As I was watching KCRA news here in Sacramento, they were doing a story about the Mayoral race between current Mayor Heather Fargo and leading candidate to replace her Kevin Johnson. More specifically, they hit on the issues of gay marriage and abortion. My first thought is, why are those issues even issues for a Mayoral race? Those are state and federal issues to be dealt with, not city or county politics. The Mayor's priorities should be that of local fiscal issues, local education, public safety, and economic development, not large societal issues.

However, it got me to thinking about how gay marriage and abortion are such divisive issues that make for contentious debates, arguments, and even downright maliciousness for those involved and how it can be remedied.

Is it so difficult to find an answer that works for everyone? I believe one is right in front of us. It's been there since the founding fathers signed off on it. It's just been lost in the political maelstrom and emotionalism that is wrapped around so many people. I call it court the vote.

When the Supreme Court made the decision to legalize abortion in 1973, I have always had a problem with the very few deciding so much for so many. The real solution should have been for the Supreme Court to remand the issue back to the states for a state by state referendum. The voters would vote yes or no to being in support of legalizing abortion. If the vote is yes, the court will support it. If the vote is no in other states, the court would also support it.

Although, I would place exceptions to an abortion ban, such as rape, incest, or the endangerment of the mother's life. I think the reasoning behind these points is obvious. Another legality I would make is that if a minor want's an abortion in a state where it is legal, than the parents or guardians would need to approve. I think this part of the issue needs to stay within the power of the parents or guardians and not be decided by the courts. It stands to reason that if parents fail in certain aspects of parenting then they should also deal with the consequences of that and not be given a failsafe position by the courts.

The same resolution holds true for gay marriage. It should be a state's rights issue. The Supreme Court should be in favor of a state by state vote and support whatever outcome is determined. What is more constitutional than the people voting on an issue to decide it's position or legality?

This resolution would end all the all the religious vs. atheists fighting. It would end all the radical gays vs/ homophobe straights fighting. It would end the god vs. those heathens fighting. It would simply put issues to rest that are, quite frankly, distracting and divesting us of our attention that is needed elsewhere. Issues like radical islam, energy development, and economic stability come to mind.

It would also relieve politicians from having to posture, double-talk, and dance around these issues. All they would have to do is say, the people voted, the people decided, and we should leave it at that.

But, far be it for me to suggest something logical and sensible in a sea of lunacy and naked ignorance.

Alan W.