My first comments pointed to my personal self interest, since I thought "what parent wouldn't want to vote for policies that would benefit their own kid?" I told them Kerry wants to raise taxes, and I don't buy his false promise that he's only going to raise taxes on those making over 200k. In response to that, my parents said "well, you make a lot more than we do -- you can afford to pay higher taxes"! Then I said Kerry has no plan to fix Social Security, and it will be bankrupt by the time I retire at its current rate. To which they said "Bush is going to cut Social Security", to which I responded that's just DNC propaganda and completely false. I said the plan is to do a partial privatization, to which my parents responded there is no way to privatize without cutting benefits to existing retirees. I said that's not true -- the system currently runs at a net profit, and privatization would be gradually phased in only for younger taxpayers without affecting current promised benefits, but it's quite difficult to argue intelligent conservative viewpoints versus Democrat scare tactics. Finally, I said it was a matter of pay now or pay later, and it's just going to be a lot more expensive the longer we wait. That didn't bother them though -- they seem content to know that Social Security will last long enough for them (they are currently in their early 60's). I gave up, saying that Kerry's Social Security plan is "more of the same", keeping your head in the sand as long as possible.
My parent's economic counterpoint was Bush's deficits. I argued that Kerry's proposals would increase spending even more dramatically, and his proposed tax increases wouldn't be enough to cover it. They agreed that Kerry would also increase spending, but that it was irresponsible for Bush to cut taxes. But I also agreed that Bush's domestic spending record has been abysmal, and I'm hoping he becomes more conservative in his second term.
Next I moved on to the War on Terror. My parents brought up the standard "no WMD" line -- to which I responded that I think the weapons were moved (and gave lots of evidence to support that point), and it was worthwhile taking out Saddam in any case (giving more evidence of his brutal history). I pointed out that brutal regimes ONLY understand the threat of force, and taking out Saddam convinced Libya to abandon their WMD program, and if Bush gets reelected he will have much more bargaining power with Iran than Kerry. That shut my parents up on the WMD issue. I told them I believed Osama was either dead, incapacitated, or hiding in a hole cut off from the world (although this was before the recent video showed up--DOH). That pretty much settled that issue -- they couldn't debate me on the facts, except to say that Kerry would "stay the course" in Iraq (which I told them I doubted--he has a 30-year record suggesting otherwise). I also pointed out Kerry's disastrous foreign policy ideas (nukes for Iran and "global test").
I went to character next -- pointing out Kerry's flip-flops and lying. My parents both agreed that Kerry was an extremely poor candidate, and wish they had someone better to vote for, but they were voting Democrat anyway. So no traction there.
Next, my parents brought up abortion--this is apparently their real hot-button issue. I've never heard my parents say anything so forcefully, they were literally yelling at me -- "DO YOU WANT ABORTIONS TO BE ILLEGAL? DO YOU WANT PEOPLE TO HAVE TO GET COAT-HANGER ABORTIONS IN BACK ALLEYS?". They brought up how Bush could end up appointing up to 4 justices in his second term, and that they would likely be pro-Life. I'm pro-choice myself (does that make me a bad conservative?), the best I could come up with was that Roe v. Wade was a case of illegal judicial activism and should be overturned anyway, regardless of your stand on abortion. Besides, the right to abortion isn't going to matter much if Iran gets nukes.
That was pretty much it -- my cell phone got cut off, I don't know where it would have went if that hadn't happened. I sent an email to my mom about Iran nukes, and she said that she would definitely consider that issue when voting. Although they are in a location where they do not need to worry about nuclear terror (a town of less than 2000 in the middle of Missouri is not a likely target, whereas I live in L.A.).
My parents do have some conservative viewpoints. My dad is against affirmative action, and believes in medical liability reform (of course he doesn't mind voting in a trial lawyer for VP). My dad also believes in individual responsibility, and parental responsibility for kids versus government. My mom was a stay-at-home mom and is a Christian. I don't know why they are so liberal, but I think it may have to do with growing up during the Vietnam War (my dad got a student deferment, and he told me he would have crippled himself by slamming his car door on his leg to avoid serving).
I've given up on any future attempts to bring up politics, my parents are apparently long set in their thinking, although I may send the occasional political column their way. Hopefully Missouri is not within 4 votes at the end! I may be able to convince my younger sister at some point, my wife convinced her younger brother to vote for Bush, woohoo!
> Next, my parents brought up abortion--this is apparently their real hot-button issue. I've never heard my parents say anything so forcefully, they were literally yelling at me -- "DO YOU WANT ABORTIONS TO BE ILLEGAL? DO YOU WANT PEOPLE TO HAVE TO GET COAT-HANGER ABORTIONS IN BACK ALLEYS?". They brought up how Bush could end up appointing up to 4 justices in his second term, and that they would likely be pro-Life.
Watch a video of a late term abortion. I was pro-choice until I saw that. I almost vomited. I don't know if I could stomach seeing a partial birth abortion. All I could think while I was watching it was "That's murder!"
If you can see what I saw and say you're still "Pro Choice" with all that means, then you're more of a cold person than I!
Early term stuff is one thing. Zygotes and all. But viability is (through science) is getting shorter into the term all the time. Nearly all abortions are medically unnecessary with "health of the woman" masquarading as the reason for it. They mean "mental health", in that "the pregency upsets the mother" and therefore is a legitimate candidate for abortion. Bull.
The number of childless couples seeking to adopt FAR outnumbers unwanted babies. The glut of kids in the adoption "industry" are older kids who are often set formed individuals. Many with a host of "issues".
I'm for the woman's reproductive rights, but late term stuff is just plain wrong and evil. I'd say 4 months, but I'm content to let science answer the question.