Some politics to think about

Our constitution guarantees us the right to freedom and privacy right? Why is it fair that the government of anyone be responsible for everyone in the counties health and well being? Is it fair that some people have to work to pay for insurance,but when laid off or underemployed are declined coverage by government assisted programs because of income limitations?Why are some people allowed to not work and be on government assisted programs without no questions asked because of meeting all the qualifications without ever paying into a system that hardworking people put into?If we have the right to freedom and privacy,why does everyone else's money have to be involved in your well being?If we want to be guaranteed freedoms, why shouldn't people be able to vote on how taxes are spent in our country? Should we honestly have to work and pay into a system that many of us will never use or have not much of a say of who should be allowed into?

I ask these questions because the elections are coming up and there is the major debate of Obamacare verses Mitt Romney's idea to allow our constitutional rights to be exercised in regards to making rules for private companies that we own. Obama signed off on the healthcare law that made it mandatory to have insurance or be fined. But he also put limitations on how private companies can run their insurance plan. Should this really be allowed? How are freedoms exercised when the government can step in and change the rules in a private company that people have the option of using willingly or now?

I feel like we all have a right to live by the motto "If you don't work, you don't eat". What would people really do without government assistance programs if they were responsible for surviving on their own without the government making others foot the bill for it? How would a person really mentally be if the government did not make people's taxes go toward their well being?Would there really be more crime than we are dealing with in our country than the "La Riots,Freedom Riders and , Civil Rights Eras"?Would people continue to use the excuse that kids would starve and hard working people would be envied if this happens? What sense would it make to stop government assistance and the government from stepping into private companies forcing them to agree with rules to help anyone no matter what?

Do you think that our rights are guaranteed if we are forced to take care of others unwillingly?Should citizens have a right to vote on where their taxes go? Instead of just being told that someone else can use your money in any way they want just because the government says they qualify to do so?All opinions are welcome, I would love to know what you think!

I love this commercial that @Tide did for the fathers,this shows how quick people assume with the gender role...

i think the role of a stay at home father rather than a woman is a great thing in some situations.the way the economy hit hard on many people around the country.plus some men never learned how to do laundry until they were forced to stay home with the kids.i say this is a wake up call for the men and the stereotypes to be ended with these gender bias and double standards in our society today.i know many may think it is a woman's job to do housework and the one to quit her job when mommy duty calls.i feel like what is wrong with a woman supporting her family financially while her partner/spouse takes on that role?some men can do housework,girl's hair,care for the kids, and cook way better than many women out there.i am glad that tide is recognizing this.i am even happier that my favorite laundry detergent is showing the effect of the economy and crushing these assumptions of gender roles.I love that tide shows how great their products work on kids clothing for every stain and piece of dirt that they manage to attract.I would never buy anything else for my families clothing( just to put my two cents in on the product.http://youtu.be/M28l-6LUp3w

What do you think of the video?

should a father's rights be taken in less consideration than a woman's.....

i ask this question because i am apart of a father's rights group for all types of fathers that face this issue on a daily.many father's are denied access to the their children all because they do not want a relationship with the mother and out of spite.who are we hurting more, the kids or making ourselves feel better from doing this to ours kids?i personally know many men who face this issue after one night stands,divorces,break ups,and etc. no matter how the child came to this world,they are entitled to both parents love if they are more than willing to give it.why should something such as child support,bitterness,money,hate,and etc get in the way as an excuse to why a father should not see their child?i personally feel there is no logic in holding a child away from a parent from either genders because of any reason that is not life or death logically.any thoughts to the logic of holding kids away from their parent for any particular reason that is not legit?lhttp://www.squidoo.com/FathersRightsInfo

i am new to this blogging thing so please excuse me if my post do not make sense at first.i am learning exactly what how to be computer and blogger savvy at the same time at a slow pace!