Everyone has the right to express them. Here are my five reasons (with a few extras woven in the prose) on why I'm casting a second ballot for Obama. Whatever you do, whoever you believe in - please go to the polls and vote tomorrow.
Your ability to bitch for the next four years depends on it.
Reason No. 5
I have a vagina. Romney's track record does little to get me excited about how he'd handle my lady parts. The abortion issue is a complicated matter that I can't simplify with a quip on a blog post. What I will say is that I don't feel comfortable making judgments about your family planning challenges based on my parameters of ethics and morality, and I don't think my president should, either. Birth control is something that women need, and I don't appreciate it when men try to legislate its availability.
On a more personal level, I appreciate the work President Obama has done for equal pay for women. The working women I know bust their asses every day in offices, newsrooms, and on the road, and they deserve to be compensated appropriately for their work. The Lilly Ledbetter Act is an important step in bringing equality to the office, and Mitt Romney isn't behind it.
Reason No. 4
I am terrified by how the Supreme Court would change if Mitt Romney was able to appoint justices. Let's face it. Some of the folks in the robes are getting long in the tooth, and Ginsburg and Breyer could retire in the next four years.
During his four years in office, President Obama has appointed two women and helped protect against extremist rulings. Romney would be sure to select justices who could do away with Roe v. Wade and hammer away at any opportunity for marriage equality. Any Romney appointees would have the potential to influence the law of the land in dramatic fashion.
Do we really need to bring back separate drinking fountains? I wouldn't put it past 'em.
Reason No. 3
Speaking of marriage equality, I think gay marriage is something that deserves to be recognized in my lifetime, and I think Barack Obama is the guy who can help make it happen. I have so many gay and lesbian friends who deserve the right to marry just as my straight friends do.
Right now my friends Chris and Craig aren't allowed to experience the same rights as my married friends. They aren't legally allowed to make end-of-life decisions for each other, and in some cases they could be banned to visit each other in a hospital. I believe they deserve the same happiness (and challenges) as any married couple - they pay taxes, they give their time and talents to the community, and they throw a hell of a Christmas party. I know if they had a wedding it would be fabulous and a huge boost the local economy. Promise.
Reason No. 2
My religious beliefs are my own. I am a firm believer in the separation of church and state, and I can't stand behind a guy whose party uses faith to defend legislation and political positioning. The GOP has turned faith and religion into a nasty arguing point that turns its back on bipartisan cooperation. Rather than legislate from the pulpit, I prefer political efforts that encourage inclusiveness - something that is completely missing from the Romney regime.
Barack Obama is focused on bringing everyone together - black, white, wealthy, poor, believers and agnostics - to ensure all perspectives are represented. Our nation was born out of a desire for religious freedom, with immigrants from all over Europe hopping on ships to seek freedom of faith and politics. Modern political leaders (i.e. Romney running mate Paul Ryan) crow about their fears of diminished Christian values in America.
Folks, it's a big, wide world out there, and lots of people have a variety of political and spiritual beliefs. And that's okay. We need to focus on our similarities, not differences, and faith is not a good starting point.
Reason No. 1
Health Care. Plain and simple - no family should ever have to file bankruptcy for a medical crisis. I know all too well how a medical crisis can tax a family - it's happened to my nuclear family twice. I am grateful Obamacare did away with lifetime caps for insurance plans and pre-existing conditions.
I also think it's important to point out that many 20-somethings are struggling to find work these days, and that means they are also struggling to secure health care. Obama's health care plan allows these young people to stay on their parents' health care plans until they turn 26.
For seniors, Romney would like to introduce a Medicare voucher program. A nonpartisan study shows that change would raise premiums for seniors, who in many cases are already on fixed incomes and not prepared to handle the uncertainty of a premium-support model. A voucher program is a risky proposition for people who have to balance the costs associated with an uncertain future, both financially and medically.
Kate's Random Musings by Kate the Great is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
5 comments:
I agree with you 100% on everything!!!! SUPREME COURT SUPREME COURT SUPREME COURT!
I'm Canadian and even I agree with you. It all comes down to what is right, and Obama is certainly on the right track.
Pretty soft stuff to rehire "your guy". Your vagina? You vote for someone because you have a vagina?
How does that square with Obama being focused on "bringing everyone together"? He has sliced you neatly into a part of the electorate based on your gender.
Because of the Ledbetter Act? Do you even know what that act does? It extended the time frame that someone could sue. That is it. Republicans were against it because it meant that businesses would have to hold records forever and be LESS likely to hire women.
http://www.collegiatetimes.com/stories/20628/the-lilly-ledbetter-act-exacerbates-gender-gap-discourages-hiring
As far as the other stuff..."separate drinking fountains?" is a shameful thing to accuse Republicans of. Do some research on the sordid history of your party if you want to see who favored Jim Crow laws and attempted to legalize bigotry and which party fought against it.
No one is going to take away your birth control...and if you think that someone will, you should know better. You are being spun.
The argument is that we shouldn't force private, religious organizations to pay for things that are against their conscience. Making a Catholic University pay for abortifacients is a violation of the basic freedoms this country was founded on. If Sandra Fluke doesn't like it, she didn't need to petition to go to school at a Jesuit University.
Romney is not this caricature you have bought into. He isn't going to take away the pill or stop African Americans from eating at lunch counters.
He is going to try and get our country, now 16 Trillion in debt and rising by 2.8 million a minute, back to some sense of fiscal sanity. We are going bankrupt, and a country that borrows 2 of every 3 dollars won't last very long.
I get that social issues and "women's issues" are important, but if the country goes completely bankrupt...how do you think that will help women?
What is Obama's plan? His last budget was voted down 99-0. He has no plan.
That is why he is accusing the other side of being against women.
It is divisive stuff. And from reading your post it works.
One last thing. When you voted for Obama in 2008 he was decidedly against gay marriage.
I get that he has "evolved" on that, and maybe you were banking that he always was pro-gay marriage and was just making a political calculation.
But what does that really say about him?
Dick Cheney was out ahead of Barack on gay marriage.
By the way, I have no problem with gay marriage...the gay community should be able to enjoy the same miseries as the rest of us.
But the logic of your statement isn't entirely correct.
Currently they have the same rights as everyone else. They have the same right to marry a non-related, consenting adult of the opposite sex as I or you do.
They are asking for a new right under the law. They wish the state to codify the marriage of same sex consenting adults.
I have no problem, and I suspect most people won't in the long run, with the State changing the rules. But it would be a new right, not a right denied.
Until that happens, and I suspect it will, they are avenues they could take (such as Power of Attorney) to mitigate some of the issues you mentioned.
Kate, we won!!!
Post a Comment