NationStates Jolt Archive

You're voting in an election, and the poll workers hand you this sticker to wear after you vote.

It says, "Change The World; Vote Your Conscience".

Do you find the phrase offensive, or slanted in any political way?

You're voting in an election, and the poll workers hand you this sticker to wear after you vote.

It says, "Change The World; Vote Your Conscience".

Do you find the phrase offensive, or slanted in any political way?
Not particularly though personally it does seem possibly more endemic to the right with the close ties between their attempt to be the “moral” party but I could be wrong and just projecting on their constant attempts to pretend to be of a higher moral calaber

Not particularly though personally it does seem possibly more endemic to the right with the close ties between their attempt to be the “moral” party but I could be wrong and just projecting on their constant attempts to pretend to be of a higher moral calaber

So you're thinking that Democrats can't vote their conscience? Since when?

So you're thinking that Democrats can't vote their conscience? Since when?
I did not say that at all … it just guessing as to the source

Taken completely out of context like this I don’t think it has much of a slant of any sort.

Sorry if my previous post was confusing I cut some bits out before posting and it may have gotten more fubar then expected

You're voting in an election, and the poll workers hand you this sticker to wear after you vote.

It says, "Change The World; Vote Your Conscience".

Do you find the phrase offensive, or slanted in any political way?

Everybody knows our consciences are long-haired hippy liberals. :p

So you're thinking that Democrats can't vote their conscience? Since when?
I certainly do. The phrase itself is sufficiently vague that it can be interpreted pretty much as the wearer decides. It's generally the sort of slogan that I associate with third parties, because that's who I hear the argument from most of all, but it's easy for me to say it would apply to me as well.

You're voting in an election, and the poll workers hand you this sticker to wear after you vote.

It says, "Change The World; Vote Your Conscience".

Do you find the phrase offensive, or slanted in any political way?
It's offensive in its pretentiousness, but not "Oh my God! How dare they?!" offensive.

You're voting in an election, and the poll workers hand you this sticker to wear after you vote.

It says, "Change The World; Vote Your Conscience".

Do you find the phrase offensive, or slanted in any political way?I would say that it's probably a leftist or libertarian sticker, as conservatives are typically not interested in changing the world; by definition they want things to stay more or less the same.

Sounds like something a left-wing party would hand out, but the phrase actually has no political bias of its own.

I would say that it's probably a leftist or libertarian sticker, as conservatives are typically not interested in changing the world; by definition they want things to stay more or less the same.
Thing is, though, a conservative could argue "the world needs to be changed back to the way it was before, and it requires a vote of conscience to make that happen." That's an argument I can see an anti-abortionist making, for instance, or someone who wants to roll back rights for gays. (Yes, I know--not true conservatives, but that's what passes for conservatism in many parts of the US these days.)

Anything beyond saying 'Please Vote', is slanted in my view. Telling you to vote your conscience is influencing your voting choice. You may decide you'd rather vote with your 'wallet' or the flip of a coin. It's supposed to be your choice.

Anything beyond saying 'Please Vote', is slanted in my view. Telling you to vote your conscience is influencing your voting choice. You may decide you'd rather vote with your 'wallet' or the flip of a coin. It's supposed to be your choice.
How about, "I Voted!" ?

I object to the first phrase, "Change the World".

"Change your Nation" is I believe, more appropriate.

Though I don't think we should bother with stickers at all.

Here's the story behind the question.
http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/news/15211297.htm

Evidently, someone thinks it's religious and means "God".

What do you all think now?

Is there anything else on the sticker? If there's a party symbol, then I feel it would be offensive. If there's no signs of party affiliation, then it's fine.

Is there anything else on the sticker? If there's a party symbol, then I feel it would be offensive. If there's no signs of party affiliation, then it's fine.
You can see the sticker at the link I provided.

No party affiliation or symbols on the sticker.

It's so cheesy, but so true... you SHOULD vote your conscience.

Here's the story behind the question.
http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/news/15211297.htm

Evidently, someone thinks it's religious and means "God".

What do you all think now?

I think you didn't read your own article. It seems that no one thinks the phrase is automatically religious. What they are trying to figure out is if its addition had a religious motive.

I think you didn't read your own article. It seems that no one thinks the phrase is automatically religious. What they are trying to figure out is if its addition had a religious motive.
Democrats object to it. I have far more than one article.

Worth Googling.

Democrats object to it. I have far more than one article.

Worth Googling.

......which still doesn't suggest that anyone automatically thinks the phrase means "God" or "religion". They think that this had a religious motive because it is based in a program begun by a fundamentalist evangelist preacher. There is nothing inherent in the phrase that is making people think "OMFG! It's religious!"

......which still doesn't suggest that anyone automatically thinks the phrase means "God" or "religion". They think that this had a religious motive because it is based in a program begun by a fundamentalist evangelist preacher. There is nothing inherent in the phrase that is making people think "OMFG! It's religious!"

I think you just contradicted yourself.

If they don't think it's religious, then why do they think it has a religious motive?

Better yet, can't an atheist have a conscience? I believe then can. Don't you?

How about, "I Voted!" ?

That would work for me.

I think it's rather insulting. Do they think I wasn't going to vote my conscience?

"Oh, I was going to vote for the candidate I found to be the most eeeevil, but this sticker has convinced me to do the right thing!"

I think you just contradicted yourself.

No, I didn't.

If they don't think it's religious, then why do they think it has a religious motive?

The fact that the program in which it is based was developed by a batshit crazy fundamentalist evangelist preacher?

Consider this: States with blue laws (ie. can't sell alcohol on Sundays) claim non-religious motives for such laws. They've claimed, for instance, that it is for public health and safety - to give a day off from having people drinking. But none of us really believe that blue laws have anything other than a religious motive.

Consider this: Millions of people participate in some sort of charity work. Charity work is not inherently religious. However, quite a few people do participate for religious reasons - ie. with religious motives.

The fact that something *can* be non-religious does not mean that the motives behind it are non-religious.

Better yet, can't an atheist have a conscience? I believe then can. Don't you?

Of course I do (although some of our politicians don't). No one - not even the eeeevvviiiiillllll Democrats - are disputing that. They are questioning, quite simply, the motives behind the sticker.

The ``I Voted Today'' sticker -- the seemingly innocuous emblem that voters slap on their chests after casting their ballot -- has been changed by Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell.

Blackwell, the Republican gubernatorial candidate who never shies from his evangelical Christian beliefs, launched the Ohio Center for Civic Character from the secretary of state's office in 2001.

The center has a prominent position -- top right corner -- on Blackwell's official state Web site, and a picture of the Earth is the same one that appears on the sticker.

It would appear that the people running against Blackwell are criticising his changes of the sticker because it contains an image associated with Blackwell and his evangelical beliefs. As do the words, apparently...

Since last November, voters have emerged from polling places with a new sticker that says: ``I Voted Today -- Change Our World, Vote Your Conscience.''

While those words may seem equally innocuous, they have roots in what Blackwell calls a ``character-building'' program that has ties to a national ``character-building'' movement founded by Chicago-area evangelist Bill Gothard.

You're voting in an election, and the poll workers hand you this sticker to wear after you vote.

It says, "Change The World; Vote Your Conscience".

Do you find the phrase offensive, or slanted in any political way?

The only slant is pro-democracy, as far as I can tell.

It seems quite rebellious, to me. "Screw the system; vote for whoever you want to vote for". I would thus suggest that it probably came from a third party who was running on an "End Tribal Red/Blue Politics" ticket or something similar.

To me, it seems like it's just saying: Vote for the party you want, not the party people tell you you want. Kind of lame, but not really biased.

You're voting in an election, and the poll workers hand you this sticker to wear after you vote.

It says, "Change The World; Vote Your Conscience".

Do you find the phrase offensive, or slanted in any political way?
I don't find that phrase offensive or politically slanted, no.

I am pleased that you used the word "conscience" as opposed to "values" or "morals," since those words have become code for the radical religious right wing in America.

Of course, it's a bit of a luke-warm statement, isn't it? How about one of these:

"GOP in 2006:
Because You Wouldn't Want People To Think You're A Commie, Now Would You?"

"Hug An Oil Baron:
GOP in 2006!"

"Democratic Party 2006:
We're Slightly Less Republican Than The Republicans!"

"Democrats in 2006:
Sick Of The GOP Fucking Up The Country? Give Us A Turn!"

I object to the first phrase, "Change the World".

"Change your Nation" is I believe, more appropriate.

Though I don't think we should bother with stickers at all.

Agreed. There's no need for poll workers to be handing anything out. It's one thing to mark someone as having voted so they only vote once (unlike many elections in Chicago [sorry, couldn't resist, Hack]), as they did with the purple ink in Iraq, but another thing entirely to be slapping slogan stickers on people. :rolleyes:

"Democrats in 2006:
Sick Of The GOP Fucking Up The Country? Give Us A Turn!"

And the small print on that one:

"We can fuck it up even more!"

Agreed. There's no need for poll workers to be handing anything out. It's one thing to mark someone as having voted so they only vote once (unlike many elections in Chicago [sorry, couldn't resist, Hack]), as they did with the purple ink in Iraq, but another thing entirely to be slapping slogan stickers on people. :rolleyes:
:( But I like getting free stickers.

I wish more campaign stickers had holograms.

There is nothing wrong with it as a slogan but I do not think that poll workers should be handing out anything to voters. People should go to vote. Vote for who benefits them the most. And then go home. Whoever benefits the most people wins. Handing out stickers to voters is pretty much pointless.

And the small print on that one:

"We can fuck it up even more!"
Nah, nobody would believe it. Everybody knows that the Democrats would be in such shock if they actually held power that it would take them at least 4 years to create any serious change one way or the other. Most of that time would be spent arguing over whether they should exactly replicate everything the Republicans were doing, or if maybe they should move further to the right just to be on the safe side.

Lollypops would be better.

My conscience would both me if I voted for Democrats because I would gt to keep less of my own money and they have no plan for Iraq.

:( But I like getting free stickers.


Seriously, why the hell would I go vote if they didn't give me a sticker for it?

My conscience would both me if I voted for Democrats because I would gt to keep less of my own money and they have no plan for Iraq.
Unlike the Republicans?

Unlike the Republicans?

Who cut my taxes twice in the past few years and established a democracy in Iraq and are helping it fight the same kind of people who attacked us on 911? You bet the Republicans have my conscience vote. The liberation of millions, the great economy, and the actual strength to fight a war on Islamic fascists brought me over to their side.

Those with a conscience don't vote Republican anyway.

Those with a conscience don't vote Republican anyway.

AH, another nonfactual insult from a left winger. I must be on the forum.

Those with a conscience don't vote Republican anyway.

Those with a conscience vote Libertarian. However, if you really want your vote to matter...

Who cut my taxes twice in the past few years and established a democracy in Iraq and are helping it fight the same kind of people who attacked us on 911? You bet the Republicans have my conscience vote. The liberation of millions, the great economy, and the actual strength to fight a war on Islamic fascists brought me over to their side.
I imagine you taking a walk through a gorgeous rain forest filled with beauty and awe with your eye firmly placed on the lens piece of a microscope.

I imagine you taking a walk through a gorgeous rain forest filled with beauty and awe with your eye firmly placed on the lens piece of a microscope.

what?:confused:

what?:confused:
Doesn't matter; I've already lost interest.

Doesn't matter; I've already lost interest.

Spotted a shiny object, did you?

Spotted a shiny object, did you?
My witty stopped working...

My theory has always been that if everyone voted for the candidate who benefited them the most personaly the country would be better off. None of this voting to help others nonsense. Those "others" can vote for themselves. And then get a sticker.

My witty stopped working...

When did it work? :p

My theory has always been that if everyone voted for the candidate who benefited them the most personaly the country would be better off. None of this voting to help others nonsense. Those "others" can vote for themselves. And then get a sticker.
What if someone’s conscience tells them that helping others is what would best help them and the country?

AH, another nonfactual insult from a left winger. I must be on the forum.
Weird usually non factual insults is your home territory, oh well.

Who cut my taxes twice in the past few years and established a democracy in Iraq and are helping it fight the same kind of people who attacked us on 911? You bet the Republicans have my conscience vote. The liberation of millions, the great economy, and the actual strength to fight a war on Islamic fascists brought me over to their side.

AH, another nonfactual insult from a left winger. I must be on the forum.
Hypocrisy, thy name is Barrygoldwater. You wouldn't know a fact if it slapped you in the face with its ass.

When did it work? :p
THERE WAS NO CALL FOR THAT!



(Every Day In Every Way I Am Getting Better And Better. Every Day In Every Way I Am Getting Better And Better. Every Day In Every Way I Am Getting Better And Better. Every Day In Every Way I Am Getting Better And Better. Every Day In Every Way I Am Getting Better And Better.)

What if someone’s conscience tells them that helping others is what would best help them and the country?

If everybody votes for who helps them the most than which ever candidate helps the most people will win.

Weird usually non factual insults is your home territory, oh well.

petty insults with no facts.

Hypocrisy, thy name is Barrygoldwater. You wouldn't know a fact if it slapped you in the face with its ass.
petty insult with no facts

If everybody votes for who helps them the most than which ever candidate helps the most people will win.
The rich won't like the answer to that.

My theory has always been that if everyone voted for the candidate who benefited them the most personaly the country would be better off. None of this voting to help others nonsense. Those "others" can vote for themselves. And then get a sticker.Wouldn't it make more sense if people were to vote for the candidate who benefitted the most people the most?

petty insult with no facts
Actually, my statement was completely factual, and I based it on my experience reading your posts. Facts seem to elude you on a minute by minute basis, and when challenged on them, you resort to the dodge you're trying right now--accusing your opponents of not using any facts in their arguments. Try addressing an argument for once, bub, and see where it gets you.

The rich won't like the answer to that.

Which is why we see the "I'll give you a handout" candidate win so often in local elections. :rolleyes:

The rich won't like the answer to that.

Assuming that the poor value handouts over jobs.

Wouldn't it make more sense if people were to vote for the candidate who benefitted the most people the most?

Well if everybody voted for who benefited themselves the most you would without question get the candidate who benefited the most people ( in reality) to win.

Actually, my statement was completely factual, and I based it on my experience reading your posts. Facts seem to elude you on a minute by minute basis, and when challenged on them, you resort to the dodge you're trying right now--accusing your opponents of not using any facts in their arguments. Try addressing an argument for once, bub, and see where it gets you.

You have not made any arguments. Including this "post".

Which is why we see the "I'll give you a handout" candidate win so often in local elections. :rolleyes:

People will be forced to vote for the candidate who creates the most jobs, as opposed to the wealthy liberal elitist handout candidates.

Assuming that the poor value handouts over jobs.
No, actually I was assuming that everyone in the country voted: then the rich won't like the answer to that.

You have not made any arguments. Including this "post".
Try reading the early part of the thread. There's a whole bunch of argument there. :rolleyes:

People will be forced to vote for the candidate who creates the most jobs, as opposed to the wealthy liberal elitist handout candidates.
You only like handouts when it applies to the rich, then.

No, actually I was assuming that everyone in the country voted: then the rich won't like the answer to that.

Why? The best way to create jobs and help the poor actualy helps the rich too.

You only like handouts when it applies to the rich, then.

I am against all government handouts.

People will be forced to vote for the candidate who creates the most jobs, as opposed to the wealthy liberal elitist handout candidates.
Oh, and by the way, petty insults with no facts.

Why? The best way to create jobs and help the poor actualy helps the rich too.
The top down theory is ludicrous.

Well if everybody voted for who benefited themselves the most you would without question get the candidate who benefited the most people ( in reality) to win.Not necessarily. You could have as low as slightly more than half of people helped by the winning candidate in this case, whereas it's likely that you would have more people helped if people voted for the candidate that helped the most people the most.

If you can refuse the sticker and not have negitivity atttahced to you there really is no issue...

Afterall religious people are allowed a voice as well...of course this is two way street...atheists also are allowed a voice...

Is it offensive? No. In the same way that the 'commandments' are not offensive...they seem to be pretty sensible...

The issue I would think is the attachment of power associated with this sticker...

I Dont see anything wrong with the sticker - I think it's good to try to convince people that their vote is important and can certainly help change things - perhaps it will convince more people to vote , perhaps not. Either way - whoopity doooo

When those stickers say “vote your conscience” what they mean is “vote so everybody has to act the way your conscience thinks they should.”

These stickers are definitely from the Republicans, not because the Democrats have don’t want to control the personal lives of their constituents (subjects), but because the Republicans are the ones pushing it right now.

Well if everybody voted for who benefited themselves the most you would without question get the candidate who benefited the most people ( in reality) to win.
The problem is, what you are actually going to get is the candidate who most people BELIEVE will benefit them most. And that candidate may bear no resemblance whatsoever to the candidate who ACTUALLY would have benefitted people the most.