Several people in my life have tried explaining to me that if they could just "get away from here" their life would be different, perhaps even better. The "here" in this quote is not nearly as significant as the "away" is. But sometimes I wonder if these individuals even realize this. Because after all, when you travel far away from all that is familiar, you are at the end of the day, still you.

Surely, a new place can cause you to be open to and embrace parts of you that you keep hidden. And likewise, new experiences can cause you to learn more about the world and maybe even yourself. But unless you plan to be a globetrotter (what exactly are you running from anyway?!) the new normal you have established will essentially become the old normal that you once knew. Because you are you. And if you weren't happy when you started, then you won't be happy where you've ended up. Leaving a person or place is simply a distraction from reality, not a solution to it.

Sometimes a change of scenery can help an  individual to gain a new perspective. But this effort, without an embrace of introspection is hardly worth it. After all, your perspective is your vision and your vision is you. How exactly do you plan to get away from that? 

Your only hope to change your experience is to change the lens through which you examine it. Introspection is a powerful and yet, sometimes elusive aspiration. It is not easy. It does not come naturally. But neither does picking up and leaving the life that you know. It is uncomfortable and the end result uncertain. But again, so is leaving. Just keep that in mind.

With such a tense political atmosphere, I feel compelled to explain why it is that i am voting for Barack Obama, again.
Here me out now. I in no way affiliate myself directly with one party or another but rather vote for and against individuals, based on the platform they present. Like most people, though, i do have certain "lines in the sand", if you will... Most importantly though, i am guided by my own worldview, values and common sense which has led me to the following reasoning. 

1. Obama has made womens rights a center piece of his campaign.

 From signing the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 to championing womens unlimited access to birth control i respect his attempts to empower women and level the playing field. (And while i recognize the abortion and birth control debate is a tumultuous one, to RESTRICT rights is simply not American. You dont have to agree with everyones behavior to support individual freedom. But this line is pretty clear. Either we make decisions about our own bodies or we do not. And healthcare availability should not make these choices for us. Considerfor instance the case of an individual who develops type 2 diabetes due to poor eating habits. Should this individual suffer when an employer decides that this value does not allign with his or her company culture? Its a strech, sure, but a parallel nontheless)

2. He drove home the cause of Universal Health Care. 

I believe this is a fundamental human right to have access to quality heath care- particularly in our country- and especially when health care costs without coverage are hardly affordable, any constantly going up. And this is not even to mention the horrors of insurance companies denying coverage based on prexisting conditions, lifetime usage limits, and the idea that insurance companies are for profit enterprises. Obama got it right making sure we all have access to coverage. And his model (based on a bipartisian effort passed by a republican governor) is one that i believe will pay dividends in the future, leading us to be a healthier nation with more reasonable health care costs. 

3. I do not blame Obama for our deficit.

We were knee deep in two wars when Obama assumed the presidency. Two wars which we had no way to pay for, especially considering the impending global recession. Yet Obama continued with our mission in the middle east. We are liberators and spreaders of democracy. But we are not occupiers. He has withdrawn from Iraq and is working on doing the same in Afghanistan. 
Additionally, i think he took the responsible route in helping out the auto industy and wall street. If those jobs and companies had evaporated with their bad investments then THAT outcome certainly would have been attached to Obama and his presidency. So why not extend a hand, and make a little extra money (on loan interest) in the process. It was a lose, lose situation. And i respect the tough predicament that he was in and the unpopular choice that he made... To SAVE AMERICAN JOBS. 
Finally, with the Recovery Act he attempted to further build upon president Bush's attempted economic stimulus. It did not necessarily work (and for the record i NEVER ACTUALLY RECEIEVED the supposed Social Security cuts he said i should have recieved in my paycheck...?) and even though it did not work, Obama admitted this and yet stood by his decision. 

4. He pushed for regulation of Wall Street via the Dodd Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection act of 2010. 

Now i am not nieve. Corporate America will find ways around it. But they know the government is watching out for the average American's interest just by the mere quickness and willing to pass such legislation. To plead free enterprise and government overreach when you are being essentially bailed out by taxpayers makes your argument void so far as i am concerned. 

5. He is supportive of gay rights. I cant for the life of me understand how this is still controversial.

I will admit that I was late to support gay marriage. I could not comprehend it in relationship to my own marriage. But when you consider your personal definition of MARRIAGE and what YOU believe being married is really about (in my view its rooted in love, family, commitment, support, and trust) not one of these things is gender specific. And there is no reason that gender should or even COULD stand in the way of 2 people feeling this way about one another. Furthermore, because these individuals commitments are not legally sanctioned, does NOT make them any less real. It only makes them less respected. No one is asking any religion to open their arms to gay marriage. But the idea that our government has not- while overtly supporting and encouraging traditional marriage- disgusts me. Obama has made SOME progress, finally allowing our troops to serve openly and refusing to use federal resources to defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court. And i am hopeful that he will continue on this path. Contrast that with Mitt Romney supporting a constitutional amendment declaring marriage as between one man and one woman and my choice here is clear. 

6. From the beginning, I have supported Obama's action in Libya. As well as his efforts to hunt Al Queda and Osama Bin Laden across the globe. So does Mitt Romney. And so does most of the world. 

7. I feel as though Obamas world view is the more practical of the two. 

Our government structure Is set up in such a way as to make American prosperity and quality of life our main goal. When our leaders faiI to support policy and legislation which supports these ideals, we vote them out of office and try again. This is quite different from even regulated capitalism and free enterprise where the focus is profit for workers and shareholders. I believe there are certain things we do better together, such as education and health care and so called "entitlement programs" which we as workers actually pay into. I would never argue government programs are or should be the standard, but for some Americans that is their standard. And i want them to have the opportunity to  better their life, even if their parents weren't able to provide this foundation for them. 

8. Obama supports the development of green technology. 

And while some of his investments went sour, (looking at you Solyndra...) he is open and optimistic to this developing market. Furthermore, his fuel efficiency standards for vehicles will save us money and increase our competitveness in the global market. And any argument that he has cut drilling permits for natural gas and oil are merely semantics. Finally, to characterize these industries as victims of his policies seem ridiculous considering their record profits in recent years.

So i want to clarify here that this post is meant to sway no one, but to simply explain my own thought process. Maybe if you are on the other side, like me, and are wondering how the hell someone could vote for HIM(?!?!) you now know where i am coming from. I see progress under Obama's leadership. To expect that a business man can come in and restructure and simplify our government structure comes across to me as quite ridiculous. Add to that the uncertainty of Mitt Romneys views on just about eveything and the choice for me is clear. This is in no way a vote AGAINST Romney, it is instead one FOR Obama. 

I have always been confused by the argument that some people, on principle, simply choose to not have children. (and by the way, i have one of these people in my own family...). These are not the same as the individuals who just never happen to have them for one reason or another. I'm talking about the people whose life plan it is to remain childless. They are not willing to make the SACRIFICE required to raise children. It is this definition of SACRIFICE which confuses me. 

Now i will make my bias explicitly clear. I have two beautiful children whom i love deeply, but please, hear me out. 

I am actually trying to understand why. Some say kids are expensive and would require a great SACRIFICE that they either dont want to or can't see themselves willing to accept.
This seems a little extreme as it is possible, with a few new learned tricks of the trade, to mitigate child care costs such as clothing and food. Day care and schooling is another important issue entirely and costs for these services are very real and not one i will characterize as so easily manipulated. But i will say that they are so situational from family to family that it seems that to base the "finacial security" argument on this alone is a bit of a strech. 
There is also this idea that your children are perpetual baggage, whom prohibit "good" parents from doing things they'd like to do such as travel, finish school, take demanding job opportunities, et cetera. 
No matter what you do with your life you are constantly weighing the cost benefit analysis of SACRIFICE. No matter if you travel, persue higher education, take a high or low paying job, you are SACRIFICING your free time, your money (or money earning potential), and your personal relationships in an effort to not only do what you want, but also to better yourself. Am i right? 

I am certainly only one case but let me tell you the things i gave up to have my children- like blowing my money, eating like crap, staying up at all hours doing who knows what and sleeping in late- are not things that i miss in the slightest.

When these arguments of- should you or should you not have children- are made, i think that some important points are left out of the equation. And i dont mean simply the happiness and love that children bring to your life (this by no means discounts this true statement; it is merely an acknowledgment that i know you have heard that argument before).

The most rewarding things about my children is not their physical being or the happiness i would not experience without them. It is rather the changes i have made and the lessons i have learned which have transformed me into this new and better version of myself that i am so proud of. 
I am learning to be responsible with my money. I am learning how important it is to live in the moment. (childhood is fleeting after all- i think we forget too often that we are actually raising PEOPLE...) My kids have forced me to learn to stop and simply have fun. And they have taught me to value education, open mindedness and common ground more so than ever before. 
I embrace this SACRIFICE in an effort to truely get to know and appreciate these individuals who also happen to be my children. 
This may be selfish insight. But its real. I have no starry eyed illusions that my children will grow up to worship me oneday or even need me for that matter. They will be amazingly capable individuals. They will move on and persue their own lives. Hopefully i will be around to watch them enjoy it.

And yet while they owe me nothing- i owe them so much. To be a good parent I have to be as honest and real and caring as i can be to show them what this life is really about. 

Interestingly, without them in my life, i'm not sure i would have ever really known...

Americans in large numbers are leaving organized religion in favor of a more personal spiritual existence. Statistics abound supporting this statement.
This is not surprising. We as a culture have fundamental problems with authority. This inherent conflict stems from our cultural value system which goes back to our nations founding. We like to think we have a direct hand in the system that governs us. And, to an extent, we do. This is not the case with organized religion, which cedes power to a supreme being. 
But when an organized system of beliefs and values is cast aside, no matter WHAT it is, something must take its place as society's moral litmus test. We do not sentence individuals in American courtrooms by citing Christian scripture, or any other for that matter, but rather our own American justice code. This is significant. This is the literal codification of our cultural value system at work.
These values have evolved from those of our founding and with good reason. To expect that our Founding Father's had figured it all out in the late 1700's is quite close minded to say the least. Why else would they have included provisions for amending our Constitution? They knew they were falliable. And they knew times and ideas change. 
These days a majority of society no longer believes that we can judge individuals as inferior based on their race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, religious affiliation or lack there-of. This has not always been the case.
We, as a people, are not only guided to vote by our personal religious beliefs, but also by using reason to determine the best candidate and pathway for our future based on their commitment to and display of these fundamental cultural values. We examine a candidates religious background in an effort to better understand his or her character. But it has been proven,  particularly in the case of Mitt Romney, that we are not going to vote with someone simply because they share our religious value system. 
Rather, we vote based on a candidates vision for our country, our state, or our city. This is also significant. We are a religiously diverse nation and a candidates vision must appeal to a majority of us. Since we are moving farther and farther away from organized religion in this country- what is replacing it? 
Sociologist Robert Bellah coined the term "Civil Religion" to explain the common thread that links us all which has stepped in to compensate for this void. This thread is in no way a challenge to organized religion, but rather, a compliment to it. We as a people have found common ground in an organic consciousness, not a spiritual religion, which is the offspring of Christianity and Democracy. This Civil Religion serves to infuse a rational non spiritual piety, or perhaps rather, a sacred democratic moral code, into  our religiously diverse society with the intent of providing justice and liberty for all people. 

I find this theory fascinating. 

That all citizens share this bond simply because we share this bond is a circular and baffeling theory, yet one that is evident in several arenas, particularly, the expression of art, music, film, and especially in our political discourse. 
We have a uniquley American culture which is translated and appreciated through these mediums. And interestingly this American consciousness, if you will, is comparable to traditional religion. American Civil Religion clearly recognizes the existence of a supreme deity (as do most Americans, even if that power is described as "energy" or "karma" or "love"). And while it is regularly referenced to be the God of the Christian religion, it is  interestingly never confirmed to be so. Further, Civil Religion claims sacred text in the form of several historically significant documents such as The Declaration of Independence, The US Constitution and Bill of Rights and the Federalist Papers, to name a few. It has symbols by which it can be recognized, the bald eagle, American flag, several monuments such as the Lincoln Memorial and the Statue of Liberty, as well as the various symbols enshrined on our currency. Finally, there are rituals in which all Americans participate, such as pledging allegiance to our flag, learning the Star Spangled Banner, and voting, to name a few. 

The most fascinating point about this theory is that this consciousness is malleable, and ever changing, much like the American culture itself. This is in stark contrast to that of organized religion. And its the closest thing to a true cultural identity that we have.