Likes: 
Faceplams: It's a Christian thing.Originally Posted by Elke
tempus est umbra in mente
It's a Christian thing.
Active Member
Yup. I'm past the point of giving these nutjobs even an iota of respect. I'm beyond sick of people basing their opinions not on logic and fact but on some ancient book of fairy tales. Not that all Christians are like that, but there are a huge number in our country who are. It's insane.
Throbbing Member
Uh, no it's not. If it was, all christians everywhere would be spouting shit like that.
That aside: I never quite understood how ethical stances could be so important in assuring a very small portion of your votes. After all, most people end up knowing someone who's gay, someone who's had an abortion, someone who's asked for euthanasia. I'm personally very much opposed to abortion, but personal experiences have taught me that it needs to be an option. It might be one I can't imagine seeing myself taking, but that doesn't mean that I wouldn't have fought for other people's rights to have one.
It's painting yourself into a corner, isn't it? In the end, you're catering to a perplexingly small subset of potential voters, and you're alienating an even more perplexingly large group of people who want to do well by the people they know and love.
Then again, the U.S. has patches of culture that are completely alien to me, so it might be that my idea of those relative numbers is just plain wrong.
Active Member
In the U.S., it absolutely is. And the Christian right is exactly who they're pandering to.
There are all sorts of reasons why people vote Republican. I can't say I agree with any of them, but a lot of people aren't really huge on the morality issues but are very fiscally conservative, and will vote Repub because of that. Then there are a lot of people who are very morally conservative, and that's what draws that crowd in. They're pandering to different parts of their base. But the right has very much made themselves, by and large, into the party of "traditional conservative values," meaning no on gay marriage and no on abortion. And the U.S. is still very homophobic (though we're making progress).That aside: I never quite understood how ethical stances could be so important in assuring a very small portion of your votes. After all, most people end up knowing someone who's gay, someone who's had an abortion, someone who's asked for euthanasia. I'm personally very much opposed to abortion, but personal experiences have taught me that it needs to be an option. It might be one I can't imagine seeing myself taking, but that doesn't mean that I wouldn't have fought for other people's rights to have one.
It's painting yourself into a corner, isn't it? In the end, you're catering to a perplexingly small subset of potential voters, and you're alienating an even more perplexingly large group of people who want to do well by the people they know and love.
Then again, the U.S. has patches of culture that are completely alien to me, so it might be that my idea of those relative numbers is just plain wrong.
So I'm sure there are a decent amount of people who probably don't agree with the right-wing on morality, but will overlook that because of any number of other issues where they agree. That seems to be the case to me, anyway. I could be wrong.
Last edited by theruiner; 01-08-2012 at 07:50 AM.
Throbbing Member
But there has to be a backlash at some point? Or maybe Obama already was the backlash... In my experience, a political party or individual candidate that draws too much attention to very strict ethical notions eventually ends up with a very hardcore but very small group of voters.
Of course, in a two party system opportunities aren't as big to go party-hopping as they are over here. It just seems like it's a very bad idea, politically speaking.
[Also, on a side note: there are plenty of American christians who have come out to support abortion, euthanasia, condom use and glbt rights. The thing is that with the very narrow vision of christianity that is often being used in US media, they are discarded as 'not real christians', while they actually are as real and as widespread as their counterparts. Just on gay marriage alone, there has been a lot of writing and blogging from different christian angles: this blogpost, this piece (it's weird to read, but it does make perfect sense), this Canadian opinion piece and this is over a decade old, but still essential: A Conservative Christian Case for Civil Same-Sex Marriage. The last one is a big read, but it's a very good and rational, non-theological argument.]
Throbbing Member
Unfortunately in the states people with these opinions are not a very small minority. Also if I'm not mistaken social wedge issues are often used by Republicans to give them the extra kick they need in a tough election. The other problem is that the demographic who are most opposed to social conservatism don't vote, which is a real shame (everyone under 30). I've talked to a good many people who absolutely hate Obama but are pretty sane on ethical issues say that "jobs are more important" or that "we can deal with that ethical issues later" and that all they know is "they will never never vote for Obama."
Still I think your right. We just get caught up in what this minority thinks because they are very loud and they are pandered to because of their location in very important states for the electoral. The truth is they are alienating a lot of people. My mother is a Reagan Republican and thinks everyone running is insane.
Active Member
Rick Santorum, who is against contraception, says the states should be able to outlaw it.
Active Member
Yay, let's all have an AIDS apocalypse, God will rescue us in the end!
gettin' jiggy wit it
That's not it! Every sperm is sacred.
(he also thinks masturbation and sex post-menopause are wrong).
tempus est umbra in mente
Really? Where the hell do they find these fucking people?
Throbbing Member
Stubby Member
here's a good piece on the current state of the GOP: http://www.truth-out.org/goodbye-all...ult/1314907779
Bite me
In the Catholic church.
Throbbing Member
Sadly, this is true. (But not ONLY in the Church, mind you. There's interpretations of the Qur'an that say the same thing. Won't Santorum love that?)
Active Member
Are you kidding? I need source material on this one. Fuck him - no, he doesn't deserve to be fucked.
Huntsman is going to take 2nd in New Hampshire. The TV ads for him kicked in yesterday and apparently NH voters are notorious for making decisions driving up to the polls.
Active Member
Brilliant.
Throbbing Member
This Salon article basically says the same thing.
gettin' jiggy wit it
Huntsman's out. So we're left with a bunch of clowns and Mitt Romney. I'm sooooo glad I'm not a Republican right now.
Hairy Member
I can't believe I'm saying it, but I'm thankful for Newt Gingrich right now for being the only one with the guts to really go after Romney. He's helping to frame the debate as government vs. wall street. Maybe Obama should put him on the ticket.
Throbbing Member
what do you mean..?
Hairy Member
Sorry, I was being sarcastic. Very often the vice presidential candidate plays the role of the attack dog. Biden is supposed to be one, but I don't think he ever lived up to that role as much as it was needed the past few years, and it might be tough for him to keep up in what will surely be a nasty campaign. Gingrich is setting up legitimate criticisms of Romney which he has thus far not defended well, and which could spell trouble for him down the road, IF Obama attacks him on it.
Here is the ad Gingrich is currently running in South Carolina ahead of the primary:
Throbbing Member
I have no desire to press play on that video. I just got back from brasil where they passed a law where you can get paid overtime for sending work emails after work hours.
I'm having culture shock.
Hairy Member
Well here's a tip that I believe is universally accepted across most cultures: It's rude to ask someone to clarify something and then reject their attempt to do so.
This is a great article that spells out what I was trying to say and more by also pointing out the irony of GOP candidates employing populist economic rhetoric more effectively than the Dems.
Perry added that “there is something inherently wrong when getting rich off failures and sticking it to someone else is how you do your business,” which is basically a wholesale rejection of the free market system.
Throbbing Member
I still watched it, but I didn't want too =[
Throbbing Member
Great ad. Mitt Romney killed my parents too.
And they go after Paul for negative ads?
gettin' jiggy wit it
WHAT?! Rick Perry said that?! And he made it out the debate venue alive?
Throbbing Member
Didn't he call the Pres of Turkey a terrorist too?
I have to say I was pretty unimpressed when people booed Dr. Paul when he said we should use the Golden Rule in regards to our foreign policies. Is your country seriously that blood thirsty for a war with Iran? Like whats the deal here.
Flaccid Member
Well, Perrry's out of the race (thank fuck)
gettin' jiggy wit it
Dr. Paul. I's gots me shivers. Technically, law degrees are juris doctore so one could call any lawyer "doctor," maybe, technically, but they don't. Ron Paul hasn't actually practiced medicine in decades. His non-interventionalist foreign policy (and drug legalization) aside, the guy's a whack job.
Throbbing Member
What does that have to do with anything?
What are you trying to say, because he hasn't practiced medicine in a long time he is some how lesser a doctor? Sure he wouldn't be able to do the job the same now, but the morals remain the same. By that logic are veterans lesser veterans because they haven't been in battle for decades? And yes he is playing up that he was once a doctor for a period of his life but so is Romney with his time on Wallstreet.
EDIT: sry ive been drinking.
Last edited by PooPooMeowChow; 01-21-2012 at 12:24 AM.
Posting Permissions
