What is the #1 topic or point you want others here on HP to see your way of thinking on?
Mine is very simple. To be a free, logical and rational thinker and stop following the masses without rhyme or reason. Blind religious faith is dangerous, and so is political party adherence without at least making an attempt to see the other side. This blind faith adherence to party or religion is the main contributor to distrust, intolerance, hatred and bigotry. We must all learn to come to the central view in order to change things in this world. Nothing is strictly black and white. There are so many things that we do not understand, and yet take a stand, make judgments, and pass laws to force people to only look in one direction.
To answer your question I must first state, I believe in honest debate based of fact, not garbage like insults, innuendo or false reports by unacceptable resources. Bring up any issue and sometimes we have different opinions on them, so be it, but it does no good to insult or play games to "win " an argument. I am very open to learning something and to spread anti-propaganda against myths and manipulations by our government, corporations and the media and I mean all media and all government. I have an agenda, to save the country from its own stupidity. Is really stinks that people are so numb to things that they forget what happened even two days ago, or better yet agree to a lie knowing they lived through the truth. So to answer the question, All topics are number one. They all apply and are reliant to now and beyond.
That's an easy one for me--Global Warming. Except it isn't that I want anyone to see my thinking on it. I want people to see the thinking of the global scientific community. If you have been paying attention to the issue as I have been there are increasingly concerned warnings coming from scientists. When scientists, who are trained to be objective and precise with their statements, begin to start basically saying that they are crapping their pants, people should take note of that. And nobody is.
I am half-expecting the next IPCC report to say the following: "Dear Earth, we have warned you and done are best to inform you for decades now and you have done NOTHING. You are on a trajectory to blow way past your safe limit of temperature rise into the realm of turning this planet into a barren rock, and still you set record emissions year after year. Anyway, we have secretly been building a rocket ship to go colonize Mars. Since you don't listen to us anyway, we are out of here. Good luck living in the furnace you are willingly building around yourselves."
We were all placed here for a reason and not for greed and the self, but to share in the goodness life has to offer, and care for others and the environment. We were not given life so that we could eradicate all other life, including ourselves, and to destroy the planet of our birth as well as all living things. There is a God and creator, as surely as we live and breathe. We have been blessed in this life and need to pass it on.
That if Romney and the Tea Party get power over this country, we are in irreparable trouble and will fall.
Do you have a better suggestion? Obama and romney are both bad for us so what is the other option?
Xenonlit, What specific policies are you referring to? Lets not speak in generalities and sound bites, but in actual policy ideas.
As a feminist, I believe in the importance of a woman being in control of her reproductive destiny. I wish to teach others the importance of birth control regarding their reproductive choice and the lives of their families. I portend that family planning is highly essential. Planned families are often happier and less stressed families.
Reproductive choices includes abortion and birth control. However, I believe in abortion only in cases of emergencies but prefer the use of birth control. Let me not digress. It is so sad today that many children are unplanned in the United States. This is totally unconscionable in this postmodern day and age of advanced contraceptive technologies.
I strongly contend that children are entitled to live as good a life as they can. Smaller families are often more socioeconomic affluent than larger families. Smaller families are also healthier for the mother and less stress for the father. Larger families, on the other hand, are often impoverished because monies have to be allotted to care for a large number of children.
Besides that children from large families are often in poorer health due to having nonnutririous foods, little or no medical and/or dental care. Large families are also deleterious to the health of the mother. After successive childbirths, the mother's body becomes irreparably damaged. Aside from that, children from large families often lead a disadvantaged life in more ways than one.
I sorely believe that birth control guarantees a better life for all concerned. Since children are our most precious resource, I find it very unconscionable that many children have to do without the most basic amenities because their parents elect to have more children than they are prepared to take care of.
The understanding of the Constitutional framework, it's 10th Amendment constraints on the federal government and how that can and should effect so many other issues.
And of course to embrace logic to find answers, even if emotion poses the question.
by Kiylah 2 weeks ago
Mine is that children shouldn't be disciplined by spanking/being hit - what's yours?
by H C Palting 2 weeks ago
Do you believe that poorer and/or less educated people have more children whom they can't support?Do you know any ill effects to the child(ren) born to these families and society? If so, what are they?
by Grace Marguerite Williams 3 years ago
Why is it irresponsible, immoral, unintelligent, even illogical to have large/very largefamilies( 6 children or more per family), especially in this postmodern day and age when advanced contraceptive technologies are very accessible and available?
by Grace Marguerite Williams 16 months ago
Why are large families ALWAYS dependent upon outside assistance to keep them socioeconomicallyafloat as opposed to small families who are very socioeconomically self-sufficient? Typical large families are poor to impoverished socioeconomically. That means that in order to be...
by janesix 3 years ago
I think it is due to the erosion of families. Mothers no longer stay home with their young children, and fathers are no where to be seen in a large percentage of families. The kids don't have a father figure, and I think this leads to joining gangs, dropping out of school, and criminal behavior. Am...
by Christian L Perry 2 months ago
What is the root cause of poverty in the world?
|HubPages Device ID|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Google Analytics|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel|
|Google Hosted Libraries|
|Google AdSense Host API|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels|
|Author Google Analytics|
|Amazon Tracking Pixel|