I am very excited about HB2, in North Carolina, which was signed into effect last week. This bill makes it so that transgender people can’t use the bathroom of their own choice; they have to use the bathroom of the gender marked on their birth certificate. I think that this is great. It respects the privacy of people. What woman wants a man claiming to be a woman, walking into their bathroom? It isn’t hate or discrimination when you have a law like this. The people that are fighting back on this bill are claiming that they just want to go to the bathroom in peace. Why are there two separate bathrooms in most places? To respect the TWO different genders. If such a thing is no big deal, why do we build walls and stalls in the first place? I honestly do not see how such a law is discriminating. I sure don’t want transgender woman claiming to be men walking into the bathroom when I’m using a urinal. It is such a simple, practical, and respectful thing to ask of people. These transgender/gay right deals are not civil rights. This is not even the same as racial discrimination. If anything, I can claim that my civil rights are being violated when a woman walks into a men’s restroom. I have my rights to personal privacy on such things, and when such things happen, I am being disrespected and degraded as a human being. In my opinion, transgender people should have to fund the building of their own restrooms. Think about it in this analogy- When you go to college, you have the choice in the degree that you major in. You are hoping to get a job in the degree you are working towards. It’s all up to you, and it’s your own choice what you pick. When you are done with college, you go look for a job that’s applicable to what you have learned. Say that you study philosophy; you aren’t going to apply for a job in engineering, and if you do, you probably won’t get accepted, which is perfectly understandable. You don’t say that you’re being discriminated against when not accepted. You can philosophize about engineering, but you just can’t do it if you don’t know how. I view being transgender in the same way; you are like a philosophy student who thinks that they’re an engineer. It’s out of your own choice that you become a philosophy student, and you aren’t an engineer, so you can’t engineer. You can write books, but you can’t design cars, buildings, or bridges. You aren’t being hated; you’re just supposed to be doing what you were created to do. Keeping men out of the women’s bathroom is the same; the men can have surgery and whatever else, but they are just like that philosophy teacher trying to be an engineer. You make the choices to do what you do, but that doesn’t entitle you to do whatever you want.
One’s philosophy is not best expressed in words; it is expressed in the choices one makes… and the choices we make are ultimately our responsibility.
When politicians get up and talk, they talk about what they’re going to fix, but never how they’ll fix it. That’s why they sound so good going into office, and look so bad coming out of office. Actions speak louder than words, and so when you look into somebody’s history, it shows a lot. Most of the people we have running for president all have shady backgrounds in their recent past. None of us want another Richard Nixon or Bill Clinton, who hid things from us. In my opinion, we’ve lost all the respectable candidates in the current election process. They don’t have any solutions for the problems that we are facing, just talk. Any of the candidates with ideas for solutions aren’t voted in. The ones that are voted in are the ones that have new ideas to make other things more complicated. Like Obama, he comes in and decides to make a complicated healthcare situation; what did that fix? We don’t really need new systems; we need solutions to the ones that are building up and are all crashing down from the last few years. We all like to start new things, but we need to finish the ones that are unfinished.
There have been an increasing number of Palestinian attacks on Israel in the last six months, and the other day an American student was killed in a stabbing. The stabber was eventually shot and killed by police. There are people starting to ask whether or not the police could’ve subdued this terrorist without killing him. Is that the point? He was running around stabbing innocent people. There were thirteen people injured that same day from other terrorists at the same time. These are attacks that should not be taken lightly, and there are many people from civilized nations joining ISIS. At least 200 Americans have joined ISIS’ ranks in Syria. These middle eastern and Palestinian groups need to be stopped. Why are we even questioning if it was ethical to kill a terrorist? We are letting these groups have too much control with them being on online social media . Israel is taking these attacks seriously, because they are surrounded by their enemies on every side. We need to be putting our foot down on such open hostility to ourselves and to our allies. These terrorists use hospitals, schools, ambulances, and civilians for shields, and kill children and Christians. The reason we have given them these weapons is to try and combat some other regime in their area. What happens, though, is that they start another group that’s dangerous to us. We have tried it a couple of times now, and we know it doesn’t work, which means we should quit arming these middle eastern groups. Terrorists are very hard to combat because they blend in with civilians, and strike fast. My solution to this problem, is to not give out weapons and to have a stronger presence when it comes to negotiating with the terror groups, which means not negotiating with the groups. When they attack civilians, you don’t talk to these attackers; you force them to quit. We should recognize these groups as criminals, not as people with rights to take prisoners. The more they aren’t recognized as viable groups receiving what they want, the more vulnerable and weaker they will be.
I had a couple of people on my last post, The Right Thing is Never Wrong, comment on what’s right is how we perceive right in our own eyes. This is true, but what they’re arguing is that abortion is okay for those that think it is okay. Let me explain why I think it’s a fallacy to believe that. The comments said that our morality is based on what we believe. But, there are laws demanding that we don’t do certain things, such as murder and rob. So, even though we all have our own convictions, we all have to follow this law. They tell me that I need to back off of the case and let them do what’s right in their own eyes and quit judging. Do you want to know something interesting? They both believe that a baby doesn’t become a human until a certain point, and so I asked them when that happens, and neither of them have responded to that question. The “right in our own eyes” argument is a smoke screen that many people don’t see past. Suze said that she doesn’t believe that a baby becomes human until the spinal cord connects; that is FALSE. That is like saying a plant isn’t a plant until you can see it sticking through the ground. Believing in something doesn’t make it true, and that’s why we have law. Human nature is selfish and will not always make decisions that are good for other people. Suze threw in a few different arguments, and one of them was that it’s the woman’s choice. Whoa! We’re talking about saving a life, not women’s rights. We are talking about human rights. That’s the problem; we don’t see that the arguments brought into these issue are ones that don’t even apply, like the medical issues of a pregnancy. They happen rarely, and since when do they give you the excuse to kill a person? Would you like it if your parents aborted you?
I got a comment on the blog post “Do Morals Matter” , in which Invisible Mikey talked about lots of abortion situations and said,”Acting ethically to solve problems isn’t always so simple, is it?” It seems like everybody thinks that if the right thing is hard, it gives them the right to do wrong. I like this next quote from Mark Twain-
Do the right thing. It will gratify some people and astonish the rest.
How does a hard situation give you the right to murder a baby? Doing right has never been simple. Invisible Mikey talks about how if you fix poverty there will be less abortions. So, apparently there’s a clause that says if you are poor it gives you the right to murder? And if you don’t feel like working, everyone else can support you on welfare? Everybody thinks that if you hit something hard in life, you should just give to it. Let me make a comparison- If you are driving down the road and your car hits a bump, you don’t let go of the wheel and crash; you grip the wheel and keep on steering the car. We, as people, are being given the choice to not do the right thing, and are being told to do the wrong thing. Every time somebody shoots people they get off the hook by claiming that they have mental problems. For crying out loud! They obviously have mental problems. They need to face the consequences of their actions. Invisible Mikey also said that abortion doesn’t equal murder. Apparently, it is more complicated than that. Do you want to know why it’s so complicated? Because they’re trying to explain that it’s perfectly okay to kill babies. That’s why it’s complicated. It doesn’t have a lot to do with poverty; it has a lot to do with our human condition of sin and selfishness. Invisible Mikey also says that we should be handing out free contraceptive devices. I have a better solution- Don’t have sex before marriage. Doing the right thing is never wrong!