Eliminating Diversity

[editec]

Liberals are seeking a homogenized society.

One cannot have a truly diverse society unless one allows different people to live out their differences.

If we were TRULY supportive of different societies?

The Mormons would be able to have multiple wives.

NAZIs would have a place where they could live out their White Rce only lives.

Hippies would have communes that weren't targeted for destruction.

Some religious people coulde live someplace where only their religion was practiced

And so on, and so forth.

We do not want diversity.

We want a tolerant society.

Except for those kinds of people who we cannot tolerate, of course.


Those people we harass at every turn.


All in the name of diversity, of course.

We are, a somewhat confused people, we Americans.

 

[code1211]

Reading an editorial, I came across an interesting thought.

The writer said that the American Liberal is interested in diversity in many things, but not in thought. They cannot stand the idea of people who think indepedantly.

What say you, Liberals? Is your Holier Than Thou attitude keeping you from accepting those who have a different set of goals, ideas and plans than you do?

Why do Liberals constantly campaign to change those around them? This seems about as intrusive and oppressive as any activiy can be.

There are certainly liberals who are intolerant of other opinions, but I'm not sure what basis there is for concluding either that this is essential to liberalism or that liberals are more likely to do this than conservatives. My own personal impression (which is only that, a personal impression) is that liberals in the public sphere are somewhat more open-minded on average than are conservatives.

That being said, tolerating other ideas should not mean treating all ideas as equally valid. Why shouldn't liberals try to change society based on their convictions, no less than conservatives? If you oppose liberal principles, then you should oppose most actions based on those principles, but surely you must understand that the action follows from the principle.

Or perhaps you are suggesting that no one, liberal or conservative, should "campaign to change those around them". I reject that notion. It's true that no one agrees on what is right, and it is true that many people change the world for the worse. Nevertheless, everyone changes the people around them, and we should strive to change the world in good ways.

Therein lies the rub.

Liberals want to change the world in "good" ways. What is it that defines "good"?

I think about teachers saying that the No Child left Behind program was a bad idea (obviously, then, not "good"). They charged that if the No Child Left Behind program was adopted, then teachers would simply teach to the test. Bush 43 asked why teaching to the test was bad.

If the tests test the capabilitites in reading, writing and arithmetic, and teachers teach to the test, then you have kids who can read and write and have math skills. Teachers felt this was "bad". Bush 43 and I both miss the meaning of bad in this.

To me, it is good to leave me the Hell alone. To a Liberal it is good to improve me. To leave me as I am is wrong. If being wrong is good, then good means something I don't understand.

 

[code1211]

Reading an editorial, I came across an interesting thought.

The writer said that the American Liberal is interested in diversity in many things, but not in thought. They cannot stand the idea of people who think indepedantly.

What say you, Liberals? Is your Holier Than Thou attitude keeping you from accepting those who have a different set of goals, ideas and plans than you do?

Why do Liberals constantly campaign to change those around them? This seems about as intrusive and oppressive as any activiy can be.

another myopic troll thread

That's not fair to myopic trolls everywhere! This thread is the outcome of years of rightwing radio.

Your prejudice and bias are noted and excused. Your elitism is a by product of your Liberalism or vice versa. These are as hard to separate as water and wet.

There is absolutely no option left to you except condemnation.

As a Liberal, you cannot help yourself.

 

[B. Kidd]

One of the initial forms of diversity, before it was even called diversity, was when the public school systems started handing out something called 'social promotions'.
It dumbed our country down and we haven't looked back since. Occurred even with a Dept. of Education.
No wonder our country is currently from IOWA..(I'm Out Wandering Around!).

 

[code1211]

Reading an editorial, I came across an interesting thought.

The writer said that the American Liberal is interested in diversity in many things, but not in thought. They cannot stand the idea of people who think indepedantly.

What say you, Liberals? Is your Holier Than Thou attitude keeping you from accepting those who have a different set of goals, ideas and plans than you do?

Why do Liberals constantly campaign to change those around them? This seems about as intrusive and oppressive as any activiy can be.

There are certainly liberals who are intolerant of other opinions, but I'm not sure what basis there is for concluding either that this is essential to liberalism or that liberals are more likely to do this than conservatives. My own personal impression (which is only that, a personal impression) is that liberals in the public sphere are somewhat more open-minded on average than are conservatives.

That being said, tolerating other ideas should not mean treating all ideas as equally valid. Why shouldn't liberals try to change society based on their convictions, no less than conservatives? If you oppose liberal principles, then you should oppose most actions based on those principles, but surely you must understand that the action follows from the principle.

Or perhaps you are suggesting that no one, liberal or conservative, should "campaign to change those around them". I reject that notion. It's true that no one agrees on what is right, and it is true that many people change the world for the worse. Nevertheless, everyone changes the people around them, and we should strive to change the world in good ways.

I freely admit that I see the world a tad differently than most. I have what many would consider liberal views on various social topics including all of the things related to Gays and legal rights, abortion and freedom of action within society for individuals.

However, I am virulently against the financial subsidation of the freedoms of anyone by society.

Basically, you can do as you please and I'll thank you to allow me the same latitude as long as neither of us inhibits the freedoms of the other in so doing. The most extensive personal freedom with the least regulation and the lowest taxation is what defines Conservatism for me.

A Liberal believes the same thing, except that he lowers all things to the lowest common denominator and will pay the freight to assure that everyone GIVEN "rights" that are in truth priviledges that should be earned. He also believes in his heart that most people are idiots that need to be protected and guarded from those that would take advantage.

That guarding takes the form of regulations, controls, targeted taxation, targeted subsidies, unreasonable exercise of power and control of the actions of those around them.

By controlling others he is doing Good.

 

[CentristFiasco]

Reading an editorial, I came across an interesting thought.

The writer said that the American Liberal is interested in diversity in many things, but not in thought. They cannot stand the idea of people who think indepedantly.

What say you, Liberals? Is your Holier Than Thou attitude keeping you from accepting those who have a different set of goals, ideas and plans than you do?

Why do Liberals constantly campaign to change those around them? This seems about as intrusive and oppressive as any activiy can be.

Unity > Diversity.

Would you really want a Radical Muslim, Radical Christian, Radical Jew and a Radical Atheist in the same room?

 

[mudwhistle]

The writer said that the American Liberal is interested in diversity in many things, but not in thought. They cannot stand the idea of people who think indepedantly.

You and the author of the op-ed not cited are confusing independent thought with dogma.

Liberals embrace independent thought and celebrate it. Conservative dogma they reject, however – such as the fallacy that a majority on welfare use drugs.

Conservatives are entitled to believe in their dogma, of course, but they have no cause to become angry when liberals confront conservative dogma with facts.

Conservatives are entitled to believe in their dogma as long as they keep it to themselves.

And with Liberals facts are subjective.......which is why Liberals don't like it when Conservatives are right....and they sometimes react violently.....if not vehemently against them.

 

[code1211]

Reading an editorial, I came across an interesting thought.

The writer said that the American Liberal is interested in diversity in many things, but not in thought. They cannot stand the idea of people who think indepedantly.

What say you, Liberals? Is your Holier Than Thou attitude keeping you from accepting those who have a different set of goals, ideas and plans than you do?

Why do Liberals constantly campaign to change those around them? This seems about as intrusive and oppressive as any activiy can be.

Unity > Diversity.

Would you really want a Radical Muslim, Radical Christian, Radical Jew and a Radical Atheist in the same room?

Well, yes, but that's just me. I think radicals deserve each other.

 

[kiwiman127]

The writer said that the American Liberal is interested in diversity in many things, but not in thought. They cannot stand the idea of people who think indepedantly.

You and the author of the op-ed not cited are confusing independent thought with dogma.

Liberals embrace independent thought and celebrate it. Conservative dogma they reject, however – such as the fallacy that a majority on welfare use drugs.

Conservatives are entitled to believe in their dogma, of course, but they have no cause to become angry when liberals confront conservative dogma with facts.

Conservatives are entitled to believe in their dogma as long as they keep it to themselves.

And with Liberals facts are subjective.......which is why Liberals don't like it when Conservatives are right....and they sometimes react violently.....if not vehemently against them.

And vice versa, if you are really an objective thinker.

 

[Wicked Jester]

The writer said that the American Liberal is interested in diversity in many things, but not in thought. They cannot stand the idea of people who think indepedantly.

You and the author of the op-ed not cited are confusing independent thought with dogma.

Liberals embrace independent thought and celebrate it. Conservative dogma they reject, however – such as the fallacy that a majority on welfare use drugs.

Conservatives are entitled to believe in their dogma, of course, but they have no cause to become angry when liberals confront conservative dogma with facts.

Yeah, ok!

Now, which of the following liberal morons is actually YOU, "presenting facts"?

www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=Crl31Xgc3_w

Christ, liberals are fuckin' idiots!

 

[DontBeStupid]

A Liberal, on the other hand, if he sees me smoking must try to make me stop. Wants to force me to wear a seat belt or helmet when he feels it is appropriate for me to do so.

A Liberal wants to take my money because he feels that he can spend it more wisely than I. A Liberal needs to regulate what I eat, drink, see, believe and think. If I want to sing a Christmas carol, I cannot because a Liberal thinks that I may offend someone.

Liberals by definition are control freaks who cannot abide the idea that there are equally valid lifestyles and activities and belief systems that exist outside the bounds of politically correct, pastuerized society. Any thought that strays from their preordained version of the TRUTH and the RIGHT is condemned.

"The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins." - Oliver Wendell Holmes

Today's Liberals believe this. Today's Conservatives do not.

 

[code1211]

A Liberal, on the other hand, if he sees me smoking must try to make me stop. Wants to force me to wear a seat belt or helmet when he feels it is appropriate for me to do so.

A Liberal wants to take my money because he feels that he can spend it more wisely than I. A Liberal needs to regulate what I eat, drink, see, believe and think. If I want to sing a Christmas carol, I cannot because a Liberal thinks that I may offend someone.

Liberals by definition are control freaks who cannot abide the idea that there are equally valid lifestyles and activities and belief systems that exist outside the bounds of politically correct, pastuerized society. Any thought that strays from their preordained version of the TRUTH and the RIGHT is condemned.

"The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins." - Oliver Wendell Holmes

Today's Liberals believe this. Today's Conservatives do not.

A true Conservative, by definition, does not intrude into the lives of others.

Intrusions into the lives of others to impose values that are Democrat or Republican by coalition, are Liberal. The only intrusion into the life of another by a Conservative is to keep him the Hell of that Conservative's life.

That is what Holmes was saying. Whether you are trying to make me pray or trying to stop me from praying, you are inflicting yourself into my life. If I pray, but do not try to include you or force you to listen, why should you care? If you pray, I don't care at all.

I don't care what your sexual preferances or practices are, but I will thank you to not force them on me. You can wear your burka if you like, but you're getting patted down before you fly or you're going to walk.

Laws should exist to protect the personal freedoms and rights and property of people. When laws are twisted or worse, written or interpreted to strip property from legal owners to award it to private citizens for financial gain, that is simply wrong. Liberals do this and have been doing this since the Dred Scot case.

Social liberals of today don't understand what they are doing and saying. It is Liberalism that created and maintained the racial separatism in the United States. A strictly Conservative interpretation of the Constitution would have swept away slavery and the various segregation laws that followed.

Liberalism is constantly choosing the expediant and easy way to avoid a solution in favor of an arrangement.

 

[Wicked Jester]

A Liberal, on the other hand, if he sees me smoking must try to make me stop. Wants to force me to wear a seat belt or helmet when he feels it is appropriate for me to do so.

A Liberal wants to take my money because he feels that he can spend it more wisely than I. A Liberal needs to regulate what I eat, drink, see, believe and think. If I want to sing a Christmas carol, I cannot because a Liberal thinks that I may offend someone.

Liberals by definition are control freaks who cannot abide the idea that there are equally valid lifestyles and activities and belief systems that exist outside the bounds of politically correct, pastuerized society. Any thought that strays from their preordained version of the TRUTH and the RIGHT is condemned.

"The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins." - Oliver Wendell Holmes

Today's Liberals believe this. Today's Conservatives do not.

Really?.......come take a swing at me, and find out the devastation that will undoubtedly befall you