World is Falling Apart Thread (Locked forever)

[jp1]

I don't if they even begin to step on what I believe is right, which they often do. I have long given up on friends, they are a made up fairly tale, they don't exist.

I have been lambasted on this site for my views on gay marriage in relation to religion- saying exactly the doctrine of my church, using the "hate the sin, not the sinner" argument, and been bashed over the head that I am a bigoted asshole. I watch people joke about rednecks and bible thumpers and all that- and being so few steps away, I get pretty pissed at these high city assholes getting laugh and mock the bumpkin. But no, if they say that this is how morality is now, fall in line or be silenced

And never judge my ass. You judge. I judge. Everyone judges, we just don't like to admit because it does make us an asshole.

I concede never was a strong word. I do unintentionally judge people from time to time, and I make it my business to correct that behavior when I realize it. We all make mistakes.

I maintain that our differences do not mean we have to hate one another, although you've made it clear we can't be friends.

I can't go any further down this particular road with you, it just doesn't feel productive.

The fact remains that I am a liberal, and you are making statements about my perception of you that aren't true. Take that at face value or continue to refute it, there's nothing more I can do then tell you like it is.

[Forlorn Drifter]

I maintain that our differences do not mean we have to hate one another, although you've made it clear we can't be friends.

I can't go any further down this particular road with you, it just doesn't feel productive.

The fact remains that I am a liberal, and you are making statements about my perception of you that aren't true. Take that at face value or continue to refute it, there's nothing more I can do then tell you like it is.

I do not hate you, although I know deep down you hate me, whether or not you are willing to admit it. Evey post I've made in this thread has continually made you think less of me, has it not? I'm sure it has.

I'm not saying we can't be friends, I'm saying I don't believe in the idea of friends. They don't exist. Business partners, people you work with, people you chat with, sure. Friends? Bah, the idea of a friend is unattainable. Anyways, this is the internet, I do not know you, you do not know me. Can you really be friends with someone (if we assume the idea exists) without knowing them? Methinks not.

And of course, the classic "this isn't going anywhere." That's supposed to be a conservative thing, y'know.

[jp1]

I've got nothing but my word. If that doesn't work for you, I'm not sure what else to say.

But no, I still do not hate you.

[Jmustang1968]

"Just don't shove those beliefs on others"

Did... did any of the liberals get that memo? Because I have heard that more times in my life than I'd like to admit, yet when I say that, I'm the asshole.

To pick a standard issue, gay marriage. Conservatives don't want it allowed, liberals want it allowed. If conservatives ban gay marriage that pushes their belief that two people of the same sex shouldn't marry on everyone else, such as the two people of the same sex. In the reverse, the conservative who doesn't think gay marriage is ok isn't suddenly obligated to get gay married even though it is now an option. That's why it's a case of conservatives pushing their beliefs on others but not the other way around. Many of the hot button social issues tend to follow this pattern of conservatives going "you can't do that" and liberals saying "you should be allowed to do that if you want to". Not all of them; gun control being a notable outlier.

I think this is more authoritarian vs libertarian, not necessarily liberal/conservative.

Conservatives want to restrict things like gay marriage and abortions etc... But many liberal type restrictions such as guns like you mentioned, and things like limited soda sizes, the controlling kids school lunches (even ones brought from home), video game violence (though this has been bipartisan, it seems many of the frontrunners on this have been democrats).

What bugs the more fiscal conservatives the most though is the raised taxes forcing us to pay or support things some don't agree with. So, I think it goes both ways.

[MrPopo]

"Just don't shove those beliefs on others"

Did... did any of the liberals get that memo? Because I have heard that more times in my life than I'd like to admit, yet when I say that, I'm the asshole.

To pick a standard issue, gay marriage. Conservatives don't want it allowed, liberals want it allowed. If conservatives ban gay marriage that pushes their belief that two people of the same sex shouldn't marry on everyone else, such as the two people of the same sex. In the reverse, the conservative who doesn't think gay marriage is ok isn't suddenly obligated to get gay married even though it is now an option. That's why it's a case of conservatives pushing their beliefs on others but not the other way around. Many of the hot button social issues tend to follow this pattern of conservatives going "you can't do that" and liberals saying "you should be allowed to do that if you want to". Not all of them; gun control being a notable outlier.

I think this is more authoritarian vs libertarian, not necessarily liberal/conservative.

Conservatives want to restrict things like gay marriage and abortions etc... But many liberal type restrictions such as guns like you mentioned, and things like limited soda sizes, the controlling kids school lunches (even ones brought from home), video game violence (though this has been bipartisan, it seems many of the frontrunners on this have been democrats).

What bugs the more fiscal conservatives the most though is the raised taxes forcing us to pay or support things some don't agree with. So, I think it goes both ways.

Indeed. I was speaking specifically to what liberal vs. conservative means in most American politics, i.e. Democrat vs. Republican. And the Republican party is this weird combination of fiscal conservatives and religious conservatives with not a lot of overlap, other than standing against the Democrats as each disagrees with part of the Democratic platform.

[ElkinFencer10]

I don't believe in the idea of friends. They don't exist. Business partners, people you work with, people you chat with, sure.

[Forlorn Drifter]

I don't believe in the idea of friends. They don't exist. Business partners, people you work with, people you chat with, sure.

I don't get it.

So, I decided to screw around since I'm being a piss-head, and took an ISideWith test...

Fucking A, I don't agree with anyone extremely. I got most similar to Trump and Fiorina, which... I know that part isn't right. I think it was skewed with certain sections being only one question, so that one question skewed me heavily towards them. Rubio being so high up didn't surprise me, nor did Cruz, Paul or Carson. Though the answers are definitely skewed in the Yes/No but or unless reasoning, because I "sided heavily" with Bernie on domestic policy, but where we both said Yes or No, the "but" was quite a bit different.

Plus, it put my pretty solidly on the Centrist mark, despite me being somewhat to heavily on what would fall under either conservative or libertarian views under "Political Themes".

[Pulsar_t]

I don't believe in the idea of friends. They don't exist. Business partners, people you work with, people you chat with, sure.

I don't get it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niccol%C3 ... hiavellian

[Blu]

I found this article quite striking and wanted to share it:

http://www.npr.org/2016/01/18/462027861 ... g-reliance

Really explains why Trump is the front-runner, and I think paints a clear picture of if he receives the nomination, why he won't win the general election

On a broader, systemic level, I believe it calls into question the limitations of a two-party system yet again.

[Ack]

I found this article quite striking and wanted to share it:

http://www.npr.org/2016/01/18/462027861 ... g-reliance

Really explains why Trump is the front-runner, and I think paints a clear picture of if he receives the nomination, why he won't win the general election

On a broader, systemic level, I believe it calls into question the limitations of a two-party system yet again.

Ah, a classic Internet comment section.

I thought this was a good assessment of some of the issues facing the Republican Party regarding their base and how it has evolved over time. It both fuels the problems of Republican candidates having to appeal to a limited base and the attacks against them being uncaring towards the problems facing other groups. If anything, I see this as a problem with the Primary system.

That said, there is some active movement against this problem by certain Republicans. For instance, Karl Rove has spent the last couple of years pointing to the modern day parallels with the election of 1896 and the need for the Republicans to seek out new groups to integrate into their base. Part of the argument for Marco Rubio's campaign in a general election is that he might appeal to more Hispanic voters than any other Republican candidate. And the political polarization of upper education has been a rallying cry we've been hearing about for...what, decades now? It's been a complaint since the 1960s protest movements on college campuses.