"Loving your country shouldn't just mean watching fireworks on the 4th of July. Loving your country must mean accepting your responsibility to do your part to change it. If you do, your life will be richer, our country will be stronger."
These are the words our President spoke in Colorado Springs. He is, of course, correct. Public service can be life-changing. I have volunteered both at home and abroad. All of my domestic volunteer work has made me proud to be doing something for my country, connecting me to my nation. What I really suggest, however, is going abroad if you can afford it.
This summer, I traveled to Cape Town, South Africa to volunteer in two children's homes. The experience was nearly indescribable- but I'm going to describe it to you anyways. Seeing the children, the effects of HIV, and even the still-lingering effects of apartheid changed my views of South Africa, the world, and even the United States. They need our help! Most of the children's homes' volunteers come from countries where public service is mandatory because people want to escape the military. I think more Americans need to see Cape Town for themselves however. I don't mean the side of Cape Town that one finds at The Mount Nelson Hotel either. I mean the real, true South Africa. The majority of blacks still live in townships and have very little money. Most of the children at the homes had HIV. All the children wanted was to be picked up and held by the volunteers.
However, something struck me about these people. They were all so open and hopeful. Blacks did not notice that they still lived in townships...they were just thrilled that they could vote. Moreover, nothing is taboo to discuss. Schools have time set aside just to share issues and concerns. People are "black", "colored" (mixed race), and "white." In the states, people feel uncomfortable even referring to an African American as "black." I'm not saying the US should suddenly be this open- that would be catastrophic. However, I am saying that if everyone goes abroad or works for their country, perspective's would be changed, as would our reputation as an arrogant nation.
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Homosexuality and State versus National Powers
Before I state my full opinion on the matter, let me get my social views out there: I will never be homosexual but I fully support gay marriage. Two of my best friends are homosexual and I want them to be able to be recognized as legally married if they so choose. However, I am fully against legalizing gay marriage on the national level. I would love it if each individual state could pass a law legalizing gay marriage. Unfortunately, the consequences of passing such a law in more conservative states could, I fear, prove disastrous, even fatal. I know of some people who cannot emotionally handle the fact that those people they despise could have full rights. I am sure there are residents like these in even the most liberal states, such as Massachusetts. However, they would easily be outvoted. In some states, the opposition would be too strong. There could be revolts, and the peace could turn to violence at any turn. It may not be that consequential to not pass the laws there, either. I live in a liberal area of Georgia, but I know that just a few counties over, no one ever comes out as being homosexual for fear of being hurt. No gays want to live in these places anyways, so to legalize gay marriage only in accepting areas does not particularly hurt them. Hopefully, some day, all will see homosexuality as natural and gay marriage will be legalized in all 50 states, but for now the handful of states that have legalized it will suffice.
However, in states with civil unions and domestic partnerships, gay MARRIAGE should slowly be introduced. I feel that it should be gradual, giving homosexuals more and more "marriage rights" until finally, they can be married under a priest, if they choose. There is a stereotype that all gays are unreligious; this is false. I have one very religious gay friend. He should be allowed to marry under a priest, yet under his state laws he will not even be allowed a domestic partnership. More states should slowly work towards legalizing gay marriage.
However, in states with civil unions and domestic partnerships, gay MARRIAGE should slowly be introduced. I feel that it should be gradual, giving homosexuals more and more "marriage rights" until finally, they can be married under a priest, if they choose. There is a stereotype that all gays are unreligious; this is false. I have one very religious gay friend. He should be allowed to marry under a priest, yet under his state laws he will not even be allowed a domestic partnership. More states should slowly work towards legalizing gay marriage.
Labels:
conservative,
gay,
homosexual,
law,
liberal,
marriage,
priest,
rights,
state
Monday, February 16, 2009
Affirmative Action is Asinine
Affirmative action is, in fact, asinine. Am I being racist? Of course not! I am some percentage of Native American, and I think it's enough to get me into college, but I still don't appreciate affirmative action. Think about it logically. Affirmative action is saying that Person Minority deserves to get into college simply because he or she IS a minority. I love minorities. Some of my best friends are Asian and Latina and African American. Like I said, I'm somewhat Native American...1/16 I believe. Being Asian is not, of course, a helpful thing if one wants to go Ivy or NESCAC or Public Ivy, etc. MIT doesn't even allow international students to apply early BECAUSE of all of the minorities that want to apply. However, a little insider birdie told me that by "minority" they mean "Asian." Thus, my dear Asian friends, my anti-Affirmative Action stance is not against you. I think colleges should be race-blind. Who cares if I am white or not? I am an intelligent human being! If 1/16 is not enough for me to be legally Native American, then why should Minority A get into College A, if I get deferred? It's reverse racism! I am the majority in every possible aspect. I am a white Anglo-Saxon. I am Protestant. I am a girl. I am basically the epitome of a "WASP" (again, assuming I am not Native American enough to be a "WNAP"-white Native American Protestant). But this isn't just about me. It's also about my intelligent Asian friend who may not get into the university of her choice because of the ridiculous stereotype that all Asians are geniuses, and any Asians who are even one IQ point below the genius quota must be rejected or waitlisted due to inferior brain capacity. Unfortunately, that stereotype exists. This is also for my international friend who wishes he knew if he was into MIT or not. He was not deferred. He was stopped from applying early by his citizenship. Dear MIT applicants: If you are not a US citizen, have fun waiting until April to discover your fate.
Obviously, affirmative action is not restricted to university either. Some businesses have "minority quotas." They've been known to say "Sorry Mr. Majority, we have to take Mrs. Minority because she is, well, a minority, and we need a few more!" Thankfully, this quota business is declining, but the university stuff is still there. Even scholarships are awarded based on race. They have Native American scholarships, Afro-American scholarships...where are the Caucasian scholarships? I understand that minorities tend to be less wealthy than "WASPs," but there are financially struggling Caucasians as well. Surely scholarships, jobs, and acceptance letters should be colorblind, and scholarships should focus only on merit and the bank account. I understand that for years on end we tortured our slaves, put our Japanese in concentration camps, and degraded our Latinos. However, is putting ourselves down really the answer? This is just creating a never-ending cycle, because one day the minorities will say "We're sorry! Now YOU have priority" and on it goes. I don't recall enslaving anyone, and while I condemn my ancestors for any racism, and I don't understand why I am being punished. This isn't Thomas Jefferson's debt being left to his children. This is simply reverse racism.
Obviously, affirmative action is not restricted to university either. Some businesses have "minority quotas." They've been known to say "Sorry Mr. Majority, we have to take Mrs. Minority because she is, well, a minority, and we need a few more!" Thankfully, this quota business is declining, but the university stuff is still there. Even scholarships are awarded based on race. They have Native American scholarships, Afro-American scholarships...where are the Caucasian scholarships? I understand that minorities tend to be less wealthy than "WASPs," but there are financially struggling Caucasians as well. Surely scholarships, jobs, and acceptance letters should be colorblind, and scholarships should focus only on merit and the bank account. I understand that for years on end we tortured our slaves, put our Japanese in concentration camps, and degraded our Latinos. However, is putting ourselves down really the answer? This is just creating a never-ending cycle, because one day the minorities will say "We're sorry! Now YOU have priority" and on it goes. I don't recall enslaving anyone, and while I condemn my ancestors for any racism, and I don't understand why I am being punished. This isn't Thomas Jefferson's debt being left to his children. This is simply reverse racism.
The Puerto Rican Conundrum
Puerto Rico is a Commonwealth of the United States. Technically, this status gives Puerto Rico autonomy, but the United States government has true sovereignty over the island. Much like in a state, the governor is the highest Puerto Rican official. Puerto Ricans are United States citizens. They have United States passports and United States birth certificates. They serve in the United States army. They use USDs and the USPS. They pay taxes to the United States. They sound almost like your typical, every day citizen. They almost are, except for one gaping fact. The day I turn 18, I will register to vote, as will many Puerto Ricans. That year is not a Presidential election year, and so, when I am 19 years and 364 days old, I will vote for President for the first time. A Puerto Rican girl born on the same day as me will not vote for President that day. Her parents, grandparent, aunts and uncles won't vote either. No one on the 3,459-square-mile land mass will go to DC the next year to be a Senator or a Representative either. No, Puerto Rico has no representation in our government.
They have our school system (although poorly funded). They pay the same taxes we do. They can vote in primaries- I suppose it's a start- and they fly our flag. Our politics affect their island. However, they are not granted the full rights of citizens. I am well aware that Puerto Rico is not a state. I understand why they are not given full representation. Puerto Rico is not a sovereign nation, either, despite a small minority, labelled terrorists, who wish it was. The island falls under United States jurisdiction. At the very least, they are half a state. They should be granted at least one Senator, at least half as many Representatives and electoral votes as they would be allotted as a state. Whether their lack of representation is racism, ethnocentrism, or nationalism, it is wrong. Puerto Rican teenagers could be the next leaders of America, but if they do get involved in politics they still cannot represent their island where it matters. The lack of Puerto Rican representation is appalling. As a commonwealth, basically a colony, they deserve half rights, if not full rights, of representation and voting.
They have our school system (although poorly funded). They pay the same taxes we do. They can vote in primaries- I suppose it's a start- and they fly our flag. Our politics affect their island. However, they are not granted the full rights of citizens. I am well aware that Puerto Rico is not a state. I understand why they are not given full representation. Puerto Rico is not a sovereign nation, either, despite a small minority, labelled terrorists, who wish it was. The island falls under United States jurisdiction. At the very least, they are half a state. They should be granted at least one Senator, at least half as many Representatives and electoral votes as they would be allotted as a state. Whether their lack of representation is racism, ethnocentrism, or nationalism, it is wrong. Puerto Rican teenagers could be the next leaders of America, but if they do get involved in politics they still cannot represent their island where it matters. The lack of Puerto Rican representation is appalling. As a commonwealth, basically a colony, they deserve half rights, if not full rights, of representation and voting.
Labels:
House,
island,
Politics,
president,
Puerto Rico,
Representatives,
Senate
Introducing the Political Partier
Hello! My name is Katie and this is my political blog. I'm a junior in high school, and I really want to be a politician and study political science in college. I won't say what high school I go to, but it's a prestigious boarding school. My blog name is a bit of a misnomer: I don't party at all. However, I thought that the title was sort of punny for a high schooler's political blog, since the stereotypical high school student parties. That's really the only introduction this blog needs, so thank you!
Katie
Katie
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)