A well thought out piece! Too many of us get all worked up over issues that, when realistically viewed, don't really affect our day-to-day lives. How many of us personally know a gay couple who want to marry or know someone who wants an abortion? Not as many, I would think, as are struggling financially due to higher gas/food prices, job loss or skyrocketing health care costs. I have yet to meet a teacher excited about "No Child Left Behind". Think, people, about what are the true, important issues in this election!!

J.J.

Very well done piece. Only a couple of things I can take issue with. The one you said Pro-choice, or pro-life and not Pro-abortion. I think you are wrong in that line but I don't want to argue that. If we make pregnant ladies carry a baby through to the end, and the baby ends up being adopted by a family that actually wants it, then maybe the justation process will serve as a deterant. There are ladies out there that do want to kill the fetus, infact, there is a candidate that voted for infantacide. Would you care to give your views on that. Not the spew from the party.

The issue with Roe vs. Wade is not that it is a woman's right, it is that it should be authorized by the respective states, and not authorized by fedzilla. Same with the same sex unions. It is up to the states. If the people of Indiana vote no in a referendum, then they are free to go to MA, or CA and get "married". But also remember, that the respective states do not have to acknowledge that union, and they will also have to go to one of those same states, for the divorce.

The divorce rate is not 50%. They took all the divorces that happen in one year which was about half of the marriages that took place in that same year. What about the marriages that stayed together year after year. The actual divorce rate is between 33-35%. I respect your opinion and look forward to reading your reply.

Conservativedad:

Well here is the quote I was using. The "study" has been rebuked by another but there are so many numbers out there which also skew the results such as the fact that marriage is being passed up for cohabitation more in more recent decades and that lowers divorce rate numbers as those cohabitating are not included as married.

"About 50% of first marriages for men under age 45 may end in

divorce, and between 44 and 52% of women's first marriages

may end in divorce for these age groups. The likelihood of a divorce

is lowest for men and women age 60, for whom 36 % of men

and 32 percent of women may divorce from their first marriage by

the end of their lives. A similar statistical exercise was performed in

1975 using marital history data from the Current Population Survey

(CPS). Projections based on those data implied that about one-third of

married persons who were 25 to 35 years old in 1975 would end their

first marriage in divorce.

The following site has all kinds of numbers, including the state's individual ones. It still shows Massachusetts being lowest and Nevada the highest. Indiana seems to be pretty high on that graph. http://www.divorcereform.org/rates.html

As far as one state making marriage or civil union legal and another state not...While a state may create an option not to recognize same from another state, our country DOES recognizes legal marriages from other countries. A good number of gay couples choose to marry in another country so that they US will honor it here already, so legally I think we are already well past the legal concept of accepting the union. Many churches in Canada will marry gay couples and already welcome those from the US to do so in their parishes. They have realized that to dismiss a portion of population who happen to be gay also dismisses a resource of many other talents and labor. Just like heterosexuals, they spend most of their man hours working, praying, and providing service for their communities. Their sexual preference is only a tiny percentage of the person as a whole yet they continue to be judged solely on that small portion. It would be as if we were judged all our lives on one negative habit we might have..."Oh Mary smokes so no way she can be a good person" or "Jenny is too forward about how she expresses her opinion so she can't possibly be helpful to this community". There's a lot more to Mary, A lot more to me, A lot more to a gay person. When we tell them to go somewhere else, we are throwing away a resource that can add to our community in many good ways. We are judging when it is only God's right to judge.

Though we are not talking about my personal opinion, here it is. The whole abortion thing is ugly. Legal or not. But so is capitol punishment as it lets man assume the role of God; in my opinion as both are killing people. Some might say that one is innocent and one is not. God said "Though shall not kill". He did not say "Though shall not kill innocent people". Some religious teachings say that the child has the stain of Adam and Eve until it is baptized, so you can even rationalize that the unborn child has the stain of sin just as you can rationalize that a mistake made in the sentencing of an innocent man cannot be reversed when that sentence is the death penalty. Some have said they are not concerned as they don't think it effects them. Maybe not directly but they will never know as that cancer surgeon they maybe will need in 30 years may be being aborted tomorrow??? Who knows how we are all connected. Maybe it is that GAY cancer surgeon you will need? See? It's all connected. Economics however drive a lot of women to get them as well as "shame". The working poor can only afford so many children and even couples struggle with the decision to have to end an unborn child's life. It is so intertwined with other human rights and dignity issues. When even here in Clay County we still have children living in houses with dirt floors and no running water, how can we judge the degree of despair a woman might find herself in when she finds she is pregnant and has no way to support the child? Abortion is a symptom of other things. If we work to make the other things better, we will reduce abortions as well. I am not saying that I support it or like it. Just that at this point I don't feel that just having an opinion about it is enough. If someone doesn't like it enough that THEY are willing to do something about it, THAT is going to reduce abortions. Not voting for someone who ALSO says they don't like them. The people who work at the crisis Pregnancy Center are DOING something. The person who takes another into their home so they have a place to go once driven out of their home because of it are doing something. Those who work gratis at St Ann Clinic in Terre Haute to provide health care for those who do not get benefits from work or the government are DOING something. I know individuals who do all of these things as well as provide funding for them. I just don't think the legal end is going to happen or work. My opinion so it discounts where the politicians stand on these matters. Do I agree with EVERY THING my candidate of choice does. Of course not. That's why I need the pro/con list.

davgreencastle:

I am slightly confused about your comment though I thank you for providing my new word for the day. My post was to make people think about the real reasons they vote for a candidate using examples of what issues are important to ME. I cannot assume to know what issues are important to others and they will have to figure those out on their own. "Clouding" of facts with attacks and posturing has always and does still occur in each party. Of course each has a prejudiced view that the "other" party is the worst. It depends however on where one stands as to which "guy" one would think is "nice but fake". I also might disagree as to what degree to disregard words as words can inspire and cause people to join and follow. I feel that leadership, empowerment, and the ability to get all to sit at the same table, if not work together, is what it takes to be a president. What one has accomplished in the past does not necessarily make them the person for the job of the future. Yes experience plays a factor but it also give more examples of their actions not being the correct ones as well. Again we can't just say one person qualifies for this description but we have to give all of them our personal measure in order to decide for ourselves. From what you have said, you feel that actions of the past are more important than one's ideas for the future. I feel that it is a delicate balance of the two. Character does indeed count but we can confuse it with wise judgment with regard to important decision making. Hitler was a church going Christian but definitely not eh man I would vote for while FDR pulled our country out of the dumps though it was well known that he had a mistress. No one we have to choose from is going to be perfect...We just have to weigh what we thin is important to be able to lead this country TODAY and have the ability to help heal the fractures in the world and our country TOMORROW. Though most know my leanings are towards the Obama/Biden ticket, I do not presume to tell others to vote for them for the reason I feel are going to help our country. I'm just saying that they really need to think it through thoroughly to make sure that THEY make the effort to really TRY to get familiar with the facts and issues so that they are not shielded by the "obfuscation" of mud slinging and mis information. Another example. As I've stated, I am against capitol punishment. So I have to disregard the fact that all of the candidates are for capital punishment...but since one has called for an inquiry/study as to how that sentence is determined as it seems to effect those in lower socioeconomic level more than others, at least a portion of the practice is being looked into. Do I think he has a chance of overturning the law? Maybe not. Do I think he might be more empathetic and educated on the matter if asked to pardon one who is sentenced so as not to repeat a past mistake?...Maybe? The other part of that equation is from what I've been taught, and from my religious background, I cannot see how an individual can be so dead set against the killing of one person and not against the killing of another. Same with war. How can someone be dead set against killing of one person when they respond that they feel a show of force is needed in order to bring some to the table for "peace" talks? Never mind those in the military who have volunteered to possibly give up their lives for their country, but those civilians who are described as "collateral damage" and not as other human beings?

These are the things I struggle with and realize that while others ask the same questions I do, others come from a different perspective, and maybe not the same basis of faith as I. Some feel that so long at they don't have to deal with it, fine. So long as it doesn't effect someone they know, fine. So long as it doesn't effect another American, fine. I guess, though I am lucky to be an American, I feel that we are all on this "Spaceship Earth" together and I am tired of the us and them mentality, whether it's the local school board type politics, or the world. I respect those who vote for McCain because they care enough to vote. Hopefully they are voting due to issues and true conviction and not because their grandpa was a republican as I am voting for Obama not because he belongs to the Democratic party. I vote all over the place with respect to party affiliation. What we do does matter and not voting tells us more than voting for what another might think is the "wrong" candidate. It says that they don't realize how good they have it now and how much better they can be in the other parts of their life if they were empowered enough to realize that one little vote, like one little good work, can add up to quite a lot when many take part.

Have a good day.

davgreencastle

Are you saying, in essence, that while we have the vote we actually have little choice as to who gets elected or if they will stand behind the promises they have made?

If so, then I must agree.

Our American political situation is such that the "election" is a crap-shoot. We never know what we are getting until the dice stop rolling. The dice don't stop rolling on Election Day, that's the day we determine who is going to throw them. They don't stop rolling until the "shooter" leaves office.

I have heard it said that Winston Churchill said "Democracy is the worst possible form of government, excepting all others." From observation, I am inclined to agree. There is simply no good way to govern people and let the people have freedom at the same time. The very concept of government and freedom clash.

But we, and America, will muddle on………………lol!

"The Vision of the Anointed" By Dr. Thomas Sowell written in 1995 he says this "In a given year, the number of divorces may well be half as large as the number of marriages that year. The marriages being counted are only those marriages taking place within the given year, while the divorces that year are from marriages that took place over a period of decades. To say that half of all marriages end in dovorce, based on such statistics, would be like saying that half the population died last year if the deaths were half as large as births. Just as most people were neither born nor died last year, so most marriages did not begin or end last year". " In the 45-54 year old bracket, for example, people who are married and currently living with their spouse outnumbered the never-married by more than fifteen to one. That is not even counting those people who had been married but were now seperated, widowed, or divorced". The 50% divorce statistic is a falasy. Dr. Sowell is a renowned economist and crunches numbers for a living. His work is easily accessable on the net. I highly reccommend the book I refrenced above.

Jenny

Very well written article. Thank you for your thoughtful peice.

We are meeting Wed nite to help people get to the polls...

Want to help out? Its fun!

Sally