Meme of American controversies...

[fajrdrako]

I got this from gillo. It's about things people might argue about, if the subject came up. It strikes me as - not so much surprising, but striking - how these questions may be of burning immediacy to Americans but they've either been settled in Canada (like the death penalty and gay marriage) or they just don't apply.

1. Do you have the guts to answer these questions and re-post as The Controversial Survey?

Sure. If there's something I don't want to talk about, I won't. I have way more controversial issues than any of this.

2. Would you do meth if it were legal?

No. Frankly, I don't really know what meth is. I don't do any drugs if I can avoid it on general yoga principles. Besides, I react oddly to all drugs. I get high on Dimetapp. Some chemicals send me suddenly into convulsions, or cause migraines. Why take the risk?

3. Abortion: for or against it?

A, c'mon, no one is just in favour of killing unborn babies randomly for the fun of it. I'm not for abortion; I'm in favour of the total freedom of any woman to have one or not have one according to her needs and desires. I think unwanted children (and desperate women) are more of a danger to society than easily-available abortions are.

4. Do you think the world would fail with a female president?

The world does not (yet) have a president. If the question refers to the President of the United States as the President of the world, it is an offensively arrogant question that isn't even worthy of an answer. I'll make one anyway. The gender of our rulers doesn't make any difference to their efficacy. Looking around me, I see lots of failing going on in this world whether the countries involved are ruled by women or men. Let's have a few more successes, regardless of who's in charge.

5. Do you approve of the death penalty?

No. That makes lawmakers into killers. Not a good thing.

6. Do you wish marijuana would be legalised already?

Yes. It's an important medicine for some, and it's less harmful than alcohol.

7. Are you for or against premarital sex?

I'm more in favour of the 'sex' part than the 'marital' part, actually. At least for myself. I think this should be a matter of individual choice, but generally speaking, I think there should be a lot more sex going on. Otherwise: make love, not war. Love makes people happy. War makes them dead.

8. Do you believe in God?

Define "God". I do not believe in any God who comes from a book. I am a pantheist; I believe that everything is holy.

9. Do you think same sex marriage should be legalised?

It is legal. Whoever asked these questions is behind the times.

Okay, okay, I also believe that gay marriage should also be legal in the US - and the UK and everywhere else, especially those countries which arrest and execute people for sodomy.

10. Do you think it's wrong that so many Hispanics are illegally moving to the USA?

Do you want an honest answer, or a safe answer? An honest answer, hmm? Okay, I'll make one, because all countries are equally culpable in this, though as far as I know it's only the US which targets Hispanics. I believe immigration should be much easier and freer than it is for everyone everywhere, that borders should be much more open than they are, and that most current regulations are cruel, elitist, corrupt, paranoid and racist.

11. A twelve year old girl has a baby, should she keep it?

That depends on way too many factors to say. What does she want? What kind of financial and moral support does she have? Are there responsible adults who can and will care for the baby with her? What will do more harm and what will do less to her already-disrupted life?

12. Should the alcohol age be lowered to eighteen?

I thought it was 18. It was 18 when I was seventeen. I don't drink much and I never keep track. 18 sounds fine to me. I think it should be the same as the voting age: if a person is old enough to vote, they should be old enough to drink, and vice versa.

13. Should the war in Iraq be called off?

What, like a party no one really wants to attend?

14. Assisted suicide is illegal: do you approve?

No. What an interesting double-negative question. I think suicide, and assisted suicide, should be legal. We should not be condemned to suffer when life becomes unbearable.

15. Do you believe in spanking your children?

Yes, but not to excess. They know the difference. Any parent should, as well.

16. Would you burn an American flag for a million dollars?

Huh? It would be kind of rude of me to do something to someone else's flag, but I have no squick when it comes to flag-burning. In the 1960s, American flag-burners were among my heroes, because they wanted an end to war.

A flag is just a symbol. I'd burn a Canadian flag for ten dollars, and I love my country.

17. Who do you think would make a better president? McCain or Obama?

Obama. McCain, regardless of his politics, isn't very intelligent.

18. Are you afraid others will judge you from reading some of your answers?

I hope they will - that they'll judge me thoughtful and caring, even when they don't agree with my conclusions.

Funny how the things that seem controversial in one country aren't controversial at all in another, even when we're right next door and heavily influenced by their culture. Controversial questions here would be things like "how do you feel about bilingualism?" and "should we pull out of Afghanistan?" and maybe "what's the problem with hockey these days?"

Comments

[gillo]

It is incredibly American isn't it? Most points are so far from being controversial it's hard to recall they once were. Abortion's been legal here all my adult life and before, and is only an issue with Catholics and a few others who want to restrict people's rights. The idea that you can "call off" a war you started in somebody else's country is equally bizarre. And so on.

We don't differ on much. I can't say I'm very surprised.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

It is incredibly American isn't it?

Yes. I had to scratch my head and translate into Canadian culture. Do we even have an equivalent problem to illegal Mexican immigrants? Not really. As for abortion - Dr Morgentaler, who was in and out of jail for years becuase of the illegal abortions he performed and the activism he incited - he recently got the Order of Canada (which is like the OBE) for his heroic work. And most Canadians applauded. As they should.

The idea that you can "call off" a war you started in somebody else's country is equally bizarre.

Well, yes. I didn't even know where to start in commenting on that one. I gave up.

We don't differ on much. I can't say I'm very surprised.

Me neither. I liked your answers, too.

[gillo]

Thank you. I'm feeling very reassured by my intelligent, thoughtful flist.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Well: I'd like to think we get the flists we earn and deserve.

[dichroic.livejournal.com]

Offensively American, I'd say (and I am USAian). That is, it's not offensive that the questions are about the US, but it's offensive that they assume they're universal. In my experience people in other ocuntries often *do* have opinions about how things in the US should be, but mostly in cases where those affect them (who the US president is) or where they think US ideas are just bizarre and silly (the Dutch on legalization of marijuana, for instance).

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Offensively American, I'd say (and I am USAian).

Or just not very carefully written.

Yes, we often have opinions about the US. Canada is usually affected by US decisions - it's my personal fear that Harper will get us mixed up in the Iraqi war, for example.

[silverwhistle.livejournal.com]

Exactly. This is pretty uncontroversial for British people, too.
Re: 9, we have civil partnerships – the 'marriage' word is unimportant, and most people call them marriages anyway!

I'm an atheist, pro-choice on abortion, anti-death penalty, and don't care what people do with flags – they're just bits of cloth. None of this is all that controversial where I live. I'm anti-drugs, but I think decriminalisation (and re-medicalisation) may be the best way forward with the hard stuff, and hash should be taxed like tobacco (I find smoking anti-social, and am glad it's no longer accepted in pubs and restaurants).

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I think it might simply be a good idea to make marijuana available by prescription, like other medical drugs - though I have trouble thinking of it as very dangerous. I'm anti-drugs and anti-alcohol on the whole, but I don't think making things illegal solves the problems connected with them. Regulation helps.

[silverwhistle.livejournal.com]

I regard alcohol as fine in moderation, but drunkenness, and drinking to get drunk, is not. I know some people who smoke marijuana; I think it's vile, smelly stuff, a sort of combination of smoking and drunkenness, and should be treated more like alcohol and tobacco – taxed and regulated.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I have a terrible horror of drunkenness. I hate being with people who are drinking much at all. It makes me uncomfortable. I think of marijuana as being more like tobacco - smelly to be around, but okay if I don't have to be present. I'm not sure if it isn't less socially or personally damaging, becuase it's less addictive than nicotine, and I know smokers who are ruining their health (not to mention their body odour) because they just can't stop smoking.

[silverwhistle.livejournal.com]

I agree, drunkenness is vile. What horrifies me here is that the habiut has developed, especially among young people, of drinking in order to get drunk as quickly as possible. But I think a good wine with a meal, or just a glass with friends, is a pleasure. Re: marijuana, people tend to combine it with tobacco in joints. They're giving themselves (and passive smokers) carcinogens, too.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Yuck. Horrible use of chemicals however you look at it.

[monsieureden.livejournal.com]

Btw, I am totally drinking a glass of wine as I type this. ;) And tomorrow I'll be at a party where people will likely be smoking a joint. Ah, well.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I don't have a problem with people drinking under most situations. I drink myself sometimes. But people drinking to excess in my company makes me very uncomfortable. One friend came to visit me for a weekend and brought a huge bottle of wine. I thought that was fine. But then she drank the whole thing herself over the space of a few hours and though she didn't show any signs of drunkenness I was surprised how very uncomfortable it made me feel.

I have no problem at all with people smoking joints around me, as long as they don't mind that I don't.

[monsieureden.livejournal.com]

Yes, it can be uncomfortable, I agree. It's why I don't usually go to parties. Today is an exception, as my friend is moving to CA and I feel I should see her a final time. I have to psyche myself a bit to go. I won't get drunk and I won't smoke joints, but everyone else probably will.

Hopefully I will enjoy some of it!

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Just relax and enjoy and try to forget what your friends are ingesting. It'll probably be fun anyway.

[monsieureden.livejournal.com]

It was ok. It was uncomfortable being an apparent conservative killjoy because I wasn't getting plastered or smoking. Oh well, it was about bidding my friend farewell, and I did that.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

That's what matters. Being uncomfortable at a party is a bit of a pain, especially when people notice you aren't drinking, eating, or whatever.

[monsieureden.livejournal.com]

I filled this out some time ago and most of the wording is very poor.

I'm about to vote yes on a state proposal to approve medical marijuana. I think one thing w/ the States is that we're states, and a lot of the laws operate thus. This goes back to the colonies, where federal government was resisted. It's still an under-tide in the culture even though I think we'll eventually move into a more national perspective. I think we'll have to.

Gay marriage is a good example of the state policy. Approved by supreme courts in some states, not in other, some have gay marriage bans (Super-DOMAs), some revoke employer rights, all dependent on proposal votes from the people within the state. In my state, the death penalty has not been allowed and abortion has been legal since I was born.

I'm iffy on these things being "settled." To be settled by our standards would be an amendment to the Constitution. CA is a great example; the courts approved gay marriage a few months ago after trying a case and now a political proposal could ban it if 'the people' agree. A court case like Roe v. Wade holds firm for now, but with the wrong judges in place, I don't know if it would stick around forever.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I'm about to vote yes on a state proposal to approve medical marijuana.

Good! I think the time has come - long since.

It's still an under-tide in the culture even though I think we'll eventually move into a more national perspective. I think we'll have to.

I agree. There are single provincial/federal differences in Canada but the world itself is getting so small we need all the organization we can get.

Gay marriage is a good example of the state policy. Approved by supreme courts in some states, not in other, some have gay marriage bans (Super-DOMAs), some revoke employer rights, all dependent on proposal votes from the people within the state.

I think the Canadian attitude is that this is more like a matter of human rights, and no province has the right to revoke human rights.

I'm iffy on these things being "settled."

Not settled for all time because life doesn't work like that, but for the time being these are not ongoing controversies. This is one reason I don't like the idea of a Constitution: it pretends things can be set in stone and they can't.

[monsieureden.livejournal.com]

I hope gay marriage becomes more of an issue of national civil rights. I do think w/ the new generation (generally they don't think twice about all of this) it will be demanded on a national scale. (please please!)

I hope in the future the States will unite more nationally. Obama gives me that hope; nationalized healthcare will be a first step in any direction.

Yes, a definite problem of a Constitution.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I hope gay marriage becomes more of an issue of national civil rights.

Which is exactly what it is.

I do think w/ the new generation (generally they don't think twice about all of this) it will be demanded on a national scale. (please please!)

It's overdue. Heck, I thought my generation would fix this. They let me down.

Obama gives me that hope; nationalized healthcare will be a first step in any direction.

My fingers are crossed for you all.

[silverwhistle.livejournal.com]

Re: Question 11, doesn't 3 deal with it?
A child that young has probably been abused to get pregnant, and to make her go through with a pregnancy (and probably physically damaging birth) is to compound the abuse.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Re: Question 11, doesn't 3 deal with it?

Of course abortion should be an option there. Absolutely.

[silverwhistle.livejournal.com]

I'd go further, and say it was a necessity, for medical and psychological reasons.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I was hedging a little, thinking that one of the problems of being 12 is that no one takes you seriously or treats you with much respect, let alone allowing you to use your own judgement about your own life and future, and that forcing an abortion on a person might, in some cases, be adding trauma to trauma. But it's also probably the right choice in 999 out of 1,000 of such cases.

(And now the idea of 1,000 such cases has given me a major squick. Poor girls.)

[silverwhistle.livejournal.com]

that forcing an abortion on a person might, in some cases, be adding trauma to trauma

Not as much, I'd have thought, as forcing her to go through with a pregnancy for which her body isn't ready, when the father is either an adult rapist (perhaps even a family member) or a bullying older child.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

It could be just an opportunistic seducer - I was certainly ripe for seduction at 12, and just as well no one but me knew it - but the whole situation would still be difficult and traumatic.

[kk1raven.livejournal.com]

When I first moved here I lived two houses away from a woman whose 13-year-old daughter was pregnant. The girl wanted the baby, the woman was proud that her daughter was having a baby and her other daughter's 4-year-old daughter couldn't wait until she was old enough to have a baby like her aunt. As far as I could see there were no men permanently involved with the family at all and no one had a job. Forcing an abortion on the girl would have been totally wrong but children having children isn't good for anyone and living in that type of situation doesn't give any of the children much chance of a decent future.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

It's hard to know how to solve problems like that without being dictatorial over people's lives.

[kk1raven.livejournal.com]

That is so true. The local problem with children having children isn't going to change until the culture behind it changes and telling a whole group of people that their culture is bad doesn't produce good results. Until something changes they're going to be locked in a continuing cycle of poverty and abuse. The only solution I see to it is to try to convince the kids that there are better alternatives rather than telling them that what their families tell them is wrong as such.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

To create change people have to have incentive to change. Otherwise they feel defensive and resist change - well, people resist change anyway, because it's scary - or they stay mired in old habits. Sometimes education - even basic primary school - gives an ambitious person a chance to escape from that kind of cycle, but probably it doesn't often happen that way.

I can imagine that being told you should give up your own child would be terrifying, and would make enemies of any authority who would say so.

[xinef.livejournal.com]

http://xinef.livejournal.com/286053.html

[duncanmac.livejournal.com]

I too wrote a reply (http://duncanmac.livejournal.com/22971.html) to these.

[mmegaera.livejournal.com]

Speaking as a USian, I think this quiz was written by a very young, naive USian, possibly not long out of hir high school civics class.

IOW, s/he meant well, but didn't realize how badly s/he was putting hir foot in hir mouth.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I think this quiz was written by a very young, naive USian, possibly not long out of hir high school civics class.

Yes - it sounded that way. Foot in mouth is the prerogative of the young. It was rather interesting, anyway.

[wijsgeer.livejournal.com]

(crystal) meth is a bad drug. I would certainly not use it and I am against legalizing it. (and I am pro legalizing marijuana and am in favour of medical prescription of heroin in some cases).
Meth is bad because it combines three nasty characteristics, 1 you are practically immediately addicted (1 or 2 times use can be enough) and it is extremely hard on the body (can reduce one from healthy to absolute wreck and 3, it makes people very aggressive.
I read an article about the recent surge of the use of meth in Capetown in South Africa. Even though it is a country with a high rate of violence, robberies and rape increased dramatically within the last half year that that drugs has been introduced. I see no possible benefits for a drug with such a profile.

[duncanmac.livejournal.com]

Since I have tended to ignore most drugs (illegal or otherwise), I was unaware of what crystal meth can do. It sounds awfully like the effects (side or otherwise) of "angel dust" or PCP. Not good.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I am pro legalizing marijuana and am in favour of medical prescription of heroin in some cases

I would agree with this. I am in favour of anything that can be used to help the suffering.

I am not really in favour of anything that is addictive, not even tobacco, or (say this softly now, I don't often say it aloud) caffeine in coffee. I don't smoke, of course, but I do drink coffee - not to excess. And people are aggressive enough already. We don't need anything to make them more aggressive.

The question of course was not "should crystal meth" be legal (I don't think a case could be made). The question was "would you ever take it?" The answer is even more 'no' after reading your comments. Sounds scary.

So why do people take it? Because they like the way it makes them feel?

[duncanmac.livejournal.com]

I am not really in favour of anything that is addictive, not even tobacco or ... caffeine in coffee.

The biggest problem I have with coffee is not the caffeine. Something in coffee used to cause odd side effects, such as nausea or vertigo, when I was younger. [One of the few benefits of middle age is that these reactions are weaker, and I've learned to guard against them by ensuring I have food in the stomach too.]

That said, I do have caffeine problems, but most caffeine for me is consumed in tea, not coffee. I also do my best to restrict daily intake, and refuse to touch it after 6 pm. I am also drinking herbal teas quite a bit, which have eased throat problems as well.

I just wish I could function at work without it. I lost at least one job in recent years because the boss claimed I was "sleeping on the job." The common attitude towards the mid-afternoon siesta (which, as I have noted elsewhere (http://duncanmac.livejournal.com/6106.html), is actually required for one's good health) is another symptom of a serious problem many people are having with the modern workplace.

Sigh.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I used to have a problem with caffeine - not addiction but overreaction. I'd show no sign of being affected by it for days but I'd end up with insomnia. Not drinking coffee solved the problem. It never seemed to matter when I drank it.

I no longer have that problem, but I don't drink coffee with caffeine anyway. I sometimes drink decaff - not believing it's good for me, but because I rather like it.

My problem with caffeine addiction isn't that I have the problem - I never have had. But it bothers me that people crave coffee and can't function without it. That's (at best) a dependency and I don't like dependencies. I don't say this aloud, of course. It would be rude. But I don't think coffee is a good thing, and have you noticed that in the popular media, a love of coffee or chocolate has taken the place that alcohol and cigarettes had fifty years ago?

As for the siesta problem: I agree. I'd suspect you had candidiasis but I don't believe it; you don't eat sugar. Is your room in the basement?

[wijsgeer.livejournal.com]

The question of course was not "should crystal meth" be legal (I don't think a case could be made). The question was "would you ever take it?"

Sure, but telling why I think it should be illegal does answer that question as well, I think. I mean, the reason I am currently not using meth is not because it is illegal but because I think it is bad for me. I've been offered illegal drugs often enough (and stuff like LSD or Coke you can easily use once in a while without getting addicted, same for marijuana) and apart from an few occasional hits of a joint I refrained.

I can understand a dislike of addiction, but I would not want to impose that to much on other people. Yes, the use of alcohol brings along a huge prize on society, not only money (direct like liver disease as indirect in car accidents) but also personal cost (relationships, lives off-course, children neglected and hurt) but even so I would not want to ban alcohol. To a certain extent because I belief people must have freedoms and also because I fear the criminalization that will come of banning. One only has to look at the huge influence of the illegal drug cartels and the violence that trade brings along. Countries like Columbia are for an important part ruled by the Mafia (the original left wing FARK), in Mexico are this year up to now at least 4000 known deaths due to Mafia activity. Sometimes I wonder if it would not be better to do a world wide legalization. But a) that will never happen and b) it is too hard to predict, an experiment that is is hardly ethical to make.

So why do people take it? Because they like the way it makes them feel?

Meth tends to be a drug used by poor and hopeless people. In the US it is mainly popular in poor rural parts, the situation in Capetown I referred to was about an area of 'kleurlingen' (not black, not white) who had had a relatively good position during the Apartheid (compared to black people) but who had lost that in the new South Africa. Meth seems to me a drug of despair.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

The relationship between law and drugs is a tricky one. It's usually intended to prevent addiction, or the crimes that accompany a need for illegal drugs; and that further drives the addicts to crime, and encourages organized crime. Especially when the drug-users are people who have been marginalized anyway, like the South Africans you mention.

I don't know what the solution should be, but I tend to approach this (philosophically) from a personal basis: Since I can't be responsible for what other people do, I will work at being responsible for myself. It's a start. But I do wish I had more solutions.

[wijsgeer.livejournal.com]

Drug use brings misery at three locations. First, and to us the most visible, the location of the user.
Second, the location of the production, the politics and economy of certain countries is so heavily infested in the drugs trade that it spoils changes of a free, democratic, healthy living. It is illegal so the bosses will never keep to trade agreements, environmental concerns. Free trade heroin will never be an option. Thirdly, the whole transport and trade. Due to the illegality it has to be smuggled, many many people spent their lives in jails all over the world because they succumbed to the pressure to smuggle (need for money, blackmail, threats). Since it is illegal there is a high level of violence, towards people lower in the hierarchy and between gangs/mobs.

On "location 1" we can speak about personal choice and such. But when whole regions are inflicted I think it is a different matter. Though I can't say I have a problem, just trying to say that a drug user in your street is not solely a problem for your street (and him/her) but a global problem.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Good analysis. Obviously no one knows how to correct the situation; it's a chaotic world we live in.

And more and more a global world in which no problems can be solved locally, except occasionally in the short term.

[duncanmac.livejournal.com]

I also came up with a shorter list (http://duncanmac.livejournal.com/23195.html) of controversial questions on my own.

What do you think of this list?

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Good questions! I don't have time to give considered answers now, but I'll bookmark this and come back later.