Blog Stage 4

In the blog that is posted as "The Right Side of Austin", I found an interesting post that was written about the right to firearms. In this post the author copies a letter written by James Johnson comparing Obama care and a potential mandate to obtain firearms. The controversial argument states two things. If Obama can pass a law requiring citizens to purchase health insurance against their will then there should be no hesitation for them to mandate citizens owning firearms. To further support this argument they point out that the Second Amendment states we have the right to bare arms where there is no amendment in regards to having health care. I don't agree with the author of this letter. Johnson states that if you can pass a background check, legislation should mandate that you purchase a firearm. I don't feel the need for everyone to be subjected to a weapon. A background check can't tell you what an individual will due in future circumstances. It doesn't show you what someone is capable of. What is does prove is that everyone has a clear background until they make a wrong choice. Two "sane" people can easily make "insane" decision with a firearm depending on the unpredictable circumstances. We should not give this right to all "innocent" people because you NEVER know what people are capable of doing.

 I think the person who wrote this letter to the editor of Syracuse.com is addressing those who feel the need to be protected at all cost. I do not think that the author makes valid points and shouldn't compromise that of mandating the need for healthcare. I feel the author should have included a point of view based on evidence supporting the differences. I do know one thing, that if there ever were to be a mandate of firearms, we better pray that there is a mandate for healthcare!

 In the article I read in the American Statesman, titled Platform vote on same-sex marriage at Democratic convention called historic, Chuck Lindell argues the topic on same sex marriage being "politically risky" for President Obama to embrace the concept. Since Obama stated in May to embrace same-sex marriage, it has become way more accepted in the United States. He stated that opinion polls showed half of Americans supporting the case, although the other half of the voters are almost equal in opponents to same-sex marriage, and because of that, it remains an issue and is to be considered in this upcoming election by both sides. 

 At the state convention in June, the Texas Democratic Party became the first in a Southern state to approve a platform backing same-sex marriage. At the  Republican National Convention in Florida, delegates approved a platform reaffirming support for a U.S. constitutional amendment that defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman and supporting similar efforts at the state level. 

"Doing the right thing when the right thing is obvious is never risky. My father was born in a segregated country, and Lyndon Johnson did something about it. I was born in a country where gay Americans did not have equality, and this president will do something about it." This quote from a straight gentleman in Austin really took me by surprise but he makes a very good statement. A fact that polls showed in May, Obama took a political hit after announcing his position on same-sex marriage, he still had 13% of America who were more likely to vote for him. 

A lot of this article had more quotes with people's opinions, then clear factual evidence of the authors argument. However I believe that everything that Presidential candidates speak upon could potentially be "politically risky". With the same-sex marriage topic, it is more risky then other cases due to the emotional side of people and it pointing out what is "right" and what is "wrong". I personally think everyone should have their own say in their personal relationships and I am glad this situation is finally being reconsidered in this upcoming election. I hope the states make the "right" decision. We need more equality in this sick country of ours!