Upon later reflection, I realized I was just as much afraid to discuss the real hot potato (no "e") issues in this public opinion column as some of them told me they were. Sure, I can go on and on about the many different political and life philosophies and their various strengths and weaknesses. But social issues, such as abortion, gay rights, the war on drugs, the death penalty and feminism, have been avoided in my letters like so many tulips I've carefully managed to tiptoe around.
In this letter, I'm not asking anyone to come tiptoe through the tulips with me.
On the issue of abortion, I'm pro-life -- not so much because I fully understand the issue myself, but mostly because of my respect for many particular individuals who claim they do fully understand it. But even my two favorite Bible theologians do not agree with one another on the abortion issue (based on the point in time each believes the actual soul enters the body).
Contrary to the TV's projected image; the American people are not divided into only two neat categories of "pro-life" and "pro-choice." There are many positions in between, based on circumstances such as the stage of pregnancy, a woman's physical or mental health, rape or incest, and deformity of the fetus. Even financial circumstances are enough reason for some to favor abortion over life.
I strongly oppose Roe vs. Wade on the grounds I do not believe the judicial courts should be "making" law. Constitutionally, laws should be created by elected representatives of the people on the federal or on the state level. I'm against judicial activism, whether it is liberal or conservative.
My position on increasing gay rights is simple. From a human viewpoint, many do's and don'ts in the Bible rub the hair on my back the wrong way, but I recognize the Bible as inerrant (without error), and God's authority as the last word. The Bible clearly states homosexuality is wrong; therefore, in my book, it is wrong.
As far as our war on drugs is concerned, I hate to admit the libertarians may be right on this issue. Their position is to decriminalize drug use by adults, which would declare prohibition a total failure. The price of drugs would come down to a market price, which would remove organized criminals as prime suppliers.
This would greatly eliminate the need for drug addicts to commit crimes against others in order to come up with the money to match the high artificial prices created in an illegal black market.
We would still treat drug abuse, help get people off these destructive substances, and have laws against giving drugs to minors. Their claim is that the alteration of the economics of the issue would reduce crime by dealers as well as users.
This leads right into my position on the death penalty. A society must use this drastic measure against people who show no regard for innocent human life. There are evil capital offenses, which cannot be properly judged in a just society without the use of capital punishment.
As for the movement of feminism in America, I believe the form now known as "militant" feminism is merely the reactionary counterpart to male chauvinism. I am against both isms.
The first stage of feminism in America probably assisted in helping achieve the goals many feminists set out to achieve with their involvement in the movement. Although there are many good women still caught up in the movement, as it now manifests itself, I believe the radical leadership at the top is using them to advance many bad revolutionary programs.
I've done my best trying to explain my positions on these five delicate issues. Whether you agree or disagree, I hope many people have enjoyed thinking about them with me.
---Kenneth J. Wolf #23 (08/22/92)
Return to Captured Thoughts