Discussion in 'Community' started by Ghost, Dec 6, 2012.
This graph explains the state of US Politics well:
No, it doesn't, Ghost. It explains little to nothing.
realjim949 - digressing a little but it is a form of child abuse to teach children any 'ideas' which argue the position that black people, jews, homosexuals, transgender people and other minorities are sub-human scum who should be exterminated.
There really isn't anything to debate at this point. Everything there is to say has already been said. At the end of the day, liberals and conservatives simply have diametrically opposite goals and values...liberals want to make the world a better and more decent place, while conservatives want to be selfish, cruel, and spiteful for its own sake.
If any progress is gonna be made between the parties, it won't be done by acting like this.
Oh, sure. Maybe we needed to sympathize more with those slave owners, and we could have avoided the Civil War. Or maybe we needed to sympathize more with those Germans who felt humiliated by the Treaty of Versailles and supported Hitler as a result...maybe that would have averted World War II and the Holocaust. No, I don't think so. History's villains are the ones who are responsible for the garbage they stuff into their own heads.
We're in an era where every opinion is to be respected. I respect the right of everyone to draw their own conclusions from the facts; I don't respect the ability to manufacture facts, nor in actions that are demonstrably harmful given a faulty understanding of the facts.
"Free speech" does not mean unchallenged speech. In an academic environment in particular, all opinions should be rigorously scrutinised. Allowing someone just to spout nonsense unchecked gives that nonsense an air of validity. It's furthering the notion that you can construct your own reality. It's the exactly opposite of what a university should be promoting.
By associating every single Republican with a Nazi or a Slave Owner or a Fascist, you just make yourself look weaker in your own opinions and cast yourself out as someone who shouldn't be listened to.
Like it or not, there are bad Democrats and bad Republicans. But there are also good Democrats and good Republicans, and the only way we'll be able to heal this nation is by reaching out to these people and starting a dialogue.
Anyone who spouts nonsense like that doesn't need to be responded too but thank you.
It does to me. I thought White Christians still demographically made up a large chunk of the Democratic Party, because of how big the demographic is nationwide, closer to 40%-45% of the Democratic Party.
The almost 75%-25% mirror contrast between the two parties explains the shift that been going on, with White Christians flocking to the Republican Party that Trump probably took advantage of to win, and the loss in the EC in 2016. Non-WhiteChristians just aren't as big of a demographic yet, even if it is growing fast.
No it doesn't. White "Christians" voted overwhelmingly for the person that most loudly repudiates their lifestyle and values over several better choices both in this election and in the last few cycles. This sort of classification tends to give a veneer of seriousness and ideological heft to that movement that it simply has never deserved in the face of evidence it acts pretty much like all other white Reoublicans.
I think the "Christian" designation means little or nothing in terms of explaining voter behaviour. You would have to dig much deeper to ascertain what level of "being Christian" informs voter choices politically. As Wocky pointed out, a sizable chunk of "Christians" ostensibly voted for a man of dubious moral character, a crude and vulgar philanderer and self avowed ***** grabber. If you were taking the "Christian" label seriously then that fact is a sad indictment on Christianity. In this case, I think the "Christian" label is as meaningful as "Nike wearer" or some other attribute which does not necessarily inform moral character. You know, there are "Christians" and there are "Christians".
I'm focusing on how few Democrats identify as White Christian. And I know how some Christians can be hypocrites, it was the first topic in the Understanding Christianity thread I created.
Further, the monolithic focus on white Christians most always does a disservice to minorities, even though the latter groups have been the more religious of the two demographics.
You're not understanding what I'm saying. I'm commenting on the demographic makeup of the Democratic Party.
Kimball Kinnison and Jedi Smuggler would be happy: the Trump/Sesions DOJ sides with the baker refusing to serve a wedding cake to a gay couple
"In a major upcoming Supreme Court case that weighs equal rights with religious liberty, the Trump administration on Thursday sided with a Colorado baker who refused to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple.
The Department of Justice on Thursday filed a brief on behalf of baker Jack Phillips, who was found to have violated the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act by refusing to created a cake to celebrate the marriage of Charlie Craig and David Mullins in 2012. Phillips said he doesn’t create wedding cakes for same-sex couples because it would violate his religious beliefs."
"The DOJ also has taken the stance that gay workers are not entitled to job protections under federal anti-discrimination laws. Since 2015, the Equal Employment and Opportunity Commission has taken the opposite stance, saying Title VII, the civil-rights statute that covers workers, protects against bias based on sexual orientation."
The DOJ is defending this position? Man, America kinda sucks right now.
I'm waiting for a Christian merchant to refuse to serve a Muslim couple, or even a Jewish one (since we supposedly killed Jesus y'all). It'll be tragic yet fun watching the Supreme Court try to carve out why it's okay to devalue LGBTQ individuals on religious grounds but not people from other religions (assuming, of course, that's the route the Nine choose to take). With Gorsuch on the Court, I expect a 5-4 ruling in favor of the baker, followed by a rash of more discriminatory behavior nationwide.
Which is one of the infinite reasons why I hate indentity politics and find Hillary's "I'm with Her" campaign slogan the stupidest one I ever heard in politics outside of Trump's MAGA slogan which was ripped right out of the "America First" movement. The same group who during the mid/late 1930's were sympathetic to Nazis, had ties to the KKK and were 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000% wrong on WWII. Why on earth Trump and his supporters seem to have the America First Movement and the Confederacy as their two heroes IDK. I think I made this point before but I am so flabbergasted by it I am seem to be stuck on it.
occam's razor would point to racism. you'd have to do some mental gymnastics to come up with another explanation.
I try to think the best of people but it's hard to argue against it. The only other thing I can think of is warp nostalgia that represents the "good old days" which if they peel back the onion, they will see they weren't that great either. And I say this as a person who does think some of the finer points of previous generations as been thrown out with everything else that need to be and that isn't a good thing. But to look at those two groups as your heroes, yeah I just don't know. There are plenty of other heroes from the south to look at and be your inspiration. But not those two groups, I just don't get it other then what I said above.
It's almost, but not quite, a huge relief to know for sure now that Rush Limbaugh doesn't actually believe anything he says on air.
I wasn't aware that Rush Limbaugh ever said anything coherent to begin with.
I get a certain amount of pleasure watching Cruz and the Republicans who tried to block sandy relief and shut down the government before have to now eat a whole lot of crow by voting for the Harvey package/clean debt ceiling/spending bill.
Now that vote is forever on their record. As are the votes of the 90 Republicans who voted against. I look forward to reading their attempts to defend that come the midterms.
Glad Harvey victims received funding quickly and hoping Irma gets the same quick response. We should never, ever, have a situation like Sandy's aid package again.
The "white christians" flocking to the republican party probably has to do with the historic tortoise-speed of the church to accept progressive ideas. The church always accepts them... 100 years after it should have.
I know so many conservatives who only voted for Trump because they believed they were voting for the conservative morals and a conservative supreme court. But my question for them was always... is the moral state of our country the most important issue in this election? If so... Donald Trump is their moral champion?
Another question I have is, why is there is a near mythic level to the evilness of Hillary Clinton? Sure she's fickle and shady, but what is really so bad about her?
Well I think there's a lot of people who just don't think a woman should hold the highest political office, or any political office for that matter. For many of the same people, it was awful that a black man was President but at least he was male. For many conservatives wimmin should be cooking, cleaning, raising children and supporting their husbands. Hillary threatened their sammich making gender stereotypes and was therefore an evil ****.
I don't see this happening any time soon but at least they're trying
Bernie and Liz on single payer.