Some additional points and elaboration on my full profile:

Issues on which I take a more "conservative" or "right"-leaning approach:

* I do not support affirmative action or racial quotas either in academia, the government, or within the private sector workforce. I also do not support payment of reparations to address past social and socioeconomic wrongs (i.e., black slavery and Jim Crow-era segregation), especially if U.S. taxpayer funding is involved. In other words, payment will be made by American taxpaying racial and ethnic groups that had absolutely nothing to do with the injustices of that unfortunate era (i.e., Asians, Hispanics, Middle Easterners, people of Jewish descent, European immigrants, people of Southern or Eastern European descent, African immigrants, Carribean immigrants, and African-Americans whose ancestors were slaves as well as those that were subject to Jim Crow-era segregation, etc.). As a second-generation Asian-American whose parents migrated to the U.S. after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, I (as well as my parents) have borne witness to more than my fair share of underqualified affirmative action recipients and beneficiaries (i.e., historically-underrepresented racial minority groups ... namely African-Americans and, to a slightly-lesser degree, Hispanics and Native Americans). In academia and in certain industries and professions, it is actually Asian males that suffer the most in terms of reverse discrimination, followed by non-Hispanic, Caucasian/White males. As a second-generation individual of Asian descent, I consider it to be inherently unfair for my Asian male counterparts (who I consider to be my close cousins and siblings in an ethnic and genetic sense) to be penalized for something that they, as well as our Asian ancestors, had nothing to do with historically. We aren't the ones that instituted slavery and Jim Crow segregation, and, as a matter of fact, those of us who were present in the U.S. prior to the passage of the amended Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, were discriminated against and excluded with limited rights in American society.

On a related note, I do believe in gender equality and equal rights for women, but only in the true sense of the word or phrase. I do not believe in lowering standards in order to accommodate someone who cannot pass the minimum standards set simply because she's female and it's mandated by law. There is a reason why you have certain standards in place to begin with in certain professions and industries. One (rather tragic) example of that is the death of Nicola Cotton, a pregnant, 24-year-old, African-American female police officer in New Orleans who was attacked, beaten, and then shot to death multiple times with her own service pistol by a much larger and stronger male assailant that she was attempting to place under arrest. This tragic shooting killed both her and her unborn child. Actually, Nicola Cotton's death (and the death of her unborn child) could have been prevented by a simple $40 to $50 dollar investment in a retention holster, but that's besides the point. It wouldn't have prevented her from getting beaten halfway to death with possible, permanent physical damage done to her brain or her body (as well as to the life and or/physical wellbeing of the unborn child that she was carrying). I have to hand it to this young lady though. She managed to hold her much larger assailant off for a full seven minutes before she was overtaken physically and shot to death with her own pistol. Your average adult female would be lucky to make it seven seconds under such an ordeal, myself included.

* I don't subscribe to political correctness. I don't believe that race, ethnicity, poverty, lack of opportunity, or physical and/or sexual abuse suffered as a child should be used as factors to try to excuse or justify violent, senseless, and heinous criminal activity. Nor do I believe that such factors should play a role in whether or not the mainstream media decides to cover a particular news item. Case in point: the brutal murders of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom. Almost everyone has heard of the Duke LaCross rape case (a case that turned out to be fraudulent, by the way), but very few have heard of the brutal gang rape, sexual torture, and murders of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom. Another case in point: the brutal home invasion murders of the Harvey family (including the brutal and fatal stabbing of an innocent 4-year-old little girl ... a young child just barely out of toddlerhood). Most people have heard of the kidnapping, home invasion, gang rape, and murder of the Petit family (the husband, a prominent local physician, managed to escape), but how many people have heard of the brutal home invasion murders of the Harvey family? Not many. One other case in point is the brutal microwave oven murder of 28-day-old Paris Talley by her mother, China Arnold. Now, nearly everyone has heard of Casey Anthony and the death of her little girl, Caylee Anthony, but how many people have heard of Paris Talley or China Arnold? ... And these are just a few examples of the countless number of extremely violent, heinous, and vicious crime that gets virtually no mainstream media coverage. It's obvious that the mainstream media is under pressure to not depict certain racial or ethnic groups in any kind of a negative light, and many mainstream media insiders will admit and attest to that rather inconvenient fact in private (and in some cases, publicly, as well). Now, don't get me wrong. I am not, in any way, trying to downplay the brutal rapes and murder of all of the females of the Petit family (including the 11-year-old daughter), or the murder of little 2-year-old Caylee Anthony. Nor am I trying to claim that their incredibly tragic stories aren't newsworthy in any way. But if you look at the aforementioned cases that got little to no mainstream media coverage, at least in a qualitative sense, these cases are equally as heinous, and, in many respects, are actually far worse when you look at the specific details of each case. As far as I'm concerned, evil is evil, and violent, vicious, brutal crime is violent, vicious, brutal crime regardless of who or what the perpetrators happen to be in terms of ethnicity or race, or any other factor or characteristic for that matter. At the very least, don't these innocent, defenseless victims, especially these very young children and tiny little infants who weren't even given a chance to live to prepubscence ... don't these hapless young souls, so viciously tortured and murdered, deserve some coverage or some mention by the mainstream media that's, at least, somewhat, if not entirely comparable to the more politically-correct cases that the mainstream media chooses to cover? I submit that they, in fact, do. I mean, is that something that's too much to ask of these spineless and gutless individuals in the mainstream media? Evidently, it is.

* I do not support abortion except in the case of incest, rape, or when the mother's life is in immediate danger. In those cases, I advocate that the pregnancy be terminated as early as possible, before the embryo or fetus has a chance to develop any further (especially if allowed to develop to a later term). I do not advocate for the option of abortion as a means to excuse irresponsible sexual behavior, or as a means of retroactive birth control especially if the abortion happens to be at a later term in the woman's pregnancy (i.e., the fetus, at this stage, has a more developed central nervous system, has the ability and capacity to experience pain and discomfort, and can respond to stimuli while still in utero ... I'm sorry, but I believe that it's disingenious and hypocritical for so-called "conscientious" individuals involved in the animal rights movement to feel a sense of "moral" and "ethical" outrage at the thought of a male baby calf of a dairy cow getting viciously murdered in a slaughterhouse (a number of whom are actual newborn infants just a few days old, referred to by the industry as "bob veal"), or for the newborn male baby chick offspring of egg-laying hens to get ground up alive or slowly suffocated and/or starved (or, worse yet, crushed) to death while advocating and supporting the murder of a human fetus, especially if the fetus is a more developed, mid-to-late-term fetus).

* I do not, personally, support homosexuality or the institution of gay marriage. I believe that there are certain universal laws of (karmic) nature that govern the universe, and when those natural laws are transgressed, they can lead to all sorts of negative consequences and outcomes either collectively or individually in any given society (by "karma" or "karmic," I simply mean the universal law of cause and effect). Examples of human activity and characteristics that are in harmony with the universal laws of nature: heterosexuality, natural intact (and therefore, fully-functional) genitalia, monogamy, regarding sex as something sacred, organic veganism, honesty, truth, peace, goodwill, unconditional love, respect, recognizing the inherent divinity within oneself and in others, etc. Examples of human activity and characteristics that are not in harmony with the universal laws of (karmic) nature: carnism/omnivorism, homosexuality, dogmatic and institutionalized patriarchy, circumcision, castration, chattel slavery, promiscuity, concubinage, prostitution, war, gang warfare, drive-by shootings (especially those that kill innocent by-standers such as infants and young children ... a sad and tragic reality that occurs on a regular basis in many inner city (ghetto) areas of the United States), rape, gang rape, genocide, drug use and abuse, addiction, intoxication, alcoholism, child molestation, incest, objectification of sex and sex partners, negativity, selfishness, greed, profanity, vulgarity, perversion, deception, theft, dishonesty, spiritual blindness, hatred, division, violence, factory farming, animal agriculture, conventional allopathic medicine, pharmaceuticals, anti-depressant psychotropic medication (especially SSRIs ... guess what the common factor is behind all of these mass shootings at schools, malls, and public places across the U.S. and other parts of the world as well as the number one cause of suicide among children, adolescents, and young people under the age of 25? This is, arguably, one of the leading causes of suicide (including murder/suicide) among individuals of all age groups, as well.), dysfunctional family dynamics, etc., etc., ad infinitum, ad nauseum. I could go on and on, but I'll stop here for brevity's sake, LOL. As far as homosexuality is concerned ... I'm sorry, but there is nothing that you can say to me that will ever convince me that unprotected anal sex and certain other (somewhat common) homosexual sex acts are normal and natural, and in accordance with the laws of nature (e.g., anal foreplay and anilingus, especially if it involves someone placing their tongue inside someone else's extremely toxic, E.coli- and bacteria-infested anus and rectum ... double (or even triple) that for individuals consuming a conventional (factory farmed) animal flesh and animal by-product based diet ... sorry to be so graphic and blunt, but those reading this should get my point, hopefully)). There is nothing normal or natural about any of this, in my opinion, and I don't believe that we should be teaching young children that it is, or that it's something to aspire to in any way. Anyhow, with that said, I do not believe in condemning anyone for their lifestyle choice so long as it doesn't negatively affect another person or impinge upon another person's basic and inherent human rights, or involve children or minors in any way. What two fully-grown, consenting adult individuals decide to do in the privacy of their own bedroom or home is, quite frankly, their business and none of mine. And as long as they keep it discreet and behind closed doors, and don't attempt, in any way, to impose their lifestyle or differing viewpoints upon me, then I really couldn't care less ... to be quite honest. Each individual has their own karmic issues in life to deal with as well as the consequences of all of the actions in life that they choose to engage in, be it positive, negative, or neutral.

Issues on which I take a more "liberal" or "left"-leaning approach:

* I'm anti-war/pro-peace and have always been as such dating back to high school. Now, I can understand the need of a domestic, military defense force to protect against invasion from a hostile enemy force, but that is not the role that the United States has played militarily and throughout history beginning in the early-to-mid 20th century with the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II. Countless numbers of innocent civilian lives, including those of infants and young children (all estimated to be anywhere over 100,000 to over 200,000), were tragically lost in what can be best described as one of the most torturous and painful (in fact, excruciating) ways to die. It's akin to the way that little 28-day-old Paris Talley had to die when she was microwaved to death by her mother, China Arnold, mentioned a few paragraphs above. This incredibly barbaric, heinous, and genocidal, retaliatory measure was instituted by then-Democratic President of the United States, Harry S. Truman. Fast forward to the Kennedy and Johnson administrations (both of the Democratic party), and their authorization of U.S. military troops in the Vietnam War ... an imperialistic, military presence that would bring about wartime atrocities such as the massacre of My Lai, in which hundreds of unarmed, defenseless, and innocent women, children, and infants along with elderly men and women were brutally and deliberately gunned down and massacred by U.S. military troops (to further add insult to tragic injury, some of the young women who were the mothers of the young children and infants brutally murdered alongside of them, were gang-raped prior to getting mercilessly executed by their own rapists ... at least, according to eyewitness accounts and U.S. military tribunal court testimony of those that were present to witness such unspeakable atrocities). This unnecessary and tragic war would result in countless tens of thousands of innocent civilian deaths, again including the deaths of infants and young children. And finally, fast forward again to more recent times during the Bush administration (Republican) and the current Obama administration (Democrat) with regard to U.S. military airstrikes and bombings. During a seven-year time period (from 2002 to 2008) that spanned both terms of the Bush administration, the Bush administration conducted approximately 24,000 air strikes in four countries (Somalia, Pakistan, Iraq, and Afghanistan), or what would amount to an air strike about every 3 hours. Compare and contrast that already horrific figure to the first term (i.e., the first four years) of the Obama administration, during which 20,130 air strikes were conducted in six countries (Libya, Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, Iraq, and Afghanistan), or what would amount to an air strike every 1-and-3/4 hours, approximately. Both of these administrations are responsible for the countless numbers of brutal and tragic civilian deaths in these six countries, including the extremely tragic and untimely deaths of innocent infants and young children ... all supported and funded by U.S. taxpayer dollars.

This propensity to wage imperialistic, homicidal, and genocidal war on the part of both the Democratic and Republican parties all throughout history, is one of the primary reasons why I do not support either party, and instead lend my (conscientious, humanitarian, and compassion-based) support towards Libertarian/Independent as well as Green Party candidates and causes. Yes, I am fully aware that virtually any Presidential candidate whose political affilitation falls outside of the Democratic or Republican party platform does not stand a snowball's chance in Hades of ever winning a national election, and any vote or support of such a candidate is merely symbolic, at best. But that's besides the point. I do not believe in voting for the so-called "lesser of two evils" especially when, in reality, they are two sides of the same imperialistic, genocidal, war-mongering, mass-murdering coin that is responsible for the gruesome, heinous, and tragic, untimely deaths of countless numbers of innocent civilians, including scores of young children, toddlers, and infants. I believe in voting based on one's deeper, fully-informed conscience regardless of where their chosen political candidates stand in terms of winning an election. I would much rather vote for a candidate with little-to-no odds of winning an election, but whose overall political and ideological stance is aligned with my own, or to not even vote at all, than I would to vote for a candidate who I perceive as the "lesser of two evils" simply because that candidate has a much higher (projected) chance of winning an election. I believe that the entire political system in the United States is in desperate need of a complete overhaul, and I am against the use of taxpayer money to go towards funding unnecessary wars that lead to massive and countless numbers of innocent civilian casualities and deaths, especially those of women, children, and infants in primarily male-dominated, patriarchal, gender-oppressive societies (i.e., innocent human beings who, by virtue of their age and/or gender, have no say in and absolutely nothing to do with the waging of war and/or military defense or offense).

* I believe wholeheartedly in gender equality and equal rights for women, and, in my youth and early adulthood years, I had a much stronger and somewhat more extreme feminist bent to my thinking and outlook on life. It was around that same time period that I decided that if I were to ever get married, that I would retain my last name and not have it supplanted by my husband's surname (I ended up compromising when I married my now ex-husband by hyphenating his surname to my own. That's a decision that, in hindsight, I regret, and a mistake that I will not make ever again.). I honestly do not see a point or a purpose for me, personally, to take on my spouse's surname. As far as I'm concerned, that's a relic from a patriarchal type of mindset in the past that doesn't apply to me, at all. Around that same time period, I also vowed that I would never be relegated to the role of a domesticated wife (i.e., someone who does all or most of the domestic chores around the house ... cooking, cleaning, dishwashing, laundry, etc.). I believe in fair play as far as domestic chores are concerned and I'm happy to say that I've remained faithful to that vow after all these years.

* I believe in the separation of church and state, and my spiritual beliefs and philosophical outlook run counter to and are at odds with traditional, patriarchal Judeo-Christianity of which most conservatives and Republicans here in the United States embrace. Actually, my spiritual beliefs and philosophical views are at complete odds with virtually all authoritarian, literalist, dogmatic, and patriarchal religious belief systems, especially the modern-day, (western) Abrahamic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

* I'm an ethical, primarily organic, plant-based consuming vegan who believes wholeheartedly in animal rights. I'm also against the use of taxpayer funding to finance the subsidization of conventional (i.e., factory farmed) meat, eggs, and dairy, and all of the inherent and institutionalized cruelty, inhumanity, and barbarism that such industries entail.

In all honesty, I really don't like to apply labels to myself with regard to politics because most of these labels have a certain stigma attached to them that may not necessarily apply in my case (e.g., non-support of homosexuality or LGBT issues and lifestyles is almost always associated with right-wing, fundamentalist Christianity; support of feminism is often associated with the more radical, bra-burning, anti-male, militant branch or offshoot of feminism; intactivism and anti-circumcision viewpoints are often regarded as anti-Semitic and racist; criticism and non-support of affirmative action and racial quotas are regarded by many as insensitive and racist, and if you happen to be a historically-underrepresented minority (i.e., African-American, Hispanic, or Native American) with such viewpoints, you're often viewed as a self-hating minority and a sellout kissing the hindquarters of "the Man"; the same thing applies when criticizing or even mentioning certain negative aspects of minority subculture, even if your intentions have nothing, at all, to do with race (i.e., criticizing Hip Hop, rap, and urban (ghetto) street culture for its violence, mysogyny, racism (against Asians and Hispanics), glorification of drug use and abuse, as well as glorification and advocacy of violent criminality, homicide, degradation of women, domestic violence, and rape ... seriously, there are some extremely misguided, brainwashed, and unreasonably guilt-ridden individuals (suffering from a sense of guilt over past social injustices that didn't even take place in their own lifetimes (i.e., slavery and Jim Crow-era segregation)) who will consider a person to be culturally-insensitive, bigoted, or racist, or, if you happen to be a minority yourself, to be a self-hating minority who just doesn't understand that the reason why these "poor, unfortunate, and disenfranchised" young men of color have to resort to crime and violence (often of the worst kind), is because they grew up in extreme poverty, in single-parent households, and didn't have any positive male role models to guide them in their formative years. As if any of that is an excuse to commit some of the most heinous and barbaric crimes against another human being.). Anyhow, I digress, and I have to state that I base my personal, political viewpoint on what makes logical, yet intuitive sense to me based upon my own personal experience and spiritual outlook in life at this point.