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.
Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality. Whereas classical liberalism emphasizes the role of liberty, social liberalism stresses the importance of equality. Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas and programs such as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free markets, civil rights, democratic societies, secular governments, and international cooperation.
Liberalism first became a distinct political movement during the Age of Enlightenment, when it became popular among philosophers and economists in the Western world. Liberalism rejected the prevailing social and political norms of hereditary privilege, state religion, absolute monarchy, and the Divine Right of Kings.
On a personal note, I always regret the use of that word "equality" when describing the goal of liberals and/or Progressives like me, because conservatives tend to misunderstand and/or abuse that term, always suggesting that "liberals want everyone to be equal." Suffice to say it is not the goal that everyone be equal, socially or financially, not by any stretch of the imagination. The goal better defined is to provide everyone at least a fair shot, as equal as possible, to have a good healthy beginning in life, to include access at a young age to education, health care, food and shelter. Providing THAT sort of opportunity to those not born into privilege is what benefits all of us the most all considered.
Well, spin it however you like to make it easier to swallow...that's a whole lot of mumbo-jumbo rhetoric.
I described my experience with liberals and the overall mind-set without dressing it up. You may have noticed I try my hardest to nutshell issues and my opinions without any framing.
Stop trying to understand...in my experience a true liberal is usually one or all of the following:
Very dependent on "the system"
A taker by default
Have psychological issues / daddy issues
A social outcast of some kind (you know what this means)
A tree hugger
Smoke a lot of weed
Watch a lot of MTV
A follower...it's MTV cool to be liberal right now
Just plain weird
It's easy to adopt the liberal mind-set if your have been or are generally on the taking end...if you're usually the one giving to the takers you just can't be a genuine liberal. If you've leaned on the system or believe you will at some point need to lean on the system your're probably a liberal...Most people who have or are truly paving their own way through life are definitely not a liberal.
Doctors are both ethically and legally required to help the sick if it is possible for them to do so.
They would lose their medical licenses and be subject to both criminal and civil liability if they failed in this regard.
Following your religious beliefs is constitutionally protected.
So refusing to bake a gay wedding cake is perfectly legal, regardless of what the ACLU and some stupid judges say.
And police are legally and ethically required to save a person in danger if they are able to do so.
Exactly.
All this whining and crying over gay wedding cakes is absurd when you consider that it is still perfectly legal to discriminate against gays in employment, housing and public accommodations in many areas of this country.
Gays and their supporters would do better to address that issue than to harass Christians.
If you can't get or keep a job, focusing on a handful of Christians not wanting to make gay wedding cakes is no different than Marie Antoinette (allegedly) saying, "Let them eat cake."
Two things come to mind reading your post:
1. Based on "So refusing to bake a gay wedding cake is perfectly legal, regardless of what the ACLU and some stupid judges say", makes it very clear that you do not believe in the American legal/justice system.
2. There are very few posters in this forum who have whined longer and more frequently about this topic than you. Post after post after post after post...
Stop trying to understand...in my experience a true liberal is usually one or all of the following:
Very dependent on "the system"
A taker by default
Have psychological issues / daddy issues
A social outcast of some kind (you know what this means)
A tree hugger
Smoke a lot of weed
Watch a lot of MTV
A follower...it's MTV cool to be liberal right now
Just plain weird
It's easy to adopt the liberal mind-set if your have been or are generally on the taking end...if you're usually the one giving to the takers you just can't be a genuine liberal. If you've leaned on the system or believe you will at some point need to lean on the system your're probably a liberal...Most people who have or are truly paving their own way through life are definitely not a liberal.
I'm very much a moderate in many of my views, and it comes down to equality.
I don't condemn all liberals based off the actions of a few idiots.
I don't condemn all Muslims based off the actions of a few idiots.
I don't condemn all gun owners based off the actions of a few idiots.
And it goes on with just about every category, be it conservatives, blacks, atheists, etc. Of course, the story changes when the majority of a group is actually causing harm (I DO condemn all pedophiles, rapists, etc). But you get the idea.
It's difficult to sort out their hypocrisy. Please help.
- Tim Cook: It's OK for Apple to do business with countries that execute men for being homosexual, but it's not OK for a baker to refuse to bake a cake for a homosexual couple in the USA.
- Bruce Springsteen: It's OK for me to refuse to do business with people I don't agree with, but it's not OK for a baker to refuse to do business with people he doesn't agree with.
- Paypal: It's OK for us to do business with countries who execute transgender people but it's not OK for NC to tell transgender people which restroom they must use.
- Barbara Boxer: When the Pope speaks about Global Warming Catholics should listen to him. But when the Pope speaks about abortion, he is wrong and Catholics should not listen to him.
But Springsteen's ignorance is quite amusing. He doesn't even know the difference between and American Indian and somebody from the country of India.
"I mean, it's 2016, who still says they're Indian? This isn't 19th century America, we recognize these people are actually Native Americans," said Springsteen, adding "if Governor Haley wants to disrespect herself that's her business, but I will not play another concert in South Carolina as long as she's governor if she doesn't start using the proper term 'Native American.'"
While she is a natural born American citizen Governor Haley's parents are immigrants from India, a fact that did little to change Springsteen's view on the matter.
Said an indignant Springsteen, "you mean there's a whole country of people who still think like this? Well, that's just one more place that will never be blessed enough to host a concert by me! Equality for all is too important an issue, and anyone who doesn't stand for equality doesn't stand with me, The Boss."
Maybe this sums it up for us;
If you are trying to equate the above with hypocrisy, try focusing on your own ideology. There is plenty there, such as the idea that the government shouldn't interfere with a person's freedom -- except if it has to do with abortion or right to die. In those cases, not only should the government interfere but the federal government should overrule state courts, such as in the Terry Schiavo case.
Conservatives believe in the sanctity of life -- up until that person is born. Then, they don't care if the child dies in poverty from lack of heath care.
Conservatives believe in the sanctity of life -- up until that person is born. Then, they don't care if the child dies in poverty from lack of heath care.
That's an outright falsehood. It's the Democrat mantra and is getting tiresome.
This is a fair point, but I doubt you'll see a response with any substance. Note the "what if" deflections... those are no substitute for supporting evidence. Maybe I should try that at my job.
"So NumberFive, did you complete that deliverable due today?"
"What if there's no such thing as deliverables?"
"There are, we reviewed the requirements last week."
"What if last week doesn't exist? Basic Philosophy 101."
"Excellent point! Here's your promotion!"
After all that mumbo jumbo, I invite you to prove that God doesn't exist -- and that He didn't give the world a past when He created it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDusty
Ok, fine. My point still stands. The new laws are idiotic and a waste of time.
So you admit that there have been laws against males going into ladies' restrooms.
Fine, we're finally getting somewhere.
That you don't care that an adult male in a dress follows your little girl into the ladies restroom tells me a lot about you.
What it tells me is not something that I would call "good."
Quote:
It's an issue of individual liberty and the role of government. Conservatives claim to support a small government. A government that is this involved in something as simple as the use of a bathroom is hardly small.
If you say so.
As I said, an adult male in dress follows your little girl into the ladies' restroom, and you're fine with that....
Quote:
And it's not just an issue of a man in a dress. It's an issue of someone being born a man and having some sort of chemical imbalance in their brain (or whatever causes it) to make them, from a psychological stand point, feel as though they are the opposite sex. And it's not just about simple feeling, like being happy or angry, it's a deep and complex psychological feeling. Brain scans have suggested that indeed, a transgendered person's brain is wired in a similar or the same way as the opposite sex. And the fact is, a transgendered person (I'll use male to female to appease your little rape scenario that you cling to as the only defense of your violation of small government values) is going to do everything in their power to make themselves seems as ordinary as possible. That man is wearing a dress, and make up, and taking hormones to change their voice and grow breasts. They may have even had their genitals removed. You're telling me, it makes more sense to send this person, who by all observation at the very least appears to be a woman, into the men's room?
Yes, if "she" has a penis.
Obviously.
Quote:
And, since women are so fragile and need every little defense they can get, since obviously they can't do it themselves, what if it's a female to male? This woman, who's wearing jeans and a flannel, taking hormones to remove their breasts and grow facial hair, and possibly has had a penis attached to them, should be in the women's room? And this will make women feel, what? More comfortable?
If it has a penis, it uses the men's room.
If it has a vagina, it uses the ladies room.
And either way, it doesn't creep other people out by looking like a half-man or a half-woman.
If that's the situation, stay home until the transition is complete.
Or be a gender-bending rock star -- in which case, your private restroom will follow you and you'll have a security detail to keep it private.
Common sense -- it's a wonderful thing.
Quote:
You're right. I can't prove that. Because it's impossible to prove a negative. This is basic science. I'm not the one require to disprove that claim. The person making the claim is responsible for presenting evidence. Until evidence is presented, it will never be treated as anything more than an idea.
That's true.
And I haven't made any claim whatsoever.
I've disputed others' ability to prove their claims -- such as that God doesn't exist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
On a personal note, I always regret the use of that word "equality" when describing the goal of liberals and/or Progressives like me, because conservatives tend to misunderstand and/or abuse that term, always suggesting that "liberals want everyone to be equal." Suffice to say it is not the goal that everyone be equal, socially or financially, not by any stretch of the imagination. The goal better defined is to provide everyone at least a fair shot, as equal as possible, to have a good healthy beginning in life, to include access at a young age to education, health care, food and shelter. Providing THAT sort of opportunity to those not born into privilege is what benefits all of us the most all considered.
That's fine.
But then liberals typically support importing huge numbers of impoverished people from the Third World into this country -- even illegal aliens -- and so it is clear that their goal is not to give everyone a fair shot.
If they wanted to do that, they wouldn't import cheap labor into this country to undercut American wages and take away American jobs.
There is an intelligent way to be liberal in the sense you promote.
Unfortunately, liberals do not follow that way.
I keep asking them, "How many immigrants is too many" and never get an answer to that question.
Never mind that we don't have enough jobs for Americans.
Never mind that Southern California (for example) is in a drought and has a housing shortage and inadequate freeways.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
Two things come to mind reading your post:
1. Based on "So refusing to bake a gay wedding cake is perfectly legal, regardless of what the ACLU and some stupid judges say", makes it very clear that you do not believe in the American legal/justice system.
Why should I believe in it?
Just because it is a "system" that happens to operate right now?
We have a legal "system" in which it is perfectly legal for politicians to be bought by special interests.
Just ask Bernie.
No, what I believe in is common sense and the Constitution.
The courts generally follow neither.
Quote:
2. There are very few posters in this forum who have whined longer and more frequently about this topic than you. Post after post after post after post...
Oh, well, poor you.
It seems to me that you're the one who is whining.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech
If you are trying to equate the above with hypocrisy, try focusing on your own ideology. There is plenty there, such as the idea that the government shouldn't interfere with a person's freedom -- except if it has to do with abortion or right to die. In those cases, not only should the government interfere but the federal government should overrule state courts, such as in the Terry Schiavo case.
You are perfectly free to kill yourself.
What are they going to do?
Arrest you?
Terry Shiavo is a very rare situation.
But of course, it becomes a huge situation -- like transgender use of bathrooms -- because liberals are completely incapable of dealing with more important issues, such as the massive offshoring of jobs and importing of cheap labor at the expense of American workers...such as politicians (including liberal politicians) being bought off by Wall street....
Even subsets of the liberal "polity" get distracted by trivia. Gay marriage or gays in the military, for example, when gays can still be fired in many parts of the country just for being gay. Isn't that the more important issue?
Liberalism is the politics of foolishness.
Quote:
Conservatives believe in the sanctity of life -- up until that person is born. Then, they don't care if the child dies in poverty from lack of heath care.
Maybe the parents are supposed to care about that.
What a novel idea!
Last edited by dechatelet; 04-25-2016 at 04:31 AM..
Stop trying to understand...in my experience a true liberal is usually one or all of the following:
Very dependent on "the system"
A taker by default
Have psychological issues / daddy issues
A social outcast of some kind (you know what this means)
A tree hugger
Smoke a lot of weed
Watch a lot of MTV
A follower...it's MTV cool to be liberal right now
Just plain weird
It's easy to adopt the liberal mind-set if your have been or are generally on the taking end...if you're usually the one giving to the takers you just can't be a genuine liberal. If you've leaned on the system or believe you will at some point need to lean on the system your're probably a liberal...Most people who have or are truly paving their own way through life are definitely not a liberal.
And I have found many want OTHERS to do things they themselves do NOT do.
I saw a bumper sticker on a liberal friend of mines car saying something about "saving the environment, right after I tied up the useless muffler that had been "shot" for quite a while.
I asked him about the hypocrisy and he just laughed and drove off spewing carbon-monoxide into the "environment".
It is well documented how little liberals give to charities compared to conservatives.
Conservatives believe in the sanctity of life -- up until that person is born. Then, they don't care if the child dies in poverty from lack of heath care.
Quote:
Originally Posted by southward bound
That's an outright falsehood. It's the Democrat mantra and is getting tiresome.
If it is false, then why are conservatives antagonistic to programs, such as the Children's Health Insurance Program and WIC - Women, Infants, and Children nutrition program?
Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality. Whereas classical liberalism emphasizes the role of liberty, social liberalism stresses the importance of equality. Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas and programs such as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free markets, civil rights, democratic societies, secular governments, and international cooperation.
Liberalism first became a distinct political movement during the Age of Enlightenment, when it became popular among philosophers and economists in the Western world. Liberalism rejected the prevailing social and political norms of hereditary privilege, state religion, absolute monarchy, and the Divine Right of Kings.
On a personal note, I always regret the use of that word "equality" when describing the goal of liberals and/or Progressives like me, because conservatives tend to misunderstand and/or abuse that term, always suggesting that "liberals want everyone to be equal." Suffice to say it is not the goal that everyone be equal, socially or financially, not by any stretch of the imagination. The goal better defined is to provide everyone at least a fair shot, as equal as possible, to have a good healthy beginning in life, to include access at a young age to education, health care, food and shelter. Providing THAT sort of opportunity to those not born into privilege is what benefits all of us the most all considered.
"Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality."
Today's American liberals have NOTHING to do with "equality"
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.
so says the named op as Broke Loser
