I'm just about done expressing my political thoughts and hopefully today's blogflection is my last for a while.
What the heck is wrong with California voters?
They voted yes for a ballot initiative statute that prohibits the confinement of certain farm animals in a manner that does not allow them to turn around freely, lie down, stand up, and fully extend their limbs.
They voted no for a ballot initiative constitutional amendment that would prohibit abortion for unemancipated minors until 48 hours after a physician notifies the minor’s parent, legal guardian or, if parental abuse has been reported, an alternative adult family member.
Are California voters more concerned about the rights of chicken littles in the animal kingdom than parental rights in the human kingdom? Are they more interested in protecting cows and chickens than unborn infants in mothers' wombs? That's my take on it - the chicken comes before the (human) egg.
It's as preposterous as the infamous 2004 murder trial when Scott Peterson was convicted of second degree murder of the unborn infant in his murdered wife's womb, yet a woman who has an abortion and the abortionist who performs it commits no crime.
Is there any difference between the unborn infant in either mother's womb? None that I can imagine. Something here doesn't pass the smell test.
A trade association executive who has worked the state government legislative arena for over 30 years told me yesterday he wasn't surprised at this dichotomous election outcome. He told me, "it's been this way for a long time because California voters are politically bipolar."
Call the spiritual doctor and pass the moral meds. We need to get healthy before it kills us. We can't afford to be politically bipolar.
Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum
What the heck is wrong with California voters?
They voted yes for a ballot initiative statute that prohibits the confinement of certain farm animals in a manner that does not allow them to turn around freely, lie down, stand up, and fully extend their limbs.
They voted no for a ballot initiative constitutional amendment that would prohibit abortion for unemancipated minors until 48 hours after a physician notifies the minor’s parent, legal guardian or, if parental abuse has been reported, an alternative adult family member.
Are California voters more concerned about the rights of chicken littles in the animal kingdom than parental rights in the human kingdom? Are they more interested in protecting cows and chickens than unborn infants in mothers' wombs? That's my take on it - the chicken comes before the (human) egg.
It's as preposterous as the infamous 2004 murder trial when Scott Peterson was convicted of second degree murder of the unborn infant in his murdered wife's womb, yet a woman who has an abortion and the abortionist who performs it commits no crime.
Is there any difference between the unborn infant in either mother's womb? None that I can imagine. Something here doesn't pass the smell test.
A trade association executive who has worked the state government legislative arena for over 30 years told me yesterday he wasn't surprised at this dichotomous election outcome. He told me, "it's been this way for a long time because California voters are politically bipolar."
Call the spiritual doctor and pass the moral meds. We need to get healthy before it kills us. We can't afford to be politically bipolar.
Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum
3 comments:
Right on. The Colorado voters are mostly the same. We went from red to very blue, thanks in large part to immigrants from California. I don't mind them coming here looking for a better life but they need to leave their liberalism in California before they make the move. Thanks a lot Californians!
Thanks for taking a liberal load off of our California shoulders Charles. Got room for more?
No. I would like to ship them back.
Post a Comment