About Me

Name:Aaron
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Search

Blog Roll

 

Republicans illogical?

 

Someone brought up to me the other day the notion that conservatives are completely illogical. Why?  Because they're anti-government regulation (we were debating the issue of oil prices and drilling off-shore).  Naturally, I see a few flaws in that extreme statement, so I felt compelled to write about it.

One, conservatism is not completely anti-regulation.  There must be some level of regulation in everything in order to maintain balance.
What we do not support is too much federal control.  Capitalism in its purest form, with absolutely no regulation, is obviously dangerous.  You end up with survival of the fittest, where only the Rockefellers and fellow elites are able to enjoy the successes of the free market.  An elite few control everything.  However, to go to the opposite extreme is also dangerous.  Over-regulating kills the life of creativity and vision.  It clogs the flow of progress.  So there must be a balance.  History has proven that capitalism works.  However history has also proven that there must be some level of regulation to keep things relatively fair and opportunity available to all Americans.  As it stands right now, there are more self-made millionaires in American than any time in our nation's history.  And the number continues to grow.  Essentially, with balanced capitalism, the little guy has a chance to take himself to another level (concerning financial success).  Yes, there are those that argue there is a vast and growing gap between the rich and poor in this nation.  But for those contending that point I would say, "When is the last time you ventured outside our nation's borders?"  If you want to see a vast gap between the rich and the poor, try visiting a communist nation, where a few elite government leaders own and control everything.  Literally.  The dictators live in palaces while the people are subjected to abject poverty.  The problem is so many of us have grown up in a free, prosperous, Western society and have never seen what else is out there.  We have no idea how good we have it in America, and we completely take it for granted.  Things aren't perfect, but we have no point of reference to compare our standard of living.  I would argue those considered "poor" in America are actually "well off" compared to a great majority of the rest of the world (I for one actually have been outside our nations borders, on many occasions).  So we must avoid gravitating towards extremes in our pursuit of bettering this great country we live in.  Balance is the healthiest way to approach every issue, especially the issue of capitalism, free markets, and the hot topic of the day, high oil prices.  We don't need to remove all regulation and just let the oil companies do whatever they want. There must be thoughtful, reasonable regulation. But I believe where we stand right now does not represent thoughtful and reasonable regulation.  More has to be done to come to a consensus on that.

Second point, it seems to be the Democrats are the illogical ones. "We can't drill our way out of this problem" was all that Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Barrack Obama had to say about allowing exploration on the outer continental shelf.
Really?  Increasing the supply of oil on our own soil doesn't help bring down the price of gas?  Hm. Seems logical to me.  Will it solve the entire energy crisis in the long-haul? Not in and of itself. But increasing drilling and exploration on U.S. soil is part of a large, comprehensive solution to get this under control. We still need to pursue alternative energy sources, absolutely. That needs to be the long-term solution. But in the meantime, we're kidding ourselves if we think holding hearings to question oil executives about their yearly salaries is going to do anything to solve the problem, particularly when there are billions of barrels of oil sitting under our feet and off our coast.  But the oil companies have millions of acres of leases they could be drilling from!  So the Democrats contest.  Yes, but having a lease does not necessarily mean there is enough oil beneath the surface to make it worth the effort of drilling.  Or it may be more difficult to get to, etc.
That point aside, the Democrats just don't seem to have an open mind about the issue.  They don't want a comprehensive approach.  They want one thing - to squeeze.  Squeeze the American people so they lower their energy usage, and squeeze the oil companies by imposing windfall tax profits.  Sure, it's a great point to bring up to the oil companies that they have these leases to drill on, but we can't be narrow minded to think that's their only option and we're not going any other route.  The Democrats in Congress seem to have the attitude that, since the oil companies won't drill on every lease they currently have, we're not going to do a single thing to help them or the American people.  Let the people suffer because we don't want to appear like we're throwing the oil companies a bone.  They've made such a big deal about the oil companies being the problem they aren't willing to work with them to provide us, the people, with a solution.  We've got to stay focused on the big picture.  A noteworthy side-point:  while these evil oil companies are recording record profits, they're also providing an interesting by-product....more jobs*.  In addition, the media loves to talk about oil companies' record profits, but fails to elaborate on the net profit (what a novel concept that doing business in the oil industry actually costs money...).  In fact, while Google reported a net profit margin of 25% in its last quarter, the average net profit margin for oil companies on the S&P 500 was around 9%*.  Does that now make Google our evil enemy?

We know there is oil off our coast, we know there is oil in ANWR, so we need to go after it.  In addition, we need to increase our pursuit of alternative energy solutions.  The Democrats don't like the idea of clean coal or nuclear energy, yet those are two viable pieces that could fit into the energy crisis puzzle.  All in all, the Democrats don't seem to like any alternative to squeezing oil companies and squeezing the American people.  Yes, I believe it's the Democrats who are the illogical ones.  Not that they don't necessarily know what they're doing (in pursuing socialist agendas)....they are just too near-sighted to see the ultimate outcome.

 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Men Were Meant to Be Men; Women...

 

Sexuality is certainly a hot topic of our day. In fact, one must be very careful when expressing opinion on this issue due to the political correctness of our society. Not that there’s anything wrong with being politically correct, so long as it does not keep us from discussing and addressing real issues, which so often times is avoided. In this column I hope to provide a new and deeper perspective for those who have written off homosexuality as mere sexual preference or inherited genetics. 

The truth is, when you look deeply into the lives of those who have embraced homosexuality, you generally find one common ingredient in their life experiences….hurt. When you couple hurt (deep-seated hurt) with twisted views of the masculine and feminine roles, you end up with men and women confused in their identity, and ultimately their sexual preference. What do I mean confused in their identity? When a man doesn’t think he’s a real man you have a problem. When a woman doesn’t believe she was born to be feminine there’s an identity issue. How does this all start? Well it usually begins at a very young age. A young boy, for example, may grow up with a distant or abusive father. His father may never encourage him or validate him as a man, so he begins to find his place among the women. They make him feel valuable. On top of that, if daddy doesn’t validate his manhood, he will always question his masculinity, even if it is only subconsciously. Of course, in some cases, that will actually drive the boy to try to be overly masculine….get in lots of fights, be extremely aggressive, seek his identity in physical strength, etc. But in many cases it drives him away from masculinity. In the book Wild at Heart, John Eldridge brilliantly discusses the inherent need for a man to feel like a man. All men are born with a built-in desire to be strong, courageous, and heroic. Why do you think little boys are constantly found playing such games as ‘cops and robbers’ or ‘Cowboys and Indians’? Why are men enthralled with war movies that are full of violence, struggle, and ultimately victory? Why are we so easily absorbed in sports like football or ultimate fighting? We crave courage, we desire honor, and we idolize heroism. We have an inherent need to feel masculine….to feel strong…..to feel like we’re a man. When that is taken away from a boy at a very young age, it alters his entire view of himself and the world around him. A neglectful or abusive father is all it takes to start a boy down the path of doubting his masculinity, and ultimately trying to find it in another man. This is also the reason that many men who have come out of the homosexual lifestyle did so with the help of straight men who were willing to befriend them. They saw the man under the surface, hidden behind the hurt and confused image of himself, and they validated his masculinity. 

The same is true of women. They have a need to feel feminine and beautiful, and that femininity (and beauty) must be validated from a very young age. Again, abusive or neglectful parents, particularly the father, can launch the course to a confused self-image. Many times (not every time, but often) when you find a woman who “came out”, you will also find she had an abusive dad and a weak mom. Dad was horrible, angry and abused her or her mother, and mother wasn’t strong or brave enough to ever confront him. As a result, in her mind, if being feminine means being weak, she doesn’t want to be feminine. The reality is, being feminine does not mean being weak by any means. There is great strength in femininity. But our experiences as we grow up in life have such a profound effect on us. This is also why so many homosexual women have deep-seated bitterness towards men. They’ve been hurt. You very rarely, if ever, find a ‘daddy’s girl’ that ends up being homosexual. Rather you find the ‘daddy’s girl’ wants to find a good young man to marry that reminds her of dad. So in the same case as men, many times the root for women is also hurt, coupled with a confused perspective of masculinity and femininity.

Now am I saying these are the only roots of homosexuality? Not at all. There are people who have grown up in healthy families and have healthy self-images, but for various reasons or circumstances, ended up embracing the homosexual lifestyle. For some the issue is just getting too close to unsafe environments. If you play with fire you will get burned. Hanging out with a homosexual friend at a gay bar because you’re trying to be a good friend and show you’re not threatened by his lifestyle is a very dangerous thing. Our environment is powerful. As is what we put before our eyes. Sometimes addiction to pornography ends in a twist you don’t see coming. What’s my point? When you have a healthy self-image and understand your masculinity or femininity, don’t play around with anything that could pervert that. What?! How dare you use the word perversion! Are you saying that homosexuality is a perverted form of sexuality?! To be clear, yes I am. If men are born with an inherent need to be and feel masculine, and women are born with an inherent need to feel feminine, any alteration in that is indeed a perversion. Many will argue that, if you’re gay, you were “just born that way”. This actually brings up a good point. Some boys will naturally be less aggressive and seem less masculine than others. The same with girls. Some girls will naturally be tom-boys while others are Barbie. This is not to be confused with their true sexuality and identity. This doesn’t change the fact that boys still desire to be seen as strong, courageous and heroic, no matter how non-aggressive or non-masculine they may seem. It doesn’t change the fact that every girl wants to be beautiful and desired as a treasure by a handsome, heroic prince. Where do you think the whole princess and knight in shining armor notion came from? Every young girl wants to be a beautiful princess, and every boy wants to be a warrior that gets the girl (once they get past the ‘girls have cooties stage’ of course). That healthy fantasy only gets twisted by hurtful experiences, confusing perceptions of masculinity and femininity, and an ever growing convoluted message of sexuality presented by the media and society in general.

  In essence, men were meant to be men….strong, courageous, heroic. Women were meant to be women….feminine, caring, beautiful.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why are we in Iraq?

The debate began almost immediately when the U.S. declared war on Iraq.  Why Iraq?  What's the threat?  Where are the WMD's?
These days the debate has shifted towards whether or not the President lied to get us into Iraq.  Then of course there's the brilliant notion that it was all about oil.  Bush is an oil guy, Iraq is full of oil, and on top of that, Bush had a score to settle with Saddam.  The reality is, if Bush was after oil he would have gone after Saudi Arabia.  They provide more oil to the U.S. than Iraq, and also there's the Saudi terrorists that were on the planes on 9/11.  That actually would have been an easier sell if Bush was after oil.  Why not go after the Saudi's?  They were behind 9/11 weren't they?  I believe Bush had a broader vision than oil.  Furthermore, he was after more than an immediate gratification or feeling of justice (after the 9/11 attacks).  Rather he made a strategic move to combat the enemies of the U.S. and Israel in a way they may not even recognize.  We certainly haven't recognized it.  Whether it was right or wrong to invade Iraq is another debate.  I'm not here to argue that.  But I believe there's more to Bush's decision than just being the dumb, stubborn Texan the mass media portrays him to be.

Iraq is nestled in the middle of arguably the most anti-Israel and anti-America region of the world.  At the time we invaded Iraq, Saddam was considered the most powerful dictator of the Arab world.  Iraq's military was also considered more powerful than Iran, Syria, or Saudi Arabia.  Most importantly, that entire region was known, and is known, to be avid sponsors and supporters of terrorists, and to be hostile towards Israel and the U.S.  What better way to engage terrorism and position ourselves to address the anti-Israeli/anti-American sentiments of the surrounding governments then to create a free, democratic ally in the midst of their haven?  Notice the President's words when he addressed the troops on April 10, 2008:


"The day will come when Iraq is a capable partner of the United States. The day will come when Iraq is a stable democracy that helps fight our common enemies and promote our common interests in the Middle East. And when that day arrives, you'll come home with pride in your success, and the gratitude of your whole nation."*

This is not just about Iraq.  This is about affecting and influencing the entire Arab world.  First and foremost, to take a country who's dictator had made it a life goal to wipe Israel off the map and turn it into an ally of Israel and of the U.S.  This changes the entire scene of the Arab world.  Now any future conflict with another Arab nation (such as Iran) takes on a new light.  We have an ally on the Iranian border that we didn’t have before.  This means Iraq could work both in diplomatic and military affairs if needed.

But there's another aspect.  Imagine how a free, democratic Iraq affects the region psychologically.  The women of Iraq now have a freedom they've never had before.  The freedom to get an education.  The freedom to have a career.  The freedom to get involved in politics.  A freedom not known by the women of the surrounding nations.  It won't take long for the women of Iran and of Syria to start saying, "I want what the women of Iraq have!"  If there's one thing democracy does, it spreads.  The people of Iraq in general have opportunity they've never experienced...and opportunity leads to prosperity. 

No, this is not about a Bush family feud with Saddam.  This is not about oil.  This is not about WMD's, though they probably affected the timing.  This is about changing the face of the Arab world.  It's about impacting a region of the world most hostile towards the U.S. and our allies.  And it's not about immediate results.  It's about the big picture.  The long run.  It's about our children and grandchildren.  The children of Iraq, of Iran, of Syria.  The generations yet unborn.  This is a movement for peace in an area sworn to violence.

This is why we're in Iraq.

*Source:  http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A Chance to Make a Difference

Through the impact of the 7.9 earthquake last week in China, 4,000 children have been orphaned, 7,000 schools collapsed, and 80,000 people are dead or missing.  There are an estimated 5 million newly homeless Chinese. 
There was an incredible article posted yesterday by Hugh Hewitt on the opportunity we face to make a difference in China.
I highly recommend having a quick look:
 
If you would like to donate to a non-profit organization that is working to bring relief and make a difference to the affected people of China, you can do so through caringforchina.org: http://www.caringforchina.org/resources/donation.htm

*You can also sponsor a child on a monthly basis by going to the link above.
"Every year in China, an estimated one million babies are abandoned in train stations, markets, and by roadsides. If these babies are found in time, they are taken to government operated orphanages, called Welfare Centers. In cooperation with the Chinese authorities, we have been given permission to care for some of these children until they are adopted." Source: http://www.caringforchina.org/cfcc/cfcc-home.htm
 
 
Also, because of the tsunami in Myanmar, 2.5 million people face starvation and disease, according to Life Outreach International.
If you would like to donate to relief in Myanmar, you can do so through Life Outreach: https://secure2.convio.net/cclo/site/Donation2?df_id=2300&2300.donation=form1&JServSessionIdr007=0stvg4u9r1.app2a
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Do Only What You Have A Vision And A Passion For

Some of us really stress ourselves out trying to decide what we really want to do in life.  What career path to take, what city to live in, what house to buy, who to marry, how to make our lives something of significance… I certainly am no exception. And with the way our society idolizes success, it’s very easy to make success the pursuit, rather than purpose or significance. We so quickly can find ourselves chasing dollar signs, fame, or simply feelings of happiness instead of living for a deeper purpose. Not that having money, being famous, or having a temporary feeling of happiness is a bad thing…but if there’s no purpose behind it, it still leaves us empty. Just look at the rich and famous who are no longer with us because of taking their own lives. They had money, they had fame, but they obviously didn’t feel their life was worth anything.

The level of happiness, or fulfillment, we find in success will be limited to the amount of significance we feel in what we do.

We’ve probably all fallen into the trap of chasing a good thing for the wrong reason. If, for example, I have a friend that is very successful financially in selling insurance, I might be tempted to try my hand at selling insurance as well. But if my only motivation is the money I see my friend making, and I’m not doing it because I really believe in getting insurance to people, then my happiness (or fulfillment) in that career will be very short-lived, if I experience any at all. In fact, it could turn out to be quite a miserable experience. Some of you have been there and know exactly what I’m talking about. If, however, I discover something I truly believe in and enjoy doing, I’ve found a key to tapping into true fulfillment in life. Through my own experiences, and learning from those who have gone before me, I’ve found that it’s wisdom to do only what I have a vision and a passion for. Ultimately, the greatest fulfillment we can find is in doing something we love and changing someone’s life for the better in the process. Whether it’s through business, music, journalism, charity, teaching, raising a family, or any other means we may choose. Our pursuit should not be for success alone, but for purpose. The pursuit of purpose naturally breeds success.  Then we can find fulfillment in what we do in life.

Do only what you have a vision and a passion for.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Redefining the Issue of Abortion

For years the argument over abortion has been about legality: does the government have the right to tell a woman (or young girl in many cases) what she can and cannot do with the developing fetus in her body? Frankly I don't see this argument coming to rest anytime soon. Furthermore, we are expected to choose sides, and the longer the argument goes on, the more extreme the two sides become. I believe we're wasting time and energy on the wrong issue. The issue is not legality. The issue is education. That may sound a little odd at first, but hear me out. Many girls would never consider entering an abortion clinic until something unexpected happens. They're young, they're scared. They don't know what their options are. They don't fully comprehend the process and what the possible after-effects will be. Granted some do, but I would argue that's a minute percentage. Research has shown the after-effects of an abortion can be traumatic, both physically and emotionally.  Because of what is physically done to their body in the process, they may have problems with childbearing in the future*. Many have also shown to experience severe depression, guilt, and other emotional and psychological after-effects*. What I am proposing is this: Women should be fully educated before stepping into an abortion clinic, so they understand the full and complete process, as well as the possible physical and emotional after-effects. Envision a class, similar to a drivers-ed class, where there is an instructor and/or video presentation. The presentation should not show any political bias, but rather focus only on facts. The class would cover the following:

1)       The actual procedure they will experience in the abortion clinic (what will physically be done with their bodies, the machinery used, safety, concerns, etc)

2)       The possible physical after-effects (based on experiences of women in the past). Not everyone's experience is the same, so multiple testimonies/experiences should be discussed.

3)       The possible emotional repercussions (based on experiences of women in the past). Again, not everyone's experience is the same, so multiple testimonies/experiences should be discussed.

4)       Other options available

I want to take a second to highlight that last point. There was someone very close to me that had gone through with an abortion several years ago. Her story is actually very common among so many of these young girls. The whole thing started by a mistake. She was embarrassed, she was scared, and she didn't know what her options were. She knew she didn't have the capability to raise the baby on her own because of her financial situation, family situation, etc. She also, however, did not realize that there is a waiting list for couples that want to adopt infants. She thought her only options were to have the baby and subject it to a very difficult life, have the baby and give it to an orphanage, or get an abortion. She didn't realize that millions of couples were waiting in line to adopt an infant**. This is something that many of these young girls don't know, and should therefore be part of the education process. 

Once these girls are completely and fully educated (again, simply with the facts and other women's personal experiences) they are free to make their own decision. The only difference is, now they are making an educated decision. They know what the procedure is on their body, they know the possible repercussions both physically and emotionally, and they know all of their options. If, after being fully educated, they decide they still want to go through with the abortion, that's their prerogative. They're going into it fully comprehending what they're doing, and fully prepared for any possible repercussions. 

The underlying issue to me is that too many of these young girls are making uneducated, emotional decisions they later regret. Many who have gone through with it verbally affirm they would go back and change it if they had known their options and known the repercussions. Today's media is not fair to them. Today's politicians are not fair to them. And many of their own friends are just as ignorant of their options and the after-effects. How dare the media, politicians, and any one else tell us this country is fair towards these young girls by giving them the right to get an abortion, when we do not take the responsibility to educate them on the process and after-effects. It's literally a life-changing decision that the media plays off as something so petty and small. But to these girls it's very serious. It will affect the rest of their life. They need to know the process. They need to know the possible repercussions. And they need to know their options. Only then can we, in good conscience, encourage them to do whatever they feel best, because we know they are making an educated decision. 
 
*Source: The Aftereffects of Abortion by David C. Reardon, Elliot Institute;  http://www.abortionfacts.com/reardon/after_effects_of_abortion.asp
*Source: The After-Effects of Abortion; The physical and phychological impact on women by Alysse Michelle ElHage and Edgar S. Douglas, M.D.; http://www.ncfamily.org/PolicyPapers/Findings%200301-AbortEffects.pdf
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »