Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Defining My Liberalism

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU
 
Lyric Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-09-06 08:16 PM
Original message
Defining My Liberalism
There seems to be a lot of disagreement on the proper definitions of terms like "Liberal", "Progressive", "Moderate", "Radical", etc. I've never been terribly concerned with labels, but I'm curious now. The following is a list of opinions that I hold on various issues. What would YOU define me as?

1. I support full and equal rights under the law for ALL citizens. This includes citizens who are commonly subjected to "limited" rights at best, and denied all rights at worst. I support the right of gay people to have their partnerships equally recognized by both state and federal government entities, just as I support the same for heterosexual couples. I support the Equal Rights Amendment. I oppose laws apply to only one gender (like the laws that say it's obscene for women to walk around topless in public, but A-Okay for men). I support full equality for all minorities--racial, ethnic, religious, disabled, gay, etc.

2. I oppose any attempt to allow religion to insert itself into government. I fully support federally-subsidized stem cell research. I oppose religious monuments on public property. I oppose captive-audience prayer in public schools. I oppose teaching creation mythology as science, and fully support the teaching of evolution.

3. I strongly support social justice programs like TANF (which is a poor replacement for AFDC, Clinton should be ashamed of himself), the Food Stamp program, Medicaid, HUD, etc. The nobility of a nation can be ascertained not only by how it treats its women, but also by how it treats its poorest citizens. Frankly, if it were up to me I'd roll back Clinton's "Welfare Reform" and come up with something a LOT more effective--like replacing the welfare "work requirement" with an "education requirement", and helping the poor pay for GEDs, tech schools, and college. Conservatives pontificate about "teaching a man to fish"--well an education is PRECISELY that. The work requirement does nothing to help these people break free of poverty, especially when the minimum wage is WELL below a "living wage". If we educate the poor (which in today's world means more than just a high school diploma) they are less likely to raise children who grow up to be poor and dependent on welfare *themselves*. We break the cycle with education. We should be PUSHING this.

4.I strongly support raising the minimum wage to at *least* $7.25 an hour, and *preferably* $8.50 an hour. I strongly support unions. I value the rights of the workers over the rights of the corporation to collect obscene amounts of profit. I have an idea for Congress--Set a new, higher minimum wage standard that must be adhered to by ANY business that wishes to incorporate. This will have the dual positive effect of (a)helping low-income workers gain better wages, and (b)potentially discouraging smaller companies from becoming bloated corporate behemoths. Also--corporations are NOT people and do NOT deserve the Constitutional protections granted to individual citizens under the law.

5. I believe that Social Security could be easily made solvent by significantly raising the FICA income cap. As of right now, you only pay FICA tax on the first $94,200 you make per year. Raise that limit until we're taking in enough for Social Security to remain healthy through the Boomer retirement. Fixing Social Security is going to cause pain to someone. It's better that the pain be siphoned off to the wealthier citizens who can more comfortably absorb the financial hit.

6. I strongly support every citizen's right to do what they wish with their own bodies, provided they cause no harm to other born humans. I am staunchly pro-choice on the abortion issue, and I am also pro-choice on the euthanasia issue. Every woman has the right to decide what to do with her own body, and every person has the right to end their life when they choose, providing that mental illness is not a factor. I oppose any and all laws that restrict what kinds of sex people are allowed to have, as well as what kinds of equipment or aids they might choose to use during intercourse or masturbation. That is a private matter that is none of the government's business. I'm against the War on Drugs, because it's been a failure and a waste of billions of taxpayer dollars, as well as an intrusion upon people's bodily sovereignty and privacy.

7. I support toughening the laws that punish deadbeat parents. If you help create a child, even unknowingly, you have a responsibility to help care for said child. In America, we do not punish children for the sins of their parents. They deserve to be cared for, no matter what the circumstances of their conceptions might have been.

8. I believe in a "Living Constitution" that is meant to progress along with the nation. I do not agree at all with Scalia's apparant (and skewed) reverence for face-value interpretations and Constitutional literalism. Our Founding Fathers were deep, thoughtful men. Taking *anything* they said or wrote at blank face value would be a mistake and a slight to their complexity of thought.

9. I value openness in government. Corruption grows best in dark unlit places--this is true for government especially.

10. I do not believe in wars against concepts or ideologies. If were are attacked, I believe in proportional response directed at the people who caused us harm. If we can't FIND the people who hurt us, bombing civilians in their general vicinity SOLVES NOTHING. It just turns us into them--murderers of civilians. If we can't find the people who hurt us, the fault lies with our own intelligence agencies--not with the poor civilians of third-world nations. If you insist on bombing babies in order to feel more masculine and tough, you probably weren't mature enough to be permitted access to our military in the first place, and should be removed from power post-haste.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC