I believe that her argument is the basis of the Republican position as to why they believe certain things cannot be allowed i.e. abortion and gay marriage.
Because, I believe, intuitively both parties DO agree that liberty without virtue is meaningless. I think most Americans believe this but they may not be able to articulate it. The GOP has hi-jacked this argument.
Neither party will argue that it is ok to murder someone. That is not a liberty with virtue, neither is theft nor fraud. You will not find it part of any political platform. Why?
So, the question is, does the Republican Party believe that the Democratic party lacks virtue in their perception of Liberty. I get the impression that the Republican Party is saying "hey, here is this round hole and if you shape yourself into a round peg, you'll fit it and your life will be ok. And we really only want policies in place that make it possible for the round pegs to do well and thrive. If you are not a round peg and you cannot conform yourself to be a round peg, then your liberties are without virtue and therefore they are meaningless. We don't want to protect them. It's your choice not to be a round peg.
I want to address the issue of gay marriage, again. What in life can be more virtuous than a lifelong commitment to another person? If two people consent to love and commit to one another and to take care of one another for the rest of their lives, how is this lacking in virtue? How is it lacking in Morality? Why is it that the Republican Party feels that protecting this liberty between two people of the same sex would be a breakdown in the direction of our country? There is no Moral breach in this act. Simply because a heterosexual cannot comprehend that the love and connection between two homosexual individuals is as real as it is between two heterosexuals does not make it less real...i.e. less valid. Why does the Republican Party believe that only they know which liberties are virtuous and which ones are not.
Do the parents of these homosexual individuals see their children lacking in virtue or morals simply because they want to marry the person they love?
What I find interesting as it relates to abortion is how they are able to dismiss the woman altogether in an effort to save an entity that is not yet here. They want to dismiss her even when the life is simply a zygot. Where is the virtue in this? Where is the virtue in forcing a woman to give birth to a child she does not want? Where is the virtue in removing the government assistance programs she would need if she gave birth to this child? I don't understand where they are coming from.
Are they assuming this woman is single and that her problems will go away if she gets married?
Why do they dismiss her from the equation? Why do they believe that her life can no longer be her own once she becomes pregnant. Will we get to the point that if someone suspects that a woman will abort her pregnancy that it would be justifiable cause to incarcerate her until such time that she gives birth. Is that where we are going with this?
How is it that the fight to protect this woman's liberty is lacking in virtue?
The Democratic Party needs to do a better job at demonstrating that we do believe in liberty with virtue. We need to help people understand that the Republican Party is NOT the authority on right and wrong, on Morals and on Virtue. Indeed, the Democratic Party is a much stronger champion of personal liberty and I think it's a stretch to accuse the Party of lacking virtue. It's time to help people understand that we believe there is virtue in individual liberties.
No comments:
Post a Comment