Whispersinink: No, nothing that I am aware of. I am curious about the positions held on these subject in relation to each other position. For example, if people who support the death penalty are also "Pro-Choice" or "Pro-Life".
The-Cave: You can come back and read the results along with me periodicaly.
Politically, I'm hard to classify. I tend to vote for the person I think would be the best in the job, regardless of the political party affiliation.
Unfortunately, here in Idaho, it turns out that the people most qualified for most of the offices being run for are Republican. It just happened that way. Although, I have voted for several Democrats and one Libertarian in my time here.
Are you the sort to write up an advertisement for a position that says "3-5 years Experience required"?
Nope. The person with the most experience isn't necessarily the most qualified. I've run into that recently, having had to hire a new employee. The person with the least experience (none) beat out the person who had worked for Qualex before.
How do they get qualified if they are never elected?
By "qualified", I mean possessing the ability/willingness to do the job (or learn). I don't care if someone has never held an elected office before or not. What I'm concerned with is what skills they bring to the job, and the vision they have for the position.
In my example above, I could have hired the former Qualex employee, and thus saved myself the headache of training, but it would have meant meeting the other demands of this person (night/weekend unavailabilites, general unavailabilites, and stated priority issues where personal events come before coming to work).
Professional politicians, those who immediately start working on getting re-elected after being elected, and do little to nothing else in between (or have one big headline grabbing event, with little else to show for their time in office), do not deserve or get my vote.
Thanks for your thoughtful answer. I am not sure why, but for some reason I was parsing qualified as experienced. Re-reading my questions, I sould like I am challenging you. I didn't mean to come off like that.
And if you took it that way, you certainly answered in a thoughtful manner rather than obviously taking offense.
Actually, I took it as a challenge, but not in a negative way. I didn't provide a substantive answer in my original opinion, and so you challenged me to defend my position.
It wasn't adversarial, but it was thought provoking.
Those people who approve of abortion and don't approve of the death penalty. And I've thought about the contradiction there.
However, I have this weaselly out: I only support abortion up to a certain point (and I'm not going to describe that point, thanks; that's a totally different argument). However, it seems to me--and others certainly feel differently--that up to a certain point, the fetus isn't a person, and the mother's health or wishes take priority. I think it is demeaning to treat abortion as a kind of retroactive birth control, but that's a moral decision of the mother's.
Are we wiping out a potential life? Yes. But I do that every time I wear a condom. I do that every time I jerk off instead of depositing my seed in a fertile vessel.
The death penalty is a different kettle of fish. There exists the possibility that the person is not guilty. Look, for instance, at the item recently where a homeless person was just released from jail: he had been placed there on sexual assault charges, and one of the teenagers who accused him admitted she made the story up to explain why she was late for school.
Yes, not having the death penalty is a greater burden on society, but the justice system might be wrong. That's why we have innocent until presumed guilty--because we want to make sure we're not wrong.
There's an entirely separate argument to be had about the actual purpose of the prison system, whether it's simply intended to isolate the criminal, punish, extract retribution, rehabilitate, or generate a profit for the state.
As a Canadian, I'm not sure that I have all of the necessary information to comment on Iraq...but I did anyway. :)
I voted yes, I'd like to see abortion illegal even if it doesn't actually match what I think. If I were making this poll, I'd have added another button which reads "I am morally opposed to abortion, but know that it cannot be stopped, and prefer legal, regulated abortion to illegal, black market ones." In a perfect situation, I'd absolutely love to see the practice abolished, but I also know that's not realistic and that I need to accept the alternative.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2004-01-30 03:19 pm (UTC)The-Cave: You can come back and read the results along with me periodicaly.
Edie
Re:
Date: 2004-01-30 04:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-30 06:45 pm (UTC)Unfortunately, here in Idaho, it turns out that the people most qualified for most of the offices being run for are Republican. It just happened that way. Although, I have voted for several Democrats and one Libertarian in my time here.
Re:
Date: 2004-01-31 04:42 am (UTC)How do they get qualified if they are never elected?
Edie
Re:
Date: 2004-01-31 07:38 am (UTC)Nope. The person with the most experience isn't necessarily the most qualified. I've run into that recently, having had to hire a new employee. The person with the least experience (none) beat out the person who had worked for Qualex before.
How do they get qualified if they are never elected?
By "qualified", I mean possessing the ability/willingness to do the job (or learn). I don't care if someone has never held an elected office before or not. What I'm concerned with is what skills they bring to the job, and the vision they have for the position.
In my example above, I could have hired the former Qualex employee, and thus saved myself the headache of training, but it would have meant meeting the other demands of this person (night/weekend unavailabilites, general unavailabilites, and stated priority issues where personal events come before coming to work).
Professional politicians, those who immediately start working on getting re-elected after being elected, and do little to nothing else in between (or have one big headline grabbing event, with little else to show for their time in office), do not deserve or get my vote.
Re:
Date: 2004-01-31 09:02 am (UTC)Thanks for your thoughtful answer. I am not sure why, but for some reason I was parsing qualified as experienced. Re-reading my questions, I sould like I am challenging you. I didn't mean to come off like that.
And if you took it that way, you certainly answered in a thoughtful manner rather than obviously taking offense.
Thanks.
Edie
Re:
Date: 2004-01-31 10:47 am (UTC)It wasn't adversarial, but it was thought provoking.
I'm certainly one of them...
Date: 2004-02-02 09:18 am (UTC)However, I have this weaselly out: I only support abortion up to a certain point (and I'm not going to describe that point, thanks; that's a totally different argument). However, it seems to me--and others certainly feel differently--that up to a certain point, the fetus isn't a person, and the mother's health or wishes take priority. I think it is demeaning to treat abortion as a kind of retroactive birth control, but that's a moral decision of the mother's.
Are we wiping out a potential life? Yes. But I do that every time I wear a condom. I do that every time I jerk off instead of depositing my seed in a fertile vessel.
The death penalty is a different kettle of fish. There exists the possibility that the person is not guilty. Look, for instance, at the item recently where a homeless person was just released from jail: he had been placed there on sexual assault charges, and one of the teenagers who accused him admitted she made the story up to explain why she was late for school.
Yes, not having the death penalty is a greater burden on society, but the justice system might be wrong. That's why we have innocent until presumed guilty--because we want to make sure we're not wrong.
There's an entirely separate argument to be had about the actual purpose of the prison system, whether it's simply intended to isolate the criminal, punish, extract retribution, rehabilitate, or generate a profit for the state.
As a Canadian, I'm not sure that I have all of the necessary information to comment on Iraq...but I did anyway. :)
no subject
Date: 2004-02-02 09:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-02-06 09:01 am (UTC)I voted yes, I'd like to see abortion illegal even if it doesn't actually match what I think. If I were making this poll, I'd have added another button which reads "I am morally opposed to abortion, but know that it cannot be stopped, and prefer legal, regulated abortion to illegal, black market ones." In a perfect situation, I'd absolutely love to see the practice abolished, but I also know that's not realistic and that I need to accept the alternative.