I’m driving to work today and the debate between Joe Davis and Bill Simon is being talked about by the AM radio guys.

 

Now, I don’t care about these bastards and I’m sure that some of the people that actually bore themselves with my daily crap are outside of California, so I’d bet that they really don’t care about who’s running for Governor in this state.  So I won’t get into the whole thing.  Why should I?  We all know it’s the lesser of two evils.  There is no real winner.  We all suffer from either candidate’s victory.  Oh well.

 

But Joe Davis said something that really makes me wonder about what we’re teaching our children these days.  Joe said, “I’m anti-gun and pro-choice…which you are not Mr. Simon”.  I assume that what Joe meant when he said Bill was the opposite is that Bill is Pro-gun and Anti-choice.  That would be the ‘not’ he was speaking of and thus the exact opposite of his already stated position.

 

Am I the only one that sees the problem with this sort of logic?  Anti-gun / pro-choice?  Pro-gun / Anti-choice? 

 

Pro-choice says that a woman has the right to decide what is healthiest for her body.  She decides if she wishes to be ‘burdened’ with the weight of raising a child.  Assuming of course the idea that a child is a burden.  Of course I realize that such ideals are argumentative in the strict confines of social interaction.  But I’m not talking (necessarily) about the social weight of raising a child, but the physical burden both on the body and the wallet.  We all understand that children are expensive.  These weight could and do effect the safety and well being of both the child and the mother.  So pro-choicers are saying that the mother has the right to decide about their future safety.

 

While at the other end Anti-gun people are saying that individuals do not have the right to protect themselves from criminals that would do damage to them and their families.  By saying this anti-gun people are saying that individuals do not have the basic right of self-preservation, which is a contradiction to believing that a woman has the right to choose.  It also sets up a mentality where a woman can decide to have a baby, but be un-able to protect it from the jungle of life and thus loose it to the animals that inhabit our streets.  In other words she can have (or is forced to have) a child who she is not legally allowed to protect.

 

The same, of course goes for the other side of the coin: Pro-gun / anti-choice.  These folks believe that it’s okay to kill someone that tries to steal your wallet and the few worthless trinkets that you carry about inside it, but it’s wrong to decide if your future is going to be jeopardized by an expected pregnancy.   They, I’ve actually heard, believe that every life is sacred…yet they opening carry about a device who’s sole purpose is to take away that sacredness. 

 

It would seem, in order to avoid being a hypocrite, you’d have to be either anti or pro everything thing: Pro-gun, pro-choice, pro-smoking, pro-war, pro-dogs for food, pro-etc. 

 

The fact that so called educated people climb up from the muck and try to rule us with this foul smelling tripe, is proof that something is a miss with us… not them…us, because we sit back in our lazy-boy recliners and allow these morally anemic sleepless masturbators to rule us.  We have earned them.  We deserve them.  They lack diatessaron and continuity.  Yet we sit back and continue to allow it.  And somewhere right now people are saying it’s because we don’t vote.  That we’ve given up on the system.  That might be true…only there is no “None of the above”* on the ballot.  If there were, no one would be voted for. There is no way of crying foul when we see that we’re being bamboozled.  We have to suffer the pill that they feed us, that’s the only hope.  And people wonder why we’ve given up on the system?  The system has given up on us when it can’t even grasp the concepts it clings to as gospel!  The system has given up on us as nothing but fodder…

 

Maybe I am fodder.  Maybe that was the real error of our forefathers founding this country, them actually believing that we are free men.

 

But I doubt they were wrong.

 

 

 

 

 

*Maybe such a thing should exist on ballots.  A None of the Above box, that allows the voter to say that the contestants are worthless and do not deserve my vote.  And in the case of majority none of the above, then the process starts over with new people.