The Balance Between Democracy and Morality

Congress’s role is to represent the people, in which they represent, and the way our system is designed is that the people give the government the power, therefore, if people want or don’t want a law to be passed, then it is congress’s job to allow it to pass or not to pass. Congress is at the federal level of our governmental system, and therefore, all laws passed or denied by congress may be popular in one district, and unpopular in another. With such a huge and diverse population, I believe that the popularity of legislation should be the defining factor, for most issues, at all levels of our government: federal, state, and local, and when the population is sharply divided on an issue, it needs to be sent down to the state or local governments.

 

One current issue for example, legalizing marijuana, has a huge contrast of people, in every single district. Some people oppose it, some people support it, and some people are neutral. I believe the number that support it is possibly larger than those who oppose it in some districts, and less in others. Therefore, I believe this law should be taken down to the state and/or local level governments. Furthermore, this issue alone makes using popularity as a factor difficult, as by making marijuana legal, hurts no one but the people that want to use it, but by making it illegal hurts the people that do want to use it, because they cannot purchase it, legally. Therefore, by making it illegal no one benefits from it, and by making it legal, no one is hurt by it.  Not only would legalizing marijuana loosen our leashes and give us more individual freedom, it could be brought into the market and help the government raise the desperately needed money through taxes, similar or the same as tobacco taxes, the taxes used in law enforcement related to marijuana, and the prisoners that are locked up on taxpayers’ dollars because they smoke weed.  What BS!!  If a city official came up to you and said should we keep this prisoner in jail because he smoked weed?  What would you say?  I would say, “so00…. what’s he in jail for?” That would be my response!!  I have better things I could do with the money that the government is wasting on locking people up because of weed, like buying myself some health insurance.

 

Furthermore, when our forefathers drafted the Constitution of the United States they seemed to do one thing wrong:  They underestimated the likeliness of politicians adopting sickening immoral policies and values, in order to gain popularity.  Old wisdom tells us that what is always right, is not always popular.  Abortion is one of the hugely controversial issues that congress and the president are always weighing in on and viciously fighting for or against.  Not only has it been scientifically proven that all life begins at conception, our own president who supports abortion, has acknowledged that life begins at conception.

“…That is why we need fathers to step up, to realize that their job does not end at conception; that what makes you a man is not the ability to have a child but the courage to raise one.”
–President Obama, Father’s Day Speech

Though he didn’t come out and say it, ask him this:  if the baby is not a baby at conception, how can a father be a father at conception?  Keep in mind that these kinds of questions are above his pay grade.

 

I believe the Government has the duty and the responsibility of supporting life. I don’t know the number of supporters or opponents of abortion, but regardless if 90% of people support abortion, it should still the Government’s role to support life.  The government needs to realize that every animal, every human being, and every person, goes through developmental stages at the beginning of their life.

 

Moving on to an even more barbaric issue at hand: Embryonic Stem Cell Research.  Now that these aborted fetuses are dead, let’s throw them into a blender and see what we can do with them.  Maybe we can eat them and gain new powers, develop a sixth sense, or find cures for cancer, because we all want to live forever!  Right?  It’s something like that… 

 

Let’s get something clear:  The act of taking a human life, in order to find a cure for a disease is a barbaric act of human selfishness. 

 

The only time such actions could possibly be justified, is when the entire human race is at great risk of being extinct. If there were such a plague that were upon us that threatened to wipe the entire human race, and the chance for survival of any new children to make it to adulthood is absent, then with good intentions of allowing new children to survive and the human race to continue to exist, then embryonic stem cell research could possibly be justified and be considered ethical. If a plague were upon us, that threatened only current human life, but newborn children were immune, then embryonic stem cell research would be still unethical, as the new research would only be a fix for the people already living, rather than for the purpose to extend the existence of human life.

 

It’s even worse to think that my tax dollars are going to fund abortions in Obama’s new health plan “reform” joke.  And my tax dollars are already paying for the embryonic stem-cell research.  I wonder if the mothers who abort their babies are going to get free college, paid by taxpayers, when they grow up too.