Super Tuesday happened yesterday. If you’re reading this right now, you’re either incredibly happy, angry, or just straight up confused. I fall into the 3rd category honestly. The moderate wing of the Democratic Party got their shit together and finally picked a moderate frontrunner whereas the progressive wing is still split. 

I’m going to break down the case for and against Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders because I think some supporters aren’t able to look at the big picture of this race.

First up: Joe Biden.

Biden is a staple moderate candidate who has put together a coalition of older black voters, moderates, and suburban democrats. His campaign started off with a large lead over the other candidates and led into a dip as Sanders and Buttigieg gained more traction, but after both Buttigieg and Klobuchar dropped out and endorsed Biden, it gave him the momentum to win approximately 8 states. Biden’s policy stances are essentially very moderate in which he wants to build on the Affordable Care Act, lower college & health care costs, raise taxes on the wealthy, and fight for, as he calls it, “the soul of the country.” His argument of providing a moderate candidate to take on Trump is an argument that I agree with personally. Progressives who were angry the nomination went to Clinton over Sanders in 2016 are saying that since we already chose a moderate and lost, we need to pick an outsider, ie. Sanders. The issue with that argument is the fact that nominating Clinton was a horrible mistake because Clinton is absolutely crazy. Democrats lost in 2016 because Clinton ignored the swing states where we automated 4 million manufacturing jobs and Trump blamed it on the immigrants, which is a statement that white working class voters might not agree with but it’s better than being ignored by the Democratic Party. The 2016 election was a complete disaster, so we can’t use it to predict the 2020 election. Nominating a moderate in the 2020 election will provide a path for moderate republicans, democrats, and progressives, whereas nominating Sanders would force republicans (& and some democrats) to vote for Trump or not vote at all. Progressives are guaranteed to vote against Trump but moderates are not, so we have to pick a candidate that will appeal to all sides of the spectrum, especially those who are sick of Trump but don’t want the country to be led by a democratic socialist.

Joe’s message of wanting to unite the party is coming across very well, especially after we saw the GOP fall apart in 2016 after the party’s leadership failed to stop Trump from getting the nomination. The common chant of Biden supporters (“We Know Joe!”) is a small but simple message that rings true – we do know Joe and we’ve seen his record. He fought for the Affordable Care Act with Obama during a time where Congress was incredibly divided, he has incredible experience in Congress as a Senator, and he’s a lawyer. Biden actually overcame an incredible stutter (insanely impressive for a politician). Weeks after he was elected to the US Senate, his wife and daughter were killed in a car accident, and many years later his eldest son passed away as well. An unpublicized fact about Biden is that whenever he meets someone who’s suffered great personal loss, he gives them his personal cell phone number and says “If you feel low & have no place to turn, call me.” This is why people are drawn to Biden. They remember everything he and Obama did during the 2008 crisis and his record before that, and they trust him to become the president. I went to the rally in Dallas on Monday, and when you’re in the room, you can tell he has the trust of the people.

The issue with nominating Joe Biden however is that the man would do horrible in a debate against Trump. He has so many verbal mistakes that the things he says are just flat wrong sometimes. One time he even said he graduated with 3 degrees – I have literally no words for how he got to that conclusion, but this is what people are scared of. Also, beautifully put by The Daily, “Joe Biden is playing by a rulebook that was wrote in 1980.” He will be going up against Donald Trump who is incredibly narcissistic and unusual, but maybe the debates will just be the 2 of them trying to outdo each other with off color statements. Another issue with nominating Biden is the history of his son in Ukraine, which is something that Trump will bring up throughout the whole election – similar to Clinton in 2016. That all being said, the only time Democrats have won is when they nominate a moderate candidate, ie. Clinton & Obama that build a movement of hope and love – a notion that Biden has accomplished (& it’s working). 

Next up: Bernie Sanders.

Bernie Sanders is known as the progressive democratic socialist who is pushing progressive bills in the Senate like Medicare for All, the Green New Deal, and College for All. Sanders’s history as a US House Representative and mayor of Burlington and the legislation he put forth show his tireless efforts to fight for the working class, which is the main message of his presidential campaign in both 2016 & 2020. The Sanders campaign has made incredible gains over the course of the year, specifically by winning the popular vote in New Hampshire & the caucuses in Iowa (probably) and Nevada. Going into Super Tuesday, Sanders was expected to sweep, but the sudden rally of the moderates gave Biden a majority in states like Texas – I think as of right now Sanders has won ~4 states & Biden ~8. Sanders has put together a coalition of Latinos, the youth, the working class, and progressives. His overall message of “Not Me, Us” shows that his campaign has truly turned into a progressive movement. 

The demonstration of his humanity through his consistent activist record

• Ran for class president in high school to raise scholarship funds for Korean War orphans
• Arrested for protesting segregation in 1962
• Opposed both Iraq wars on moral grounds
• Attended the March on Washington with MLK Jr
• Was forcibly removed from protest about Willis Wagons in Chicago

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg for his activist record. Combined with his legislative record in the House where he was known as the “amendment king,” his record certainly shows that the man is passionate and determined. Bernie’s message is that he is done waiting for progressive action to slowly make its way through Congress and that he wants change right now – and there are a lot of people who agree with him. The argument to nominate Bernie mainly stems from if you have a crazy populist movement on the right, you can match it with a crazy populist movement on the left or fight with a moderate. Trump’s movement of white working class anger matched with minority working class anger would end in a brutal battle but it might work. 

A big issue with Bernie is his policies. Many Democrats like the idea of where the progressive goals would end up, but they don’t support the methodology to get to those goals (I fall in this camp myself). The complete ban on fracking will not only make an incredibly difficult transition from fossil fuel to renewable, but in swing states like Pennsylvania (which Trump won in 2016 but Obama won previously) where fracking is a big part of their economy, it will have a severe impact during the general election. A similar hard transition will be his Medicare for All plan which would eliminate all private insurance, and although everyone wants everyone to have access to health care, a complete description of the system would essentially hand the entire election to Trump. Providing a public option and lowering health care costs overall – especially with the threat of coronavirus – provides a much more pragmatic and practical result (one that would actually get through Congress & win over moderates). The big problem with Bernie is that he wants immediate change over controversial & complicated issues, and although the majority of the country wants the progressive goals, the way Bernie wants to get there is not the most popular way – a smoother transition is what moderates desire. 

There are other concerns surrounding Bernie’s health as he did have a heart attack at an earlier point in the race, but seeing as though every candidate left (excluding Tusli Gabbard) is in their 70s, it’s a boomer fight now – all of their health conditions are a concern. 

Finally, the last concern: the Bernie Bros. I myself have been a victim of Bernie Bros toxicity as I am an avid Andrew Yang supporter, and it’s a legitimate concern. There are certain progressive supporters who don’t understand that you can’t win an election by bullying supporters of other candidates and then begging them to vote for their candidate. Project Veritas has gotten undercover videos of 4 separate paid campaign field organizers talking about how “Milwaukee will burn if he doesn’t get the nomination” and advocating that Stalin had the right idea with the gulags – they even said it might be necessary to “reeducate” Republicans using gulags. The Sanders’ campaign then proceeded to put all of their field organizers Twitter accounts on private and never acknowledged the videos. I don’t understand personally how someone who exemplifies every aspect of humanity can let his supporters spread such hate and toxicity, not only with the videos but on all social media. Anytime Andrew Yang tweets, there are hundreds of responses from Bernie supporters saying “Endorse Bernie” after literally months of harassment – Yang has already said he will support the Democratic nominee and would endorse anyone who supports UBI – but moral of the story, he’s still getting harassed constantly just for being nice to people who aren’t progressives.

This is the biggest issue and is why I think Bernie will not be able to unite the Democratic base. Moderates can’t vote for Bernie because they don’t agree with his policies (& actually might agree with Trump on certain policies), but progressives would be able to vote for Biden because they share some policy goals. Bernie’s campaign is built on anger and fighting against the establishment (similar to Trump), so giving the American people a chance to vote for something they believe in, ie. hope and the soul of the country, would produce a better result than anger and more division. Personally, I would support both of these candidates over Trump just because even though I don’t agree with Bernie’s methods, I love the heart he puts into what he does, and I love Biden’s message of “fighting for the soul of the country” because I truly think that’s what this election is. Yang was obviously my #1, but I would support both over Trump because I miss having a role model as president. Yes, Trump does cut through the normal shit inside politics, and he knows & embraces he’s a scumbag, but I don’t think having someone like Trump as president is good for the country. You don’t have to agree with the president on policy because there’s always going to be a political shift in office, but I still think we’re missing the peace and respect that presidents should have for not only the office, but all sides of the political spectrum. Trump, Biden, and Bernie don’t align with my policies exactly, but overall both Biden and Bernie align with my personal ideology of how politics should work.

Polit(what the fr)ic

Hello blog it’s Brooklynn. Yes, this isn’t a vlog, but at this point I was at a loss for how to introduce this topic and just thought I would dive right in, cut to the chase, jump off a cliff… you get the jist.

What brings me out of this silence was the drawing to a close of the impeachment trials. Was that last week? I think so…, but you see I’m busy and my attention is sporadic and I thought maybe better late than never. What I’ve learned from the conclusion of the trials is how deeply American culture likes to group things. The gray area in between is what’s frightening and often times misunderstood, and going against this grain of societal precedents is what is deemed as worthy of attention. Politics is simply a reflection of the culture of the times. 

This claim may seem a little bland because, yes, politicians are people that are elected into office to represent the views that we share – views that are, rather heavily, influenced by the culture of today. However, I’d venture to say that in the past four years, politics and politicians have not completely caught up.

So much of your basic politics seems to be revolved around which party you identify with and which views you hold on certain societal issues such as health care, abortion, or climate change. The truth is, only one of those things matters – what you believe in. In no scenario should anyone be forced to conform to a party. The two party system seems to only simplify your options, but in actuality, it pits one side against the other; and, when greed and ambition are factored in, only leads to disaster. Granted, as whole, politicians get a bad reputation because of the few who do follow that slippery slope downward, but these stereotypes emerge because they are somewhat based in fact. They create this generalization of a politician – someone who wants to do good and can’t accomplish anything, someone who has been bought out by major corporations and is simply doing their bidding to get re elected. All of these perceptions emerge because in there are specific people we can point to for each stereotype. 

And in this general persona of modern politics, there seems an understanding that a politician is either fiercely democrat or fiercely republican, or pro Trump or anti Trump, causing the humanity of politics to be lost. Each person is voting for the party that they belong to, generally speaking, which makes sense (you typically belong to a party because you align with most of their ideological platform). However, part of me wonders how much each politician weighs his or her party when it comes down to casting their vote. It seems to me like a common case of peer pressure. If you don’t vote one way another, often time it could cost you the next election cycle. Not to forget that while all this is playing out in our government buildings, the media is able to portray it with varying levels of fact, pitting one side against the other and turning politics into a middle school cafeteria. 

I say middle school cafeteria because in middle school you know more people. Cliques still overlap at this point and information still spreads like a disease. By the time you get to high school, hell, we don’t even sit in the cafeteria (when did sitting on the floor become cool? I’m still baffled). In high school everyone has formed their own clique typically based on extracurriculars and the information is walled up in that group. Middle schoolers are less mature than high schoolers (for the most part) and this is my main point. 

Before Trump took office I think I was too young to really be concerned about any aspect of politics. Therefore, the increased tension that is being broadcasted by the parties is what I’ve seen as relatively normal, but my understanding is it wasn’t always like this. As a kid, I don’t remember Obama being critiqued in the news everyday the way Trump is, but Trump brought with him something new to the whitehouse. Trump has not been a promoter of much social change (and I think that’s a statement that can be agreed upon regardless). He won the office with a campaign that wasn’t afraid to say something insulting or controversial – he said whatever he wished and twitter was his output. And for the most part, I think he’s continued this. This methodology of salandering people that are different than you seems to have been normalized these four years and it’s alienating people. Nobody wants to hear constant reports of politicians engaged in petty arguments. They want progress, in some cases, no matter what the cost, and now-a-days the cost seems to be just that – attacks from one side to the other about who knows what. 

These attacks are focused on and generally based along party lines – and that’s the problem. No more do we see politicians behind the mask of “democrat” or “republican”. No longer can we see their humanity…

…which is what brings us to Mitt Romney.

I think what struck me here initially was speech. I’ve linked it here if you wish to read the transcript or watch it. Mitt Romney brings humanity back into politics. The United States is a country with a Christian majority (65% as of 2019) and Romney nods to his “oath before God” which guided his vote. Romney represents Utah in congress – a state where 62% of the population is Mormon. Mormonism is often times seen as a strict religion and an oath to God is something that is taken seriously. He let his humanity and oath to God take precedent to his party allegiances. Was it an easy decision for him? Definitely not. But what’s important to notice is that in his speech, he predicts how his decision to vote in favor of one count of Trump’s impeachment trial would be used against him by members of his own party. Romney was able to separate out Trump’s actions from which party he belonged to and that’s what’s important. So much of politics is following a party or a candidate for what they believe, however I believe what they believe is just as important as who they are as a person which is why I have an aversion towards Trump. Politicians are supposed to be leaders of our democracy and if leaders were to act that way in other setting it wouldn’t be tolerated. 

I digress. Back to Romney.

Romney didn’t let the pressure of his party decide his vote. He is an individual in a nation where I was taught individualism was valued. The response by others seems to call that into question. In a country where times and the narratives of the citizens are constantly changing, the themes simply aren’t. Washington advised against the two party system but feuds by Jefferson and Hamilton helped to initiate the system we rely on today. Immigration discrimination has always been an issue – be it the Africans when they were first forced off the Dutch ships in 1619, Catholics in the 1700s and 1800s, the Eastern Europeans and Jews in the 1800s, the Chinese in the 1800 and 1900s, to the Mexican immigrants now (I find this all ironic considering none of us our natives to this land – even the native Americans that first settled the land). Every other decade we initiate social change and yet we still aren’t to a point of equality. Pessimistic? Maybe, but progress is relative. 

In politics we haven’t much progressed. If anything, we have dug deeper into the hole that the two party system is and in no way have given ourselves a clear way of getting out of it. However, with each new generation, society has trended towards the acceptance of individualism and appreciation of those who are different than us. Each generation seems to be attempting to right those wrongs of the past. Our politics hasn’t moved past that though. Our politicians seem to be stuck in the same box they always have been whereas the world is moving forward. No longer are we simply black or white, male or female, gay or straight. We are multi-racial, multi-ethnic – stronger in our diversity. And now for my plug for gay club.

I am not gay. I just want to put that out there. But my friend is president of gay club, and during block lunch she was trying to get others to come to the meeting (gays are inclusive, you see, they welcome everybody) and so I said that I would go next week and she bet that I wouldn’t. So of course I went. It was entertaining and educational as well. I was informed of all the different types of LGBTQ+ people who make up that diverse community by way of which flag represents them. (In case you were wondering, there is a straight ally flag. It’s black and white striped. Sorta like a prison uniform. And so our dear president of gay club goes “See? It’s because you are imprisoned by your heterosexuality!” anyways back to the point…) I was unaware that there were so many types of sexualities and sexual preferences that had been defined, and I felt my eyes opening to a community that I had narrowed in mind. I feel like some people are this way with politics – especially the younger generations. Their minds have been tainted by the polarization that the media has crafted – isolating the two groups and not presenting the shades of purple that are in between the reds of republicans and blues of democrats. 

As a society it seems that we are progressing towards the inclusivity that appreciates the diversity that our population represents. The ideas of being opened minded and not boxing yourself into a singular hole are ever present… with the exception of politics. With politics it seems you are either one or the other when moderates are going to be our saving grace. Mitt Romney proved it’s possible to take a step forward with his conscious even if it meant a theoretical step back with his party loyalties. I hope he has started a wave where humanity is put before party alliances. 

Because after all, humanity is the one thing we all have in common. 

Democrats want to get Trump out of the White House, but what they’re doing right now is guaranteeing him another term. In order to win, the Democrats need to present a unified front with a nominee that can win over both sides of the aisle. Trying to turn American socialist while trying to get a narcissistic idiot out of the White House is not their smartest move.

Many presidential candidates such as Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders are taking an approach of prioritizing Medicare-for-All & essentially socialist ideals. These programs aren’t necessarily bad ideas, but their timing is absolutely terrible. Most people who vote aren’t one side or the other, but rather they switch back and forth between who to vote for based on what they propose. A large number of voters who voted for Obama ended up voting for Trump in 2016. This goes to show that it matters who the Democrats nominate. All throughout the 2016 campaigns, people thought Trump was a joke and that there was no way he would ever be elected. Then, the Democrats chose Clinton as their candidate. The American people had to make a choice: the businessman who promises to protect the country & “make america great again” & or the woman who has an extremely sketchy background as Secretary of State & is the wife of an impeached president. 

The Democrats need to be smart. If they want to get Trump out, they need to get the moderates & republicans on their side. Nominating Bernie Sanders will not do that – it will guarantee Trump another term. Nominating a centrist and true democratic candidate such as Micheal Bloomberg, Andrew Yang, Amy Klobachur, or really any democrat that isn’t a socialist, will set them up for success. The Democrats are assuming that everyone will vote blue because Trump has “gone crazy”, which is not the case. Who the DNC nominates will determine the outcome of the election, and if they make the wrong choice, it’s all over. Catering to both sides will show a unified Democratic front, providing a rational solution to Trump’s presidency. 

Andrew Yang often talks about how we should be looking not left, not right, but forward, and I think he’s got the right idea. Anytime we’re talking about Trump and not about the country’s problems, he’s winning. We need to focus on fixing the issues that got our country to the point where Donald Trump became president, not on what stupid comment the president tweeted 5 minutes ago.

By Jacquelyn Burrer

I know the title is a bit bold, but if you’re pissed or curious, keep reading.

I recently started reading a book called Enough by Gabrielle Giffords and Mark Kelly. This book is about their personal experiences with gun violence from the perspective of gun-owners. Gabrielle was a senator who was shot in the face at an event she was speaking at, and she miraculously survived. The couple started becoming active advocates for gun control, and this book was basically about their journey, and everything they discovered.

In the book, it talks about how they started an organization, Americans for Responsible Solutions, after a mass shooting that they were affected by. Their group gained lots of traction after Gabrielle was shot, and they used this new popularity to fight for solutions. This book is very interesting because they often state multiple times that they are gun-owners who believe strongly in the 2nd Amendment, but they believe that it’s getting out of control.

Before I get completely into this, I wanted to state my personal opinion on gun control. I see it the same way that I look at abortion. I would rather have a gun and not use it than need it & have it taken away. I would rather have the option of getting an abortion and not use it than have the option prohibited. I also believe that action needs to be taken in this subject specifically with universal background checks, and a couple other initiatives I will mention later in the article. These laws will not prevent all tragedies, but if they can prevent even one, that’s a win.

Gun control is a very weird subject because the only time it’s talked about is in a mass shooting situation. Yes, mass shootings are terrible, and we should be trying to prevent them, but in reality, mass shooting deaths are extremely small in comparison to gun deaths. A report from 2013 identified 78 “public mass shootings” between 1983 and 2012, which claimed 547 lives. For context, 11,622 people (more than 20 times the mass shooting toll over three decades) died in gun homicides in 2012 alone. That’s ridiculous. Organizations like March for Our Lives are great because they’re getting their opinions out in the world, but they need to be focusing on the larger issues at hand: domestic violence, suicide, gang violence, and gun trafficking.

The first main issue I mentioned, domestic violence, is a serious threat that can be easily stopped. Many gun-control advocates want to enact laws that restrict people who have been convicted of domestic violence from gaining access to guns. Here’s a couple crazy facts for you if you don’t think this is an issue:

• Nearly one million women alive today have been shot or shot at by an intimate partner.
• In an average month, 52 American women are shot to death by an intimate partner.
• Access to a gun in a domestic violence situation makes it 5 times more likely that a woman will be killed.

If we could get a ban on people who have been convicted of domestic violence from buying guns, we could prevent so much harm, and hopefully save lives.

The next issue is suicide. This is definitely not a common gun-control topic, but it’s actually the leading cause of gun deaths in America. In an average year, 22,274 out of 36,383 gun deaths were caused by suicide. That means nearly two thirds of gun deaths are suicides. Suicide is a much harder issue to tackle because in order to do that, there would be massive reconstruction on the entire process of getting a gun which, in my opinion, is something that is necessary to prevent deaths. We would need to enact processes along the lines of universal background checks & mental health evaluations, but in actuality, any kind of structure would be better than the system we have now.

Gang violence. Many people talk about this issue, but they normally talk about it without thinking about the reality. Take Chicago for example. Illinois has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, but they have a very high gun death rate. Why is that? The best conclusion is obviously gun laws don’t work, right? No. That is very, very wrong. What people don’t look at are the locations of which the guns that are used in Chicago come from.

SO FAR THIS YEAR, 1,043 PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SHOT TO DEATH IN CHICAGO.

A study of guns in Chicago found that more than 60% of new guns used in Chicago gang-related crimes and 31.6% used in non-gang-related crimes were bought in other states. Indiana was a particularly heavy supplier, providing nearly one-third of the gang guns and nearly one-fifth of the non-gang guns. STATE LINES DO NOT STOP GUN LAWS. The gun laws in the surrounding states are very relaxed which allows them to easily slip guns into cities like Chicago. After new ATF data was released, it was discovered that around 8,700 firearms recovered in Illinois and for which the bureau found a source state, more than half came from out of state — 1,366, nearly 16%, came from Indiana alone.

In the book I was reading, it talked about gun trafficking a lot. I’m going to insert an excerpt that I think describes this issue perfectly.

“Gun trafficking was another major problem that Gabby and I wanted to prioritize. Let’s say you want to make some extra cash selling guns. You have no criminal record and pass a background check at a licensed firearms dealer. You buy ten inexpensive handguns for about $200 each. You load them into your trunk, drive to a street corner late at night, and sell the pistols for $400 each to a customer base that may consist of criminals, but you don’t have direct knowledge of their activities one way or the other. With your markup, you make $2,000. As you drive off, you toss an empty paper cup from your window. ‘What crime was committed here?’ a report asks. Answer: ‘Littering.’ That’s right: there are no federal laws that make those gun transactions illegal. If we applied the same lax standards to drug dealing, a person caught holding dozens of small baggies of cocaine on a street corner late at night would only be charged with possession, not the far more serious charge of intent to distribute.”

Gun trafficking is an issue that is NEVER talked about, and if we could get our country to focus on it even for a little bit, we could help change opinions of gun control, and save lives.

I’m going to close out this insanely long article with my favorite quote from the book that describes my stance on gun control completely, thank you for reading this.

“We don’t fundamentally disagree with the NRA’s constantly repeated line, ‘GUNS DON”T KILL PEOPLE. PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE.’ But our country is in a state of crisis, especially compared to other developed nations, precisely because we have few measures in place to keep guns out of the hands of people who do kill.”

By Rachel Gray

Women’s reproductive rights has been a heavily debated topic in Congress, as well as the Judicial branch, in the past 30 years. However, the attention to these issues has increased exponentially since Republicans gained control over the Senate in the midterm elections and now the Supreme Court is leaning towards the right with Kavanaugh’s appointment. This shift towards a right-leaning government has shifted the political agenda towards more controversial issues such as abortion laws as seen in the Georgia Heartbeat Bill.

Since this passing of this bill, many other states have begun to draft their own restrictive laws on abortion that follow the ideas of the Heartbeat Bill. Late Tuesday night, Alabama’s Senate passed a bill that banned nearly all abortions. This new bill, which passed 25-6,  is one of the most restrictive abortion bans in the United States.” The bill would make it a crime for doctors to perform abortions at any stage of a pregnancy, unless a woman’s life is threatened or in case of a lethal fetal anomaly.”1 Not only does this bill put women in danger, but it includes a penalty of up to 99 years in prison for doctors who perform abortions. There are no exceptions for cases of rape or incest unlike in Georgia’s Heartbeat Bill. This bill, which excludes exceptions, has an agenda to directly challenge the Roe v Wade decision that established a woman’s right to abortion. In doing so, the Alabama Senate hopes to push the idea that “a fetus is a person with rights.”2 Although the Democrats didn’t have the votes to stop this bill, many Senators such as Sen. Vivian Davis Figures “questioned why supporters would not want victims of rape or incest to have an exception for a horrific act.” This bill has no other qualifications for a time period of fetus duration like the Heartbeat bill’s 6 week period- whereas this bill states that the moment on conception is the determining factor that grants fetus rights. “Those who backed the new law said they don’t expect it to take effect, instead intending its passage to be part of a broader strategy by antiabortion activists to persuade the U.S. Supreme Court to reconsider the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, which legalized abortion nationwide.”3

Upon researching this bill, it appears that this bill will punish women at the expense of political gain. Not only is restricting safe abortions morally corrupt but to claim to be pro-life is contradictory to the fact that Alabama “fails to support children once they are born” as stated by Susan Pace Hamill, a law professor at the University of Alabama. As I’ve stated many times before, banning legal abortions will open the flood gates to unsafe, back-alley abortions which put financially challenged, minority women at risk.

The issue of religion also comes into play as evangelical republican senators like Sen. Clyde Chambliss claim that “if we terminate the life of an unborn child, we are putting ourselves in God’s place.” Not only does this violate the separation of church and state doctrine, but it attacks those without a faith who are pro-choice. In the long run, the real fight isn’t about if you’re pro-life or pro-choice, but it hints at the question of how much control does the government have over a woman’s body?

In the future, with the increasing rate of these bills, I believe we will see the precedent of Roe v Wade tested like never before. This isn’t the last of these heartbeat bills, but with the support of these bills also comes the equal rise in dissent towards the bills as well. The fight for reproductive rights is far from over for women all across the world. In order to ensure equal protection under the law, we must fight for one another and guarantee that everyone is given an equal opportunity to choose what they believe is the right decision for their person- which, in turn, means ensuring that there is legal access for women to safe abortions in all 50 states.

Hey guys it’s Jacquelyn. For the past couple weeks, a bill has been floating around Georgia that has become one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the nation on this past Tuesday. The law basically states than abortion is prohibited after 6 weeks of pregnancy, rather than the previous law of 20 weeks, with the exception if the woman’s life is in danger, or in cases of rape & incest that have been filed with the police.

When I was researching about this topic, I found out the the 6 week mark, is when a doctor can start detecting a fetal heartbeat (generally). This 6 week time limit is ridiculous because a woman who might consider an abortion, wouldn’t even know if they were pregnant because they would have only missed their period for 1 cycle, and in some cases, women who are pregnant still get periods. Missing a period is so common due to exercise, stress, etc. that missing one period wouldn’t automatically set off an alarm that they’re pregnant. And even if they found out they were pregnant, it would give them almost no time to decide what they want to do. A decision like this takes time and lots of thinking, and this law gives them a tiny amount of time to make a huge choice.

I’ve had many discussions with people about abortion, and especially being a Catholic, abortion is seen as one of the greatest sins someone can commit. I’m pro-choice, however, my faith tells me to be pro-life. I was talking with someone recently and they mentioned the fact that they don’t agree with abortion because they don’t like it. I don’t understand this perspective sometimes because it’s not like anyone likes abortion, but they like having the choice available. Women would rather have the option and not use it, rather than having the option taken away from them. I do believe that an individual should always try to consider other options alternative to abortion, but I think the choice should be up to the parents, and not the government.

by: Rachel Gray

Welcome!

First let me start this off by saying I’m super excited to start this journey with y’all, and hopefully to help educate others about the ins-and-outs of the chaotic political atmosphere we are so fortunate to experience in this day and age. For all who don’t know me, I’ll give y’all a little bit of background information. I’ve grown up in a mainly religious, Republican household; however, that was only one of the households. My other household didn’t emerge until middle school, a democratic household headed by two gay men-my dads. Most of my beliefs come from that side of my family; however, that’s not to say that I haven’t been influenced by my religious/republican side as well. But enough about my life, let’s dive into my beliefs.

[Following a similar order to Jacquelyn]

Up first: gun control

Having grown up in the south, I’ve been surrounded my gun my entire life. From an early age I remember going hunting with my grandpa and shooting cans in the deep woods of Mississippi. There is nothing wrong with stable civilians owning guns for trivial things such as self defense or hunting; however, the laws in our country tend to leave out the stable civilians part and focus solely on the right to protect the right to own a gun regardless of the consequences. I believe that there should be laws in place to help eliminate the loopholes in the system that allow for domestic abusers and mentally unstable people to easily purchase guns without going to all the trouble of registering the gun and background checks. Speaking of, I believe that one thing we desperately need in our country, especially with the drastic increase in gun related violence, is universal background checks. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not advocating for taking away guns from responsible gun owners because they are not the problem, the NRA is. If people are willing to go through a couple of extra steps in order to maintain safety in our schools, churches, movie theaters, and clubs, then we can work towards safer world where we don’t have to fear going to school not knowing if we will make it home.

Second: Abortion/LGBT Rights/Civil Rights

As a young queer woman in America, it’s safe to say I support LGBT rights. Being alive during a major shift in the lgbt liberation movement, legalization of gay marriage across all states, has been life changing. Not only have I gotten to see my parents gain the right to get married in any state (and they did!), but I get to be a part of the movement to help bring equality to other countries as well. On another note, I am pro-choice 110%. The truth is that no one is inherently “pro-abortion” as many people would like you to believe. To be pro-choice is to believe in the opportunity for a woman to have the right to do with her body as she wants. My opinion on what another woman should do with her body is irrelevant as it doesn’t affect me in the same way it will affect the other woman. The idea that defunding Planned Parenthood will lead to a decrease in abortions is quite literally fake news. Planned Parenthood offers SAFE abortions and as a result of defunding it, there will be an increase in abortions that put women’s’ lives in danger because they will no longer have access to many of the services that PP provides such as STD testing and treatment, birth control, well-woman exams, cancer screening and prevention, hormone therapy, infertility services, and general health care. By eliminating PP we are getting rid of services that help provide low income family and people without insurance get the education and medical help they rely on.

Third: Healthcare/College

Having taken one economic class, which I wasn’t too keen on, I’m going to come out and say I’m not an expert on the financial side of politics. I know that free college isn’t a financially obtainable goal since it would result in raising taxes for everyone, and no one likes paying more money for things that don’t directly affect them. The same idea also applies for health care. However, there are many countries that operate on a single-payer healthcare system such as Canada, Taiwan, and South Korea. This system is a type of universal healthcare financed by taxes that covers the costs of essential healthcare for all residents, with costs covered by a single public system. I believe that everyone should have access to affordable healthcare because denying care is unhumanitarian. If you deny healthcare to people who can’t afford it, leaving them for dead, isn’t morally right. College is the same way for me. Having access to college is a necessity for some people as having a college degree could be the defining factor that separates two qualified potential employees. Many lower class citizens can’t afford to attend college due to their socioeconomic status. Because the price of colleges have skyrocketed over the years, and there is no incentive to lower them, there needs to be a plan to allow those who can’t afford to attend the same opportunities as those who can. By making community colleges free, we can provide affordable education without the drastic increase of taxes that universal free college would demand.

Fourth: Immigration

Finally, the thing that has plagued both FOX and CNN recently. Immigration. This is a tricky topic because it’s a very controversial one that can become a one way ticket to partisan government arguments. I’ll keep it short and sweet for y’all: We shouldn’t be closing the borders and splitting apart families. What makes America great is the diversity we experience due to the “land of the free” aspect we promote. By shutting the borders, we are saying that we don’t want diversity and we become immersed in toxic nationalism. We should be encouraging legal immigration and allowing non-citizen to safely pursue citizenship without fearing being ripped from their families in the process. Let us celebrate our differences and work towards a more diverse, inclusive future for the generations to come.

Okay so my name is Brooklynn and I’ll briefly talk about how I feel about certain issues, just like my compadre before me. She’s more knowledgeable in the political arena, but the past presidential election has really brought the political state of our country to the forefront, and has forced me to start thinking of how I stand on key issues. I’m not going to pretend I’m the most informed or researched in any area I talk about, but I’m looking forward to using this site as a way to find out more statistics about issues that affect us and about the platforms on which the 2020 candidates are running on.

The issue of abortion is the only issue that I have a firm and unwavering stance on. I am 100% pro choice. I believe that no laws should rule over women’s bodies. I understand that people have problems with abortion because of religious beliefs, and I respect that, but laws shouldn’t be applied on everyone because of a certain group’s beliefs. Others may come from different backgrounds and are under different circumstances and abortion may be the answer for them and no way should laws prohibit that option. I feel the same way about LGBTQ rights. There shouldn’t be laws that discriminate against a person’s sexuality just like their shouldn’t be laws that discriminate against race or gender.

As for gun control I believe in universal background checks. Piggybacking off of what Jacquelyn said before me, if you aren’t a threat, a background check shouldn’t affect you. It’s a quick preventative measure that could potentially save many lives. As a student, school shooters are a real threat and anything that can be done, should be done to keep guns out of the hands of people who want to use them for harm.

I just began reading up on the health care issue and it’s quite complicated, and because I’ve never dealt directly with the system, it’s even more foreign. The article I read (click here to read it) was quite interesting though, and from the stats it gave me, it definitely seems that something is not quite right with our current system. I’d honestly like to research it more and provide more information on this topic to help others discover their stance as I try to find my own.

The main problem that I have with current politics is the politicians themselves. Like I said earlier, I wanted to become more involved and knowledgeable about our political climate after the last presidential election. This is because I was honestly shocked that someone with seemingly such poor morals could be elected as leader of our nation. I would hear about the petty things he would say or what new insult he came up with for politician x or y and it really bothered me. It still does. Leaders in our band program seem to be held to a higher moral standard sometimes than he is. If teenagers can be held to a higher ethics than our president, I feel that something is wrong. I understand that people aren’t perfect, but as the figurehead of our country I feel like you can at least try to be respectful and set a good example for the youth of our nation.

Moving on from Trump, I hate how politics seems to be dividing people. It doesn’t matter that you may believe different things from the people sitting next to you or living in your house; what matters is that we should be able to discuss these issues, gain a broader perspective, and learn that there could be a compromise to appease both parties. Nothing frightens me more than people who don’t want to discuss their political beliefs for fear that the other person may disagree. I understand if you want to keep your beliefs to yourself, I respect that. I’ve done that before because it’s easier not to have someone try and pick apart why you take a certain stance. However, I want to encourage everyone to be willing to share their beliefs and inquire why the other belief is held. Asking why and learning why helps you gain a new perspective and deepens your complexity of thought. Just because I don’t really care for ketchup and you put ketchup on everything doesn’t mean we can’t be friends; and the same should go for politics. Disagree with the concept, not the person.

One of the main reasons I wanted to be part of this blog was to pick the sh*t (keeping it clean here) out of politics. Like the title implies, there’s a lot of stuff in politics that doesn’t need to be and I think it’s important to  be able to see past that. Through this blog, we can present the facts without bias as well as pros and cons to each side. Our generation is the future of this country and it’s important that we become active and knowledgeable members of our political community.

Hi friends, it’s Jacquelyn. I don’t know if you’ve heard, but I really like politics. So, I made yet another blog where I’m going to write about politics with some friends.

We decided our first couple posts would be the 3 of us talking about our personal political views, and I’m going first. I’m going to do a general overview of a couple different issues like gun control, abortion, LGBTQ, college, healthcare, etc.

Up first: gun control.

I am a very strong believer of implementing universal background checks. I think that if something as simple as that could help, we should do it. It’s not a drastic change, and if you’re not a psychopath, it doesn’t really affect you that much. This little inconvenience can help keep people safe, and I think that’s 100% worth it.

Second: Abortion/LGBTQ

This is a very touchy topic in my religion (I’m Roman Catholic), however, I still support the LGBTQ community along with the woman’s right to choose. In Catholicism, if you get an abortion, you will be excommunicated from the church which basically means you can never receive Communion because you have sinned so greatly. In my eyes, I think that abortion is never a black and white situation. It always depends on the circumstances (like with rape, incest, etc.) and the woman herself. I was talking with one of my friends about this and she said that “No one is pro-abortion, they’re pro-choice,” & I’ve never really thought about it that way. I don’t like the idea of abortion, but I think that since we have the technology, we should have the choice to use it if necessary. With the LGBTQ community, I completely support them. I personally don’t understand why it’s supposedly “wrong” in the eyes of the church. I know that it’s written in the bible, but I think that the bible focuses WAY more on being kind and to love your neighbor rather than saying being gay is a sin.

Third: Healthcare/College

Everywhere I look on twitter, all I see is someone talking about how amazing the idea of “free college” is. Personally, I don’t agree with free college. I think the prices should be lowered SUBSTANTIALLY, and that community college should be free, but I don’t agree with free public college. So many people don’t go to college because they simply don’t need to with the career path they are following. I have kind of the same stance on healthcare. I think our current plans like Medicaid should be improved, and that we should provide free basic services, but I don’t agree with free healthcare. Going along with healthcare, I think the insulin price insanity needs to be fixed immediately because it’s, quite frankly, absolutely ridiculous.