I HATE MAKING DECISIONS!

So in trying to do my duty as an American Citizen I need to decide what issues are important to me and in what issues are MOST important. I am obviously not going to agree with all the views held by whichever candidate I vote for but the majority of the views held by the candidate should match how I feel about my top issues. The problem is sometimes I can't decide. For example:

Drilling for oil in previously restricted US areas

PROS: Creates potential jobs for US workers, reduces our dependence on foreign oil
CONS: Possible damage to the environment, does not reduce our dependence on oil overall

The problem I am trying to reconcile is that both options hold good points. Do I want people in America to have jobs? Heck yeah I do! Do I want to reduce the our dependence on oil in favor of more ecological friendly alternatives? YES!

Because both of these are things that I want and I think that both are vitally important I have to weigh which one I want more.

I feel that as a Christian we are entrusted with God's earth and should protect it as much as possible. Not only that but we have a duty to future generations to use our resources wisely. But at what cost?

You can argue that focusing our energies on finding fuel alternatives creates jobs, just as drilling close to america would. But this denies a few truths - the jobs created for energy alternatives are not for those that would be working on an oil rig. I can't say for sure but I definitely think that jobs created at the higher end of the education level bars those who do not have an advanced degree but if someone with an advance degree needs a job, he can apply for jobs that do not have as strict requirement for education. This means that the job creation is not equal. If job creation isn't equal than that is another factor that should be determined as well. Who am I to judge who get the jobs? I know people on both walks of life.

The other thing is that if drilling in America would mean that we stopped drilling elsewhere then the ecological impact would be negated. But it isn't. Those doing the drilling are companies. The bottom line is their goal. That isn't a bad thing. If it wasn't their goal they would be a NFP entity. So then do we increase the chances of having another environmental disaster, as with BP? That disaster also cost a lot of people their jobs.

As one of my favorite author says "The truth often defies simplicity".

So once I finally make my decision on where I stand on this issue (which research still has to be done on my end so I don't fall victim to someone else's bias) then we have to bring in something like healthcare.

 Do I want everyone to have healthcare? Of course! Do I want to pay for the cost of treating lung cancer for someone who has smoked for 20 years? No! Do I want people with pre existing conditions to have healthcare? Yes! Do I think that small business should be forced to pay health insurance? No.

Once again I would have to do research to come to my own conclusions on where I stand. THEN on top of that I have to decide if my stance for drilling on american soil or healthcare was more important than the other ESPECIALLY if neither candidate support both of my views.

Then again maybe Obama supports my #1 and 4 but Romney supports #2 and 3? Where do I go from there. Romney might support more of top choices but Obama might support my #1.

This mess of decision making is the main reason I voted straight ticket in the last election. This is also the reason I will not vote straight ticket again. Voting straight ticket is supporting a political parties views. It's time I supported my own.