Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Are you one of those people who are incapable of tackling more than one issue at a time? How does supporting gay marriage stop me from wanting a strong economy?
I am for going after more then one issue, but we have been rather unsuccesful with our economy. Maybe we should focus harder on it.
What exactly is someone trying to impose onto you? Is it that they want the same rights that you have, with regards to marrying who you wish to marry(see equality of marriage)? Is it that they want to be able to decide to do whatever it is with their body that they wish to(see pro-choice). Is it that a woman wants to be paid equal to that of her male colleague(see equality in the workplace). I just can't see how this imposes on your rights. Please, explain to me how it does?
As far as gay rights, one side wants to tell people who they can and can't marry, the other doesn't want to tell others how to live their lives. However, move towards gun rights, and the side that didn't want to tell others how to live their lives is all of a sudden telling others how to live their lives, and the side that wants to tell people who they can and can't marry is the one not telling others how to live their lives. Then you can move to abortion rights and it flips back around again....until you get back to the environment, where it flips back around AGAIN.
Bottom line is that both "sides" of our political system feel they have a right to dictate how others live their lives. And both sides think the "other" side has no right to dictate how others live their lives.
Don't get me wrong, its cool with me gay people can get married, just go to work and pay taxes and you are fine by me.
But why is gay marriage such a massive issue? I mean its definitely worth mentioning, but it seems alot of people are revolving a large part of there vote based on it. I mean its estimated only about 4% of the poulation is gay, The media/TV is very gay friendly
Abortion, this topic will be argued for a long time. It is a topic so split there will likely never be a change as you push away half of your voters.
I mean I understand, war, foreign policy, jobs, taxes, economy, etc.... Just seems like a large part of the population is fooled by smoke and mirrors, and doesnt see real issues.
Because social issues are highly emotional. Arcane stuff like tax codes are difficult to understand, but emotions rouse easily.
How many of us ever really understood the bank collapses of 2008 and why they happened?
I sure did not. It took months for me to understand all of the intertwined and complicated stuff that went on, and I had to work pretty hard to gain the understanding.
Much of government is like that. You can always learn anything in detail, but much of what is learned is no fun... it's dry, boring, and full of jargon. The social stuff can all be said in a few sentences on either side of almost all of it's issues.
What is important to one person may not be important to another. What alarms one person may not alarm another. Life is always like that in all its shades for all of us.
Social issues get to the heart and core of who we are--what rights we have as an individual in making very personal decisions. If the economy is bad, I can still work out a way to beat the averages and work my way to the top, but if the government says I can't marry someone I love, I can't use reliable birth control like the pill (personhood amendments) yadda yadda yadda, there's no working around it.
It's interesting to me that radical right wing R's are the ones pushing the draconian social issues, yet they're the first ones to complain--to ask why we're not focusing on the economy instead--when people jump up in arms and fight back.
In 2012 it was the Dems pushing the social issues and it got Obama re-elected. Republicans weren't talking much about them this time. It wasn't 2004 when I would agree Bush ran on social issues.
The trend is for candidates to focus on social issues when they don't have a positive record to run on. They energize the base and turn out the numbers, which is really all a candidate needs.
Because social issues are highly emotional. Arcane stuff like tax codes are difficult to understand, but emotions rouse easily.
How many of us ever really understood the bank collapses of 2008 and why they happened?
I sure did not. It took months for me to understand all of the intertwined and complicated stuff that went on, and I had to work pretty hard to gain the understanding.
Much of government is like that. You can always learn anything in detail, but much of what is learned is no fun... it's dry, boring, and full of jargon. The social stuff can all be said in a few sentences on either side of almost all of it's issues.
What is important to one person may not be important to another. What alarms one person may not alarm another. Life is always like that in all its shades for all of us.
Social issues a lot of the times are directly tied in to the economy, too, though. That's what one also has to factor in when trying to understand the country's economic past/present/future. It's not just what banks are doing, but also how those who are customers of the banks and economy are doing, in regards to their equality(their civil rights and all that jazz). You are right, calculating the country's economic equation can definitely be difficult, but just don't forget the social variables to that equation.
It doesn't but why does it seem like issues like gay marriage are publicized as much or even more. I just noticed in the last election, people wanted to vote fiscally conservative, but on social issues wanted to go liberal. In the ned they stuck with social issues. But it seems the latter would affect our lives more.
Truth! A lot of people were/are fed up with Obama but since social issues trump all others, they voted for him anyways because they support him on gay marriage and abortion.
Truth! A lot of people were/are fed up with Obama but since social issues trump all others, they voted for him anyways because they support him on gay marriage and abortion.
Wasn't about social issues. Those are MSNBC talking points. What floored Romney was the fact that the economy is still a mess, and Romney was making subtle points, including Paul Ryan et. al, about gutting social welfare programs. Maybe if you're a white, middle class to upper middle class liberal do social issues trump all. Of course it would, because you're not worried whether you're going to have heating in the winter, whether or not you're going to be thrown out onto the street because you can't afford your rent, or eat because your rent is eating up your paycheck, however little it is. White social liberals are really out of touch with the working classes of America, just as bad as Romney is
Social issues get to the heart and core of who we are--what rights we have as an individual in making very personal decisions. If the economy is bad, I can still work out a way to beat the averages and work my way to the top, but if the government says I can't marry someone I love, I can't use reliable birth control like the pill (personhood amendments) yadda yadda yadda, there's no working around it.
It's interesting to me that radical right wing R's are the ones pushing the draconian social issues, yet they're the first ones to complain--to ask why we're not focusing on the economy instead--when people jump up in arms and fight back.
I hate to tell you this, it's your side that puts out there that the "evil righties are trying to do away with" xyz, infringing on your social rights. And you guys buy it hook, line, and sinker.
Look around, social issues are decided by the states, not the feds. When voting in a national election, it is simply about how your tax dollars will be spent and the state of our economy. PERIOD.
Socially, what's good for North Dakota may not work in South Carolina. They decide those things individually.
In our country and as a country, we have much larger fish to fry than gay marriage. Who gives a crap? We need jobs for Americans, we need our country to be able to keep our heads above water.
I did not hear one person that was given the time of day claim that they would do anything to take away social rights. Read carefully now, "given the time of day". Hell, most on the right side don't even want to touch those things with a ten foot pole and would much rather that the states decide their social rights.
It's your side that puts up the smoke and mirrors and you all fall for it EVERY SINGLE TIME. Yet, we still cannot find a job. Great, everyone can marry who they want, but they just can't afford it.
Everyone needs to vote with their brain and their pocket in national elections and leave their hearts and other parts out of it.
I hate to tell you this, it's your side that puts out there that the "evil righties are trying to do away with" xyz, infringing on your social rights. And you guys buy it hook, line, and sinker.
Look around, social issues are decided by the states, not the feds. When voting in a national election, it is simply about how your tax dollars will be spent and the state of our economy. PERIOD.
Socially, what's good for North Dakota may not work in South Carolina. They decide those things individually.
In our country and as a country, we have much larger fish to fry than gay marriage. Who gives a crap? We need jobs for Americans, we need our country to be able to keep our heads above water.
I did not hear one person that was given the time of day claim that they would do anything to take away social rights. Read carefully now, "given the time of day". Hell, most on the right side don't even want to touch those things with a ten foot pole and would much rather that the states decide their social rights.
It's your side that puts up the smoke and mirrors and you all fall for it EVERY SINGLE TIME. Yet, we still cannot find a job. Great, everyone can marry who they want, but they just can't afford it.
Everyone needs to vote with their brain and their pocket in national elections and leave their hearts and other parts out of it.
This is very true. I've said it before, some social issues, like gay marriage and abortion, are not decided on the federal level. Under our system if the SCOTUS does not change it, if you want gay marriage, then vote for a Democrat politician on the state level. Feds can't unilaterally legalize same-sex marriage across the country except the Supreme Court. As of right now, Perry v. Schwarzenegger will only affect California and not any other state, even other states in the 9th Circuit.
If I'm reading your post right, you're basically saying social issues are easy to talk about and east to form an opinion about, but stuff that actually matters is too complicated for the average American to bother with?
This can be proved to an extent just by reading this board.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
