Labels

  Everyone known to anyone is defined by labels. Whether it be labels of political stances, religion, personality or even genres, people tend to define a person by the “category” they fall under regarding the particular matter. What society needs to learn is nobody, as individuals, can be defined by a particular label or party. Its either you are liberal or conservative, republican or democrat, and much more depending on what you are talking about. There are no in-betweens. You just are one or the other. And what you chose to go more under is how you are defined through and through regarding the matter.

Regarding politics and government, you are either Republican or Democrat. There are no either or’s. How can you categorize someone’s entire political and governmental opinions into just two parties? Which one do I have to chose? If I chose Republican then I have to be enthusiastically ecstatic for the idea of war when I’m very much not. I think, when it comes down to it, we have to maintain order and peace in defense through war. But the idea of battling our disputes out, shedding endless blood of our “pawns” (troops) and even more blood of innocent locals has always, in general, disturbed me. But if I chose Democrat, that means I will also have to be enthusiastically ecstatic for the idea of giving someone else the right to shove a medal hanger into another person, from a very uncomfortable point of entry, to rip another innocent human being apart. Hmmmmm…….. Republican it is.

There is also the “issue” of Capitalism and Communism. I “grew up” believing that capitalism was the only right and Communism is of Satan. But I mean is there really that much evil in thinking it might be a good thing for the rich to help the poor in society up. Granted, there are demands in society needed to keep a country alive and those demands require special abilities. Abilities that take a lot of work. So the idea of making all mans income and financial possession equal takes away motivation to acquire such demanding positions. Why not just work as a cashier in your local food store? This makes sense of Capitalism. But the idea of Communism is still in effect, even in a Capitalist county. Its why we have taxes taken out. Is it really good for society when there are people making millions doing nothing and people nearly homeless without work? Granted, to full scale go for communism would be a bad idea, but is the idea and advice of it really such an evil idea? Going full scale Capitalist seems to heartless and selfish, but going full scale Communist would be stupid and unfair. So what does that make me? What is my Label? I feel like both ideas can work together, a Capitalist run nation of progression as well as incorporating the idea of Communism moderately to keep society as a whole strong, leaving no man on his own to die. I don’t know. To fall under the Label of Communism or Socialism would be to fall under the Label of complete retardation. But to fall under the Label of Capitalism would seem too strictly heartless. I guess that’s why when anyone asks me my political views, I just say Moderate..

There are also two opposing labels regarding the concept of abortion. To society, you are either “Pro-life” or the bubbled up label “Pro-choice”. (See note, “My Body, My Right”)

Even Art (music, movies, ect…) has Labels and Genres on it. Doesn’t that defeat the definition, purpose and dignity of Art? (See note, “The Obligation of Art”)

To be “Religious” is now a label. The term “Religious” in society today means to live one’s life under dictation of God and the rules in Religion. It has become a way of describing someone that believes in God and has morals. People assume that when someone is labeled “Religious”, they fallow dictation when it comes to morality, banning all moral reasoning. My new ethics teacher spends half his time in class bashing Religion because he believes it to dictate moral rules demanded by God outside the bounds of moral reasoning. Who could blame him, the way society now treats the label “religious”. It makes it nearly impossible for someone to realize the truth in Religion being outside of God and moral truth. That it is just a tool used by those who have already and/or are still establishing truth through moral reasoning. This way of thinking was brought into society because of the “Devine Command theory”. The Devine Command Theory states that right is right and wrong is wrong simply because God said so. Frankly, that is the biggest load of horse shit I have ever heard. I am “Anti-Authoritarian”. It means I do not believe in dictation of a defining way of life simply because someone says so. If anyone follows the Devine Command Theory (meaning if they follow the rules presented in their Religion simply because their Religion says so) they are no better than horse shit as well. Morality is a defining in right and wrong. Not a list that someone wrote for the hell of it and demands people to follow it just because he said so. There is no greater insult to God. God calls all of us to seek and find truth. To understand life and the way it ought to be lived. That is morality. Not to read and obey words. It’s those people whose morality is based on their Religious dictations that make society and people like my new Ethics teacher treat the label of “Religion” the way they do.  So because I am “Anti-Authoritarian” for the same reason my new teacher is also “Anti-Authoritarian”, I can properly defend the use and purpose of religion by incorporating moral reasoning as its structure. He hates me now ;)

When it comes to how open you are regarding concepts of life and change, you are either Liberal or Conservative. To be considered a Conservative means you are stubborn in the traditional ways of life involving morality, government, and issues, leaving no room for change or exception. To be a Liberal means you are not only open, but all for change, whatever it may be. Especially if it goes against the traditional way. So to be a Liberal is just as stubborn as being a Conservative. You want my opinion? I think they are both foolish. So which one am I then?

There is a term used in society used to label people called “Uber-Conservative”. When someone in this day and age calls someone an uber-conservative, it means that person takes common traditional life concepts (usually involving morality) to an over excessive and unreasonable degree and is very stubborn on them. This would be the type of person you would see saying things like alcohol is the devil or skirts are evil. The “traditional” view on alcohol involves the immorality of getting drunk, not necessarily alcohol in and of itself. And the “traditional” view on dress involves keeping ourselves and those around us free from lustful thoughts and inappropriate temptations, not whether or not someone wants to where a skirt of whatever size because it is hot out or a pair of pants because they are comfortable. When asked why they empower these extremes, they have no answer rather than referencing to their label, whether it be religious or not. They are the kind of people that get all up in your face about the most unreasonable stubborn issues where no issue is to be had. We have all met one, and we all hate them. I have used this word (uber-conservative) to describe a particular type of person as well. However, society is really good at taking the actual definition of a term and making it into a label that does not fit with its original definition. Has anyone ever thought about what to be conservative in something actually means? It means to be strong and not easily moved in the understandings in truth involving life you have found. When living out those understandings and holding them close to your heart, you are “conservative” in those truths. I would hope that anyone who has come to understand truths regarding life, morality and behavior would be conservative in them. Why would you have reason not to? The term “Uber-Conservative” is used to describe a fool who takes things that can, traditionally, have truth attached to them way too far to the point where it becomes unreasonable. However, the “label” is miss-used. With the truth in what it means to be conservative in something you have come to understand, I can honestly say that I am, and proudly, an Uber-Conservative..

                It is hard to publically express what labels you fall more under to people who don’t know you. For if you state a label, the people will think of you the way society treats that particular label, which is not necessarily how you my stand. For instance, for the people that know me personally, I can say I believe in “Choice”, am “Republican”, “Religious”, and “Conservative”. But since Society has miss-guided absolute definitions on said labels, to anyone who does not personally know me, I am forced to generalize and say I am “Pro-life”, politically “Moderate”, of “Faith”, and a fanatic in searching for understanding in Truth, to be most accurate…but I would just rather people get to know me and I them.  Is it really that hard to diminish the idea of “Labels” in order to define an individual?