Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Golden Mean fallacy more refers to the idea that there's always a perfect "moderate" position in between any two. Sometimes one is just wrong. Sometimes both are.
As for two sides, there can be infinitely many sides. What you want is reasonable sides, of which there can be one or none. It all goes back to you have to think about it...
The democrats are the conservatives by European standards actually. (And per the actual definition of adopt change cautiously and respect traditions, like say democracy and respect for the press).
edited 2nd Feb '17 6:33:16 PM by CenturyEye
Look with century eyes... With our backs to the arch And the wreck of our kind We will stare straight ahead For the rest of our livesIn GENERAL, the democrats are the conservative party yes. As I've said multiple times, Obama is more of a conservative than most of the GOP.
That's why I'm so insistent on labeling the GOP and many of their voters as reactionaries. I can respect proper conservatives though we might disagree on certain things, but reactionaries always want to return to a "golden age" which usually means an age where certain people had it much worse and they are either conscious of that and that is specifically what they want, or they are indifferent to it.
Draghinazzo, you would be hard-pressed to find anyone actually that bigoted. There's absolutely a side where "the LGBT agenda goes directly against my long-held, traditional religious values, and I'm uncomfortable with that. I don't want the gays to burn." Isn't that freedom simply as valid? The religious freedom?
Just a little for fun thing
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1236181463125323&substory_index=0&id=387496794660465
"Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is Lord Dampnut"
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
We have a conservative party-it is called the "Democrats". The US is without anything resembling a progressive party that is sane, so the Democrats absorb the social progressives by default; by the standards of most other democracies, the Democratic party is Centrist to center-right.
And multi-
'd.
@justhelping: Seriously? have you heard anything said by the speakers for the millions of Evangelicals in this country? The hatred and bigotry is real and exactly that open and virulent, and it is not limited to fringe groups like WBC.
edited 2nd Feb '17 6:39:20 PM by ViperMagnum357
![]()
![]()
They already have that freedom. You can be as bigoted as you want as long as you're not bothering others with it. But that's not where the issue lies. Religious freedom as it applies to politics is them asking to be openly discriminatory on the basis of their religion, thereby denying the freedoms of others.
edited 2nd Feb '17 6:40:04 PM by TheRoguePenguin
A surprising amount of people actually ARE pretty close to being that bigoted, as some people have pointed out before me.
But really, what that person is saying in your example ends up being the same thing as what I said in practice, except put a lot more nicely and much closer to what people realistically opposing LGBT rights would say.
Here's the thing: your rights end when another's begin. I will never grant any legitimacy to someone who is using their spirituality as a cloak to deny other people's civil rights. "Religious freedom" means you can believe and worship whatever you like. When that begins to impede on other people's rights, then it is not religious freedom, it's the right oppress people you don't like based on arbitrary reasons. The US is a secular state.
So if a person doesn't like gay people, then whatever, they're bigots as far as I'm concerned but they can hold whatever opinions they want and obviously I can't do anything about that. But if they're trying to deny people jobs, the ability to get civil unions, to be recognized by the gender they actually identify as, etc, then they've crossed a line.
edited 2nd Feb '17 6:47:15 PM by Draghinazzo
If people insist on clinging to these illusions then nothing will change.
Now, indoctrinating children like in that article is something I absolutely do not advocate, but I think there's a few promising avenues. Getting involved in local politics, even simply going out and trying to open up dialogue with people who are open to it (if you can, I am certainly not going to suggest that burden to people who might be in danger from doing so) - which I think is often more effective than talking to some faceless person who lives in an online bubble. I mean, I'm obviously not saying it does not happen, but sometimes things get lost in translation online.
And if someone has kids or is in a position of influence over them - it's so important to make sure to raise them to be decent human beings. Not 'to share my political beliefs' or anything, but to believe that ever person deserves protecting, to stand up for and with the marginalized and persecuted, to question easy answers and to try and have as much information as possible before making decisions. From my personal experience, when I was growing up my dad made a point of not telling his kids what his political and religious opinions were (my mother, not as much, but she taught me that sometimes the most devastating thing you can say to someone who's being an asshole is "have a nice day!"). He thought he shouldn't have that kind of influence over us, but that it was more important for him to teach us to think things through and care about and look after people, instead. I turned out alright, I think.
Although, really sometimes all you can do is just hope people come to their senses. Like my grandfather said after the election "I am old, and done waiting for some of you to become better people." In the end, the anger, selfishness, and entitlement of some people might just be too much to overcome.
...well, this post sure has a Downer Ending, doesn't it?
![]()
![]()
I agree with you. I don't think any church should be forced to officiate a religious ceremony if it goes against their beliefs. Any church is free to do what it pleases within the realm of its own domain - religion.
That's not really what most people are talking about though, they care about being discriminated in the job market, of being denied the legal benefits of civil unions, things like that.
edited 2nd Feb '17 6:54:31 PM by Draghinazzo
"Now, indoctrinating children like in that article is something I absolutely do not advocate, but I think there's a few promising avenues. Getting involved in local politics, even simply going out and trying to open up dialogue with people who are open to it (if you can, I am certainly not going to suggest that burden to people who might be in danger from doing so) - which I think is often more effective than talking to some faceless person who lives in an online bubble. I mean, I'm obviously not saying it does not happen, but sometimes things get lost in translation online. "
Thousands of us across the country are already doing it, man. We really are.
I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.![]()
![]()
...Yeah, reading it over I was kind of being Captain Obvious, there. Sorry.
edited 2nd Feb '17 6:58:29 PM by Pseudopartition

I wish we had a real conservative party, instead of...whatever it is the GOP is now. Hell, I might even consider voting for that party.
"I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work." -Thomas Edison