Father Heathen
Veteran Member
there is no one demanding conformity of beliefs on that side of the spectrum;
...come on, now... Seriously?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
there is no one demanding conformity of beliefs on that side of the spectrum;
You're assuming too much -- my conversations with liberals on any platform indicate that there is very little understanding on that side. If it's there, it's rare... There are a few -- Bill Maher, Tim Pool, etc... It's really damn rare...
The most common area of fault though on the liberal side are conflating the conviction of the oppositions view with religious beliefs. Most conservatives compartmentalize those things -- e.g. understand their faith, social view, and economic positions may necessarily be at odds to some degree and aim to resolve them. Liberals are more likely to abandon tradition for some sort of virtue points that appease their egos -- while simultaneously actually doing nothing. Mind you, I'm a right-leaning Libertarian by modern understandings... I've dealt with both sides -- they both want more government for "reasons", and I want way less... My political position has always been -- "I don't need a new daddy to tell me what to do when I've grown up." Both angles in popular politics are adverse to that notion, so I've ceded that I'll never be satisfied either way... lol
My political position has always been -- "I don't need a new daddy to tell me what to do when I've grown up."
How can you say MOST conservative compartmentalize things??? That is absurd.
Most conservatives I meet think their own opinions are "facts" while other people's opinions are "wrong", "lies", or "falsehoods". Just because someone has a different opinion than you do does not make it immediately "wrong." It think conservatives are like born-again Christians in the sense that the more people who share their dogma the more they are convinced their dogma is not delusion.
It was an idiotic statement.
How can you say MOST conservative compartmentalize things??? That is absurd.
Or you just don't hate yourself enough to vote for a party that hates you, along with hating science. I vote Democratic because they're less insane than the Republicans, although both are garbage.Which one? Modern day propaganda is very sophisticated in that it makes the person think the views they have about politics and religion are them thinking for themselves. But in actuality, their views are programmed according to very well known techniques:
Think of this way. Just take one election, say the 2020 presidential election, and vote Democrat if you are a Republican. And vote Republican if you are Democrat. If the very idea of voting for the party you don't normally vote for makes you physically ill, then there's a good chance you've been programmed by propaganda.
People on the left are not looking for "a new daddy". Why do you get to define what it means to be a liberal Democrat? This would be like me saying conservative right wingers are just looking for a God-like strong bully leader they can worship in authority because they are incapable of thinking for themselves.
Or you just don't hate yourself enough to vote for a party that hates you, along with hating science. I vote Democratic because they're less insane than the Republicans, although both are garbage.
They certainly do.. beyond that talking of the right in terms of the most extreme of it's proponents is absurdity... Most conservatives are "right-center" or "middle-right" and not the "religious right", but everyone here seems to be frustrated with the smallest percentage of right in total. (The religious right...) The "alt-right" is a media fiction created by the liberal media, so I'm not even discussing that.
When I say "compartmentalize" I mean that conservatives are willing to work with all of those others, even though they agree on little -- they're willing to work for the small bits that they do. (This is the cause of the weird LGBT stance position, with most of the right being completely fine with it/supportive, and a small vocal minority rejecting it.) Surprisingly, they're even willing to work with Democrats most of the time of the issues they agree with. This is a vastly different perspective than I've witnessed with most liberals in modern times -- you either swallow what they're shoveling whole or they're throwing you under the bus or embracing enmity. Even with that said, I don't think progressives represent the majority of Democrats in their beliefs either -- though the progressives are currently working to force out the middle-left and the center-left in the party. It's more of a wait and see on that one...
Certainly, either party has a capacity for partisan antics, but I'm not talking that so much as the voter base and individuals.
This is probably a cultural thing but where I come from 'liberals' are not the 'left wing'.the liberals
From my position, yes they are...
They want daddy to give them:
1) Money
2) Healthcare
3) Keep them safe by taking away all the guns
4) Tax everything to pay for "the madness"
5) Keep the "environment" clean (Isn't it your job to clean up your mess?)
6) Indoctrinate their children in morals and thought in school
(in fairness, 6 applies to the religious right as well, but it's unanimous on the left, especially on issues of LGBT, Abortion, and etc... On the right, there are a lot of people who just want a secular education that doesn't include these topics -- they feel the parents should handle them.)
etc...
This is the exactly the capacity a "daddy" serves in your pre-Adult life. When I grew up I expected to be self-sufficient and provide all of these things to myself and my family, and I still don't want or need anyone to do them for me as they will not do them better from my perspective.
It's interesting that monotheistic religions which preach left wing things like "loving thy neighbour" and the sanctity of life seem to find their home in right wing politics... could it be that life is only sacred until you don't agree with their choices.... surely not....
EDIT: This is an unfair generalisation, thanks for pointing that out. I now mean this only to apply to conservatism - of course it's possible to be a leftie religious person and I'm glad of it, we need more of that sort of thing.
Both right wing politics and the Bible/Christian Deity were chronicled/philosophized in such a way as to leave them prone to manipulation by authoritarian figures.
So you find both of those two things coalescing in politics. Not that there aren't left leaning authoritarians, as there are.
Ditto, but my guess is that I'm probably even further to the left than you as I'm on the lunatic left-wing fringe.I am Catholic and regard myself as fairly liberal.
Fundamentalist Protestants and JW's tend to be more anti-science, but mainstream Protestants, Catholics, Anglicans, and Orthodox generally are not.Another popular myth is that religious people are anti-science.
I guess that's why the Christian west led the world in the transition from monarchies to republics with checks and balances to prevent concentration of power.
The terms "left" and "right" mean different things to different people. I'll note that some of the most odious oligarchies existing today are atheist states.
View attachment 29708
I guess that's why the Christian west led the world in the transition from monarchies to republics with checks and balances to prevent concentration of power.
The terms "left" and "right" mean different things to different people. I'll note that some of the most odious oligarchies existing today are atheist states.
View attachment 29708
Thanks for the history lesson, but I honestly have absolutely zero idea where all this stuff about Reaganomics and minimum wage comes from in a conversation about why conservatives have more religious folk than liberals. I was just referencing data about the different moral foundations that liberals, moderates and conservatives have.Since Reaganomics wealth inequality is at all time highs. Trickle down economics just doesn't work. How many times are we going to see massive tax cuts for the rich along with the gutting of consumer protection laws and delays in raising the minimum wage before people wise up to the fact these policies only exacerbate wealth inequality. If you are billionaire everything is great! But if you are just some common Joe, not so much:
I really sick and tired of right wingers telling me what it means to be a liberal Democrat. Why do they get to define what it means. As a liberal Democrat, I will go with FDR's 1936 speech on what it means to be a liberal Democrat in this country:
"An old English judge once said: 'Necessitous men are not free men.' Liberty requires opportunity to make a living - a living decent according to the standard of the time, a living which gives man not only enough to live by, but something to live for.
For too many of us the political equality we once had won was meaningless in the face of economic inequality. A small group had concentrated into their own hands an almost complete control over other people's property, other people's money, other people's labor - other people's lives. For too many of us life was no longer free; liberty no longer real; men could no longer follow the pursuit of happiness.
Against economic tyranny such as this, the American citizen could appeal only to the organized power of government."
Speech before the 1936 Democratic National Convention
How can any conservative think they have any morals at all when wealth inequality is so out of proportion?
And for God sake why can't we have a minimum wage law that is based on some economic measure independent of inflation. Every 10 or 15 years we hash out the same God damn stupid arguments about the minimum wage. Conservatives want total control over people's economic lives. Liberals want to restore freedom and liberty to the worker making the median wage.