I have been planning, and thinking of running for a high political office once I reach the required age to do so. If I do win, my plans entail-
-Fully separating church and state in the US, you shouldn't have to swear to a god you don't believe in, in an anthem, and or court (though exceptions have already been made to the latter). Mind you, this doesn't mean I am for the persecution of any religion, they should still be protected under the 1st Amendment.
-A basic healthcare system available to all Americans, while at the same time not eradicating competitive insurance agencies. This also will not be felt on the middle and lower class (I will explain later)
-Full rights for the LGBTQ+ community such as the ability to adopt.
-Personally I have no issue with the second amendment, however I think we must limit what Americans can and cannot own (not extensively but people shouldn't be keeping anti-tank rifles in their basement) and have extensive background checks. At the same time to counteract mass shootings we need to have a comprehensive and free therapist and psychologists to provide people with the mental help they need.
- Free upper education, we need to stay competitive with the rest of the world and increase the amount of people who are college educated.
-Increased taxes based on the wealthiest citizens, while also decreasing military budget.
-Increased wages for military personnel, including a major system to help battle ptsd and other mental health issues. (Just one of many changes to the military, might make a post to explain it later).
-Terms for senators and representatives (I am thinking 8 (maybe 10) years max)
-Clean energy (which includes; but is not limited too) Nuclear power, hydropower and solar panels.
-Using our words, not first to improve our international strength.
-Subsidizing the creation of small and medium businesses
-Decreasing political power of western ranchers (ask me about this, its a weird one)
-Fixing immigration crisis; blocking them off isn't moral or going to work for long, and we cannot let them all in. The third option is improving their home countries and hopefully causing the immigration flow to slow.
-Greater effort in space exploration; coupled with an international alliance of the major powers to explore space, hopefully improving Earthside relations.
-Decreasing pay-wage gap
-Reclaiming American manufacturing ability through subsidization.
-Decreasing congressional wages
Feel free to debate any ideas with me.
| 18647 - Réponse de Gianna50 , 24 ans (US) - 2021-07-29 >> NEW|
|Just because I am a conservative does not mean I agree with everything that other conservatives do. For example, I highly supported Donald Trump for making peace in a part of the Gulf War. I really was amazed at his speech at the March for Life. And he did very good things with the Little Sisters of the Poor. But I do not like the way he managed the tariffs and other import taxes during his presidency. I do not know who the 3% er's are, and I have hardly heard of the proud boys, much less of them bringing arms into riots.
"The US Government provides insulin to patients, in return those patients are expected to provide an equal service back if they can." What is the incentive for the patients to return an equal service? They are getting something for no cost to them. I wish the world could be "I give you something for 'free', you give me something for 'free'" but it isn't the way things are. What's an equal service back? If taxes were to be raised to fund this government run insurance company, people who have no need for it would be paying money. Insulin can be very expensive, and many poorer people who need it would be grateful to have it for 'free', but how would they contribute back? Certainly if it's 'free' they wouldn't be paying money. And if they have to give a service it would be like being a government slave a little bit. I still think in this situation it shouldn't be the federal government's job. I still stand by my "family, community, county, state, federal government" order. And I think that by giving insulin and casts, for example, for free is definitely going to put privately run insurance companies out of business. The only way for the privately run companies to compete would be to make their products "free", but that would put them out of business. I feel that if you would want to make this federal healthcare system the best thing to do would be to have a monthly fee, perhaps, so that people still have to pay money but it might not be felt as much as buying the insulin themselves.
Perhaps if the media wasn't exaggerating the effects of COVID it might be better for your unemployment policy. Right now many businesses are short of labor because people (who I might add are likely vaccinated) are wary of the delta variant. The vaccine against COVID is about 78% percent effective against getting delta, and even if you do catch it, it is 98% effective against death and 96% effective against hospitalizations. It's easy to be scared to go back into the workplace when people say 'the numbers are still rising'. The numbers are never going to fall. Unemployment is very helpful to people who have worked hard at some point in their lives but are now physically incapable of doing any work, but a fully able-bodied person being on unemployment is very different.
Looking back down at what you said about abortion and women being able to decide for themselves, you said "killing is wrong". It is very wrong, and in American today you are put in jail for many years for killing someone. How is that different from someone killing a child in the womb? Both ways you are killing. So should women get to choose to kill someone?
What are your views on drugs? And what are your views on the electoral college?
| 18646 - Réponse de Jack100 , 16 ans (USA) - 2021-07-29 >> NEW|
|Of course I agree with you, I want a peaceful riot, I want peace in America as a whole. I feel what you just said "not bring arms into the strike" is contradictory to most conservative groups of thought, of course I don't know your views but the proud boys and 3% ers brought their arms into protests and it was applauded by the right. Is this any different?
Except they are making money from it, people who work in insulin production are still getting paid by private companies, the US government then provides said insulin by buying it from the companies and distributing it. The market is still free, and the US government is now a buyer on it.
My general belief is this: The US government provides insulin to patients, in return those patients are expected to provide an equal service back if they can. I think there should be a three month cap to unemployment, after that you have to prove that you are still unable to work (medical reasons) and you no longer get the benefits. I have been pondering whether only people who are on unemployment or working should receive free healthcare, it is another incentive to work, however I can foresee many issues linked to this.
Besides for obviously making sure the owner is following their end of the deal I don't see any reason why more government oversight would be involved.
| 18645 - Réponse de Gianna50 , 24 ans (US) - 2021-07-28 >> NEW|
|It doesn't have to be a major riot. It can be peaceful. People who really truly care about the issue would make a stand. You can boycott products or just NOT bring arms into the strike.
Why would people choose to work and make said casts and give said insulin if they are not making any money from it? I know someone's health is on the line, but the world isn't so simple. I'm assuming you've heard this quote before "There's no such thing as a free lunch". There's always some cost to it, whether or not it affects the individual receiving the benefit. The money that isn't being paid to the distributor could be putting their survival on the line. It is like last year when "non-essential" people lost their jobs due to COVID... Every job is essential... It allows the person to buy food and pay their taxes. And now due to that heck of a time, it is very difficult finding people to work because their unemployment is paying more than a job would.
That's a pretty good idea about starting small businesses. I have a small question though. Would the government have much oversight over the business, or would they just give the tax cut and sum of money for the said 5 years? I think it is important not to have much government oversight in sole proprietorships and partnerships.
| 18644 - Réponse de Jack100 , 16 ans (USA) - 2021-07-28 >> NEW|
|Last time they did a major riot it turned into an uprising as 10,000 workers took up arms in 1921. The US military came in with mercenaries and police and by the end over 100 people laid dead. Lately teachers are striking because of little pay, so the spirit does exist.
Essentially a healthcare system that provides necessary benefits to allow people to live, while I don't like quoting Karl Marx my healthcare idea essentially follows the latter part of the quote "to each according to his needs." If people need insulin to survive they will receive insulin for free, if someone needs a caste for a broken arm they will get said caste. I also don't believe people should pay $400 for an ambulance. How I will pay for this is by combining medicare and medicaid, and streamlining the system. Instead of getting strangled in red-tap. Also a boost through to the system with money (I am still figuring out from where). This is something everyone will benefit from.
I don't think someone who can pay for college should have the government pay for them, a wealth limit is required. If someone makes six digits a year they should be able to pay or help pay for their own kids college.
Small stores are important for numerous reasons, not only do they bring more diversity to a market they also usually provide more jobs and closer community interaction. Think about it this way, a 25% tax cut is given if someone opens a business, if they manage to keep that business open for lets say five years they get a sum of money. The US government did something similar to encourage Western immigration.
| 18643 - Réponse de Gianna107 , 24 ans (US) - 2021-07-28 >> NEW|
|If people have given up hope for change or it is the norm for them, it shows they don't really care enough about it to try to strike/boycott. If the people don't think it's that big of an issue, then why should we get the government to stop it?
That is a good idea about military budgeting.
Can you explain your idea about a basic healthcare system available to all Americans?
Also, about the college funding thing, or unemployment, or anything where you receive help financially (I know we have stopped discussing this, but I have done more research on it). After looking at many articles and statistics, I believe that if someone can't afford something, they should go to their family. If the family can't help, they can turn to their community. If the community can't help, go to the county. Then state. Then federal government. I think you shouldn't go to the federal government right away.
Why do you want to subsidize the creation of small and medium businesses?
| 18641 - Réponse de Jack100 , 16 ans (USA) - 2021-07-20 |
|Perhaps, yet we have not seen any major strike or protest in recent years, perhaps people have given up hope for change or it is not the norm for them.
I agree, both of my parents didn't get vaccinated for another 1 1/2 months after they were eligible for it due to uncertainty on it's safety.
Well I am not squashing the military budget, once you take off some of the funds going to our forces in other countries you will have quite a chunk of money to work with. Using some of that to finance my changes, while the rest leaves the budget is my idea.
| 18640 - Réponse de Gianna50 , 24 ans (US) - 2021-07-19 |
|I understand what you mean about striking, but I think there is a point where the people need to fight for what is right. You have said that the government would want to get the mines started again quickly, so I think in this case it is up to the people of WV to do what they think is right.
I agree with you about corruption and not interfering too much.
My mother has told me that even people who are vaccinated have been getting cases of COVID due to the delta variant, but the number of deaths and hospitalizations has been going down. There is no way to get rid of all COVID in the world. No vaccine can do that. And it is still very early in the vaccination to be having EVERYONE vaccinated. Vaccinations started coming out in January, I believe, and I wouldn't be surprised if many people were nervous to get it due to its newness. I know plenty of parents who don't vaccinate their children/themselves against certain things if they don't think they will pay off/have more trouble than it's worth. The most important people have been vaccinated, and when the media is always watching the case numbers and commenting on it, it is always going to seem high. The US is doing very well compared to places like Russia where the citizens don't trust the government enough for many of them to get their vaccine.
Just wondering, how do you intend to lower the military budget when including more therapist, psychological, etc. services?
| 18639 - Réponse de Jack100 , 16 ans (USA) - 2021-07-18 |
|Yes, but if someone is living on welfare they might get desperate and work despite it being morally incorrect. Strikes have happened though it really takes the state or Federal government to really do anything to regulate the companies more, something They haven't done.
Socialism/Communism don't always mean corruption, though they usually go hand in hand. I don't think we should destabilize any more governments though, we should give the people the means and tools to improve their country and send it in the direction they want it to go rather than us doing it for them and doing what we think is best.
Your mother has an important job. Currently (I believe) a third of the population is not vaccinated, and Covid cases are rising again due to the delta variant. If they were vaccinated I don't think we would be having this issue again. Of course we can't vaccinate young children, sorry I forgot to mention that, and because of that if someone really can't receive the vaccine I don't think they should be barred.
| 18638 - Réponse de Gianna50 , 24 ans (US) - 2021-07-18 |
|But if people in WV boycotted the products because they were awful, and some of the workers went on strike, wouldn't that result in almost no one joining the company? Anyone who had the water would know that it is bad, and anyone who didn't have it would probably hear it from friends/family.
So corruption is the result of socialism/communism is what I am getting from what you said. By the CIA destabilizing corrupt governments and helping to stabilize new ones, corruption would be more easily solved.
I know this was for Addison, but I don't think the whole population needs to be vaccinated, nor do I think that people should be barred from entering a place if they aren't (obviously if someone is not feeling well they shouldn't be going out, but that is just common sense). It would be like banning a person who has not had their measles vaccine from public places. My mother works for the DIA in a field of infectious diseases, and has told me many a time that children passing COVID to other people is very unlikely, especially if they are asymptomatic (the same applies for other ages as well, though children have the lowest chance of passing it on). However, if they are symptomatic, they shouldn't be going out anyways as the best treatment for any sickness is to lie in bed and drink ginger ale and watch hours of television.
| 18637 - Réponse de Jack100 , 16 ans (USA) - 2021-07-18 |
|Thank you again. I do hope to become one eventually.
Yes, I know some people do use gofundme to gain access to college, it isn't a bad idea.
West Virginia has a moderate union size with 10% of the population being in a union, however that isn't all just coal mining. 4.6% of the population of WV is unemployed, roughly 82,432 people. While 14,000 WV work in the coal business, if they go on strike there are more than enough fresh manpower for the company to grab and use.
Large amounts of funds are often stolen by local officials. In Guatemala, despite great gains many of the wealthy have impunity and are even trying to corrupt the system more.
Despite my views being left leaning I wouldn't run as a Democrat simply because I cannot stand the parties hypocrisy and corruption (the same applies the the Republican party as well). Running as an independent is risky because you lack the support of a pre-established party, so perhaps a run as a Green candidate would be best. However, I can't foresee the future and anything could change, already cracks are forming within the Democratic and Republican coalition parties. The Democrats splintering between the Liberals and Progressives and the Republicans splitting between the Libertarians, Moderate Conservatives and other smaller groups. However unless the electoral college disappears I don't think we will see any smaller party gain power.
While I am fully vaccinated, and I believe the entire populace should be vaccinated, it is the persons individual choice. However, the person should know that if they are barred from entering stores, or school that is on them. They always have a choice and they made it now they have to live with the consequences. It's like a no shoes, no shirt, no service policy.
I don't think defunding the police is the right idea, their funds should be allocated to better training, education and professionalism instead of being a small army. This would cut back on violence and if the police actual know how to properly behave things might get better. (Trust me I met this one police officer once who could use a few hundred hours of gun safety training).
If your wondering about my view on Biden... I think he is fine, but I personally would have prefered someone younger and stronger such as Pete Buttigeg or Andrew Yang. I think Kamala Harris as president would also have made a good choice, I think she will be Biden's successor because I don't think he will run for president again.
| 18636 - Réponse de Gianna50 , 24 ans (US) - 2021-07-17 |
|You are a very smart boy, Jack. I wouldn't be surprised if one day you do become a politician.
I can definitely see why having more convenient ways for college is very important to you. Nowadays with technology I feel like there should be something like the "GoFundMe" site for colleges, where it is easier for college students to get the money they need and it wouldn't be forced through taxes.
I'm from Pennsylvania, and we have a lot of coal up here. Isn't there a way WV could still strike and boycott the unsafe products and get products from other states instead?
You have very good ideas for helping to stop immigration. Can you please give me some examples of corruption?
I wouldn't necessarily say your media idea is horrible. I would just say that there are a lot of people who don't like having an overly loud media to deal with a lot.
| 18635 - Réponse de Addison60 , 12 ans (USA) - 2021-07-17 |
|Question(s): would you be running as Republican, Democrat, Independent, etc. What are your views on the current situation of the country? I am a conservative, personally, so I would like to see where you stand on some of these issues.|
| 18633 - Réponse de Jack100 , 16 ans (USA) - 2021-07-17 |
|Thank you, my father was never able to attend college, not because he wasn't intelligent enough to do so but because he was never able to afford it. Due to that it is a personal issue to me.
The issue in West Virginia is that inhumane and unsafe mining is more efficient than safely mining and because of that a lot of companies besides for a few who are willing to get their hands dirty are kicked out. Sure people could strike and boycott their products, but a lot of the jobs in WV are from the coal business and it is also crucial to American power so the government would be hasty to get the mines running again.
I agree, I wrote a thesis about Media bias for my final this year and I came to the conclusion that while media is biased, it isn't as biased as many say. It simply offers different viewpoints from thousands of different people on a subject (maybe some of these people are insane *Alex Jones*) but nonetheless media simply is perspective until propaganda gets mixed in.
In C. & S. America a major drive for emigration is government instability, safety concerns and poverty/lack of jobs. The CIA have routinely throughout history destabilized governments within the regions and thus, I wouldn't be surprised if they are still doing it. Remove that and begin trying to stabilize governments. Corruption is an issue I haven't exactly figured out an answer to yet.
Yeah, my media plan does have issues and is probably a horrible idea. One thing I definitely have to say is that Trump did help stabilize one region of the Middle East.
| 18632 - Réponse de Gianna50 , 24 ans (US) - 2021-07-17 |
|I know that there are really bright, intelligent, hard-working students out there like you, but I still think that having taxes for other people's schooling is not the best idea. I really do applaud you and wish I had been as diligent as you when I was 16. I really think that while the government tries to do this to help include people who aren't as successful, I feel that it isn't their job to provide education to unsuccessful families. Once again, I feel that you should have the option to help fund (almost like a collection box at Church) someone else's education. I am no politician (I'm a nurse), however, and my parents began to save for my and my siblings' educations from the time we were born, so my opinions on this might not be the best. I apologize.
I was not aware what was happening in WV. That is horrible. A government program such as the FDA (one that I-a major germaphobe-actually like) really should look into this. Although, I do feel that sole-proprietorships or partnerships might be more careful with this. If something is wrong with their product, people simply refuse to buy it and their business goes down, hinting to them that something is awry.
Perhaps I have heard too much conservative news at my parents' house, as I have definitely heard some countries in Europe referred to as "socialist" before. It is hard finding a balance between the left and right, and knowing what is true and what isn't. Do you have any particular things you want to do in other countries to help solve immigration problems?
It is definitely difficult trying to figure out what is too much involvement in other countries where terrorists and other bad people are trying to do bad things. It doesn't feel right to leave Afghanistan without much help against the enemies, but at the same time it is their country and sometimes the USA needs to stay out. A good example of why we should still help, however, is when recently (in the past year, I believe) Trump helped make some peace among Israel and some gulf countries, which hadn't been at peace for a very long time. About the media, infiltrating their media is definitely a low and deceitful action, but trying to overpower theirs with our own might just get a little bit annoying. I typically don't like hearing the media too much, as it is often very biased towards a party as well as false in one form or another, and sometimes hearing the media can just get annoying.
| 18631 - Réponse de Jack100 , 16 ans (USA) - 2021-07-16 |
|I do, I work 25 hours a week to prepare for it and already have $5000 in scholarships. Just because I want free college doesn't necessarily mean I want it because I am lazy. I think we have to factor in people who are not as successful as I am, it doesn't mean they are stupid, most of the time people like myself take the scholarships and leave behind nothing for them. Even if it is a close race I end up almost paying all of college off, even more so not every community is rich enough to ascend a group of kids to college level.
Corporations do have a lot of oversight, but once again look at West Virginia where water supplies are often poisoned by coal mining companies (not purposely) but they don't care the human cost to their endeavors.
I agree killing is wrong, that's why I hate war. But I stand by my words that women should be able to decide for themselves.
The amount of people fleeing Europe because of socialism is very little, and may I add Europe isn't socialist. They primarily have a social-capitalist hybrid Democracy, which while it is very left leaning is definitely not the envisioning of Karl Marx. Most seem quite content with their current system. China is obviously a different example because most of those that leave are searching for freedom. Our national debt is definitely something we need to cut back on.
Afghanistan is a tough question and one I have always pondered. I don't believe we should have gotten ourselves involved in a war there. But, I still think we should be helping the government we set up, the video of the Afghan commandos solidified that belief. I don't think attacking their media is the right solution, but if we can overpower it with ours that will fix the problem.
| 18630 - Réponse de Gianna50 , 24 ans (US) - 2021-07-16 |
|I still feel that you should pay off your college debt yourself (or your family and community and people who are willing to help). I think that it should be optional, rather than necessary by taxes, to help fund other peoples' educations.
I apologize... I did not think about things like roads and power grids. I do realize that government involvement is necessary in some cases, but I feel that the government nowadays takes their role too far very often. Though I would like to point out that corporations have a lot of oversight from the government.
I agree that we should pull some troops out of Germany. 40,000 is too much. I was not aware that there were that many in Germany. I do think we should keep high numbers in places such as Iraq and Afghanistan or other places that are likely to be attacking.
About military propaganda, I don't think we should do anything to Iran for calling us terrorists. We call them terrorists, and it's not like we can go and take over their media. I think that is a different country, and they obviously will have different views. However, if our country is calling US troops terrorists, something is certainly wrong.
My thoughts on abortion is that it is wrong no matter your religion. It is murder. I believe that if women aren't ready to have children, they shouldn't be having (you can call me a wimp for saying this) you-know-what. Once pregnant, a woman isn't only choosing what they want for their body. They are choosing for both bodies, and no matter your religion, killing is wrong.
I don't know what to do about immigration myself, but I would like to point out that a lot of people leave their countries for the freedom the US has. Many countries in Europe are socialist, China is communist, no one wants to live in Iraq or Afghanistan or any places involved in the gulf war for obvious reasons. I think that a lot of people leave their homes for the freedom, freedom that has been kept for almost 250 years. It would be difficult to improve the government of their own countries. But in places such as countries in Africa where it is difficult to live, I would say helping them and improving their country would be a good solution. But one thing to keep in mind is that the USA already has a $28.2 trillion debt.
| 18629 - Réponse de Jack100 , 16 ans (USA) - 2021-07-15 |
|I would agree by saying people would be bums and manipulate the system, but there are things that people manipulate in every system. During the 60's and 70's China faced a predicament of what you are describing, everyone didn't want to work because they got things even if they didn't and because of that China made capitalist reforms. But, they have free education in China and their students perform better than ours (admittedly the are an authoritarian police state) but if people have incentives to do something such as a good job after college they will try hard to do so.
I disagree that privatizing everything is a good idea, I feel that is setting the room for disaster. Power grids, roads, bus lines, libraries, and museums would all start falling into disrepair or close without massive local works being done. You would be putting a monopoly on American life in the hands of corporations who would probably seize this opportunity to take over these services for their own benefit. What happens to the highways? Who takes care of that, they are payed for by the public after all. I don't trust the government much, but I trust corporations less (look at West Virginia and their struggle against corporate power).
I agree, we shouldn't pull too many out but I don't think we need 40,000 troops in Germany. My thoughts on military benefits come from the fact that after the Vietnam was thousands of veterans never received funds for being in contact with agent orange and many are dying from cancer. The same applies to various things in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars such as hearing loss.
The propaganda is something I noticed recently, but it is primarily pushed forward by anti-US media, in articles they tend to loosely use the word terrorist and American soldier together. I mean Iran declared all American soldiers terrorists a few years ago. I think American soldiers are hero's and that as will all groups there are a few bad apples that need to be casted out.
I feel like abortion is immoral (from a religious standpoint), but I think women should have the right to choose what they want with their bodies. However I think abstinence, education and safety is the best way to decrease the amount of abortions needed. But also as I said earlier I don't think religion should be forced upon others, and as such we shouldn't use religious reasons to inflict mass change.
| 18628 - Réponse de Gianna50 , 24 ans (US) - 2021-07-15 |
|I should have specified... By "dressed as a female" I meant doing things like plastic surgery and also just pretending you are a female in general when you are not. It is unnatural to pretend to be the other gender on the daily basis and actually considering yourself to be the other gender.
So regarding education.... I am not a huge fan of having it being a public service. My family was homeschooled due to our having to move every few years, and we still had to pay taxes to the public schools even though our family had nothing to do with them. We didn't participate in public school sports or any classes or any evaluators. In general, I find public services to be slightly unjust. You could be paying for a child to go to school, but the child could be lazy and won't try to do well, as their family won't be the one paying for their schooling. I find this to be an example of socialism. Someone could be giving their money to the government to redistribute "equally" among everybody. So someone who worked hard all their life would be as poor as a lazy bum who didn't work a day of his life. The incentives to be successful is much lower in almost everything provided by the government. Personally, I think your family and community of friends/neighbors who are willing to will be happy to help if a good family needs help.
I don't think pulling too many troops out of foreign territory is a good idea. Having troops in foreign territory typically helps prevent terrorist attacks in places such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, and other places that are involved in the gulf war. And having military families in bases in other countries (Japan, Germany, England, Singapore, etc.) helps build better relations with those countries. Veterans already get a generous pension for their services as well as healthcare. I would also make the psychological help optional, as some of the military who works in the intelligence field, for example, might not need any. We had pretty good wages. Can you please tell me about all the military propaganda? I never heard of that happening. I thought troops were seen as heroes.
Just curious, what are your views on abortion?
| 18627 - Réponse de Jack100 , 16 ans (USA) - 2021-07-15 |
|Throughout history women and men have dressed similarly or very differently, I mean (to me at least) a tunic is too different from a dress and the clothing worn in the 1600's to 1700's was 'female' as well (tights, skirts). So I am not understanding how a man wearing a dress is unnatural as men have worn similar things throughout history.
In my plan it would be a public service, just like primary education. Since other people are paying for a stranger's kid to be educated, is it that different from free college? I see free college as an extension of primary education, and the general state of mind is that the new college graduates will help expand the economy which will help put the money back into the pockets of those who payed for it. Also, while the older population won't benefit from this, it allows for the future generations too and they will face less stigma to it because they got into college for free, and are now paying for another kid. It is a fair deal in my opinion.
If we pull out troops from military conflicts and foreign territory, I think we can decrease our military budget without cutting into pre-existing programs. However I don't think skinning the budget entirely is the right idea, and that a portion of those funds should go to pensions for veterans, healthcare for veterans (which includes psychological help as well) and reintegrating them with the public. Another thing would be increased wages. I think more needs to be done in regards to improving American troops image, instead of being demonized by media and foreign propaganda.
Please tell me about your views, I am interested to hear them. Also, I thank you family for their service.
| 18626 - Réponse de Gianna50 , 24 ans (US) - 2021-07-15 |
|I feel that the best idea about the wolves is to fund farmers to put up better defenses against the wolves. It involves government involvement, but not too much, and it is easily done.
I still think vitro fertilization is very unnatural. You are taking sperm a male who you don't know. I believe that the only way that is fruitful is if the marriage can sexually produce children, sperm from the husband and the ova from the wife. And I don't approve of infertile couples using vitro either.
In my eyes, there are only two genders; male and female. You are your biological gender. Transgender people who choose to be male still have the same equal rights as every other female. I believe that transgender people are put aside as "different" because it is unnatural for someone who is biologically male to be walking around dressed as a female. So I feel that whatever was ratified during the women's rights movement still applies today, and transgender people are equal to their original gender (or in my opinion, should be, but given some sensitive respect due to their evidently deflated self-esteem.
I do believe that everyone should be able to receive a college education, but when you make it "free", it is other people in the country who are forced to pay money for someone's college. I feel that if someone goes to college before they are able to pay for it, they should pay it off over time with the money they earn from jobs, which will typically pay higher if you are college educated. And the incentives to do well are higher when you know that paying the debt is on you.
What are your ideas for changing the military? As someone who was in a Navy family, I feel I can give you some first hand advice.
| 18625 - Réponse de Jack100 , 16 ans (USA) - 2021-07-15 |
|Yellowstone is only ~3,500 sq. miles, so only a few wolf packs could really live there. To answer that question we have to look at history, the federal and state governments didn't regulate or involve themselves with a lot of early hunting and wolves, mountain lions, beavers and coyotes were all almost exterminated in the mid 1800's during our push West. I would argue no government regulation is not the right course of action because at least you could ensure a portion of the population could survive. Or we could actually fund farmers to put up better fences and stop this deal entirely (but killing a few hundred wolves is cheaper than putting up a decent fence so you can expect the ranchers to be in arms about that).
When it comes to invitro it isn't unnatural by some senses you could say, you are simply given the sperm of a man. Sure the process isn't done naturally but child is born naturally and the sperm isn't created using chemicals, it is natural as well. It is common even with straight couples if the husband is infertile.
I heard a saying while I was researching the women's rights movement a while back, "Different but equal." it was a term used by people who were against the movement to try to defend the inequality between the two genders. Obviously that wasn't true, women at the time were not equal to men in many ways, but the same debate is sort of re-emerging today. Are transgender people equal to others, or is it the same "different but equal" saying?
We could debate other things, energy, government budget, foreign policy...
| 18624 - Réponse de Gianna50 , 24 ans (US) - 2021-07-14 |
|I feel that with all the government land (I am not sure how big Yellowstone is, or other national parks) they may be able to contain wolves on that land. I don't particularly care for my Yellowstone idea, myself, but if there is no other way to save the wolves, it is okay. I feel that the solution to the wolf problem, however, is simply to stop government involvement in it. I feel that if Idaho hadn't allowed its citizens to kill 90% of the wolves, there would be more wolves. I think that if the government doesn't get involved, the wolves might have a higher chance of survival. I know it sounds weird, but I feel that the people in Idaho have almost a pressure to kill 90% of wolves. Or, again I am against government taking this much action, states can lower the percentage of wolves that can be killed.
I looked up the word "equal" in my dictionary and it says "adj. 1 of the same amount, size, or value 2 having the same rights, ability, or position. n. any person or thing that is equal. v. to be equal to; match"
I believe that a transgender person who chooses to be a boy would have more rights than a girl who remains a girl, as the transgender girl would have the option to join the boys' sports team. A transgender person who is originally a girl is still equal to a girl. And if someone sees themselves as female and can't join the team of someone who is biologically female, the person who sees themselves as female has all the same rights as every other biological male. A biological and not transgender male is not allowed to join a different gender's team, and when it comes down to it, a transgender person is still their same gender.
Yes, I think at this point we will have to agree to disagree about marriage. But to comment on your statements, someone who isn't married can still make it to heaven. In marriage it is just being an extra "support buddy" to your spouse to help them get to heaven. And with vitro fertilization, is the marriage truly fruitful? Or is it going to unnatural means to get a child?
I am rather sad that we are starting to end our debate. If there is anything else you want to debate about, I would be happy to do so. Or if you want my REF number, I can give you it.
| 18623 - Réponse de Jack100 , 16 ans (USA) - 2021-07-13 |
|I agree, but often throughout the bible god has acted because of humanity, not as if their was a predestined path. The Tower of Babel, the great flood, Adam and Eve's exile... Sometimes I think god leaves our future up to us, and he only acts to save us from our own demise. Due to that I think fighting climate change is up to us.
Well that is the problem, sure you can add wolves to Yellowstone but the more wolves there are the less prey their will be to share between them. The wolves starve and die soon after. So they need land to themselves, some wolf packs territories extend over a 1000 sq. miles. Keeping them penned in will be almost impossible as well. Besides wolves are necessary even in places they are hunted to lower the prey species populations as when they grow to large they can also damage an ecosystem. Everything needs to be in equilibrium.
Being equal (in my perspective) means that a person is deemed as the same in terms of rights to all others. If a person see's themselves as female, and is unable to play on a female team, do they have the same right as someone who is biologically female who is. Equal doesn't always mean the same, on a balance scale you can have two 5 pound weights to one ten pound weights. They are equal but sometimes it doesn't mean they both get one law or option.
I suppose when it comes down to marriage we will have to agree to disagree... however if a marriage leads your family to heaven and homosexuals cannot marry then how are they meant to get to it? Also, homosexual relations can still be fruitful, gay women can get in vitro fertilization and lead a fruitful life.
| 18622 - Réponse de Gianna50 , 24 ans (US) - 2021-07-12 |
|Thank you for letting me know that my message wasn't appearing. Perhaps I accidentally x'd out instead of pressing "Ok, Publish."
While the idea of global warming does scare me sometimes, I have to believe that a lot of it comes from the media, which has been known to exaggerate often. I understand that the world is heating, but I believe that it will cool down again. The world has gone through ice ages, so perhaps it is going through a -what should I call it- steam age. I know it will be very rough for a while, but it's in God's hands and humanity will make it through.
I do not agree with hunting wolves for no particular reason. I don't believe people should be killing wolves like that. What if the government tried to repopulate wolves on national land, where people can't kill them?
May I ask why someone being on their chosen gender's team is equal? I believe that it is equal when everyone on the team is the same gender. I don't really see how it is equal for a transgender person to be on their chosen gender's team.
I might be wrong here, but I was under the assumption that US laws were based on Christian moral law? A sin is a deliberate thought, word, deed, or omission that hurts God and others. If you believed that a homosexual marriage was a sin, and did it anyways, it would be living a life of sin. Marrying someone you don't truly love because you are afraid to come out is also an ill-advised thing to do, which is why the Catholic Church recommends and supports homosexually oriented people to live a life of chastity. God would certainly not smile down on anyone dishonoring or being prejudiced against LGBTQ+ members, and He loves them the same as the rest of us. LGBTQ+ members can still be a part of the Church and the Church tries its best to help them. In the mid-1970s, the Vatican recognized the difference between being homosexual and engaging in homogenital (same-sex) acts. Catholic teaching holds that, as a state beyond a person’s choice, being homosexual is not wrong. But just as it is wrong for unmarried heterosexuals to engage in sex, so, too, homogenital acts are wrong.
My family and the Church always told me that marriage was to create new life as well as lead your spouse and children to Heaven. Gay couples, therefore, are not fruitful. I do believe, however, that adoption should be available for single LGBTQ+ and not LGBTQ+ people. Adopting a child, in my opinion, is very difficult (there are too many limitations) and expensive to do, thus the reason more heterosexual families don't do it. My family wanted to adopt, but since we were military and moving around a lot we weren't able to, and then when my father retired and we looked into adopting again, we realized that our home (four children, three of which had mental illnesses, and a mother and a father) was too small and chaotic to ever be allowed to adopt a child.
I am rather enjoying this too. I'd say it is beneficial to see other people's points of view. This is helping me understand some things that I hadn't considered before.
| 18621 - Réponse de Jack100 , 16 ans (USA) - 2021-07-12 |
|I am not seeing your message|
| 18620 - Réponse de Gianna50 , 24 ans (US) - 2021-07-12 |
|I did write a reply but I don't see it above your message. Please tell me if it didn't send.|
| 18619 - Réponse de Jack100 , 16 ans (USA) - 2021-07-12 |
|I too believe nature will fight for itself, but I worry not for nature but for humans. Lets make the human body an analogy for nature, when a virus or infection upsets its homeostasis our body increases it's temperature to kill the invader. While humans are far more durable than a virus, a change of five degrees won't kill us, what will will come next. So the Earth is hot and the virus still isn't dead, but since it is hotter (the heat caused by more C02 due to less trees and more pollution) more water evaporates which further thickens Earths atmosphere. This cycle continues as the Earth gets hotter and hotter, rainfall slows. Places that were already arid become deserts and places like Africa practically become unlivable due to a lack of water to farm and lack of land to support such a large population. So they flee to places like America where we are currently dealing with wildfires and water issues as well, and we cannot support these people. Things get violent, things turn to anarchy. Nature or humanity isn't going to die, but things will be very rough for a very long time.
I agree that they probably wouldn't but logging companies, mining companies and farmers will still want some of this new land and cut down said trees. So Idaho signed a bill that allowed for 90% of the wolf population to be killed, no questions asked how it is done or where. Whats worse is that millions of dollars were spent to bring them up their their current numbers only for them to be slaughtered again.
Definitely, someone who is trans will always biologically be their birth gender, it is something people cannot change. I disagree, if trans people were allowed to play as their gender, then that would be equal as they would be considered who they are. Fair would be not allowing them to join other teams because of their inherent physical strength that often surpasses that of someone who is biologically female.
For the marriage question it comes down to the old debate "Do we base our laws on Christianity or are we a secular nation" Also, what is worse? Sinning once by marrying another person of the same gender, or sinning everyday because you are uncomfortable with coming out and lie everyday to say you are not homosexual. I also don't think god would smile kindly upon preventing people from a part of religion just because of who they love. Also I think a same-sex marriage can be fruitful, sure they usually cannot have kids, but they can adopt (something a lot of heterosexual marriages do not do because they already have kids)
Also, I have to say I am enjoying having a debate with someone about issues that is calm and hasn't devolved into a screaming match.
| 18618 - Réponse de Gianna50 , 24 ans (US) - 2021-07-11 |
|The government owns a large amount of land in the USA and takes many means to protect the trees on their land. I believe that ranchers, as they don't value trees very much besides, perhaps, shade for their cattle, wouldn't buy land with as many trees (as it would take up some of their land they wanted for cattle) and if their trees died, it would not be as many. And with national parks that the government has control over, I believe that we won't lack too many trees. It is the life cycle, and trees have survived much longer than any of us have been alive. Surely Emerald Ash Borers wouldn't kill off the whole tree population. While I do care about the environment some, I firmly believe that nature has and will continue to fight for itself for many years.
Hunting animals off your property is a debate in my mind. It is hard because my mind tells me that people simply shouldn't do it, but I know that a lot of folks will choose to hunt animals off their property. I also don't want the government to have too much power, however, as that could lead to many future problems. Do you know if the people who kill the wolves (ones that haven't strayed onto their property) do so close to their property or just whenever they see them? I could be completely wrong, but in the scene that is in my head I see ranchers killing wolves that are coming close to their property, so as to stop the problem before it arises. But I don't know for sure and I was wondering if you could give me more input.
I can also see both sides of the argument on transgender people being able to play sports, but I do believe that even when you say you are transgender, you are still your original gender. You might identify as a male or female, but biologically you aren't. It all comes down to your chromosomes.... Males have an X and Y, and females have an X and X. Equality comes in where you know everyone on the team has the same gender as you, and I believe it is more fair/equal to have transgender people playing on their original gender's team than having them play on their chosen gender's team.
I do not believe that workplaces should be firing workers for their sexual orientation. I feel that in most places the policy should be "Don't ask, don't tell" unless you trust the person to still understand that you can't help your sexual orientation. If I were a business owner in that situation, I would still believe that a marriage is between and man and a woman and disagree if they are in a romantic relationship with someone of the same gender, but I would not fire them for something they cannot help.
Here is something that I base a marriage off of:
"Marriage is the beginning—the beginning of the family—and is a life-long commitment. It also provides an opportunity to grow in selflessness as you serve your wife and children. Marriage is more than a physical union; it is also a spiritual and emotional union. This union mirrors the one between God and His Church."
"In the Catholic Church, marriage, also known as holy matrimony, is the 'covenant by which a man and woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life and which is ordered by its nature to the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring', and which 'has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament between the baptised.' "
Again, I know that I am probably very biased to my Catholic faith, but a marriage needs to be fruitful, and a marriage between the same gender is not so. I would not call myself homophobic, as I am not violently against gay marriages and I understand their points of view.
| 18616 - Réponse de Jack100 , 16 ans (USA) - 2021-07-11 |
|True, your explanation of how decreasing federal lands is a solution, is something I find agreeable. I will have to think about that more.
However, the Emerald Ash Borer kills trees and I don't think ranchers have much use for trees on their property in general. Also,soil degradation is still a thing and with cattle leaving the plains bare of grasses causes immense erosion and is a factor which caused the Dust bowl during the 1930's.
I agree that if an animal is attacking someone's property they have a right to defend it, however the hunting of the wolves does not just include that. They are allowed to purge those that haven't even bothered their property yet.
Admittedly my thoughts on transgender people in sports are still not fully developed. I can see both sides of the argument and I think it inevitably comes down to "are we an equal country, or a fair country?" If we were equal then of course I think transgender kids should be allowed on other teams, but if we are a fair country they shouldn't because it wouldn't be fair for some people (yet it also wouldn't be fair for them).
Why LGBTQ+ are being fired from their jobs is primarily due to homophobia I believe, their employers simply don't like them because they are homosexual. So they find illegitimate reasons to fire them. It is interesting seeing a difference in our believes despite us both being Christian, though I can see that being caused by myself being a Methodist. The main problem I do have with your beliefs is marriage, since to me they still deserve (at least for legal reasons) to be able to be classified as married since it is important when it comes to... lets say adoption.
| 18614 - Réponse de Gianna50 , 24 ans (US) - 2021-07-11 |
|Not all the lands they maintain include places like Yellowstone. Personally I think that they could still own enough land yet not destroy national parks like Yellowstone. I also believe that if someone owns that property and raises an important commodity on it, they will be eager to get rid of insects such as emerald ash borers. It is their land and they would face the consequences.
As for hunting animals, I also believe that you can set up precautions to stop them from coming in to attack your cattle. And again if it is private property, and the predators freely roam onto their land, I feel that they can try to dispose of the animal (though personally I would try to set up better fences, barns, etc. before trying to kill the animal, but to each their own.)
Thank you for pointing out that about the ranchers' powers. I didn't think about that before. I agree with you that it is corrupt, but on the other hand if they decide to stop providing the nation with beef, they won't be gaining money and their business reputation will be scarred. And with fish, ham, and chicken along with beef that take up most of the country's meat, I believe that Americans would not starve.
My point of view regarding LGBTQ+, which is probably very much so based on my Catholic religion, is that yes, you can love anybody, and you should love everybody, but a marriage is in between a man and a woman, and if you aren't married but are involved sexually with one another it is adultery. So in my view, LGBTQ+ shouldn't be a community of people who are sexually engaged with people of the same gender, but perhaps people who struggle with the sexual orientation of people of the same gender, and they can support each other to get through a life of chastity.
Transgender people still have the bodily functions and hormones of their original gender. This would make it rather dangerous for themselves or other people on a sports team of one gender. For example, if a female pretends she is a boy and joins a boy sports team, she might be seriously injured going against much stronger and differently built boys, as well as not being as good of a player, since after many years boys are simply faster and stronger than girls. And if a man pretends he is a girl and joins a girl sport team, they might injure other females and also have the unfair advantage of being faster and stronger. Not being able to go into a bathroom of their new "adopted" gender I feel is a lot fairer to people who have remained their gender in the bathroom. It would practically be the same thing as a boy going into a girls' bathroom or a girl going into a boys' bathroom.
May I ask why LGBTQ+ are fired from their jobs simply because of their gender? I don't see that as being fair myself, as it would be the same thing as a straight man or woman being fired because of their gender, and LGBTQ+'s sexual orientation is no business of their workplace.
And as for the military, until recently being gay was against the US law, so if someone was gay in the military, it would mean they were breaking the law. That's where the phrase "Don't ask, don't tell" came in, so that gay people in the military wouldn't be fired due to their sexual orientation, which no one can help.
Note, when I say sexual orientation I am referring to the gender they are attracted to. By sexual behaviors I mean acting romantically around one another.
| 18612 - Réponse de Jack100 , 16 ans (USA) - 2021-07-11 |
|While that certainly is a possible solution, these lands include areas such as Yellowstone. By removing federal control of these regions can prove disastrous for the local environment. While in the bigger picture it does look small, it opens paths for other animals or plants to take over due to the absence of a natural "immune system". Insects such as the Emerald Ash borer have already devastated some American forests, which then hurts our lumber industry. It is a domino effect.
That isn't exactly what I am suggesting, I do not care or plan to enforce where you can and cannot raise cattle, that is a major overstep of government authority to me. However, just because you choose to raise cattle in a certain region; knowing that there is a chance for attacks on your animals shouldn't grant you special privileges to hunt animals.
The way they have power is this: They provide most of the meat that feeds the US, importing it isn't easy and because of that thirty or so companies can consolidate control over the industry; killing smaller honest ranchers. If you control the food supply of a country you essentially control the country. Obviously they are not starving us or forcing us directly, but their immense wealth gained from their beef monopoly allows them to easily buy out state and federal congressmen. I think both of us can agree both aisles of our government is very corrupt.
By LGBTQ+ rights I don't just mean rights, I also mean perception. (I should have specified). For example the US government did not include Xavier Bettels (Luxembourg's president) husbands name from a photo, despite having every other spouses name in 2017. So what rights are they missing? Transgender people (this is still a huge debate) cannot join sports teams, or go to bathrooms of their new gender in many states. Also according to the ACLU many LGBTQ+ are rejected or fired from jobs simply because of their gender, and until recently soldiers couldn't be openly gay.
| 18611 - Réponse de Gianna50 , 24 ans (US) - 2021-07-11 |
|As a conservative, I feel that most of these issues could be solved by not having as much public and taxpayer-paid land, and more private property. I also don't see why they should be limited on what they can do based on where their cattle are raised. And I don't understand how they have more power than the rest of us when we are in a labor union.
Also, what rights do LGBTQ+ people not have?
| 18610 - Réponse de Jack 100 , 16 ans (USA) - 2021-07-10 |
|So in the Western states, including the great plains states and most of the Rocky mountain states large cattle ranches exist. There are quite a few issues that originate from this:
-A it takes more acres of land per cow to raise a cow in the West than the East; this due to a variety of reasons ranging from less nutrients to a different climate.
-Also due to needing more land for cows these cows consume the US government allows them to graze on public land. When these ranchers began to hurt the soil quality and animal life the US government cut them off. In 2014-2017 a series of events took place which included an occupation of a ranger station, the murder of two police officers and for dozens to be injured.
-Due the the necessity for meat, these ranchers hold a strangle hold on the region. Recently wolves made a comeback from local extinction, but ranchers are once again allowed to hunt wolves using all means. (Including helicopters). However in Wisconsin and Michigan out of 8.7 million sheep wolves only killed 3,879 in 2015.
-Ranchers input millions of dollars into lobbying both state and federal governments to give them increased autonomy and to prevent action to change the climate.
While most ranchers are small time and have nothing to do with this, I believe much needs to be done to combat the influence of large ranchers because they are hurting the environment, their political leverage and because they are grazing their cattle on taxpayer property.
| 18609 - Réponse de Gianna50 , 24 ans (US) - 2021-07-10 |
|Please explain to me the western rancher thing.
I personally don't think I'd vote for you but I definitely think a lot of people would. Keep going buddy!
Pro Life or Pro Choice? Reply your answer below.
| 18634 - Réponse de Addison60 , 12 ans (USA) - 2021-07-17 |
|Pro-life- a woman makes her decision when she gets pregnant.|
| 18615 - Réponse de Gianna50 , 24 ans (US) - 2021-07-11 |
|Pro-life, but I believe it is more fitting to call it Pro-Human Rights|
| 18605 - Réponse de Marie50 , 14 ans (USA) - 2021-06-24 |
What do you think of Greta Thunberg?
I think she is a girl used by socialism and communism to make political environmentalism. Personally, I would never support her.
| 18602 - Réponse de L250 (Germany) - 2021-06-22 |
|Hey! i would love to discuss with you about this topic, but could you please support your statement with an argument? Why do you think that she is used by communism?|
| 18600 - Réponse de yangrunze8 , 15 ans (China) - 2021-06-13 |
|HOW DARE YOU!!!|
| 18599 - Réponse de John162 (USA) - 2021-06-13 |
|Yes, you are perfectly right.
Greta Thunberg is a puppet used by the left to gain political acclaim.
I need help again. I'm trying to make a quiz but it says that I need to select all the good answers and I have. Can I have some help here please?
| 18591 - Réponse de Amaani0 (United Kingdom) - 2021-05-08 |
| Ok, I figured it out but I want to know when data base will be available?|
Hi, I'm trying to post a blog on Students of the world but every time I go search my name there's nothing there. I think I'm doing something wrong. Can I have some help please?
| 18561 - Réponse de Amaani0 (United Kingdom) - 2021-04-05 |
| Thank's a lot! I've found it now.|
| 18555 - Réponse de Nicolas152 (webmaster) - 2021-04-03 |
you can find you blogs here: http://www.blog-city.info/pages.php?TRI=5
Direct links :
Hi guys, I want to be a CEO of Technology Company. When I founded a Technology Company and became the CEO of a technology company, I also became a Member of the Indonesian Political Party.
Bonjour Nicolas, j'ai encore besoin de tes conseils. Je ne peux plus accéder à ma boite aux lettres car j'ai changé d'ordinateur et donc d'e-mail. Comment puis-je faire, j'ais deux nouveaux messages qui attendent une réponse. Je te remercie beaucoup.
| 18435 - Réponse de Nicolas126 , 55 ans (Normandie) - 2020-09-03 |
aucune importance si tu as changé d'adresse email. Ton mot de passe n'a pas changé. Il te permettra de modifier ton profil, incluant adresse email, mot de passe ou ce que tu veux.
Si tu as oublié ton MDP, peux-tu m'envoyer un message par e-mail en me rappelant ton N° REF, sur mon adresse : edm.nicolas / free.fr
I did the PC test and my results are:
Economic Left/Right: -6.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.97
which means I'm 6/10 points to the left and 6/10 points to the libertarian.
One day I would want to run for NSW Premier under the Labor Party (my country's centre-left party). I would be running on a platform of
-Investing in Clean Energy
-Increasing Public Transport options
-Increasing rights for LGBTQI+ people
- Setting up a kind of "we are doing this what do u think of it" agency (YourGov)
Would you vote for me? Keeping in mind on the political compass test I identify as Social Democratic
| 18604 - Réponse de John50 , 11 ans (USA) - 2021-06-24 |
|I don't think I'd vote for you. LGBTQ+ is against my religion, and don't they already have enough rights?|
| 18485 - Réponse de Malcolm62 , 12 ans (Australia) - 2020-11-23 |
| Nuclear energy is clean, but I believe that it comes with many problems such as meltdowns. If proven safe, I would push for it, but I'm more concerned with hydro and solar.|
| 18483 - Réponse de Nyx169 (USA) - 2020-11-16 |
|To suggest that I am 'kidding' by addressing the scientific fact that nuclear energy is the only reliable, sustainable energy is neither an argument nor a rebuttal, though I would gladly debate you on the issue. Are you aware of how nuclear energy is created?
A Nuclear reactor creates heat that is used to make steam.
The steam turns a turbine connected to an electromagnet, called a generator.
The generator produces electricity.
Take note that the water has been sterilized by the heat, so not only is it creating energy, it's cleaning our waterways.
| 18472 - Réponse de Nicolas152 (France) - 2020-10-31 |
|Nuclear energy, a clean energy ? Are you kidding, Nyx ?|
| 18464 - Réponse de Nyx169 (USA) - 2020-10-30 |
|You claim to support clean energy. Do you support Nuclear Energy? Because Nuclear is the only source of clean energy that will ever be able to support a nation.|
| 18411 - Réponse de Malcolm181 , 11 ans (Australia) - 2020-06-28 |
| 18408 - Réponse de Alex139 , 16 ans (Great Britain) - 2020-06-27 |
|Perhaps you could also advocate improved rights for differently able (disabled) people and for ethnic minorities?
Probably the most democratic, responsible, useful and popular approach for "your gov" would include inviting opinion on possible future options - "we are considering doing so and so, what do you think?" - as well as comment on decisions already made.
I wish to become a state representative one day though I am just 13 and I am hoping that I can. I was wondering based on this list would you vote for me?
. I believe in God
. I believe families are essential
. I think that everyone is subject to the law
. I have memorized the US constitution and rewritten it in my own words
. I believe everyone should have an equal start in life
. I think that marriage is between a man and a woman
. I Don't encourage the drinking of any strong drinks like Coffe, Tea, Wine, etc.
. I care for others :)
| 18465 - Réponse de Nyx169 (USA) - 2020-10-30 |
|Your position is interesting. You stand for freedom in every respect except strong drink... unless, of course, you simply have an opinion on that matter and do not intend to enact any laws that would inhibit freedom in this regard.
Additionally, the rewriting the Constitution is dangerous to the extreme... do you believe the Constitution is open to interpretation?
| 18437 - Réponse de bubbles202 (USA) - 2020-09-10 |
|hai hai! Personally I wouldn't vote for you either (no offense). Your platform is ok, but I would focus on more politic ideas than peoples drinking choices. Personally coffee is a life saver, and boba is delicious. But that's besides the point I would revise and focus more on what political ideas you have. :)
| 18414 - Réponse de Malcolm181 , 11 ans (Australia) - 2020-07-08 |
|"Your platform is alright," or alt-right badum tsssss|
| 18397 - Réponse de Jack217 , 14 ans (Australia) - 2020-06-09 |
|Your platform is alright, I wouldn't vote for you (thats just my preference, don't feel offended) but you would only really appeal to patriots and conservative to far-right voters. Some things could be different, for example voters aren't going to care if you can recite the constitution or your opinion on strong drinks. Not to be rude but it's just how politics works.|
A friend of mine (female)is in love with my husband. What can I do ? He is so pretty and kind that I understand her but she would be ready to share with me. If I shared of course he would chase me. Can you help me ? Many thanks.
| 18399 - Réponse de Jack143 , 14 ans (Australia) - 2020-06-13 |
|This is the politics board. Sorry to hear that but this is not the best place to post.|
Hi! I'm a 16 year old girl from New Jersey. I am politically conservative/libertarian.
I am pro life, second amendment (arming the citizen population), first amendment (freedom of speech, religion, etc.) and pretty much all of the constitution. I am pro lower taxes and Lasseiz faire economy. I'm pro life. I'm against socialism (including communism). I'm strongly against abortion and third wave feminism. I think any American who thinks they are oppressed is fooling themselves. I'm against government funding (of anything).
I think climate change is inevitable, but humans are vain to think they could do it, let alone "fix" it.
"I may not agree with a word you say, but I'll defend to my death your right to say it."
Please leave your comments below.
| 18601 - Réponse de Marie127 , 14 ans (USA) - 2021-06-18 |
|Personally I agree with all that you said, but I am not sure about arming the population (this may have to do with the fact that I am only 14 lol). I am very much prolife myself. I dunno how to balance out guns because I am very much scared of guns myself and it's just kinda scary to me so I don't know what to say there. Government funding is certainly a problem. Perhaps if they didn't fund so much, more people would be motivated to go get jobs rather than simply decide to live off the government. I have a relative who won't get married because she is getting payments because she is a single mother (the baby daddy is in jail), even though she is living with and has been living with the same guy for many years. I believe in *some* government control, but not very much.
As I said I am very pro life and I believe that if a woman can't help the child, the community and her family can help her. I don't believe that the government should be getting in people's ways of helping their family. And I do look at both sides of the debate.... If a child in a woman's womb isn't really a child, well then it is just 9 more months of carrying it around if you don't do abortion. However, if a child really is a child in a mother's womb, then abortion is murder. Again, there other things you can do with your child than murder if you don't want it.
As a homeschooler I know it is cheaper and a lot better than public schooling. And parents can teach their children morals they want their children to know, and honestly a lot of accidental pregnancies happen in school (or so I've heard from my public schooled friends), therefore getting rid of most debate about abortion as well.
I also believe marriage is between a man and a woman. A marriage must be fruitful, and that means a man and a woman.
Most of this might reflect my Catholic faith, but I stand firm with my beliefs.
| 18597 - Réponse de John161 (Italy) - 2021-06-12 |
|You are completely right!|
| 18521 - Réponse de Mya88 , 17 ans (USA) - 2021-01-28 |
|K, so personally, I think people shouldn't be having sex if they aren't prepared for the possibility of having a child. If, however, someone who can't afford it becomes pregnant, I think the community, not the government, should help her. Murder should never even be on the table as an option.|
| 18520 - Réponse de Kara245 (Australie) - 2021-01-24 |
|I find it kind of curious that you oppose both abortion and government funding. Since financial concerns are one of the factors that lead women to seek abortion, don't you think that providing support for families would help us save some of these babies? Or do you have another solution?|
| 18513 - Réponse de Mya88 , 17 ans (USA) - 2021-01-18 |
|Naomi: k, so no, they aren't contradictions. Guns are as precautions and no one but homicidal maniacs buy guns, not to protect themselves or hunt, but to kill people. The second amendment exists to protect the first amendment. It's the citizens means of staying safe and preventing a totalitarian government from potentially existing.|
| 18512 - Réponse de Mya88 , 17 ans (USA) - 2021-01-18 |
|Nyx: thanks, but hopefully that will never happen.|
| 18493 - Réponse de Jasmine5 , 13 ans (USA) - 2020-12-02 |
|Hi, I am not in agreement with about anything you said, but I wonder if you are religious or not? Did your religious views influence your political views?|
| 18492 - Réponse de Naomi213 (United Kingdom) - 2020-11-27 |
|Ok, so first of all you have completely contradicted you're claim that you're "pro-life" by saying you want to arm the citizen population. Do you realize that this means giving them guns, literally designed to take away lives?!
Secondly, I think abortion is very sad, but by making it illegal many are more likely to try and do it in illegal ways which are far more dangerous than getting it done legally for both the baby you're trying to protect and the mother herself. Furthermore, if someone isn't financially stable I think its wrong to force them into bringing a child into this world, where they don't even know if they would be able to put food on their table. You may say that it is her fault for not using protection but the truth is everyone makes mistakes, and as far as I'm concerned there is not yet a time machine. Plus there are so many circumstances that could have got her into this situation that she had no control over. I think it is a women's choice what she does with her body, and even if you don't agree with, at the end of the day it's her body not yours so you don't get a say in what she decides to do with it.
Thirdly, countries such as Sweden, which have high taxes, are very successful and in my opinion is one of the best places to live. You may think that living in a country where people are dying of hunger on the streets, while meanwhile there are people so insanely rich, like Jeff Bezos. If you think that this is in anyway moral, then I simply don't understand how. I understand that he 'worked hard to earn that money' but I don't think this makes it anymore justifiable, because someone could work just as hard cleaning toilets, earning next to nothing. I'm not saying that people who barely have enough money in the first place must give this away as tax, but there are people who have so much, who just are taxed so little.
About the climate change, if you're not going to listen to the very intelligent scientists, who know far more on this topic than both of us, then that's your idiocy, and I can't really say much to improve that.
You said you don't agree with government funding of anything-I don't completely know what you mean by this. The very roads you drive on are government funded, so are the schools that the majority of the population in America go to. If you want to privatize schools then you seem to think that education is something only to be enjoyed by the privileged/rich. This may not be what you mean I'm not sure. Maybe you are referring to the health care, which is privatized in America. Again, you said you're 'pro-life' but with privatized healthcare, you're implying that medical care (which is needed to keep you alive, fit and healthy) is something only to be used by those who can afford it. If the government funded better sex education and reduced the cost of contraception, this would reduce accidental pregnancies, therefore reducing the amount of abortions, which is literally something you want to decrease.
I'm sure you're a nice person, I just strongly disagree with your political views. :)
| 18466 - Réponse de Nyx169 (USA) - 2020-10-30 |
|I stand and salute you: I sincerely hope you go into politics. The world would be a MUCH better place with people like you in power.|
| 18426 - Réponse de Emirhan40 , 19 ans (Turkey) - 2020-08-03 |
|Hi! I also support weaponization of the population. It's the safest way to protect innocent. I agree with lowering taxes especially it's really high in my country. We should fight against Statism actaully not only socialism. Not only third wave feminism all of political correct people are treat to free world. I'm not fully against government funding programs but most of them are really useless. Actually climate change is inevitable but not with government funded green energy. With economich growth and private funded researchers innovations in green energy we can solve the problem.|
| 18418 - Réponse de Mya88 , 16 ans (Usa) - 2020-07-14 |
| I'm saying no one is oppressed, as in oppressed by the government.|| |