Forced to vote Democrat: Christianity's Stranglehold on the Right
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-10-2015, 06:28 PM
RE: Forced to vote Democrat: Christianity's Stranglehold on the Right
To the OP, I am in a similar predicament. Officially I'm still a registered Republican, but in practice I'm far from that, being a somewhat liberal atheist (fiscal conservative though). Can't stand either party TBH, but the more people like me decide to register "Independent", the further skewed the parties get to the extremes. I'm not giving up my primary vote (despite it being completely fucking pointless in CA, by the time I get to vote most of the candidates have dropped out) until the 2-party system and primary process changes. Then when the general election comes around, I'll put my vote the direction I think has the best chance of fucking up the current system, be that for Trump, Bernie, Rand Paul or some third party candidate (I don't care if they win, in fact, I wouldn't vote for Trump unless I thought he WOULDN'T win).

I did take that isidewith quiz a while back though and I was somewhat surprised to be at about 90% agreement with Bernie Sanders. I do really like the guy, but don't agree with him on a couple major issues. However, I am more than willing to overlook some of his somewhat nonsensical/naïve positions given the chance that he'd have to alter the current political process for the better. A few socialist programs can't possibly bring as much destruction as the current ridiculous primary/2-party system/electoral college/Super-PAC/gerrymandering/corruption clusterfuck we have now. His goal of publicly financing elections could go a long way toward fixing a lot of that. Here's to hoping at least.

"just an FYI: There are 2 kinds of people in the world -- those who divide everybody into 2 kinds of people & those who don't." Neil deGrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes MustangManda's post
28-10-2015, 06:51 PM
RE: Forced to vote Democrat: Christianity's Stranglehold on the Right
(28-10-2015 06:28 PM)MustangManda Wrote:  To the OP, I am in a similar predicament. Officially I'm still a registered Republican, but in practice I'm far from that, being a somewhat liberal atheist (fiscal conservative though). Can't stand either party TBH, but the more people like me decide to register "Independent", the further skewed the parties get to the extremes. I'm not giving up my primary vote (despite it being completely fucking pointless in CA, by the time I get to vote most of the candidates have dropped out) until the 2-party system and primary process changes. Then when the general election comes around, I'll put my vote the direction I think has the best chance of fucking up the current system, be that for Trump, Bernie, Rand Paul or some third party candidate (I don't care if they win, in fact, I wouldn't vote for Trump unless I thought he WOULDN'T win).

I did take that isidewith quiz a while back though and I was somewhat surprised to be at about 90% agreement with Bernie Sanders. I do really like the guy, but don't agree with him on a couple major issues. However, I am more than willing to overlook some of his somewhat nonsensical/naïve positions given the chance that he'd have to alter the current political process for the better. A few socialist programs can't possibly bring as much destruction as the current ridiculous primary/2-party system/electoral college/Super-PAC/gerrymandering/corruption clusterfuck we have now. His goal of publicly financing elections could go a long way toward fixing a lot of that. Here's to hoping at least.

Yeah, I think I was like 87% with Bernie, I really appreciate his approach as far as honesty and forwardness goes. I mean, you gotta have some serious balls to even use the term socialist in regards to yourself in politics today, mainly because of the misconceptions but still. I find it admirable. His stance on money in politics is dead on as well. The big problem I see with Bernie isn't so much bad ideas, it's more what would be required to achieve almost everything he wants. Essentially a paradigm shift in government and politics, it's pretty much a pipe dream.

As far as politics in general, I think we are in agreement here as well, doing away with Citizens United, Gerrymandering, and the Electoral College would solve about 95% of the problem right there.

Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty. -Thomas Jefferson

A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. -David Hume
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-10-2015, 11:24 PM
RE: Forced to vote Democrat: Christianity's Stranglehold on the Right
(28-10-2015 05:36 PM)RinChi Wrote:  
(28-10-2015 05:12 PM)Adrianime Wrote:  Wow. No need to be a dick. Just stating my opinion, not imposing it on you.

Nice, "you are entitled to your opinion, but you are an idiot and obviously not as smart as me." response. Dick.

My apologies if I came across like a dick, it was certainly not my intention. I was just trying to point out that opinions should be grounded in something, preferably in some kind of evidence. Everyone is entitled to believe whatever they want, but if you want to proclaim something to me, you better have something to back it up besides unfounded conviction. I never made any statement about your intelligence, not everyone thinks about or has the time to research the evidence for every single thing they assert, including myself. The thing is, when I am presented with evidence counter to my beliefs, I don't take it as a personal insult, I make a choice to either find opposing evidence and make my argument, or accept said evidence and change my belief based on it. I could provide literally books worth of evidence that the "drug war" or indeed drug laws in general don't work. You want to assert otherwise, fine, show me the contrary evidence. If you cant to that, then you are asserting an unfounded belief. This is not meant as an insult, it is a statement of fact.
My jerk-reaction was out of character. I have no interest in convincing you about my point of view, or debating about why you think you are right. I could be wrong, I don't think it's impossible that I'm not. What I find offensive is calling my point of view unethical and then in your "I'm superior" tone comparing my thoughts to a religious mindset. You have your personal and political beliefs and I have mine. You seem the type who likes to point out to people why you are right and they are wrong. The type of person I don't enjoy talking to.

I prefer fantasy, but I have to live in reality.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-10-2015, 11:56 PM
RE: Forced to vote Democrat: Christianity's Stranglehold on the Right
(27-10-2015 03:52 PM)RinChi Wrote:  Does anyone else share my disgust here? And if so, how can it change? It seems so ingrained right now. Fundamentalist Christianity forever epoxied to the ass cheek of the libertarian right. Someone get me a crowbar.

I do. I'm a registered Libertarian who voted for Barack Obama in 08 to keep Sarah Palin far away from the driver's seat.

It's in a way worse this year, as I cannot bring myself to consider Clinton at all, and so will revert to my third-party vote, all the while washing my hands of the disaster unfolding in front of us.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thumpalumpacus's post
29-10-2015, 12:44 AM (This post was last modified: 29-10-2015 04:36 AM by RinChi.)
RE: Forced to vote Democrat: Christianity's Stranglehold on the Right
(28-10-2015 11:24 PM)Adrianime Wrote:  My jerk-reaction was out of character. I have no interest in convincing you about my point of view, or debating about why you think you are right. I could be wrong, I don't think it's impossible that I'm not. What I find offensive is calling my point of view unethical and then in your "I'm superior" tone comparing my thoughts to a religious mindset. You have your personal and political beliefs and I have mine. You seem the type who likes to point out to people why you are right and they are wrong. The type of person I don't enjoy talking to.

This is what I get for apologizing.

So you just like to tell people you disagree with them, provide some non-evidence, then leave, contributing nothing to the thread? Sorry pal, I don't play that crap. You wanna call me out on something, you are more than welcome, but you better be bringing something better than that bullshit. I happen to enjoy engaging with other people who don't agree with me in spirited debate, I learn things all the time, and my views constantly evolve and refine themselves because of it. Here's the thing though, I'm a skeptic, my atheism is a product of that. I make decisions and form opinions on evidence, not touchy feelies or sensationalist fear mongering headlines.

As for my so called "insults" and "superior tone", I didn't say anything that wasn't 100% accurate. Spending billions of dollars on shit that hasn't done anything but finance the private prisons who hold non violent offenders for decades because they had some weed on them, robbing them of thier lives, IS unethical! These are people who could have been valuable citizens, who have done nothing wrong but made a stupid mistake, they didn't hurt anyone. Believing something in the absence of any, or in spite of all available evidence is pretty much the definition of a religious belief. But oh poor you, someone said you were wrong. Grow some skin.

You wanna keep your blinders on and cry foul every time someone challenges your world view, that's fine, but don't think for a second that I'm going to do the same. Here's the real problem, you are one of those people who cant interact with anyone who holds opinions contrary to your own, I'll bet if I agreed with you you would like talking to me just fine.

Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty. -Thomas Jefferson

A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. -David Hume
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2015, 01:13 AM
RE: Forced to vote Democrat: Christianity's Stranglehold on the Right
(29-10-2015 12:44 AM)RinChi Wrote:  
(28-10-2015 11:24 PM)Adrianime Wrote:  My jerk-reaction was out of character. I have no interest in convincing you about my point of view, or debating about why you think you are right. I could be wrong, I don't think it's impossible that I'm not. What I find offensive is calling my point of view unethical and then in your "I'm superior" tone comparing my thoughts to a religious mindset. You have your personal and political beliefs and I have mine. You seem the type who likes to point out to people why you are right and they are wrong. The type of person I don't enjoy talking to.

This is what I get for apologizing.

If you have no intention of convincing me or arguing anything, then why did you post a lame ass article as some sort of proof that I was wrong? So you just like to tell people you disagree with them, provide some non-evidence, then leave, contributing nothing to the thread? Sorry pal, I don't play that crap. You wanna call me out on something, you are more than welcome, but you better be bringing something better than that bullshit. I happen to enjoy engaging with other people who don't agree with me in spirited debate, I learn things all the time, and my views constantly evolve and refine themselves because of it. Here's the thing though, I'm a skeptic, my atheism is a product of that. I make decisions and form opinions on evidence, not touchy feelies or sensationalist fear mongering headlines.

As for my so called "insults" and "superior tone", I didn't say anything that wasn't 100% accurate. Spending billions of dollars on shit that hasn't done anything but finance the private prisons who hold non violent offenders for decades because they had some weed on them, robbing them of thier lives, IS unethical! These are people who could have been valuable citizens, who have done nothing wrong but made a stupid mistake, they didn't hurt anyone. Believing something in the absence of any, or in spite of all available evidence is pretty much the definition of a religious belief. But oh poor you, someone said you were wrong. Grow some skin.

You wanna keep your blinders on and cry foul every time someone challenges your world view, that's fine, but don't think for a second that I'm going to do the same. Here's the real problem, you are one of those people who cant interact with anyone who holds opinions contrary to your own, I'll bet if I agreed with you you would like talking to me just fine.

You're making a whole lot of assumptions for no reason in this. And a lot of the points are irrelevant to anything argued or stated. I think you're being defensive for no reason, you weren't called out on something, you were told by someone they don't agree with you. Maybe it's off the straight pathway from what your thread was about but it's an element that comes from the start of the argument.

It's your view that freedom trumps all, you are one if you want to, can defend such view or support it and perhaps in some ways you did. There's nothing wrong about someone really just disagreeing with the simple acceptance of freedom being that freedom in a/the primary right.

We are mostly accepting beings without any direct overarching authority to say what is or isn't the most important concept for sentience to acknowledge.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2015, 01:37 AM
RE: Forced to vote Democrat: Christianity's Stranglehold on the Right
(29-10-2015 01:13 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  You're making a whole lot of assumptions for no reason in this. And a lot of the points are irrelevant to anything argued or stated. I think you're being defensive for no reason, you weren't called out on something, you were told by someone they don't agree with you. Maybe it's off the straight pathway from what your thread was about but it's an element that comes from the start of the argument.

It's your view that freedom trumps all, you are one if you want to, can defend such view or support it and perhaps in some ways you did. There's nothing wrong about someone really just disagreeing with the simple acceptance of freedom being that freedom in a/the primary right.

We are mostly accepting beings without any direct overarching authority to say what is or isn't the most important concept for sentience to acknowledge.

Obviously you didn't follow the thread, this was not about freedom being a primary right, it was about whether or not substance prohibition works. I say it doesn't and can show volumes of evidence to back it up. He refuted me by showing some article about what a couple of crackheads did to thier baby(which is actually just more evidence that the laws don't work). I never got defensive at all, I asked for something better than a sad article. Instead I just get called a dick, twice! But even after that I didn't resort to childish name calling. As a matter of fact I apologized, and further explained my position, to which I just get another snotty reply. Who exactly is getting defensive here?

I'm not sure what assumptions you think I'm making, but I gladly invite you to elaborate.

Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty. -Thomas Jefferson

A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. -David Hume
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2015, 02:04 AM
RE: Forced to vote Democrat: Christianity's Stranglehold on the Right
(27-10-2015 06:24 PM)Adrianime Wrote:  Well i disagree with freedom as the primary right, but I do agree that the republican party makes itself "unvotable" because of the heavy religious influence.

I wish in politics they focused more on issues that fix conflict/national debt rather than the issues they tend to focus on that won't change our country's (USA) situation.

Eisenhower predicted all of this in his Military industrial complex speech.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2015, 02:54 AM (This post was last modified: 29-10-2015 03:01 AM by ClydeLee.)
RE: Forced to vote Democrat: Christianity's Stranglehold on the Right
(29-10-2015 01:37 AM)RinChi Wrote:  
(29-10-2015 01:13 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  You're making a whole lot of assumptions for no reason in this. And a lot of the points are irrelevant to anything argued or stated. I think you're being defensive for no reason, you weren't called out on something, you were told by someone they don't agree with you. Maybe it's off the straight pathway from what your thread was about but it's an element that comes from the start of the argument.

It's your view that freedom trumps all, you are one if you want to, can defend such view or support it and perhaps in some ways you did. There's nothing wrong about someone really just disagreeing with the simple acceptance of freedom being that freedom in a/the primary right.

We are mostly accepting beings without any direct overarching authority to say what is or isn't the most important concept for sentience to acknowledge.

Obviously you didn't follow the thread, this was not about freedom being a primary right, it was about whether or not substance prohibition works. I say it doesn't and can show volumes of evidence to back it up. He refuted me by showing some article about what a couple of crackheads did to thier baby(which is actually just more evidence that the laws don't work). I never got defensive at all, I asked for something better than a sad article. Instead I just get called a dick, twice! But even after that I didn't resort to childish name calling. As a matter of fact I apologized, and further explained my position, to which I just get another snotty reply. Who exactly is getting defensive here?

I'm not sure what assumptions you think I'm making, but I gladly invite you to elaborate.

Huh? he didn't post any link about anything of this case. Or make the claims about substances, what are you talking about? where posts erased or edited or something? I see looking you're not talking about the interaction I'm talking about here. You are referring to something else with lorddarkhelm which related, wasn't started via the same points.

When someone one thing is stated outwardly, That's not constitutional or ethical it is laded with a question to, why in this scenario did that person say such things? What was the interpenetration that made the person even view if it's "constitutional" even relevant. The comments were directed in a purely US political should do this manner nor is there some grand overview of the one ethical solution. It's not even highlighted that those are desired views. These were the types of assumptions that got you called a dick, though I wouldn't put it to that degree.

And where were you defensive, you stated a whole bunch of comments, then someone says I view it a different way, you back down saying they're just making assertions without evidence. It's not like you have done anything but that yourself in the thread... but neither really are so relevant because both are just staying, I view this moral as higher of importance. Yet you're defending the statement like it's so much more than just one saying I view freedom as more important vs another saying, what I think is good in this scenario involves some order.

The main issues I have with your type of stance is it always comes off so excessively arbitrary. The baselines for what is "good" what governments(in general not specific ones) should be limited too or not be limited too. It's so often just decided, yet not agreed upon and bickering happens upon different grounds. That's why I agree with him it's usually pointless to debate because people just sit there and argue details separate from the source of why the view is different.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2015, 06:04 AM
RE: Forced to vote Democrat: Christianity's Stranglehold on the Right
(27-10-2015 03:52 PM)RinChi Wrote:  I'm wondering if I'm alone here on this, I suspect not. My political views are pretty simple, freedom trumps all. It's the basis for the country's constitution. Everyone should have the right to do anything they want with thier bodies and property until such a point that they infringe on another's rights of the same. Period. No, offending them doesn't count, real, serious, physical harm. There should be no drug laws, no regulations on marriage, no bullshit ADA, the EPA should probably exist, but it's powers should be confined to public land only. Don't even get me started on the FCC. I could go on and on here, and I probably will in some other thread, but it's not the point of this one.

The point is, in my view the U.S. government is way too big, it's out of control, outrageously expensive and continues every year to more closely resemble a police state. This is a decidedly right wing position to take. Furthermore, the democratic party's insistence on creating a government division or subsidization for everything under the sun, and funding all those things with my money is revolting.

Unfortunately, I will vote democratic anyway for one simple reason: Religion, specifically Christianity has completely and utterly hijacked the republican party and they are poisoning the well. Every single point of contention I have with the republican candidates is a direct result of thier insistence to pander to the religious community, anti-abortion, gay marriage, contraception, pornography, stem cell research, interference in education, the list goes on and on... What the fuck is an ideology that professes to believe in small government doing advocating government interference in all these personal issues?!!! It's so frustrating!!

Not only are these things in direct opposition to small government, they are incredibly damaging to the country as a whole. How many proper biologists and physicists do you think we would produce if they got what they want... teaching our children that the earth is 6000 years old, and that evolution didn't take place? Or what is it doing to our children's psyche to be taught that sexual repression is the appropriate and correct mentality to have? Is there really a good reason that my daughter, when she grows up, can't go out and show her tits off if she wishes? Where do they get off telling them that it's immoral? These, and so much more are all very damaging to the American spirit, never mind the constitution. To me, this is the stuff that should really matter when we call ourselves atheists, the very real harm religion is doing to our country and our world.

It feels like a false choice, a political trap. Either I force myself to concede my non religious convictions for the sake of my political ones and vote for what will essentially become a theocracy, Or I concede my political beliefs and vote for what will essentially become a nanny state. The proverbial "lose-lose" situation.

Does anyone else share my disgust here? And if so, how can it change? It seems so ingrained right now. Fundamentalist Christianity forever epoxied to the ass cheek of the libertarian right. Someone get me a crowbar.


Is there any particular government that you see as modeled after this limited government type ideal? Even when speaking of European, Scandinavian countries, the ones with general high marks on a variety of indexes, their governments play far from a limited role.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: