I like to keep up with stuff that happens in the political
world. That proves to be awful
difficult, though, when you don’t watch the news and just happen to pick up on
what you see or hear. As a result, I get
behind and people talk about stuff and I have no idea what’s going on. Recently I’ve heard about Rand Paul and him
being commended and I had no idea what it was about. So I looked into it. It turns out that it is a recent development
on something I’ve already read about that has me pretty concerned.
Here is the basic background to what is happening. The Obama administration believes that it has
the right to conduct drone strikes on American citizens on American soil if
they are believed to be involved in terrorist activity. No arrest, no trial, no sentencing. This has caused quite an uproar and has
sparked controversy in several issues, including the value of life, the rights
of the American citizen, and what the limits of executive power are. This culminated on Wednesday, when the
appointment of John Brennan as the director of the CIA was being discussed. Brennan has been a staunch supporter of the
administrations drone policy, so naturally some of our more reasonable members
of Congress had a problem with his appointment, Rand Paul being one of
them. So in response, he filibustered
Brennan’s appointment.
If you aren’t familiar with what a filibuster is, it is
basically when a politician wants to protest a decision, so he or she speaks
for hours during the meeting so that the vote is either delayed or
prevented. Paul spoke for just shy of 13
hours. Now that is one dedicated
politician.
The unfortunate result was that Brennan was still voted
in. The question I must ask, then, is
did it do any good? In general, I am not
a fan of filibusters. It seems to me
that they do very little in practicality, but I will say this: at least the man
did something. During his filibuster, Paul said “if there
was an ounce of courage in this body, I would not be here alone.” Why is Mr. Paul alone? Are we all okay with giving one man the power
to kill an American citizen without any arrest, trial, conviction, or
sentencing? I think not. I daresay that
Paul may not be the only one in Congress who feels this way. But he’s the only one with the courage to
stand up and say so.
The most despicable part of this whole mess is the value we
are placing on human life. It is a trend
that
seems to be increasing every time I turn around. Planned Parenthood executed a record 333,000
unborn babies last year. Euthanasia is
now legal in the states of Washington, Montana, and Oregon. Now the President thinks he has the right to
convict and kill any American who is suspected of being of involved in
terrorist activity. Human life is
becoming increasingly disposable.
Today I started reading The
Hunger Games. A lot of the books I
read describe worlds that I wish were real and that I would love to be a part
of. Not this one. It describes a North America that requires
her districts to submit a boy and a girl to “The Hunger Games” to fight ‘till
the death. Not only is this necessary,
but it is celebrated like a festivity.
It is seen as good. As
right. Another book I read a while back
offered another futuristic look at human life.
In Unwind, abortion has become
illegal but parents can, while their child is a teenager, have them “unwound,”
a process by which they are salvaged for body parts and organs.
As I read those books, I appreciate the
warnings that they offer regarding where a lack of respect for human life
leads. I like to think we’re a ways off
from what those books describe. But are
we?
No comments:
Post a Comment