NationStates Jolt Archive

Why do so many people think that Conservative republicans are so much more moral than democrats and that Democrats are evil Queers burning bibles and trying to destroy the world as we know it? Isn't morality not what we are superficially, like being homosexual or not being entirely religious. If so, then why are we forcefed that these things are immoral. It's all hypocracy! What do you think?

According to my concept of morality, Democrats are. Of course, I don't think queers burning Bibles is immoral at all. And Republicans need to get the vote somehow, so they say that they are morally superior, and that, although false, appeals to a lot of voters.

Why do so many people think that Conservative republicans are so much more moral than democrats and that Democrats are evil Queers burning bibles and trying to destroy the world as we know it? Isn't morality not what we are superficially, like being homosexual or not being entirely religious. If so, then why are we forcefed that these things are immoral. It's all hypocracy! What do you think?
I sometimes think the exact opposite. Conservatives tend to hide behind their morals, and not actual help anyone. Liberals actually pay attention to the world, and do something about it.

I agree, saying you're moral doesn't make you morally correct. Shouldn't your actions you take to the things around determine that?

I agree, saying you're moral doesn't make you morally correct. Shouldn't your actions you take to the things around determine that?
Absolutly.
"Evil will suceed when good men do nothing."

Why do so many people think that Conservative republicans are so much more moral than democrats and that Democrats are evil Queers burning bibles and trying to destroy the world as we know it?

I do not know. I consider the differences between republicans and democrats to be neglible when seen in the vast spectrum of existing political parties.

I do not know. I consider the differences between republicans and democrats to be neglible when seen in the vast spectrum of existing political parties.

I agree, there's not really much af a difference, a politician's a politician. Morality isn't all that important in their eyes except winning votes over. But I'd have to say Republican scandals tend to lead to a much greater damage to the common people that Democratic ones. I don't care if the president gets a blowjob or gets in a 69 with Marylin Monroe. That's his choice. But when you would spend 69 Billion dollars ona war which they say is in its last phases which could actually last 12-16 years and then give people that earn more than 2 million dollars a year a tax cut rather than help people in need of support such as the Louisianans that's messed up. And besides how does the last phases of a war last 3-4 time longer than the entire war has already.

And don't get me wrong, I support our troops and I respect the fact that the people of Iraq probably are better off without Saddam, the fact that we have no plan really bugs me. I'd say that is highly immoral.

I agree, there's not really much af a difference, a politician's a politician. Morality isn't all that important in their eyes except winning votes over. But I'd have to say Republican scandals tend to lead to a much greater damage to the common people that Democratic ones. I don't care if the president gets a blowjob or gets in a 69 with Marylin Monroe. That's his choice. But when you would spend 69 Billion dollars ona war which they say is in its last phases which could actually last 12-16 years and then give people that earn more than 2 million dollars a year a tax cut rather than help people in need of support such as the Louisianans that's messed up. And besides how does the last phases of a war last 3-4 time longer than the entire war has already.

And don't get me wrong, I support our troops and I respect the fact that the people of Iraq probably are better off without Saddam, the fact that we have no plan really bugs me. I'd say that is highly immoral.
Agreed whoheartdly.

While Republicans do like to claim they are all for religion, they are more often than not the ones engaging the most in dirtying their hands in serious, slanderous mud-slinging and attacknig the opposition and anyone that disagrees with them.

I like the Democrats more. Naturally, they are more "morally correct".
I do not like the Republicans. Thus, they are less "morally correct".

I generally find the Democratic core to be "pro-labour".
In contrast, the Republican core is more "pro-business".

The politicians though? They're a load of crock.

The Republican politicians try to hide their corruption under a veneer of Judeo-Christian morality while the Democratic politicians don't. The only reason they appear more moral is because they know how to play the religion game with their constituents.

In all honesty, neither party is morally superior to the other, because neither party really gives a shit about the people they represent. The morally correct people in the two parties are the ones whose ideas are affected by their own beliefs and experiences, not politics.

The "correctness" of their ideas is of course debatable, but neither side really has moral superiority.

Neither party is morally correct. All either of them wants is to win the next election and the one after that ect.. They will tell you what ever they have to, to win bottom line. Many times we are given the "choice" on voting for the lesser of two evils ( and if your brother is the Gov. of let's sat Fl. then you get to win no matter what the voters say.). In having only two major parties neither can take the moral high ground because they each do the same damn thing. The Right plays the Christian Values Card and the Left plays the Race / We Care Card. All to pull on those old heart strings and to get you to vote for them. Now don't you go and vote for a third party candidate because then you we be giving the election to the other party ( the one we know you hate. ) Did you know that the H.R. is trying to pass a bill (H.R. 4694)that will require a third party candidates to get signatures from 1 in 5 registered voters ( "For third-party candidates to be eligible for the same funds that Republicans and Democrats would receive, they would have to obtain enough signatures to exceed 20% of votes cast in the last election within their district.") before they can get government funds but the "Major Party Candidates" do not have to? All each party cares about is POWER.:confused:

Morals are based on the beliefs of the majority, and most people (Not all for those of you who will probably attack me shortly) are influenced by the majority in their beliefs regarding morality. So, I suppose, if the Democrats recieved the larger popular vote (IIRC) then they are supposedly the more "moral" party based on the beliefs of the population.

Of course, this is why our judicial system should work on the Harm Principle. John Stuart Mill FTW.

The correct answer is "Neither".

Both sides will say whatever you want to hear, to get your vote. Neither will actually do anything about morals while in power. Both will suck up to things which boost the economy.

Both sides will say whatever you want to hear, to get your vote. Neither will actually do anything about morals while in power. Both will suck up to things which boost the economy.

I wish they did. Instead, they spend all of their time whining about big, bad China and India and pretending like it's the 1950's again.

*snip* Of course, I don't think queers burning Bibles is immoral at all.

*Burns a bible, just for the heck of it*

Come on, you know us Queers are inherently immoral. We like having hot sweaty man-on-man sex. That's got to be immoral, right? And, we burn Bibles *everyday*. That had to be my third or fourth, I stopped counting a while back.

'Course, advocating giving more money to wealthy and less money to the poor, now that's what morality is ALL ABOUT.
[/sarcasm]

Man, people hiding behind their so-called morality are funny.

Moral, Immoral, it's all an illusion, it's just how many people there are coincidentally behind you.

Moral, Immoral, it's all an illusion, it's just how many people there are coincidentally behind you.
If it's an illusion, do you advocate torture and murder?

If it's an illusion, do you advocate torture and murder?
Oh, come on, torture is *so* 16th century.

i'd say in first place morality isn't the bussiness of government (other then to behaive ITSELF). and i don't see attempting to legislate morality as being itself at all moral.

republicans hide behind a pretense of religiousity, at least one major faction of them, the other major faction makes less pretense of being anything other then bizdroids out for what they can get for themselves. at any rate republicans in general (and when generalizing about ANY group, bear in mind there are ALWAYS exceptions) wouldn't know morality from a hole in the ground if it bit them on the ass.

democrates on the other hand, at least have been, less interested in paying lip service to the pseudomoral pretentions of (primarily christer) religiousity, then of acturaly practicing something resembling a practical and objective morality (even if the're not always any better then anyone else at doing so, none the less this appears to be genuinely their aim, even if the practical considerations of competitive politics all to often complicate matters and get in the way)

this is the reality, and an all too unfortunate one in the u.s. of today.

(and an objective morality isn't about what you go to bed with but about what kind of a world your priorities in combination with everyone else's actualy create)

=^^=
.../\...

I sometimes think the exact opposite. Conservatives tend to hide behind their morals, and not actual help anyone. Liberals actually pay attention to the world, and do something about it.

Let me translate this. Liberals worry about what the rest of the world is doing, conservatives worry about their family and what is good for it. For instance, liberals are worried about civil liberties such as the ability to say "sh*t" on television, and about all sorts of social problems associated with everybody else. For the most part, conservatives worry about bringing up their children, and teach/demonstrate by example.

A perfect example of this is:

A conservative just worries about their family. We go to church and teach our children to study hard in school, don't spare the rod, and pretty much ignore what society (liberals) say you should do, or not do, and do what is best for your family, and do what has worked for hundreds of years. Traditional. We also believe in sacrifice, and not in pure hedonism (just because it feels good, doesn't mean we should always do it. Sacrifice and conservative action is often best)

Conservatives are all about results



A liberal worries about the world, and gets involved in things that have nothing to do with their family. They feel that what feels good should be done, even if it is at the long-range detriment to their family. Liberals feel that tradition and reasonableness should be disregarded if it gets in the way of hedonism. Sacrifice is good, only if it has an immediate return on investment. Children are taught these values, and shown that what feels good is most likely always the way to go.

Liberals are all about feelings

Let me translate this. Liberals worry about what the rest of the world is doing, conservatives worry about their family and what is good for it. For instance, liberals are worried about civil liberties such as the ability to say "sh*t" on television, and about all sorts of social problems associated with everybody else. For the most part, conservatives worry about bringing up their children, and teach/demonstrate by example.

A perfect example of this is:

A conservative just worries about their family. We go to church and teach our children to study hard in school, don't spare the rod, and pretty much ignore what society (liberals) say you should do, or not do, and do what is best for your family, and do what has worked for hundreds of years. Traditional. We also believe in sacrifice, and not in pure hedonism (just because it feels good, doesn't mean we should always do it. Sacrifice and conservative action is often best)

Conservatives are all about results



A liberal worries about the world, and gets involved in things that have nothing to do with their family. They feel that what feels good should be done, even if it is at the long-range detriment to their family. Liberals feel that tradition and reasonableness should be disregarded if it gets in the way of hedonism. Sacrifice is good, only if it has an immediate return on investment. Children are taught these values, and shown that what feels good is most likely always the way to go.

Liberals are all about feelings
Um...what? Liberals are the minority, not the majority. And no, you have no idea how a liberal family works. Don't try to define something you know nothing about.

I don't even understand how this political divide with religion even came up, to where it appears at face value that all conservatives are literal Bible believers, and that all Liberals are supposedly only at best liberal Bible believers, as far as I know, Conservative just literally means you don't want things to change much and strict constitutionalism and all that, and Liberal just means you want to bend things and stretch things as situations develop. How did it polarize into political parties? Personally, there's a great many things i'd like to change about the government that are probably very unconstitutional for me to suggest, which as I understand it would make me a liberal, except im totally a literal Bible believer, 6 days for creation, abortion is murder, homosexuality a sin, contradictions don't exist, all that 9 yards. I've also seen one or 2 instances where a few people on the so-called "far right" didn't exactly show very Biblical colors so to speak, so I just have to wonder, how did religious beliefs become polarized into political factions? :/

Let me translate this. Liberals worry about what the rest of the world is doing, conservatives worry about their family and what is good for it. For instance, liberals are worried about civil liberties such as the ability to say "sh*t" on television, and about all sorts of social problems associated with everybody else. For the most part, conservatives worry about bringing up their children, and teach/demonstrate by example.

A perfect example of this is:

A conservative just worries about their family. We go to church and teach our children to study hard in school, don't spare the rod, and pretty much ignore what society (liberals) say you should do, or not do, and do what is best for your family, and do what has worked for hundreds of years. Traditional. We also believe in sacrifice, and not in pure hedonism (just because it feels good, doesn't mean we should always do it. Sacrifice and conservative action is often best)

Conservatives are all about results



A liberal worries about the world, and gets involved in things that have nothing to do with their family. They feel that what feels good should be done, even if it is at the long-range detriment to their family. Liberals feel that tradition and reasonableness should be disregarded if it gets in the way of hedonism. Sacrifice is good, only if it has an immediate return on investment. Children are taught these values, and shown that what feels good is most likely always the way to go.

Liberals are all about feelings
Here is the huge flaw in your argument:

Conservatives, at least in the sense you seem to use it, do not worry only about their family and what's good for them.

They seem to be under a notion that what's good for their family is good for everyone else, and as such, should be imposed on the rest of the state/country/world/universe.

Personally, if a conservative is against contraceptives or birth control, I'm fine with it. He just can avoid using it.

But when they go ahead and start ranting about how me or my children shouldn't have access to birth control, or sex ed, or that they should only have sex in heterosexual marriage or any other form that fits their own religious/moral/ethical beliefs, I draw a line.

Conservatives tend to arrogantly assume they know better and should decide for everyone else. So no, they're not only about thinking of their own family and getting results.

Here is the huge flaw in your argument:

Conservatives, at least in the sense you seem to use it, do not worry only about their family and what's good for them.

They seem to be under a notion that what's good for their family is good for everyone else, and as such, should be imposed on the rest of the state/country/world/universe.

Personally, if a conservative is against contraceptives or birth control, I'm fine with it. He just can avoid using it.

But when they go ahead and start ranting about how me or my children shouldn't have access to birth control, or sex ed, or that they should only have sex in heterosexual marriage or any other form that fits their own religious/moral/ethical beliefs, I draw a line.

Conservatives tend to arrogantly assume they know better and should decide for everyone else. So no, they're not only about thinking of their own family and getting results.Exactly.

Um...what? Liberals are the minority, not the majority. And no, you have no idea how a liberal family works. Don't try to define something you know nothing about.

I know the world is going to hell in a handbasket, and that the Liberals are taking us there, leading like a drum major. If things were more conservative, if people had more respect for their elders, if rules were more strict, and the world were more skeptical of "instant gratification", we would not be in the mess we are in.

I do know about Liberal familes. I know it is you guys that destroyed "Mayberry", and the old days. The world of the old days has been torn down, and it has been rebuilt as a bordello of many pleasures, but no responsibilities.

The fact is, if everybody worried about their own families, and stopped worrying about the rest of the world, we could get it back.

I know the world is going to hell in a handbasket, and that the Liberals are taking us there, leading like a drum major. If things were more conservative, if people had more respect for their elders, if rules were more strict, and the world were more skeptical of "instant gratification", we would not be in the mess we are in.

I do know about Liberal familes. I know it is you guys that destroyed "Mayberry", and the old days. The world of the old days has been torn down, and it has been rebuilt as a bordello of many pleasures, but no responsibilities.

The fact is, if everybody worried about their own families, and stopped worrying about the rest of the world, we could get it back.
Yes, liberals are ruining the world. We must have stolen two elections, started a war, and pissed off the entire middle east.

"Who's more morally correct? D or R?"

Neither, or more accurately both. Morality is defined by a consensus of the particular group in question. Obviously both of these groups are going to define morality in their own way. Where the rub comes in is when we move to the Country as a whole. Since there apparently is no true concensus within the Country at large on what is moral, which morality is accepted depends upon which Party is voted in. Anyone besides me find that a bit ... frightening? :eek:

"Who's more morally correct? D or R?"

Neither, or more accurately both. Morality is defined by a consensus of the particular group in question. Obviously both of these groups are going to define morality in their own way. Where the rub comes in is when we move to the Country as a whole. Since there apparently is no true concensus within the Country at large on what is moral, which morality is accepted depends upon which Party is voted in. Anyone besides me find that a bit ... frightening? :eek:

Well said.

Why do so many people think that Conservative republicans are so much more moral than democrats and that Democrats are evil Queers burning bibles and trying to destroy the world as we know it? Isn't morality not what we are superficially, like being homosexual or not being entirely religious. If so, then why are we forcefed that these things are immoral. It's all hypocracy! What do you think?

Neither. Nor do the Democratic and Republican Parties care one bat's fart about morality.

They exist solely for the purpose of controlling political power.

Individual Democrats and Republicans may be moral. Those morals may or may not be misplaced. Those people may or ma not understand that their moral guidelines are not everyone's moral guidelines.

But that has absolutely nothing to do with either major American political party except as a bargaining chip.

Yes, liberals are ruining the world. We must have stolen two elections, started a war, and pissed off the entire middle east.

But stealing is such a harsh term. Lets just say that we "temporarily borrowed" the elections (for the good of the country, of course). And we didn't start a war -- we "liberated an oppressed people with the help of a grand coalition." And we didn't piss off the Middle East, we "gave them democracy."

Yes, liberals are ruining the world. We must have stolen two elections, started a war, and pissed off the entire middle east.

Hahaha. We, a group of people who are/were/always will be willing to fight and sacrifice, and if needs be, die for our families safety and prosperousness are being opposed by a bunch of liberals who do nothing if it doesn't feel good, would never sacrifice their lives or anything else for anybody, including their own families, (but are more than willing to expect other people to sacrifice for them), and have no values other than hedonism. You guys don't have a chance. We have a backbone, and we have souls we are trying to protect. We have families we would die for. You can not possibly ever hope to win, not with your attitudes.

Yes, liberals are ruining the world. We must have stolen two elections, started a war, and pissed off the entire middle east.
buuuuuuuurn!

The fact is, if everybody worried about their own families, and stopped worrying about the rest of the world, we could get it back.

I take it this means you disagree with the 'War on Terror' and pretty much every other interaction America has with the world at large?

I personly think your a faggot who shuld move back to canada with your gay friends.

Hahaha. We, a group of people who are/were/always will be willing to fight and sacrifice, and if needs be, die for our families safety and prosperousness are being opposed by a bunch of liberals who do nothing if it doesn't feel good, would never sacrifice their lives or anything else for anybody, including their own families, (but are more than willing to expect other people to sacrifice for them), and have no values other than hedonism. You guys don't have a chance. We have a backbone, and we have souls we are trying to protect. We have families we would die for. You can not possibly ever hope to win, not with your attitudes.
Again, stop talking about something you know nothing about. I would give my life for my family and for my country, but not in a senselss war. How was Iraq hurting your family?

I personly think your a faggot who shuld move back to canada with your gay friends.

Lol flaming...

I personly think your a faggot who shuld move back to canada with your gay friends.

Is this directed at the OP? Please be more specific.

Absolutly.
"Evil will suceed when good men do nothing."

It's "Evil prevails when good men fail to act" or, if you prefer... "Evil prevails..."

Hahaha.

Tee-hee.

We, a group of people who are/were/always will be willing to fight and sacrifice, and if needs be, die for our families safety and prosperousness are being opposed by a bunch of liberals who do nothing if it doesn't feel good, would never sacrifice their lives or anything else for anybody, including their own families, (but are more than willing to expect other people to sacrifice for them), and have no values other than hedonism.

We, a group of people who are/were/always will be dedicated to peaceful resolutions of conficts through diplomacy, and, if need be, die to protect our families from a threat, are being oppressed by a bunch of conservatives who do everything that isn't right, who sacrifice soldiers indiscriminately in unjustified wars, who kill mindlessly, not matter if they kill their fellow countrymen, and have no values save insane gun-nuttery.

You guys don't have a chance. We have a backbone, and we have souls we are trying to protect. We have families we would die for. You can not possibly ever hope to win, not with your attitudes.

You guys don't have a chance. We have a brain, and we have lives we are trying to save and people we are trying to protect. We also have families we would die for. You can possibly understand what winning is -- not with your attitudes.

I personly think your a faggot who shuld move back to canada with your gay friends.
http://www.abestweb.com/smilies/extinguish.gif

Typical L vs D point of view

L: The school is responsible for teaching our children. We just have to send them. If they do not get taught, then it is society's/government's fault for not providing adequate education/training. We, as parents, are not responsible. If our children fail at getting taught what they need to survive, shame on the government, but we are pretty much okay with that, I guess, as long as we are changing society/government for future generations

D: WE, and nobody else, are responsible for teaching our children. The school is just a place they go to gather knowledge, that along with what we teach, will allow them to stand like a mighty oak in a world full of willows. If our children are not taught, it is nobody's fault but our own. Nobody is responsible for my family but me, because nobody cares about it as much as I do.

http://www.abestweb.com/smilies/extinguish.gif

Nothing stops flaming more than a good old fashioned "lol flaming"

Reported the flaming.

Typical L vs D point of view

L: The school is responsible for teaching our children. We just have to send them. If they do not get taught, then it is society's/government's fault for not providing adequate education/training. We, as parents, are not responsible. If our children fail at getting taught what they need to survive, shame on the government, but we are pretty much okay with that, I guess, as long as we are changing society/government for future generations

D: WE, and nobody else, are responsible for teaching our children. The school is just a place they go to gather knowledge, that along with what we teach, will allow them to stand like a mighty oak in a world full of willows. If our children are not taught, it is nobody's fault but our own. Nobody is responsible for my family but me, because nobody cares about it as much as I do.
Actually, that's not true. At all. So, again, stop trying to explain something you know nothing about.

Typical L vs D point of view
<snip>

Translation: L thinks too big, D thinks too small. So.. who is the one who got it "just right" ?

Tee-hee.



We, a group of people who are/were/always will be dedicated to peaceful resolutions of conficts through diplomacy, and, if need be, die to protect our families from a threat, are being oppressed by a bunch of conservatives who do everything that isn't right, who sacrifice soldiers indiscriminately in unjustified wars, who kill mindlessly, not matter if they kill their fellow countrymen, and have no values save insane gun-nuttery.



You guys don't have a chance. We have a brain, and we have lives we are trying to save and people we are trying to protect. We also have families we would die for. You can possibly understand what winning is -- not with your attitudes.

I do not disagree that this "war" is growing more and more senseless every day. But this is yet another L vs D difference.

L: The war was probably a bad idea from the beginning, but we started it, and congress voted it was the thing to do. But NOW that it doesn't feel good anymore, we should just stop and come home, because finishing what we start is hard, and we don't do anything that isn't fun.

D: The war was probably a bad idea from the beginning, but we started it, and we have to finish it. We destablized an entire region, and we are not going to be seen as a bunch of punks who went in and made a mess, and then wait for somebody else to clean it up. We have the responsiblity to make things right, and as good citizens, we have to see it through, no matter what the cost.

A conservative just worries about their family. We go to church and teach our children to study hard in school, don't spare the rod, and pretty much ignore what society (liberals) say you should do, or not do, and do what is best for your family, and do what has worked for hundreds of years. Traditional. We also believe in sacrifice, and not in pure hedonism (just because it feels good, doesn't mean we should always do it. Sacrifice and conservative action is often best)

Conservatives are all about results

A liberal worries about the world, and gets involved in things that have nothing to do with their family. They feel that what feels good should be done, even if it is at the long-range detriment to their family. Liberals feel that tradition and reasonableness should be disregarded if it gets in the way of hedonism. Sacrifice is good, only if it has an immediate return on investment. Children are taught these values, and shown that what feels good is most likely always the way to go.

Liberals are all about feelings

so is the war in iraq, where loads of american, british and other families have lost sons/daughters/spouses, an example of taking care of your family and not getting involved with things that dont concern you?

Conservative just literally means you don't want things to change much and strict constitutionalism and all that, and Liberal just means you want to bend things and stretch things as situations develop. :/

hang on didnt bush try to change the constitution recently? something about gay rights or something? had a 28 in it i think.

Here is the huge flaw in your argument:

Conservatives, at least in the sense you seem to use it, do not worry only about their family and what's good for them.

They seem to be under a notion that what's good for their family is good for everyone else, and as such, should be imposed on the rest of the state/country/world/universe.

Personally, if a conservative is against contraceptives or birth control, I'm fine with it. He just can avoid using it.

But when they go ahead and start ranting about how me or my children shouldn't have access to birth control, or sex ed, or that they should only have sex in heterosexual marriage or any other form that fits their own religious/moral/ethical beliefs, I draw a line.

Conservatives tend to arrogantly assume they know better and should decide for everyone else. So no, they're not only about thinking of their own family and getting results.

hear, hear! well put :)


I do know about Liberal familes. I know it is you guys that destroyed "Mayberry", and the old days. The world of the old days has been torn down, and it has been rebuilt as a bordello of many pleasures, but no responsibilities.

The fact is, if everybody worried about their own families, and stopped worrying about the rest of the world, we could get it back.

ah, you're a 'golden ager'. i hope you realise that whatever golden age you wish to get back to never actually existed. every period in history has been frought with difficulties and injustices and there have always been people who have looked back to some mythical romanticised vision of a golden age when everything was how you like it. i would contend that if you actually lived in whatever era you fantacise about you would probably be one of the ones looking back to some other earlier golden age. you might as well just go back to living in the trees... or the sea.:gundge:

oops that was a well long post. o well it had to be to make my point :p

Duh (feels stupid) I am saying L D. I mean L C. Sorry

I do not disagree that this "war" is growing more and more senseless every day. But this is yet another L vs D difference.

L: The war was probably a bad idea from the beginning, but we started it, and congress voted it was the thing to do. But NOW that it doesn't feel good anymore, we should just stop and come home, because finishing what we start is hard, and we don't do anything that isn't fun.

D: The war was probably a bad idea from the beginning, but we started it, and we have to finish it. We destablized an entire region, and we are not going to be seen as a bunch of punks who went in and made a mess, and then wait for somebody else to clean it up. We have the responsiblity to make things right, and as good citizens, we have to see it through, no matter what the cost.
We started it because our conservative president lied to us.

Hahaha. We, a group of people who are/were/always will be willing to fight and sacrifice, and if needs be, die for our families safety and prosperousness are being opposed by a bunch of liberals who do nothing if it doesn't feel good, would never sacrifice their lives or anything else for anybody, including their own families, (but are more than willing to expect other people to sacrifice for them), and have no values other than hedonism. You guys don't have a chance. We have a backbone, and we have souls we are trying to protect. We have families we would die for. You can not possibly ever hope to win, not with your attitudes.

You obviously underestime greatly just how determined some of us are to protect our liberties and rights.

You'll find, for example, some of us queers will not kneel down and give up the fight to a bunch of self-righteous religious zealots trying to marginalize us and strip us of basic human rights.

You will find women willing to fight to the death to retain their right to decide what the hell they want to do with their own body.

You will find atheists struggling until their right not to believe in your god is secure, and their right not to be ruled according to the tenets of a faith that isn't their own.

You, sir, are very wrong when you assume others don't have a cause to fight for. And you're even more dismally wrong when you're thinking they're not as ready to sacrifice everything they have for their cause. And you don't realize, either, that the only reason they might have to fight at all is because of the ignorance and arrogance of those who think they know better than everyone what's good for them.

Hahaha. We, a group of people who are/were/always will be willing to fight and sacrifice, and if needs be, die for our families safety and prosperousness are being opposed by a bunch of liberals who do nothing if it doesn't feel good, would never sacrifice their lives or anything else for anybody, including their own families, (but are more than willing to expect other people to sacrifice for them), and have no values other than hedonism. You guys don't have a chance. We have a backbone, and we have souls we are trying to protect. We have families we would die for. You can not possibly ever hope to win, not with your attitudes.

Christ! with your attitude i'm suprised you don't have to do more fighting for your very survival:p

I personly think your a faggot who shuld move back to canada with your gay friends.
It's all fine with us Canadians. Gays and lesbians are actually welcomed members of society here.

We started it because our conservative president lied to us.


WE started it because WE were misinformed.

Lol, whenever WE do something right, it is WE who chould get the credit.

whenever WE do something wrong, it is somebody else's fault.

Again, typical liberal thinking.

L: The war was probably a bad idea from the beginning, but we started it, and congress voted it was the thing to do. But NOW that it doesn't feel good anymore, we should just stop and come home, because finishing what we start is hard, and we don't do anything that isn't fun.

The war was a bad idea from the beginning. Unfortunately, the war has been started by Congress, not us. We need to get out of it before we screw things up even more, because we don't agree with slaughtering those who risk everything to defend their country, women, and children.

R: We destablized an entire region, and we are not going to be seen as a bunch of punks who went in and made a mess, and then wait for somebody else to clean it up. We have the responsiblity to make things right, and as good citizens, we have to see it through, no matter what the cost.

We destabilized an entire region, but instead of retreating, we are going to destabilize it some more. Destabilizing is fun, you know? We have the responsibility to make things right, but unfortunately, we are misguiding in our attempts, and are making things worse. We mean well, but we do wrong. But we're stubborn, so we'll never apologize. That's for the liberals to do.

WE started it because WE were misinformed.
Lol, whenever WE do something right, it is WE who chould get the credit.
whenever WE do something wrong, it is somebody else's fault.
Again, typical liberal thinking.

You meant to type "WE started it because THEY told lies which WE foolishly believed, therefor it is THEIR fault".
Gullibles vs Liars. Douche vs Turd. Why bother to argue in favour of either ?

We started it because our conservative president lied to us.

Who's we?

Duh (feels stupid) I am saying L D. I mean L C. Sorry

Funny how the pathetic truth comes out when one isn't really concentrating hard enough on masking it.

WE started it because WE were misinformed.

Lol, whenever WE do something right, it is WE who chould get the credit.

whenever WE do something wrong, it is somebody else's fault.

Again, typical liberal thinking.

I've taken lots of psychology classes, and never did I learn about patterns of thinking that were solely partisan. Could you perhaps explain your unique viewpoint to me?

While you're at it... just what do you mean by "liberal" and "conservative?" Other than "them" and "us" of course.

You obviously underestime greatly just how determined some of us are to protect our liberties and rights.

You'll find, for example, some of us queers will not kneel down and give up the fight to a bunch of self-righteous religious zealots trying to marginalize us and strip us of basic human rights.

You will find women willing to fight to the death to retain their right to decide what the hell they want to do with their own body.

You will find atheists struggling until their right not to believe in your god is secure, and their right not to be ruled according to the tenets of a faith that isn't their own.

You, sir, are very wrong when you assume others don't have a cause to fight for. And you're even more dismally wrong when you're thinking they're not as ready to sacrifice everything they have for their cause. And you don't realize, either, that the only reason they might have to fight at all is because of the ignorance and arrogance of those who think they know better than everyone what's good for them.


I am not as black and white as I seem. I do believe what I am saying, as I think there IS too much hedonism in this country. However, I also think that Gay/Lesbians should be allowed a civil union in which they can get insurance at work, inherit property if one should die, keep children if the primary "partner" should die, and be given the same rights as other folks. I do not agree in the marriage part, but I also don't think that the government should be involved in religion at all.


*sigh*


It is so hard to believe in what you believe in without appearing as a neandretal to other folks. I believe in responsibility for you actions, in raising your children, in not passing the buck to other folks.

I believe that for my family, God is the choice. I believe that others can believe what they want. I do not think that believing in God is the descriminator between good people and bad people. But I do think that people who believe in God are surrounded by other "good" people, and tend toward doing "good" things.




I believe that the world is going bad. It scares me, because I do not want my children and grandchildren to suffer because I did nothing to stop the sad creep toward valueless lifestyle. It scares me to the core.

WE started it because WE were misinformed.

Lol, whenever WE do something right, it is WE who chould get the credit.

whenever WE do something wrong, it is somebody else's fault.

Again, typical liberal thinking.

surely thats typical thinking of anyone who believes themselves to be right about anything? the thing is what Quaon said whas absolutely correct. Bush and his cronies conspired with blair and his to fabricate a reason for going to war with iraq when the real, and thoroughly immoral, reason was simply to secure the middle east oil reserves under the control of a US/uk controlled puppet 'democracy'. inverted commas because arabs are allowed to vote for whoever they like as long as we like them too. see recent election of Hamas in palestine and subsequent bickering about sanctions and whatnot.

The war was a bad idea from the beginning. Unfortunately, the war has been started by Congress, not us. We need to get out of it before we screw things up even more, because we don't agree with slaughtering those who risk everything to defend their country, women, and children.



We destabilized an entire region, but instead of retreating, we are going to destabilize it some more. Destabilizing is fun, you know? We have the responsibility to make things right, but unfortunately, we are misguiding in our attempts, and are making things worse. We mean well, but we do wrong. But we're stubborn, so we'll never apologize. That's for the liberals to do.



Lol, there may be some truth in this, too. I do not think that we think that destabilizing is fun, you are just poking at me with a stick, there. But I do think that in our staunch idealism, we tend to be a little stubborn.

It scares me to the core.

So your main problem with liberals is that they have no values? Which values in particular do you think they lack?

I do not think that we think that destabilizing is fun, you are just poking at me with a stick, there. But I do think that in our staunch idealism, we tend to be a little stubborn.

Yeah, I know you (and conservatives in general) don't think that destabilizing is fun, the same way that liberals (in general) do not just do things because they're fun. I'm probably more stubborn in my ideology than most conservatives are, anyway. Both think that they're right, so neither can be persuaded. :)

The truth is, the democratic party HAS become the party of hedonism. "Do what you like, somebody will pay for it later, but hopefully not us" Cuss and show inappropriate things on television (as if this were some great big stroke of positive change in the world) at the risk of our children. Let's save the starving people because it makes us feel bad to think about people starving, but of course, we don't care who is going to pay for it, or what sort of society it is going to create when you stand up this welfare dependant generation. Sacrifice is out of the question. The Democratic party is the party of video games and instant gratification. And no accountability. People are flocking like mad from the Democratic party, because nobody who works like the devil to save their families wants you guys in charge.

There has to be accountability.

There has to be sacrifice.

If you give everybody a first place blue ribbon, then blue ribbons are worthless. The fact is, there are losers. They will become winners if they work hard enough and compete.

Life is hard, and raising children is tough. But we have to be strong and steadfast.

Yeah, I know you (and conservatives in general) don't think that destabilizing is fun, the same way that liberals (in general) do not just do things because they're fun. I'm probably more stubborn in my ideology than most conservatives are, anyway. Both think that they're right, so neither can be persuaded. :)

True. I agree with you. We often use hyperbole to demonstrate our frustration.

we don't care who is going to pay for it

Clinton: surplus.
Bush: deficit.

Say what you want about Democrats, but they foot the bill. Anyway, what's so bad about instant gratification at no one's expense? What's so bad about having fun?

Hmm, libertarian, equality-for-all, pacifist, pro-environment, nonjudgemental intellectuals or bible thumping, racist, big-business, war-mongering, irrational, hypocritical, tree-killers?



I'm voting democratic.

A lot of guys who get on these boards are genuinely trying to gather flames. I am not. I am frustrated, but I believe that things can be fixed. I am mostly frustrated by the general lack of "can-do" spirit that I expect from the United States. We are in a way, and all we do is bicker, complain, and point fingers.

Chances are, if we all got together and went after finishing this thing, it would go over in an instant. But the terrorists, and the extremists are doing their thing, beheading people, exploding car bombs, and killing soldiers for YOU GUYS. You are their audience. They are stirring you guys up, and creating doubt in our ranks.

If we were firm and solid in our approach, there would be no chink in our armor to go against, and this thing would die in a whimper, because terrorism doesnt work against a solid and combined and dedicated country. It works to separate fragments, and it works to get us fighting agains each other, while the fox robs the henhouse.

Dont you see, you guys are going to lose us this war, because you are the self-fulfilling prophesy? You are the tool they are using to destroy us. Isn't it obvious?

Clinton: surplus.
Bush: deficit.

Say what you want about Democrats, but they foot the bill. Anyway, what's so bad about instant gratification at no one's expense? What's so bad about having fun?



Oh, I forgot to put in my post that democrats understand elementary math.

A lot of guys who get on these boards are genuinely trying to gather flames. I am not. I am frustrated, but I believe that things can be fixed. I am mostly frustrated by the general lack of "can-do" spirit that I expect from the United States. We are in a way, and all we do is bicker, complain, and point fingers.

Chances are, if we all got together and went after finishing this thing, it would go over in an instant. But the terrorists, and the extremists are doing their thing, beheading people, exploding car bombs, and killing soldiers for YOU GUYS. You are their audience. They are stirring you guys up, and creating doubt in our ranks.

If we were firm and solid in our approach, there would be no chink in our armor to go against, and this thing would die in a whimper, because terrorism doesnt work against a solid and combined and dedicated country. It works to separate fragments, and it works to get us fighting agains each other, while the fox robs the henhouse.

Dont you see, you guys are going to lose us this war, because you are the self-fulfilling prophesy? You are the tool they are using to destroy us. Isn't it obvious?



So, who wants to have a book discussion on 1984?

I am not as black and white as I seem. I do believe what I am saying, as I think there IS too much hedonism in this country. However, I also think that Gay/Lesbians should be allowed a civil union in which they can get insurance at work, inherit property if one should die, keep children if the primary "partner" should die, and be given the same rights as other folks. I do not agree in the marriage part, but I also don't think that the government should be involved in religion at all.


*sigh*


It is so hard to believe in what you believe in without appearing as a neandretal to other folks. I believe in responsibility for you actions, in raising your children, in not passing the buck to other folks.

I believe that for my family, God is the choice. I believe that others can believe what they want. I do not think that believing in God is the descriminator between good people and bad people. But I do think that people who believe in God are surrounded by other "good" people, and tend toward doing "good" things.




I believe that the world is going bad. It scares me, because I do not want my children and grandchildren to suffer because I did nothing to stop the sad creep toward valueless lifestyle. It scares me to the core.
Who gave you the right to decide good values and bad values? And also, I think the term liberal is misleading. We want to maintain the status quo (no war), we're trying to keep the constituition the same as it is (Bush is trying to amend it so he can discriminate against gays), we want to stay out of other people's buisness (we don't want to be in the Middle East), and we want everyone to have equal rights (again, Bush is bigoted against homosexuals).

A lot of guys who get on these boards are genuinely trying to gather flames. I am not.

Then why are you deliberately misrepresenting your opponents positions while minimising criticism of your own ?

Dont you see, you guys are going to lose us this war, because you are the self-fulfilling prophesy? You are the tool they are using to destroy us. Isn't it obvious?

Well, I guess that's where I disagree with you. I believe that you cannot defeat terrorism by killing terrorists -- you need to attack the problem at its core -- their ideology. They are prepared to kill themselves just to harm USans, among others. They do it because they believe that they are right, and because they believe that they are defending their country and way of life. I'm afraid that you guys are going to make us lose the war. When you invaded Iraq, that added fuel to the terrorists' fire -- they hate us even more now, and they are even more dedicated now. That's why there is such a long-standing insurgency in Iraq. The terrorists (low-level ones at least, the ones who kill themselves and/or others) do not seek to undermine the government by turning it against each other. They simply want to prove their point. In my opinion, the way to defeat them is to show them that they have no point, that what they're doing is wrong. I don't believe that they're immoral, just that they have a flawed belief, and are controlled like sheep by those more powerful than them, by propaganda. If we give them no reason to hate us, they will not attack us, and anti-US terrorism will die down. Unfortunately, with the war on terror and the war in Iraq, we are just reinforcing the ideologies of terrorists who think we seek to destroy their way of life. The same is true of the American Revolution -- the British completely ignored what the Americans wanted. This got the Americans enraged at the British, and the independence movement gained momentum. Eventually, the Americans won the war. That's exactly what I fear will happen if we keep using heavy-handed approaches.

Sacrifices? Are you kidding me?

I make fiendish amount of donations, we had a canned food drive in my first period class, and I would come in every morning with two plastic bags full of food to be shipped across the seas! I plan on "adopting" a child in Africa, because, as a consumer in the western world, I am responsible for the world, and so are you.

You are a preponant for your family, and taking care of your family. Well guess what. The world is your family, take care of us. You don't want to help people around the world, its just going to come back around and bite you in the ass. You think Osama Bin Laden rose with the creation of liberalism? HA! Osama Bin Laden came to fruition as a terrorist leader, when we were at home caring about ourselves rather than the world. If we (Im Canadian, but we must all take the blame for such things) had of merely shown some compassion or even understanding, things may have gone differently.

Our indifference and unwillingness to get involved in a positive manner is what will threaten the livelyhood of your family. And mine too.

Democrats

Sacrifices? Are you kidding me?

I make fiendish amount of donations, we had a canned food drive in my first period class, and I would come in every morning with two plastic bags full of food to be shipped across the seas! I plan on "adopting" a child in Africa, because, as a consumer in the western world, I am responsible for the world, and so are you.

You are a preponant for your family, and taking care of your family. Well guess what. The world is your family, take care of us. You don't want to help people around the world, its just going to come back around and bite you in the ass. You think Osama Bin Laden rose with the creation of liberalism? HA! Osama Bin Laden came to fruition as a terrorist leader, when we were at home caring about ourselves rather than the world. If we (Im Canadian, but we must all take the blame for such things) had of merely shown some compassion or even understanding, things may have gone differently.

Our indifference and unwillingness to get involved in a positive manner is what will threaten the livelyhood of your family. And mine too.



Maybe if America were less corpo-fascist and imperialistic things would turn out differently.

Maybe if America were less corpo-fascist and imperialistic things would turn out differently.

I personally like Corporations; They keep me well paid and happen to provide me with lots of things that make my life enjoyable. Not only that, but I can share some of my money with those less fortunate.

I personally like Corporations; They keep me well paid and happen to provide me with lots of things that make my life enjoyable. Not only that, but I can share some of my money with those less fortunate.


The word 'corpo-fascist' as ONE word is referring to a hyphenation of the words corporate and fascist. Capitalism is not necessarily bad; however, Bush economics scare me.

If we take a stance greater than simple laissez faire - i.e. monopolies, trusts, environmental destruction - then maybe we could be more proactive in the world instead of fighting corporate misguided wars and trying to feed insatiable materialistic needs.

Who's more morally correct? D or R?


If you have to ask, you don't need to know.

A liberal worries about the world, and gets involved in things that have nothing to do with their family. They feel that what feels good should be done, even if it is at the long-range detriment to their family. Liberals feel that tradition and reasonableness should be disregarded if it gets in the way of hedonism. Sacrifice is good, only if it has an immediate return on investment. Children are taught these values, and shown that what feels good is most likely always the way to go.

Liberals are all about feelings
You're confusing liberals with libertines (hedonists).

If conservatives are all about results and liberals are all about instant gatification, then why are conservatives not behind the environmentalist movement? Conservatives prefer to make a quick buck than to preserve the environment for their children who they supposedly care so much about.

If conservatives are not worried about anything beyond their own family, then why are they so big on "patriotism" (read: nationalism)? Why do they care to support changing distant regimes?

You're confusing liberals with libertines (hedonists).

If conservatives are all about results and liberals are all about instant gatification, then why are conservatives not behind the environmentalist movement? Conservatives prefer to make a quick buck than to preserve the environment for their children who they supposedly care so much about.

If conservatives are not worried about anything beyond their own family, then why are they so big on "patriotism" (read: nationalism)? Why do they care to support changing distant regimes?

Here's one conservative that is a cave environmentalist. :D So much for your pigeonholing effort.

Here's one conservative that is a cave environmentalist. :D So much for your pigeonholing effort.
Kewl! I'm pretty strong on environmental issues as well, although not much of a "conservative."

What's a "cave" environmentalist??

Kewl! I'm pretty strong on environmental issues as well, although not much of a "conservative."

What's a "cave" environmentalist??

I belong to one national organization (National Speleological Society), and one regional organization (Indiana Karst Conservancy), and also indirectly support the Nature Conservancy, which shares many of our goals.

Basically, I support the conservation and protection of caves, and the animal life that call caves their home, and the land that supports cavern development, which is known as karst.

http://www.caves.org/
http://www.caves.org/conservancy/ikc/
http://www.karstconservancy.org/index.asp
http://www.cavebiota.com/

I know the world is going to hell in a handbasket, and that the Liberals are taking us there, leading like a drum major. If things were more conservative, if people had more respect for their elders, if rules were more strict, and the world were more skeptical of "instant gratification", we would not be in the mess we are in.
Instant gratification culture comes from advanced technology and capitalism, which both liberals and conservatives support.

a bunch of liberals who do nothing if it doesn't feel good, would never sacrifice their lives or anything else for anybody, including their own families, (but are more than willing to expect other people to sacrifice for them), and have no values other than hedonism. You guys don't have a chance.
Groundless.

C: The war was probably a bad idea from the beginning, but we started it, and we have to finish it. We destablized an entire region, and we are not going to be seen as a bunch of punks who went in and made a mess, and then wait for somebody else to clean it up. We have the responsiblity to make things right, and as good citizens, we have to see it through, no matter what the cost.
This is my opinion and I am liberal. Maybe you need to look at what actual liberals think, rather than looking at immature people and assuming that's what all liberals are like. You're so irrational to look at the worst elements of a group and generalising because that's what you want to believe.

WE started it because WE were misinformed.

Lol, whenever WE do something right, it is WE who chould get the credit.

whenever WE do something wrong, it is somebody else's fault.

Again, typical liberal thinking.
Well, "WE" didn't start the war. The government did. Not society in general. If the government does a good job, it gets the credit. If the government does a bad job, it gets the blame.

It is so hard to believe in what you believe in without appearing as a neandretal to other folks.
So you're blaming your beliefs rather than the way you argue them? How "liberal" of you!

So your main problem with liberals is that they have no values? Which values in particular do you think they lack?
He thinks that they lack all values except for hedonism. Which is why they want to work to preserve the environment. :rolleyes:

The truth is, the democratic party HAS become the party of hedonism. "Do what you like, somebody will pay for it later, but hopefully not us"
That's a good description of Bush's fiscal policy. He spends as much as he wants and gives the tax break too! Where's the responsibility there?

Let's save the starving people because it makes us feel bad to think about people starving
So saving starving people is hedonistic, but spending all your money on yourself is making a sacrifice?

The word 'corpo-fascist' as ONE word is referring to a hyphenation of the words corporate and fascist. Capitalism is not necessarily bad; however, Bush economics scare me.

If we take a stance greater than simple laissez faire - i.e. monopolies, trusts, environmental destruction - then maybe we could be more proactive in the world instead of fighting corporate misguided wars and trying to feed insatiable materialistic needs.
Bush never invented an economic ideology, and he certainly doesn't implement laissez-faire policies.

Here's one conservative that is a cave environmentalist. :D So much for your pigeonholing effort.
I haven't seen any of your posts, and your political compass score gives me no reason to believe that you are a conservative.

I have a few hot button issues that qualify me admirably, I think. Ask Fass or Straughn. And, I voted for Bush, as well. Twice. I considered him to be the lesser of two evils, basically, both times. Though I do have a few other beliefs that kind of make me a more centrist conservative, granted.

Instant gratification culture comes from advanced technology and capitalism, which both liberals and conservatives support.


Groundless.


This is my opinion and I am liberal. Maybe you need to look at what actual liberals think, rather than looking at immature people and assuming that's what all liberals are like. You're so irrational to look at the worst elements of a group and generalising because that's what you want to believe.


Well, "WE" didn't start the war. The government did. Not society in general. If the government does a good job, it gets the credit. If the government does a bad job, it gets the blame.


So you're blaming your beliefs rather than the way you argue them? How "liberal" of you!


He thinks that they lack all values except for hedonism. Which is why they want to work to preserve the environment. :rolleyes:


That's a good description of Bush's fiscal policy. He spends as much as he wants and gives the tax break too! Where's the responsibility there?


So saving starving people is hedonistic, but spending all your money on yourself is making a sacrifice?








You have excellent points, and for the most part, I think that most people are not at the extreme of everything...indeed, we stand under an umbrella that we do not particularly like, but it succeeds in keeping us mostly dry. I feel that way about the Republican party. I think it is a little wacko in some areas -- leave the gay people alone, they aren't hurting anybody; let women get an abortion if they want one (not under 18 without a parent's consent); stem cell research is not bad, it can save lives; etc, etc, etc.

I, however, cannot stand under the Liberal umbrella. I realize that not everyone in the Democratic party is not a seething hedonist who goes out and explores every pleasure without regard to moral/legal/ethical considerations. Quite the contrary. I think that most people who belong to the Liberal party kind of back away from that, but since liberals are not conservatives, they stick with them.


From a conservatives point of view (or my point of view), I would rather be closer to conservative than closer to liberal. Liberal thinking scares me. The liberal concept includes a great deal of civil liberties, you cannot deny -- liberties to do what you want, however you want, and express yourself in any way you want. That scares conservatives. Sure, to a teen-ager, civil liberties and the ability to express yourself looks like a hell of a lot of fun. Tatoos, piercings, blue hair, all of these things make a person look cool, as well as drinking and smoking, and doing drugs, and early-teen-aged sex. But to other folks who live out in the world, we realize that in order to succeed in this world monitarily, you have to be conservative. You can't have a big swawstika tatoo on your forehead and expect to ever get a job at a major company as anything but perhaps a janitor. All those piercings are going to leave scars and marks -- but mostly they are going to mark their personalities.

For example, if a parent tells his/her kid that it is okay to dress/mark yourself up like that, and then they do not get a great job, or the teacher immediately suspects them for any wrong doing, the kid gets the opinion that everybody dislikes them, and that the world is against them. It is SOOOO hard to get over that. If they dressed sharp and conservative, a teacher will give them so much more leeway, and assume good things... this is the way it is.

We need to teach our children to fit in, not to stand out. We need to teach our children to compete with the other kids and excel, not to make a new category on their own so they do not have to compete. Competition is healthy, and fitting in and getting used to fitting in makes you more capable of competing when the time comes.

Isn't it obvious that we should direct or kids to success -- and success in our world is conservative. If all the really successful people in this world wore metalica tee-shirts and mohawks, then I would teach my kids to do that. I want my kids to have the opportunity to go for the biggest piece of the pie that they can get, and I want them to be ready for the biggest challenges. I do not help them by filling their heads full of nonsense, and teach them that nothing is their problem, it is all someone else's fault


I am conservative for the kids.

I belong to one national organization (National Speleological Society), and one regional organization (Indiana Karst Conservancy), and also indirectly support the Nature Conservancy, which shares many of our goals.

Basically, I support the conservation and protection of caves, and the animal life that call caves their home, and the land that supports cavern development, which is known as karst.

http://www.caves.org/
http://www.caves.org/conservancy/ikc/
http://www.karstconservancy.org/index.asp
http://www.cavebiota.com/
KEWL! I use to donate to the NC Nature Conservancy, back before my life was turned upside down. I also use to be a member of The Sierrra Club.

I personly think your a faggot who shuld move back to canada with your gay friends.

I personally think you are flaming. Knock it off now.

I also think that you should learn the difference between your and you're, the rules of capitalization, and proper spelling.

Meh, there's no difference between the Republicrats anymore. They're all controlled by the same special interests.

<snip>

We need to teach our children to fit in, not to stand out. We need to teach our children to compete with the other kids and excel, not to make a new category on their own so they do not have to compete. Competition is healthy, and fitting in and getting used to fitting in makes you more capable of competing when the time comes.

Isn't it obvious that we should direct or kids to success -- and success in our world is conservative. If all the really successful people in this world wore metalica tee-shirts and mohawks, then I would teach my kids to do that.
There's no getting through to you is there? Liberalism is not teenage hedonism. Liberalism isn't about wearing rock t-shirts, getting tattoos and the rest. Most of what you have written about has nothing to do with politics. I'm not here to debate child-rearing with you.

"We need to teach our children to fit in, not to stand out." This is crap. If you child goes on to set up his own business, do you think he ought to lack the creativity to be anything more than a clone of his competitors? No! He should offer the market a unique variation on the product or service. That way he will find success. Don't you know anything about the real world? That's business today.

I have a few hot button issues that qualify me admirably, I think. Ask Fass or Straughn. And, I voted for Bush, as well. Twice. I considered him to be the lesser of two evils, basically, both times. Though I do have a few other beliefs that kind of make me a more centrist conservative, granted.
You have a left-of-centre score on the political compass.

Morality is subjective. Therefore, both groups are, in their own eyes.

Note: apologies if someone already brought this up. I was too tired to wade through 7 pages of posts.

Sure, to a teen-ager, civil liberties and the ability to express yourself looks like a hell of a lot of fun. Tatoos, piercings, blue hair, all of these things make a person look cool, as well as drinking and smoking, and doing drugs, and early-teen-aged sex.

The fact that they have a right to do something doesn't mean that they have to do it. I support their right to be moronic and emo as long as it doesn't infringe upon everyone else's rights. If that path will lead them to failure, then it's their fault. Ultimately, I think the parents should decide what's best for their kids, not the government. The government should give them their rights, and the parents should restrict their rights as they deem best. Keep the government out of how to raise children.