Don’t allow the “Hillary Clinton for President” bandwagon to hold you hostage. If you’re an anxious political activist such as myself, you know the importance in voting for the candidate who will lead America—the land of the free.
Here we go. The endless criticism of those opposed to electing Clinton as the nation’s next leader from those women who believe voting for anyone else ordains you as a hypocrite or a traitor to your own kind.
With elections around the corner, women’s political views are being tossed around like a game of hot potato. Just because Clinton is a woman should that make her rightful heir to the presidency of the United States? The answer is no.
Voters hopped on the Obama bandwagon going coo-coo for cocoa puffs towards electing the country’s first African-American president. Yes, Obama has served his country to the best of his abilities, but we will all wonder if McCain could’ve served better had he been given the chance.
It’s not about her political history, her last name or her gender. Clinton shouldn’t reign as our country’s next president just because she’s a woman. The sole factor of a candidate’s sex doesn’t get me going. Would I vote for a better-qualified man versus a woman just because she would be the first female president? Absolutely.
For a start, Clinton’s 1995 declaration in Beijing at the Fourth World Conference on women that said “human rights are women’s rights are one in the same,” has come up in her campaign.
During her term of Secretary of State, her pro-woman efforts put her at the front-line of election season.
She’s simply using being a woman to her advantage as any politician with a brain would.
Yes. Women’s equality is any nation’s best asset. Provided a give-and-take concept, if the government grants women jobs, then they can feed their children and allow them a better education.
However, giving women a political pedestal won’t ensure improved national policies and it definitely won’t make the nation’s economic issues vanish into thin air.
News Star journalist Kathleen Parker is a firm believer of the Clinton campaign. Parker believes Clinton is the face of women’s rights achievements on a global scale.
“If you cannot see the merits of a distaff leader, perhaps you should trade your ovaries for testicle,” Parker said. That’s harsh.
But there’s yet another glitch in Clinton’s campaign. As a woman, ovaries intact, Clinton allows her democratic beliefs to lead the way by not standing up for the one platform that empowers women—reproduction. Clinton supports women’s rights but doesn’t take a stand for pro-life.
Meanwhile, Clinton’s greatest challenge is how to take her campaign to the next level. She is no longer the “female candidate.” Her competitor, Republican preliminary nominee Carly Fiorina, blocks Clinton’s efforts to continue riding the “Elect me for first female president” bus. Fiorina proves to be just as qualified for presidency sisterhood as Clinton.
She’s a well-established and successful CEO and businesswoman, having done campaign work in the past for Republican candidate John McCain in the 2012 presidential election.
Opposed to Parker’s political opinion, Clinton’s ovaries matter no more to me than another’s testicles “if we must stoop to such symbolism.”
The resolution is that there shouldn’t be a “war of women.” Female voters shouldn’t have to be subject to the heat from pro-Clinton lovers. Voters of all races, social classes and genders shouldn’t feel the pressure to vote for Clinton because “women should vote for women.”
The beauty of being a woman allowed to vote in the United States shouldn’t involve a “War of women: Gang up, vote for Clinton” clique, which I agree takes testicles to say.
Now how about those ovaries?
Religion can be spoken about freely, yet we tread softly when publically mentioning it.
But, the hardest idea to grasp is that having the right to spread religious awareness is certainly not the same as pushing beliefs on others.
While people reserve the right to practice religious freedom and to speak without restraint about any faith they choose, forcing others to listen isn’t freedom of speech; it’s harassment.
There are over 127 major religions and seven billion people on earth with seven billion different views of God. Some love Him, some fear Him, some question His existence and some are still searching for Him.
Some will decide that God plays no role in the trials and tribulations of life, while others will find faith the moment they see their newborn child take the first breath of being.
Whether we discover where we spiritually belong in a pew on Sunday morning or on a lonely drive with no destination, the journey to finding or forgetting God is what determines our views. We can’t be told what and who to believe in, or to even believe in anything at all.
What we learn, who we meet and the challenges we face are what we remember when we stand before Him, not the church members that knock on our front doors, or the people that stand in the quad condemning us all to hell.
And if the church goer at your front door changes your perspective, let them. Be baptized in one church, change your mind, and be baptized in another. Let what you learned in biology class make you question evolution and the powers above.
Learning from life experiences and questioning God’s ways isn’t sin; it’s human. It’s human to change emotionally, mentally, and spiritually when physical surroundings change. It’s human to simply be curious and indecisive.
Faith only exists because there are people that believe strongly enough in it to make it a reality and a way of life. Without doubters and differences, the strength of religion would never have anything to be measured against.
Because of that, religion without true belief is weak.
Never practice out of habit, don’t follow just because your parents or friends do, and don’t ever think one religion is superior to another. In a time that seems to have the explanation for everything in a test tube or on a database, people believing in any God at all is a miracle in itself.
