Eternia.com

First and foremost, I am a Christian, a mother, and I suppose my political ties lie towards the liberal side. That being said, I am relatively IRRITATED with Republican Sen. Sam Brownback, who is quoted by CNN.com as stating: “I have decided, after much prayerful consideration, to consider a bid for the Republican nomination for the presidency,” Brownback said in a statement. “There is a real need in our country to rebuild the family and renew our culture and there is a need for genuine conservatism and real compassion in the national discussion.”

Brownback, you have it wrong.

There is a need in our country for health care.

For adequate and affordable housing.

For sustainable education and jobs that families can live on.

I don’t see how your 20 members exploratory advisory committee, an eclectic mix ranging from anti-abortion activists to business executives, including: Domino’s Pizza founder Tom Monaghan, former Major League Baseball commissioner Bowie Kuhn, and the Rev. Frank Pavone, head of the advocacy group Priests for Life, can possibly fix the situation in America.

While Brownback decides who has the right to an abortion, to be married, to proceed with ethical scientific research, he ignores the real problems in our nation. Education reform has done little to ensure that children can read. Drug addiction plagues our society. My grandmother can not buy all her medications, which currently cost about 400 dollars a month. She has to decide between painkillers and her diabetes medicine.

Using moral theory as a foundation for political pendantics is not only wrong, it is an affront to everything I hold dear as an American citizen. This is a country of rights and respect. Who am I, and who are the politicians, to decide what can be researched in science? Why do we propose that our Christian morals should be forced on the less fortunate? Women do not, as a gender, decide to have an abortion because it is fun. I promise you that. It is a decision made because a situation prevents a mother from believing she can raise a child, or have the child. Yes, there is adoption available, but this is not always a solution. Especially when one considers how overwrought our foster care and adoption centers are.

Secondly, the politicians should never decide what can be scientifically explored. This is not a politician’s job, unless said politician is actually a scientist who has a real background in real science, not a degree in politics. I’m pretty sure Brownback does not fit the bill, and therefore makes his judgments on science based on his perception of moral rights and wrongs.

Brownback is not all that bad, really. CNN.com states that “Brownback’s faith also leads him to tackle social injustice around the world. He’s spearheaded legislation to fight genocide in Sudan, cut down human slave trafficking and prison recidivism. Last week, he took an AIDS test with a potential White House rival on the Democratic side — Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois — to encourage others to be tested.”

That’s awesome. I think its great that Brownback tackles the problems in the world that our government tends to ignore because there is no financial reason to stop Sudan genocide (Iraq = financial reason, Sudan = no financial reason).

My concern is not of Brownback’s ethical and moral capabilities as a humanitarian. My concern is that in these ethical and moral implications, his political premise is assaulting female rights and scientific studies.

You know, I find it interesting that the American government spends BILLIONS per year on WAR MACHINES, which obviously KILL PEOPLE. Yet, stem cell research, which has implications TO SAVE LIVES is suddenly a hotly contested MORAL DISPUTE.

Perhaps, we should spend less money deciding who to kill and how to kill, and more money making our streets, homes, education and jobs secure and safe for the future.

Reference: http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/12/04/brownback.2008.ap/index.html

Filed under: Commentary