NationStates Jolt Archive

This debate seems to be starting in another thread where it doesn't belong so I am posing the question here...

Which way are we headed in the US as a people overall?

I imagine that it is possible that it is headed in two directions at once as well. Like economically liberal and socially conservative or vice-versa.

I am interested also in seeing if people voice their opinions based on wishful thinking, cynicism, objective evidence or whatever.

I personally think that overall we are becoming more liberal. Just looking at the difference between how life was lived in the 50's and what was considered appropriate behavior then as opposed to today. Gay marriage and civil unions would not even be a consideration if we were as conservative as back then.

What kinds of signs do you see in our society that make your case?


And yes I flurked up and didn't include a poll. Whatcha gunna do about it punk?

Gay marriage is only allowed in Massachusettes, and I think a couple of other states. In Europe, a number of nations allow it, such as Sweden, UK, Spain and so on. In the US there is still talk of regressing and outlawing gay marriage. Additionally, whilst Europe remains religious (average rating of 50% according to polls), the US is still more religious and willing to adopt conservative religious values. In someways, the way it handles religion is more liberal, yet the outcome of the high level of religiosity is still conservatism.

The US is indeed more liberal when it comes to economics though.

Neither. It's becoming more neoconservative.

This debate seems to be starting in another thread where it doesn't belong so I am posing the question here...

Which way are we headed in the US as a people overall?

I imagine that it is possible that it is headed in two directions at once as well. Like economically liberal and socially conservative or vice-versa.

I am interested also in seeing if people voice their opinions based on wishful thinking, cynicism, objective evidence or whatever.

I personally think that overall we are becoming more liberal. Just looking at the difference between how life was lived in the 50's and what was considered appropriate behavior then as opposed to today. Gay marriage and civil unions would not even be a consideration if we were as conservative as back then.

What kinds of signs do you see in our society that make your case?

'Conservative' and 'liberal' are not absolutes to which you can move towards, they're not like the N./S. Poles. Definitions of liberal and conservative change across time (generations) and place (countries and cultures). You have to decide what you mean by conservative and liberal before you can decide which way a culture's moving.

Congress, the Supreme Court, The Presidency, all are in the hands of self-identified conservatives; the President is surrounded by advisors from the last conservative govt in the 80s/90s; Rupert Murdoch's rightwing conservative media group controls a significant proportion of media outlets; the importance of the armed forces, the country having 'threat alerts', tax breaks for the wealthy, all suggest a country veering consrvative-wise to me.

the world always becomes more liberal. That's why it's called progress. What was common during the 50's (regarding Civil Rights) is now unheard of. Except now, it seems as though we're going more conservative, as overturning Roe v Wade is under serious consideration and is now scarily possible. Gay marriage progress has been halted. Bush is trying to throw us back to the good ol days, of whippin' your black and fuckin' your wife till she can't plop kids out fast enough.

In the short term, the US is still becoming Conservative, but, long term, the US has been moving to the left. much more so than at any other time in our history.

Furthurmore, I believe, in political terms, Libertarianism will begin to take hold in mainstream America. You never know, perhaps the 2 party system will end on the wings of a Libertarian party.

I'd say probably more conservative, although if you look long-term (as you did with your comparison to the 50s) it's more liberal.

Just the views of a semi-ignorant foreigner.

The USA is becoming more liberal conservative.

Bush is trying to throw us back to the good ol days, of fuckin' your wife

I don't see why that's so bad. Jealous, are we?;) :p

It could really go either way. At the moment, we're caught in a wave of fundamentalism, which is basically Christianity's belated immune response to the Enlightenment, but on the other hand, the always-present overall trends towards progress are still going. The fact that we're so bitterly divided attests to the strength and size of both factions, so really, the future of America isn't all that clear.

If I had to guess, I'd say that our economic politics will keep the mixed, cyclical, see-saw pattern, though definitely continuing to be much more conservative and capitalist than Europe, but that social politics will start tipping in favor of the liberal view. The endless progression of technology and science, and the overall trends towards plurality, will cause that. We'll stay divided, though - I think the culture wars are definitely here to stay, and escalate.

Elgesh']'Conservative' and 'liberal' are not absolutes to which you can move towards, they're not like the N./S. Poles. Definitions of liberal and conservative change across time (generations) and place (countries and cultures). You have to decide what you mean by conservative and liberal before you can decide which way a culture's moving.
True. You can break down political beliefs into beliefs regarding the economy, society, the state and its role, the military and so on. A person could be a mix of differing political beliefs, say left-wing when it comes to the economy, yet right wing when it comes to society.

the u.s. is becoming more confused. poll any particular issue except for maybe three, and it looks like things are either holding steady or trending leftwards. but a good chunk of those leftward trenders vote for theocrats and fascists.

True. You can break down political beliefs into beliefs regarding the economy, society, the state and its role, the military and so on. A person could be a mix of differing political beliefs, say left-wing when it comes to the economy, yet right wing when it comes to society.

Stalinist?

Stalinist?
Not necessarily. You may simply believe in a strong welfare element for the state yet endorse loose government, not complete communism.

I think the extremes on either side are becoming more polarized, thanks to a lot of help from a media that wants to couch every debate in a one hand/other hand sort of debate rather than actually going after facts in context.

On social issues, the country is becoming more liberal according to recent polls. 65% of people support Roe. The younger demographic groups overwhelmingly support gay rights and women's equality and civil rights. But I think our politicians are becoming more conservative, especially on social issues, because there's less downside to doing so. Anti-abortion voters have a greater ability to punish politicians than pro-choice voters do, because pro-choice voters aren't generally single-issue voters. So politicians figure that if they're anti-abortion, they've locked up a motivated sector of the populace to vote for them no matter what their other stances are.

I don't see why that's so bad. Jealous, are we?;) :p
how'd you know?

Anti-abortion voters have a greater ability to punish politicians than pro-choice voters do, because pro-choice voters aren't generally single-issue voters. So politicians figure that if they're anti-abortion, they've locked up a motivated sector of the populace to vote for them no matter what their other stances are.

in fact, a good percentage of those single-issue abortion voters are deeply confused/ignorant/delusional about the other stances of the politicians and party they support.

I wish we were becoming more libertarian :(

I wish we were becoming more libertarian :(

I would very much enjoy that.

I wish we were becoming more libertarian :(
What is the difference between liberal and libertarian exactly?

Meh. The average "liberal" American politicion is still more conservative than most European conservatives...

I wish we were becoming more libertarian :(

I wish we became a libertarian dictatorship. All the social and economic freedoms you could want, but no elections. I.e., have sex with whoever you wanted (provided both partners consented), marry anyone you wanted (again, as long as both partners consented), do whatever you wanted with your own body, spend your money however you wanted, debate any issue you wanted, say whatever you wanted, live wherever you wanted, etc., and basically be able to do almost everything except vote.

Recently, I read that Christianity is growing only in North Africa and the United States. Since religious people are much more likely to be conservative (when it comes to social matters, at least) I would say that The US is becoming more conservative. :headbang: :mad:

Also, I read an interesting theory that states that the US is becoming more conservative because of Roe v. Wade. It goes like this: Since liberals are more likely to have abortions, the number of children being born to liberal parents is declining, while conservatives tend to have more children, on the assumption that some of them won't have an abortion.

Recently, I read that Christianity is growing only in North Africa and the United States. Since religious people are much more likely to be conservative (when it comes to social matters, at least) I would say that The US is becoming more conservative. :headbang: :mad:

Also, I read an interesting theory that states that the US is becoming more conservative because of Roe v. Wade. It goes like this: Since liberals are more likely to have abortions, the number of children being born to liberal parents is declining, while conservatives tend to have more children, on the assumption that some of them won't have an abortion.

This post reminded me of the Pastafarian pirate decline theory.

I wish we became a libertarian dictatorship. All the social and economic freedoms you could want, but no elections. I.e., have sex with whoever you wanted (provided both partners consented), marry anyone you wanted (again, as long as both partners consented), do whatever you wanted with your own body, spend your money however you wanted, debate any issue you wanted, say whatever you wanted, live wherever you wanted, etc., and basically be able to do almost everything except vote.
Even better if the "dictatorship" was a group of intellectuals that would be monitored by independent commissions. That would shit from partisan politics to true aristocracy and meritocracy. I don't see it happening though :(

What is the difference between liberal and libertarian exactly?

Libertarians are what fits the European and rest-of-world perception of "liberal". That whole free market thing.

"Liberal" appears to be a broad term used to describe everyone from communists to the Democrat centre-right.

Also, I read an interesting theory that states that the US is becoming more conservative because of Roe v. Wade. It goes like this: Since liberals are more likely to have abortions, the number of children being born to liberal parents is declining, while conservatives tend to have more children, on the assumption that some of them won't have an abortion.

Good God this argument again.

If you think liberals are the only one getting abortions, then you really need to look into it more.

Never mind the fact that nobody is born liberal or conservative. There are many instances of where the children tend to follow a different ideology then the parents. For example, I know two extreamly liberal people and their son is rather conservative......

Libertarians are what fits the European and rest-of-world perception of "liberal". That whole free market thing.

"Liberal" appears to be a broad term used to describe everyone from communists to the Democrat centre-right.
Thanks for clearing that up :)

What is the difference between liberal and libertarian exactly?
not too much. Mainly, libertarians may be diverse in supporting communism or a laizze-faire capitalism but agree that human rights are important. They also seem to have the degree of arrogance that allows them to insult both liberals and conservatives while taking the high road claiming to be libertarian.

not too much. Mainly, libertarians may be diverse in supporting communism or a laizze-faire capitalism but agree that human rights are important. They also seem to have the degree of arrogance that allows them to insult both liberals and conservatives while taking the high road claiming to be libertarian.
Laissez-faire...is libertarian strictly an american term then?

I think we'll have to wait until the november mid-terms to see for sure.

Laissez-faire...is libertarian strictly an american term then?

As an economic stance, yes.

As achtung 45 stated, elsewhere, it's more of a social position, and in previous times, the word "libertarian" was associated a lot more strongly with the left.

For example, I am a libertarian socialist, but most US Libertarians would not hesitate to tell me that it isn't possible...because they see libertarianism as a mostly economic position.

lol - I meant to have a poll but I didn't check the box I think. oh wellz

Yes I know it's much more complicated than liberal vs. conservative. I was leaving the definitions up to the replyer, plus I didn't want to write a 14 page essay on all the facets of liberal/conservative meanings (mostly because I wouldn't be able to).

I also know and said in the original post that you can break it down and say we are becoming liberal in one area and conservative in another. I still think that overall we are heading toward a more liberal future even though we still have a lot of conservative elements.

I don't think you can stop progress.

As an economic stance, yes.

As achtung 45 stated, elsewhere, it's more of a social position, and in previous times, the word "libertarian" was associated a lot more strongly with the left.

For example, I am a libertarian socialist, but most US Libertarians would not hesitate to tell me that it isn't possible...because they see libertarianism as a mostly economic position.
Right, that answers a question I long had looming in my head. Thanks.

In my opinion America is being more divisive. The conservitives want nothing to do with the liberals the liberals want nothing to do with the conservitives. Both sides see the other as irrational and counter productive.

Do libertarians actually believe that companies should be able to do whatever they want? That they can pollute as much as they want and dump anything in our rivers, and cut down all the lumber they can get their hands on? Really, I don't know but it seems that I heard that somewhere.

"Is the US becoming more liberal or conservative?"

As long as the Democrats are held hostage by the far left, and don't come up with any new ideas or people worth a shit to run for office, the US will seem to be continuing its rightward drift.

"Is the US becoming more liberal or conservative?"

As long as the Democrats are held hostage by the far left, and don't come up with any new ideas or people worth a shit to run for office, the US will seem to be continuing its rightward drift.


nice work on taking this chance to bash the left rather than say anything with substance.

I still think that overall we are heading toward a more liberal future even though we still have a lot of conservative elements.

I don't think you can stop progress.

Maybe it's even more useful to say 'we're heading towards a more liberal future even though we still have a lot of conservative moments'?

I agree with you, but I think that, for sake of argument, _conservative_ (the same is true of all political ideologies, just staying on-topic with the example :)) elements within society can influence several 'strands', making a given time in the historyt of a nation more conservative than others.

It's not just fading from red to blue (conservative to liberal) across time like a pattern on fabric; but the different-coloured threads can ifluence the threads around them, making one time more consevative _while still generally_ moving in a 'liberal' direction.

nice work on taking this chance to bash the left rather than say anything with substance.
He asked. I answered.

Besides, the left needs to have its collective ass kicked anyway.

Right, that answers a question I long had looming in my head. Thanks.

You're welcome.
Do libertarians actually believe that companies should be able to do whatever they want? That they can pollute as much as they want and dump anything in our rivers, and cut down all the lumber they can get their hands on? Really, I don't know but it seems that I heard that somewhere.

Hey, the market will provide solutions. When everything is dead, the rivers black, and the sky almost the same colour, someone will realise that they can make a bucketload of money out of restoring the environment.

:/

He asked. I answered.

Besides, the left needs to have its collective ass kicked anyway.
No more so then the right

No more so then the right
True, true.

The U.S. is going up economically, but seriously downhill in all other regions i.e. social standards, living standards etc.

Elgesh']Maybe it's even more useful to say 'we're heading towards a more liberal future even though we still have a lot of conservative moments'?

I agree with you, but I think that, for sake of argument, _conservative_ (the same is true of all political ideologies, just staying on-topic with the example :)) elements within society can influence several 'strands', making a given time in the historyt of a nation more conservative than others.

It's not just fading from red to blue (conservative to liberal) across time like a pattern on fabric; but the different-coloured threads can ifluence the threads around them, making one time more consevative _while still generally_ moving in a 'liberal' direction.


I can see that but I also see something of a fading pattern as well. Theres an obvious ebb and flow effect that constantly happens and many little strange anomolies too; like where a governer in a blue state might end up being some Republican/movie star freakshow for a while.

I guess my main focus though is on the attitude of the US citizens in general, the way of live we live day to day, and the types of media that we see/enjoy/partake in.

He asked. I answered.

Besides, the left needs to have its collective ass kicked anyway.


I asked yes, and I was hoping for people to give their hypothesis and reasons to back up their hypothesis. What did you do? Spout Republican/conservative talking points while bashing the left (which are really just the same things) as usual.

The left, the people with no ideas as you and every other Republican that can't think for themselves claim (yes I know you claim not to be a republican and that you are a centrist so no need to bring that up again), are the ones who are always looking for ways to make things better for everyone and fight oppression. Without the left there would be no progress.

Hey, the market will provide solutions. When everything is dead, the rivers black, and the sky almost the same colour, someone will realise that they can make a bucketload of money out of restoring the environment.

:/


lol

actually it might be pretty kuhl to see the ocean on fire

They also seem to have the degree of arrogance that allows them to insult both liberals and conservatives while taking the high road claiming to be libertarian.

All the ones I have met in person tend to view everybody else as lazy and stupid......

"Is the US becoming more liberal or conservative?"

As long as the Democrats are held hostage by the far left, and don't come up with any new ideas or people worth a shit to run for office, the US will seem to be continuing its rightward drift.

Your "centrism" is showing again.......

All the ones I have met in person tend to view everybody else as lazy and stupid......


I'm no libertarian but there are days when I feel the same way. :p

My answer to the question if US is becoming more liberal is not at all.
Social politics are decreasing, ecological advisors are not listened, economic information is not favourable, because US spents the same cuantity of cash of all the others coutries in the world (thats the real fact of the Irak´s invasion).....
We cannot compare the actual situation whitin the 50´s, american´s prestige has decreased enormously.
Personally i belive that america is going by the way of self destruction, specially with that kind of leadership, which has the same skills than Homer Simpson.
Confirms that the future is on the decline

Why does the title say poll when there is no poll?

"Is the US becoming more liberal or conservative?"

As long as the Democrats are held hostage by the far left.
They're not. If the US even has a far left, they don't have power. With most major Democrats endorsing the Iraq war and other Republican policies, I'd say that Bush owns them.

They're not. If the US even has a far left, they don't have power. With most major Democrats endorsing the Iraq war and other Republican policies, I'd say that Bush owns them.

bah, facts. you can prove anything that's even remotely true with facts.

Why does the title say poll when there is no poll?

It's a liberal conspiracy to hide the truth.

I'd say probably more conservative, although if you look long-term (as you did with your comparison to the 50s) it's more liberal.

Just the views of a semi-ignorant foreigner.

Ja,ja Just the view of a blinded by the opulence and audovisual aids.

and if we comapre the Hitler´s governemente before the war with the medieval time, he was also a liberal and a freedom warrior, absolutly incredible some comparations, because the world has changed a lot in only one decade

The left, the people with no ideas as you and every other Republican that can't think for themselves claim, are the ones who are always looking for ways to make things better for everyone and fight oppression. Without the left there would be no progress.
Well said. Though let's not make the grevious error of thinking that the Democrats are leftists.

Why does the title say poll when there is no poll?


cuz I fuckered up :(

I put the number of poll options I wanted but I forgot to check the box saying I wanted a poll

Well said. Though let's not make the grevious error of thinking that the Democrats are leftists.


I hope I didn't imply that because I certainly agree with you that there are no leftists in the Democratic party.

Ja,ja Just the view of a blinded by the opulence and audovisual aids.

and if we comapre the Hitler´s governemente before the war with the medieval time, he was also a liberal and a freedom warrior, absolutly incredible some comparations, because the world has changed a lot in only one decade


are you referring to me as the one being blind? I have acknowledged that there are plenty of conservative elements in the US have I not? What visual aids are you talking about? lol - by looking at the state of things now versus 50 years ago? And yes Germany during hitlers time was more liberal than say the dark ages... and moving forward thru time we see it getting even more liberal. You only helped to prove my point.

Every year thigns seemingly get more liberal... yes there is a see-saw effect that happens but overall you can see that thru time every country seems to move slowly toward a more liberal way of life.

Hopefully, we're moving economically conservative and socially liberal, since liberals can't run the economy for shit but are great at preserving civil liberties while conservatives are bad when it comes to civil rights but great at running the economy. Keep them in their fields of expertise.

Do libertarians actually believe that companies should be able to do whatever they want? That they can pollute as much as they want and dump anything in our rivers, and cut down all the lumber they can get their hands on? Really, I don't know but it seems that I heard that somewhere.

Do whatever they want? In matter of speaking, yes.

However, in a libertarian society, there would be no limited liability (which is granted to corporations by the state) for a corporation to hide behind.

A company would have to weigh the risks of many lawsuits due to multitudes of three-headed children against enforcing stricter environmental standards.

Stronger private property rights would allow those affected by said pollutants to more easily seek compensation from the corporations, assuming they decided on polluting the river.

As for tree cutting, if the paper company owned the land, they could cut down as many trees as they wanted. Of course, they'd then have to buy more land with more trees if they cut down all of their previous ones, or they could just maintain tree farms. Like they do now, I think.

while conservatives are bad when it comes to civil rights but great at running the economy.

Assuming we're not talking about Bush conservatism; which I'm sure makes most real conservatives puke.

I'd say its' becoming more politically liberal (bigger government, more entitlements) and more socially conservatives. Neither are good.

The US is becoming way more conservative, especially under Bush and his Christian right-wing filth! :sniper:

Do whatever they want? In matter of speaking, yes.

However, in a libertarian society, there would be no limited liability (which is granted to corporations by the state) for a corporation to hide behind.

A company would have to weigh the risks of many lawsuits due to multitudes of three-headed children against enforcing stricter environmental standards.

Stronger private property rights would allow those affected by said pollutants to more easily seek compensation from the corporations, assuming they decided on polluting the river.

As for tree cutting, if the paper company owned the land, they could cut down as many trees as they wanted. Of course, they'd then have to buy more land with more trees if they cut down all of their previous ones, or they could just maintain tree farms. Like they do now, I think.



Assuming we're not talking about Bush conservatism; which I'm sure makes most real conservatives puke.\

I feel very uneasy with a system that would allow for a company to pollute in the first place because you know it is going to happen. It happens even with laws against it, laws that issue pretty hefty fines, that some of those companies still do it. I think they would rather pay the fines and continue to pollute because proper disposal still costs more and most people are so apathetic to pollution that they could give a shit less about it until it affects them directly and they have some new form of cancer or something.

Didn't the court system pretty much fail on this anyway which is why we had to come up with environmental legistlation in the end?

We may have conservatives (if you can call such recklessness conservative) running the country right now but that doesnt really indicate a long term trend. Over the long term I think it is undeniable that no matter who is in power, we continue to become mroe socially liberal as a whole.

I am not saying that conservatism is going away completely nor should it. We need opposites to keep each other in check.

Frankly I'm disappointed that everyone seems to associate conservatism with Bush. Back here over the pond we're quite happy with conservative tendencies, especially the work that the Labour government have been doing. Hopefully there will be more of a shift towards independent economics (the best idea Blair ever came up with) and we can let experts run the economy instead of politicians.
I think it's sad that many people see conservative governments as being good with the economy when in fact all they're doing is letting go and not messing around with government intervention as is sadly the case with more liberal/leftist/socialist governments. Unless you call not having a policy a policy, of course.

Nice to see the traditional mindless comments from each side in this thread, as well. A tip for social interation for you - calling people filth is not a good way to persuade them that you are right.

My view? I see the US as becoming far more imperial than it has ever been whatever political spectrum it sits on. Taking US-style freedoms and democracy to the rest of the world regardless of whether that's even a good thing, and all that jazz.

I feel very uneasy with a system that would allow for a company to pollute in the first place because you know it is going to happen. It happens even with laws against it, laws that issue pretty hefty fines, and some of those companies still do it. I think they would rather pay the fines and continue to pollute because proper disposal still costs way more and most people are so apathetic to pollution that they could give a shit less about it until it affects them directly and they have some new form of cancer or something.

Yes, that is kind of the problem. However, thanks to the rise of mass media the companies have to to avert a PR disaster. Plus, as much as I hate class-action lawsuits, those things have done some good on the environmental end.

Didn't the court system pretty much fail on this anyway which is why we had to come up with legistlation end the end?

I don't think the court really has jurisdiction since environmental controls seem to fall under "regulating commerce" which is Congress' job.

Yes, that is kind of the problem. However, thanks to the rise of mass media the companies have to to avert a PR disaster. Plus, as much as I hate class-action lawsuits, those things have done some good on the environmental end.



I don't think the court really has jurisdiction since environmental controls seem to fall under "regulating commerce" which is Congress' job.


Yes, but companies have a lot more resources when it comes to pumping out their side of the story in the media. Not to mention the influence they can push so much more easily on lawmakers (I don't think this will change if we remove environmental laws).

Also did environmental controls exist before the creation of the EPA in the early 70's? What I meant was that before there were environmental controls, the courts had to decide if people were being wronged, isn't that right? I was guessing that if that was the case then it must not have been a good system if they decided that it wasn't working and we had to put environmental controls in place.

Yes, but companies have a lot more resources when it comes to pumping out their side of the story in the media. Not to mention the influence they can push so much more easily on lawmakers (I don't think this will change if we remove environmental laws).

That's why the internet is so great; there are literally millions of people who can get and disseminate information instantly that the high-priced corporate PR spin is literally overwhelmed. Of course, that doesn't do a thing about the lawmakers which is why attempts at environmental accountability are unsuccessful.

Also did environmental controls exist before the creation of the EPA in the early 70's? What I meant was that before there were environmental controls, the courts had to decide if people were being wronged, isn't that right? I was guessing that if that was the case then it must not have been a good system if they decided that it wasn't working and we had to put environmental controls in place.

I think the first Supreme Court cases were in the 1920's, but virtually no other cases were brought before the Court until the 1970's. It seems any abuses were either settled in lower courts or not at all.

http://www.planning.org/25anniversary/cases.htm

nice work on taking this chance to bash the left rather than say anything with substance.
Did you expect any different?

And just in case anyone wants to accuse me of the same, Post #15 is my contribution.

Good God this argument again.

If you think liberals are the only one getting abortions, then you really need to look into it more.

Never mind the fact that nobody is born liberal or conservative. There are many instances of where the children tend to follow a different ideology then the parents. For example, I know two extreamly liberal people and their son is rather conservative......

I wasn't saying that I believe this theory, I was only saying that it's an interesting theory and it deserves consideration. Besides, parents do influence their children. If your parents are hard-core Christian, you will likely be hard-core Christian. If your parents are atheists, you will more likely be an atheist than a believer.;)

That's why the internet is so great; there are literally millions of people who can get and disseminate information instantly that the high-priced corporate PR spin is literally overwhelmed. Of course, that doesn't do a thing about the lawmakers which is why attempts at environmental accountability are unsuccessful.



I think the first Supreme Court cases were in the 1920's, but virtually no other cases were brought before the Court until the 1970's. It seems any abuses were either settled in lower courts or not at all.

http://www.planning.org/25anniversary/cases.htm

Sure, I know the internet is a great place to get information out there but it is a big place and not everyone gets their issues out there successfully, but the corporation can put up webpages to refute the information, pay others to blog for them and pay scientists to lie for them and the internet just becomes another place for misinformation.

I think that environmental laws have proven to have positive effects - no more rivers catching on fire, the bald eagle taken off the endangered species list, and dark pollution clouds dissapearing over large industrial cities have proven that environmental regulations have done what the courts could not do just by punishing businesses one at a time.

Yes class action suits have done wonders and I am not saying environmental regulations are the final say in how to do things but neither is "letting the market decide".

Did you expect any different?

And just in case anyone wants to accuse me of the same, Post #15 is my contribution.


No I didn't but I am an optimist and I continue to hold out hope.

I wasn't saying that I believe this theory, I was only saying that it's an interesting theory and it deserves consideration. Besides, parents do influence their children. If your parents are hard-core Christian, you will likely be hard-core Christian. If your parents are atheists, you will more likely be an atheist than a believer.;)
Politics is not like religion.

Politics is not like religion.

But religion has a direct effect on politics. Protestants are more likely to vote Republican, :mp5: Catholics and Jews are more likely to vote Democrat.

But religion has a direct effect on politics. Protestants are more likely to vote Republican, :mp5: Catholics and Jews are more likely to vote Democrat.

Nope, democrats have lost the catholic vote.

Nope, democrats have lost the catholic vote.

Not all of them.

But religion has a direct effect on politics. Protestants are more likely to vote Republican, :mp5: Catholics and Jews are more likely to vote Democrat.
There's no evidence to suggest that they're voting Republican because they're Protestant. There's no evidence to suggest that they're voting Democrat because they're Jewish.

Not all of them.
I'm sure Liverbreath didn't mean that. I mean, it's also true that there are plenty of Protestants who vote Democrat.