Babies and Voting Don't Mix.

   On the 29th of Novemember, Daily Casallo wrote a strong article about a person's option to vote; the article is entitled "Is Voting a Moral Obligation?" The content in her article raised my eyebrows, but her message was clear: she feels that people have an innate ability to choose, and I agree with that point.

   Her chosen article covers a passionate republican speaker, Kevin Fulton. The republican gives his biased opinion over three topics: abortion, racism, and envy. However, Daily chose to connect the topic of abortion to a person's obligation to vote. Kevin's view couldn't be more conservative; the writer associated abortion with murder. Futhermore, he places blame on his coined phrase, "The Brainwashing Democrats." His diction bothers me. In regards to the article, Daily and myself hold many of the same beliefs. Unfortunately, a few of Daily's opinions made me question her stance on the issue.

   At first glance, Daily's response disagrees with the biased republican's view on abortion. Kevin's style of writing flustered her; she agrees with the pro-choice stance, yet she doesn't quite understand his method of presenting. The democrat's demographic is consisted of the middle-class, and it has liberal ideals that resonate with the minorities, African-Americans and Hispanics. Many of the minorities have babies at a young age. Futhermore, her perception that most democrats appeal to the wealthy bothers me. I agree with Daily's criticism over Kevin's article: democrats aren't brainwashing minorities. However, Daily's definition of pro-choice seems lackluster.

  Premature infants are voiceless beings who need to be protected, but unexpected factors may cause future parents to relinquish the infant of an opportunity to run on this earth. I don't agree with abortion, yet I have this feeling of sympathy for the parents. During the pregnancy, complications with the fetus may result in a life threatening delivery. If that's the case, then will the mother be shunned for terminating the pregnancy? This topic has a wide gray area. I don't agree with the Daily's simple interpretation of pro-choice and abortion. However, I do believe that anxious mothers-to-be should consult with experienced people about pregnancy. Abortion should be the last resort, and if parents naive young couples use the unpleasant procedure as a way to get out of parenthood, then they themselves should be labeled as murderers.

I Side With the Blue.

     My views on Texas' issues are simple: I believe that the Government should assist its people financially, but it should try to avoid putting restrictions on a person's perception of values. The polls in the Texas Tribune indicate the opinions of the students attending the University of Texas. However, my problem stems from the results regarding higher education spending and same-sex marriage. I believe that Texas isn't spending enough money on higher education, and the support for allowing same-sex couples to marry is too low, which makes me livid.

     Higher education is important. It promotes individualism, and it creates an open environment that welcomes partisan identification; I myself have developed my political ideology from attending courses that inform me of current events. Unfortunately, the Government isn't investing enough money into higher education. In fact, a lackluster 11 percent surveyed saying that the education has improved. Furthermore, of the 800 people who participated in the online poll, 37 percent agreed that Texas isn't spending enough on higher education. I would support the idea of investing more money into higher education, but I would have to halt my passionate idea. The legislature would have to meet to discuss its budget. If the opportunity arises, then I'm all set to promote an increase on higher education. Unfortunately, candidates fear a large increase in spending because it affects their constituencies. Money doesn't magically come from a money stork, who hands out money from his money tree. It comes out of the residents' pocket, and that obstacle has proven to be a huge burden in recent years.

     The issue of same-sex marriage confuses me. In this modern culture, why are we hesitant in letting people express themselves how they see fit. If we look back to specific time periods, then we would discover similarities to our current form of discrimination against same-sex couples: in the puritan time period, villagers would shun any woman who exposed their ankles or too much thigh. Victorian ideals are a thing of the past, and we embrace individualism. In the past, citizens of these states segregated people based on color; African Americans were assigned designated water fountains. What's the difference between segregating based on color and segregating based on sexual orientation? One involved segregation at public facilities, and its modern incarnation is attempting to segregate in the church. In this article, only 36 percent of the poll's participants agreed on allowing same-sex couples to marry. A civil union does not constitute as a marriage. My liberal side is going into overdrive! I support same-sex marriage because I don't feel it's the Government's business to involve itself in our daily lives.

     I have a liberal view on issues, and the Texas Tribune's polls indicate that some people in this red state share the same views as myself. Unfortunately, we are not the majority. My voice is drowned out by the noise of the crashing red waves.