Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Truean]

Dunno how I feel about that.

There are specific instances of people widely saying "We're all for the constitution!" and then saying they should repeal the 14th amendment, a part of the constitution.... Because, clearly if they don't agree with it, the "founding fathers" wouldn't either...[sigh].

Like I said, I'm sure not ALL do it, but the ones who do REALLY stick out.

[Luke_Prowler]

"Constitution" has basicly become a buzz word like Liberty, Freedom, and Jobs. Basicly used to poke a reaction out of people who take politic at face value.

[Duke 2.0]

 I think my beef(Of which there has been many slices of in the past) was with a sort of intellectual Uncanny Valley effect, where I already agree with the base idea but not with the small difference of intensity or slip of over-generalization.

[Powder Miner]

...I live in Seattle, and am a very open conservative.

To start off, I am for gay rights. So don't try to force the "Republicans are all against gay rights" thing on me- it's one of the myriad things that angers me when I read it.

Now that that's out of the way... Not all of us are stupid. Please don't say we are- it's just a prejudice and it annoys the heck out of me. And in fact we DO know about the constitution (although I disagree with Perry about gay rights)- Obamacare's mandate clause, for example, IS actually unconstitutional- violating the Tenth Amendment (If the constitution doesn't give a power to the state then the people get it- and mandating purchases isn't a power given by the constitution to the state), for example. Don't assume we're just randomly stating it when we call something unconstitutional.

[SalmonGod]

As RedKing and I both said, not all conservatives/republicans are openly anti-intellectual.  But they're a growing culture that many of us encounter in our daily lives.  Judging by the behavior of republican representatives, they're also a growing influence that is mostly dominating the republican party these days.

I mean seriously... I'm not comfortable with how close we were to having Sarah Palin in the white house.

[scriver]

It doesn't matter how much "elitism" is an anti-intellectual buzzword, elitist crap is still elitist crap no matter whose ass it comes from. And making people who disagree with you up to be drooling simpletons, for no other reasons than that they disagree with you, is very much elitist crap.

Now, I'll leave it at that, because I am not knowledgeable enough to argue about USAmerican culture, politi-ideological or otherwise, with Americans, so maybe there is reason to call them idiots. However, to me you're coming of as engaging in "I have Opinion, and I am intelligent (obviously, I mean, it's me); they don't share Opinion, they must be simpleminded fools" thinking.

[Nadaka]

...I live in Seattle, and am a very open conservative.

To start off, I am for gay rights. So don't try to force the "Republicans are all against gay rights" thing on me- it's one of the myriad things that angers me when I read it.

Now that that's out of the way... Not all of us are stupid. Please don't say we are- it's just a prejudice and it annoys the heck out of me. And in fact we DO know about the constitution (although I disagree with Perry about gay rights)- Obamacare's mandate clause, for example, IS actually unconstitutional- violating the Tenth Amendment (If the constitution doesn't give a power to the state then the people get it- and mandating purchases isn't a power given by the constitution to the state), for example. Don't assume we're just randomly stating it when we call something unconstitutional.

I do not align myself with organizations that I substantially disagree with. Why do you? Suppression of gay rights and violation of the constitution is both popular and official Republican policy.

The mandatory purchase of insurance was a republican backed compromise solution. The single payer option would have been constitutional. "Obamacare" is unconstitutional because the Republicans would not accept the constitutionally valid option.

[Truean]

To start off, I am for gay rights. So don't try to force the "Republicans are all against gay rights" thing on me- it's one of the myriad things that angers me when I read it.

Maybe it isn't "All" republicans who are homophobic. Maybe some of them are good, but they're silent when the bad ones speak up. They don't speak up when a gay soldier is booed at a presidential debate, because he is gay.

?

Surely you'll agree that at least an overwhelming majority of Republicans are against gay rights? Someone has to be voting for these things.... There's a reason most if not all of the Republican Presidential Candidates don't like it....



Holy Crap 40% don't think it should be legal to be gay and in a gay relationship:


And even in the updated 2011 version guess which political ideology still overwhelmingly doesn't like the gays...?

I am being unreasonable here, because looking at those numbers, what else am I supposed to think?

[Darvi]

WTF happened in '86? O_o

[Willfor]

-snip-

-snip-

Thank you for doing the only thing you could have possibly done that is going to shut down his desire to see you as someone who isn't attacking him based on his affiliations. Thank you for beating him in the head because of the moniker he wears. Thank you for taking the high road. He is not a person, he is the enemy.

[Truean]

WTF happened in '86? O_o

This Basically, it was the opposite of Lawrence v. Texas and it said it was totally cool to make being gay a crime....

-snip-

-snip-

Thank you for doing the only thing you could have possibly done that is going to shut down his desire to see you as someone who isn't attacking him based on his affiliations. Thank you for beating him in the head because of the moniker he wears. Thank you for taking the high road. He is not a person, he is the enemy.

Saying, "most republicans are against gay rights," is true, hence why politicians of that party overwhelmingly go for anti gay legislation. I appreciate those who aren't against gay rights whatever political beliefs they may have. Saying the Republican party is overwhelmingly against gay rights is not saying he is against gay rights. I'm not demonizing him, I'm not saying he's an enemy.

I'm saying it's wrong for that political party to be against gays and that the party goals are against gays. Its individual members may vary, and I hope they do, a lot.

[Jackrabbit]

It still baffles me that it's only at 50% or higher but I guess America is a big country with lots of cultures stirred in.

And Australia's not that much better. Australia shits me more, actually, because we have no excuse.

-snip-

-snip-

Thank you for doing the only thing you could have possibly done that is going to shut down his desire to see you as someone who isn't attacking him based on his affiliations. Thank you for beating him in the head because of the moniker he wears. Thank you for taking the high road. He is not a person, he is the enemy.

It's rather difficult to keep an argument that is so strongly tied to emotions and core values from becoming heated and so far you've done the absolute worst at helping prevent that.

[SalmonGod]

However, to me you're coming of as engaging in "I have Opinion, and I am intelligent (obviously, I mean, it's me); they don't share Opinion, they must be simpleminded fools" thinking.

No no.  I understand that this is the way you're seeing it and would agree with you, but I'm trying to explain that it's more than this.  There is a significant cultural presence in America of people who actively and openly ignore and/or reject logic and evidence. 

They will say that something is true, you will put direct evidence in front of their face that it is not, and they'll look away with their fingers in their ears screaming "LALALALALALALALA".  For instance, try talking with people here about the war in Iraq.  It has been thoroughly debunked and officially admitted by many of the same people who were involved with starting the war that Iraq had no WMD and that there were no terrorist links to justify the invasion.  You can put this stuff right in front of them and they'll either behave like you just showed them a bunch of meaningless gibberish or tell you plainly "I don't care about this stuff, I still believe it's true." 

They'll demonize Islamic nations for their oppressive religious laws, and in the same breath advocate criminalization of abortion and homosexuality in America on completely religious basis.  It's not at all a matter of opinion to point out to them that this is a blatant logical contradiction, and they need to either find different ways to justify their actions or admit to being exactly like the people they identify as villains.  You'll get the same response.

Push this too hard, and you'll get accused of being some sort of snake-tongued liberal intellectual involved in some conspiracy to undermine their values through dirty intellectualism, which needs to be eliminated via some violent dystopian solution.

This is not calling them stupid because they believe things that are stupid.  This is calling them stupid because they believe things in stupid ways.  They openly embrace ignorance and reject education and intelligence, and it's a cultural trend here that is becoming very active and dangerous.

And I repeat that I do not believe conservatism is defined by these types of people.  They are just a cultural group that aligns itself with one party.

[kaijyuu]

I do not align myself with organizations that I substantially disagree with. Why do you?

I'd be willing to bet the vast majority of Americans do this. There's only two parties with a shot at winning anything, and unless one is a total sheep nodding in agreement to whatever their chosen party says, no one completely agrees with either side.

Example: Do you "substantially disagree" with video game censorship? I do. The democratic party is usually the one heading that particular debacle in the US. I'll probably still (largely) vote democratic, though.


Anywho I think his point is "don't generalize," which I can totally get behind.

[Virex]

The very idea that evidence is to be heard at all times is, in itself, elitist, because it assumes the behavior of self-proclaimed "logical people" to be superior to the behavior of "irrational people".


In addition to that, anti-intelectualism is an important and popular political view. Decrying it as uneducated and unworthy is basically anti-democratic.