, demonstrating that even native, English-speaking Americans can't even master our language (if you speak or are learning any other language, you realize how stupidly impossible English can be), and second of all, we're well past the point of being able to enact and enforce any such law.
Persons should be able to serve in the military regardless of their sexual preferences as long as their behavior meets strict military standards.
Strongly agree. I don't give a crap if a soldier is gay. If he's willing to defend our country, let him do it. And if you are a homophobe and are in the military, it's only a matter of time before you run into a situation much scarier than a gay man in your squad (or whatever the technical term is), so maybe you're not a good fit for the military.
If two persons apply for college, and one of them is a minority, the minority should be given special consideration if his/her resume indicates social or educational hardships.
I abso-freaking-lutely hate affirmative action. Believe it or not, white middle-classers can have just as many social or economic hardships as we perceive minorities may have. No special consideration on the basis of sex, religion, or ethnicity, no exceptions.
The death penalty is an outdated form of punishment, is possibly "cruel and unusual," and should be abolished.
Strongly disagree. See above.
There should be occasional and random drug testing of all high school students.
Strongly disagree. I quote PigPen from 'Out Cold': "I don't need a drug test to tell you I do drugs." And if you are frank with yourself, you realize that anything "occasional and random" is usually "frequent and targeted." Get real.
It should be legal and Constitutional to set a time in schools designated to prayer.
Sure, prayer should be legal and Constitutional in school. If you are not faithful, use the time to meditate or reflect, or play PacMan on your phone.
Public schools should be required to teach Biblical creationism in all classes that teach the theory of evolution. Strongly disagree.
Crap, I'm about as interested in learning Biblical creationism in school as I am in learning about Darwinian Evolution. I think they should both be pitched, as neither are provable and both are so controversial. In any regard, the time could be better spent in teaching our youth more practical things, like math or speech.
The U.S. government should not be allowed to torture people in U.S. custody for any reason, including obtaining information regarding the threat of a terrorist attack, because of the potential international ramifications.
Absolutely agree. It's basic human rights, people. We hated the Stalinist Communists for doing the same things that we do now (only for now we do them on a much smaller scale).
Police and/or school officials schould be able to search student lockers on a random basis for illegal materials.
Strongly agree. The locker does not belong to you, it belongs to the school to use at their discretion. Same thing goes with business phones and computers, company cars, etc. If it's not yours, you have no claim to privacy or privatization.
Police officers should be prohibited from conducting investigations based on racial profiling and should be reprimanded and/or fired if they do.
Agree. But how easy is that to prove?
The U.S. should pass a Constitutional Amendment to define marriage.
Absolutely agree. Not because I am necessarily for/against gay/straight marriage, but because I'm sick of hearing about it. A Federal Law passed once and for all one way or the other, and let's put some limitation like "nonrevocable for 100 years." I'm sick of all the states flip-flopping, too. Passing a law, then turning it back over, and returning it, then amending it, etc. Sheesh. I would like to take this opportunity now, though, to state that marriage is a privileged, not a right, and no where are you guaranteed a right to marry, gay OR straight. So if it's an equality issue, so be it. But it is NOT a civil rights issue.
HIV screening should be a standard part of routine physical examinations.
Agree. What's the harm? And there must be some good to is. Just don't charge an extra $100 for a "mandatory" blood test. If it's costly and you want to require it, you'd better find some way to raise the capital for it. Requirements for any military duty, including combat, should be based on physical, emotional, and intellectual abilities, with no refernce to gender.
Strongly agree. The sexes are [mostly] equal. And another spelling error in the question, not that I'm perfect...
The U.S. has a moral and ethical obligation to provide humanitarian aid to countries who are undergoing political, economic, or social humanitarian crises.
Strongly agree. I live my life by this mantra: "Think of your brethren like unto yourselves, and be familiar with all and free with your substance, that they may be rich like unto you." Truer words were never spoken. Almost prophetic...
Parents should be able to send their children to any school they choose and taxpayer money should be used to support schools that parents choose (public or private).
Strongly agree. I like the idea of school vouchers, though I have never see them in practice, so maybe they really don't work that well. But the idea of running a school the same way you would a business, with actual accountability and stuff sounds neat.
Sex education should be in the curriculum of all public schools and all students should be required to take the class unless exempt by parents.
Strongly agree. Sex education does not make kids have sex, nor is there any statistically significant correlation to it. However, there is a correlation between pre/extra marital sex and exposure to sex in the media, so if you don't want your kids having sex, banning sex ed won't do it--turning the TV off will. Sex ed is just a anatomical science.
The U.S. should pass a Constiutional Amendment that would make it illegal to discriminate in any situation solely on the basis of gender.
Strongly agree. For better or for worse. This includes affirmative action.
No comments:
Post a Comment