Editor's note: More than 1,000 students from high schools throughout
Southern Nevada participated in the 49th annual Sun Youth Forum on Nov.
23. The students were divided into groups to discuss a variety of
topics. A spokesperson was chosen from each group to write a column
about the students' findings. Today's columnist is Cimarron-Memorial
High School student Marisol Montoya, who writes about the discussion in
her group, "Home in Nevada."

WHERE I STAND - MARISOL MONTOYA - SPIRIT OF DEBATE LIVES

In recent years America has experienced a decline in bipartisanship
and cooperation in politics. This was highlighted in this election and
has been seen in the bitter divides over social issues and
legislation.

With the Sun Youth Forum occurring as the election wounds were still
open, one might assume that these divides would be more prevalent than
usual. As expected, there were divisions and they were deeply drawn by
personal beliefs.

However, what I experienced at the Youth Forum was a stark difference
to the lack of political cooperation shown in recent months. My peers
listened to each other and were respectful of each other. A strong
example of this was demonstrated when the issue of the death penalty
was discussed.

The room was deeply divided -- 17 supported the death penalty while 15
were opposed to it. Specifically, on the issue of the death penalty
for minors, those in favor believed that if you kill someone you
should pay the price with your own life. It was also stated that the
funding to keep someone in jail for life was too much of a financial
burden on taxpayers.

But that argument was countered with a strong rebuttal, that the price
of executing someone is actually more expensive than keeping someone
in jail for life. Many people, including myself, also had a problem
with the fact that America is the only western democracy that uses the
death penalty. For opponents of the death penalty, the risk of
executing an innocent person was also far too great to sway anyone's
opinion to the other side.

The divide in our room over the death penalty was very similar to the
one in the political arena, but when it came to an even more divisive
issue, such as gay marriage, there was much agreement.

Only six people in the 30-plus group opposed gay marriage. Everyone in
our room came to the agreement, however, that as much as marriage may
be about love, this particular issue is about the rights that come
with marriage or a civil union, such as the rights of inheritance,
taxes, real estate, hospital visitation, medical and legal decisions.

While some students were uncomfortable with the word marriage, all
seemed uncomfortable at denying rights based on sexuality. Almost all
believed that someone's religious beliefs should not determine human
rights. Some even felt that the government should not be involved in
marriage, period, and that the government should just honor civil
unions for all and that a church or religious sect could choose to
recognize it as a marriage.

All I wanted from the discussion was an answer to my question: If
homosexuals can fight and die for our country, why can't they have the
same rights all others are entitled to? However, the best response I
received was that the military has a "Don't ask, don't tell" policy,
which I already knew.

While we were still contemplating the rights for homosexuals via
marriage, another debatable right was addressed. Should you have the
right to use marijuana? Contrary to popular belief, an overwhelming
majority of the students did not support legalization.

Seventeen supported legalization while 14 opposed -- a difference of
only three people. (One student had no opinion on the issue.) To me,
it seems ridiculous for someone to possibly lose their right to vote
if they're convicted of using a non-addictive drug.

Common ground was reached, though, on a medicinal purpose for
marijuana. This is because marijuana, for many patients, is the only
drug that can effectively cut the nauseating edge of chemotherapy. It
also gives you an appetite.

Not even THC pills give the same effect as smoked marijuana.
Ultimately, we agreed that if marijuana was ever to be legalized in
any form, regulations and taxes would have to be imposed. An issue
also tied with regulations and money, because taxes ultimately mean
money, was Yucca Mountain. While an overwhelming majority were opposed
to Yucca Mountain, nearly everyone felt it was inevitable. Most of the
group said they would support it as long as the security and storage
were strictly regulated.

However, the sarcasm in accepting it was shown when everyone said they
would gladly take the waste dump if Nevada's schools were given as
much money to spend per pupil as is spent on education by those states
ranking in the top five in the country. While the looming threat of
nuclear waste shadowed many students' perceptions, including my own,
some believed that there was hope in stalling the waste dump from
being used anytime soon. So strong was this belief that some students
came together to help form Youth Against Yucca Mountain.

The Sun Youth Forum gave more hope for the re-emergence of
bipartisanship that seems to have been lost in recent years. These
youths, representing the future of our country, were working and
listening. It wasn't a shouting match of "my ideas are better and are
not to be compromised." I was proud to see that cooperation in
politics is not an extinct concept. Perhaps more of this will take
place in politics in the near future.