Watching tv there is occasionally a GoDaddy ad about being the first person to buy a domain so that nobody else will take your idea. The thinking being that if one person is able to think up an idea at least one other person in the world is probably thinking about a similar idea (if your idea is 1 in 1 million, then there are 7000 people who can think like you). So when other people are able to think like you and present your ideas, you can be mad or you can choose to accept the fact that other people promote and share a concept you share.
If we go with the ever popular opinion debate known as politics you see a lot of like minded attitudes and opinions. Yet as someone who tends to come from multiple angles on certain issues I sometimes have a harder time finding tons of people I agree with on a lot of things, yet alone on one or two major issues in their entirety. Yet recently there was an ad about one of the ways I think is interesting to discuss the idea of Pro-Life. If in understanding a Pro-Life argument one is supposed to be calling LIFE sacred, does one then not also have to support things such as gun bans, removal of capital punishment, be anti-war, be pro-welfare and other programs designed at providing food or healthcare to people to prevent against preventable disease? So while I don’t have an issue at all with a politician using my argument (in fact I’m happy about it), it does make it interesting that now when I state said argument people are assuming that I stole it from someone else. For the record, I don’t necessarily come down on the Pro-Life or Pro-Choice side of the argument, but find the TOTAL Pro-LIFE argument a very interesting standard that apparently a major part of the political spectrum is being slightly hypocritical to. But what do I know, chances are I’m just regurgitating other people’s “original” ideas myself.