CDZ Liberal/Conservative Labels Miss the Point

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Any political philosophy which does not first consider the nature of human beings and adapt itself to that is a pointless exercise in intellectual masturbation.

you are obviously a total illiterate. Aristotle Locke and our Founders based America on "natural law". This means freedom from artificial unnatural central govt. Liberals are 100% opposed.

We see examples of liberalism in Hitler Stalin and Mao Pol Pot Castro and to a lesser extent Obama FDR LBJ.

Do you understand these basics now? Welcome to your ABC's

 

[PratchettFan]

As to freedom, that is nonsense. Conservatives are no more interested in freedom than liberals.

well now that seems 100% mistaken given the conservatives sign the pledge and liberals don't

What pledge?

see what we mean about liberalism being based in pure ignorance? Most Republicans sign Grover Norquist's pledge not to raise taxes. They also voted against the stimulus and Obamacare, have shut down the govt numerous times, and introduced 30 Balanced Budget Amendments, and are part of the tradition stated with Aristotle that freedom from govt is the best fom of govt..

Oh, that pledge. Yes, I very nice piece of pointless political theatre. Hopefully, that way the electorate doesn't actually pay attention to what they are really doing. I see it works.

What has that got to do with freedom?

 

[PratchettFan]

Any political philosophy which does not first consider the nature of human beings and adapt itself to that is a pointless exercise in intellectual masturbation.

you are obviously a total illiterate. Aristotle Locke and our Founders based America on "natural law". This means freedom from artificial unnatural central govt. Liberals are 100% opposed.

We see examples of liberalism in Hitler Stalin and Mao Pol Pot Castro and to a lesser extent Obama FDR LBJ.

Do you understand these basics now? Welcome to your ABC's

I understand the basics. You are wrong. Our founders based America on written law, that's why they wrote the law. They didn't agree with your position on government, which is why they created a government. You are free to follow any "natural law" you please, but I am under no obligation to care. I honestly don't know if you have read John Locke, but if so I don't think you understood him. You certainly don't understand the men who founded this nation.

 

[Rikurzhen]

As to freedom, that is nonsense. Conservatives are no more interested in freedom than liberals.

Which side is fighting the good fight for restoring the right to free association? Liberals favor oppression, conservatives favor human rights.

Nonsense. Marriage equality - conservatives oppose. Abortion rights - conservatives oppose. Legalization of drugs - conservatives oppose. Conservatives, like liberals, are for the human rights they want - not the human rights of other people. That isn't a desire for freedom, it's a desire for entitlement. Freedom means you get to do what you want to do whether I approve or not, and that is not the position of conservatives.

Nonsense squared.

Homosexuals have always had the right to get married. No one stood in the way of Rock Hudson or Dr. Sally Ride getting married. Marriage equality has always been there. The debate was never about discrimination against homosexuals, it was about changing the definition of marriage so that people could marry horses, or people of the same sex could get married.


Abortion is an issue focused on child abuse and its prevention. People are trying to protect children.

Legalization of drugs. Liberals oppose the legalization of heroin and its sale to children. They oppose legalization of heroin by appealing to the principle of harm. Conservatives oppose the legalization of marijuana by appealing to the same principle. The difference between conservatives and liberals on this issue is where to draw the line. It's fallacious to argue that the two sides are arguing about freedom.

Conservatives, like liberals, are for the human rights they want - not the human rights of other people.

With liberals now sticking their noses into regultring the sex lives of people one would expect to find liberals in women's wombs and that's exactly where we find them. Conservatives on the other hand are fighting for the rights of those not yet born, so it's impossible to argue that they're fighting for want they want and not the rights of other people, in that it's not their life that they're fighting to save.

 

[Pogo]

.... and that's why we call him "Special Ed".

 

[Rikurzhen]

Taxes are not theft. Taking something and refusing to pay for it is theft. So if you use the roads, enjoy freedom won by our military, expect your day in court, want firefighters to extinguish your house or come get you if you slice your leg off, then you need to pay your share of that cost. That does not mean you decide how the money will be spent, just like owning some shares in AT&T doesn't let you tell the CEO how to do his job. If you don't like that deal, you're not a serf tied to the land.

I see this dishonest argument trotted out by leftists all the fucking time. Do you have no shame? Must you be so intellectually dishonest?

No serious critic is arguing against taxes which pay for public goods and leftists know that. People are arguing against INCOME REDISTRIBUTION. I get absolutely NO BENEFIT when the taxes I pay are used to pay for your hemorrhoid operation. You've just received a private benefit. Your hemorrhoid operation is not like paying for a fire department or for roads, public goods which benefit us all.

We fought a brutal civil war to end slavery in this country. We thought it was immoral that the sweat off of one man's brow could be mandated to benefit the welfare of another man. Yet, that's exactly what liberals are foisting on us again - one man must work and the benefits he produces from his work are stolen from him by force and sent to benefit another man's personal consumption of goods and services.

 

[Rikurzhen]

As to freedom, that is nonsense. Conservatives are no more interested in freedom than liberals.

Which side is fighting the good fight for restoring the right to free association? Liberals favor oppression, conservatives favor human rights.

Nonsense. Marriage equality - conservatives oppose. Abortion rights - conservatives oppose. Legalization of drugs - conservatives oppose. Conservatives, like liberals, are for the human rights they want - not the human rights of other people. That isn't a desire for freedom, it's a desire for entitlement. Freedom means you get to do what you want to do whether I approve or not, and that is not the position of conservatives.

Qualified agreement, the qualification being that such examples do not represent true Conservatism, just as activist thrusts like Affirmative Action and gun control laws do not represent true Liberalism. They represent those who wrap themselves in those flags (or are portrayed as such by their opponents), but falsely so.

Keep working on your strategy there, laddie, and you'll be perfecting your No True Scotsman schtick in no time.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Unqualified agreement. The conservatives of today are not the conservatives of my time. I have been a conservative my entire life, but I am a conservative in the same vein as Goldwater and Buckley. Such people are referred to as RHINOs by the current crop. Goldwater warned us what would happen if we brought in the religious right, and he was right.

So you are opposed to the Civil Rights Acts vast overreach into the private sector?

 

[Pogo]

As to freedom, that is nonsense. Conservatives are no more interested in freedom than liberals.

Which side is fighting the good fight for restoring the right to free association? Liberals favor oppression, conservatives favor human rights.

Nonsense. Marriage equality - conservatives oppose. Abortion rights - conservatives oppose. Legalization of drugs - conservatives oppose. Conservatives, like liberals, are for the human rights they want - not the human rights of other people. That isn't a desire for freedom, it's a desire for entitlement. Freedom means you get to do what you want to do whether I approve or not, and that is not the position of conservatives.

Qualified agreement, the qualification being that such examples do not represent true Conservatism, just as activist thrusts like Affirmative Action and gun control laws do not represent true Liberalism. They represent those who wrap themselves in those flags (or are portrayed as such by their opponents), but falsely so.

Keep working on your strategy there, laddie, and you'll be perfecting your No True Scotsman schtick in no time.

I guess a bogus fallacy claim is easier than admitting you don't know the definitions of the terms you use...

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Unqualified agreement. The conservatives of today are not the conservatives of my time. I have been a conservative my entire life, but I am a conservative in the same vein as Goldwater and Buckley. Such people are referred to as RHINOs by the current crop. Goldwater warned us what would happen if we brought in the religious right, and he was right.

LOL! There is no conservatism, absent the Religious Right. As without the Americans, all ya have is THE LEFT!

 

[Mathbud1]

Your theory appears to be wishful thinking, like fulfilling an expression of your identify. You can't simply claim to be more rational. You have to back up the claim.

For example, I can back up that people get more conservative as they drink more alcohol.

Low-Effort Thought Promotes Political Conservatism

Or that brain studies show conservatives to be more motivated by fear and threats.

Conservatives Big on Fear Brain Study Finds Psychology Today

Scientists Are Beginning to Figure Out Why Conservatives Are Conservative Mother Jones

Such findings seem to support that liberals are more motivated by rationality than conservatives.

I would say that you are wrong in your conclusion. Being more aware of threats and responding to them more forcefully or quickly does not in any way imply irrationality.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

In other words, Conservatives seek answers, while Liberals seek personal ratification. Thus, "never the twain shall meet."

actually conservatives since Aristotle and Jefferson have sought freedom from govt while liberals have sought huge magical welfare govt. Your answers/ratification dichotomy is 100% irrelevant.

1) conservatives don't seek answers, they know the answer. It is freedom.
2) liberals do seek personal ratification but this is because they lack the intelligence to understand freedom just as someone might lack the intelligence to understand calculus. Yes they are personally ratified and feel morally superior because they support welfare but this does not make it a legitimate political position.

"Gratification"... Liberals seek gratification. The Liberal is about nothing if not soothing their base instincts. They're the closest thing humanity has to 'animal'.

In post apocalyptic world, the few surviving individuals we know of as Liberals today, will be known as 'property', akin to livestock. This without regard to their race, hair color, eye color or favorite color... . This because they simply do not possess the means to reason soundly, thus do not possess the minimal requirement to live free...

What a complete crock of Bolshoi.

Liberalism -- which invented this country -- is completely about people, specifically We the People That is, the idea that "we" are in charge of ourselves.... not some royalty, not some church, not some upper class aristocracy. That was the whole idea of this noble experiment.

If not for liberal who were willing to break the law for our noble experiment, we would not have The United States. Conservatives would still be spying for the king.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Unqualified agreement. The conservatives of today are not the conservatives of my time. I have been a conservative my entire life, but I am a conservative in the same vein as Goldwater and Buckley. Such people are referred to as RHINOs by the current crop. Goldwater warned us what would happen if we brought in the religious right, and he was right.

LOL! There is no conservatism, absent the Religious Right. As without the Americans, all ya have is THE LEFT!

Amazingly, I agree with you.

The conservative right is dead.

 

[PratchettFan]

As to freedom, that is nonsense. Conservatives are no more interested in freedom than liberals.

Which side is fighting the good fight for restoring the right to free association? Liberals favor oppression, conservatives favor human rights.

Nonsense. Marriage equality - conservatives oppose. Abortion rights - conservatives oppose. Legalization of drugs - conservatives oppose. Conservatives, like liberals, are for the human rights they want - not the human rights of other people. That isn't a desire for freedom, it's a desire for entitlement. Freedom means you get to do what you want to do whether I approve or not, and that is not the position of conservatives.

Nonsense squared.

Homosexuals have always had the right to get married. No one stood in the way of Rock Hudson or Dr. Sally Ride getting married. Marriage equality has always been there. The debate was never about discrimination against homosexuals, it was about changing the definition of marriage so that people could marry horses, or people of the same sex could get married.


Abortion is an issue focused on child abuse and its prevention. People are trying to protect children.

Legalization of drugs. Liberals oppose the legalization of heroin and its sale to children. They oppose legalization of heroin by appealing to the principle of harm. Conservatives oppose the legalization of marijuana by appealing to the same principle. The difference between conservatives and liberals on this issue is where to draw the line. It's fallacious to argue that the two sides are arguing about freedom.

Conservatives, like liberals, are for the human rights they want - not the human rights of other people.

With liberals now sticking their noses into regultring the sex lives of people one would expect to find liberals in women's wombs and that's exactly where we find them. Conservatives on the other hand are fighting for the rights of those not yet born, so it's impossible to argue that they're fighting for want they want and not the rights of other people, in that it's not their life that they're fighting to save.

I never said liberals were for freedom, I said conservatives were no more for freedom than them. All you have done above is attempt to justify that opposition to freedom.

 

[PratchettFan]

Unqualified agreement. The conservatives of today are not the conservatives of my time. I have been a conservative my entire life, but I am a conservative in the same vein as Goldwater and Buckley. Such people are referred to as RHINOs by the current crop. Goldwater warned us what would happen if we brought in the religious right, and he was right.

LOL! There is no conservatism, absent the Religious Right. As without the Americans, all ya have is THE LEFT!

Sadly, they did sell themselves for power and now cater to the lowest common denominator. Goldwater did warn us.

 

[PratchettFan]

Unqualified agreement. The conservatives of today are not the conservatives of my time. I have been a conservative my entire life, but I am a conservative in the same vein as Goldwater and Buckley. Such people are referred to as RHINOs by the current crop. Goldwater warned us what would happen if we brought in the religious right, and he was right.

So you are opposed to the Civil Rights Acts vast overreach into the private sector?

Yes.

 

[PratchettFan]

Taxes are not theft. Taking something and refusing to pay for it is theft. So if you use the roads, enjoy freedom won by our military, expect your day in court, want firefighters to extinguish your house or come get you if you slice your leg off, then you need to pay your share of that cost. That does not mean you decide how the money will be spent, just like owning some shares in AT&T doesn't let you tell the CEO how to do his job. If you don't like that deal, you're not a serf tied to the land.

I see this dishonest argument trotted out by leftists all the fucking time. Do you have no shame? Must you be so intellectually dishonest?

No serious critic is arguing against taxes which pay for public goods and leftists know that. People are arguing against INCOME REDISTRIBUTION. I get absolutely NO BENEFIT when the taxes I pay are used to pay for your hemorrhoid operation. You've just received a private benefit. Your hemorrhoid operation is not like paying for a fire department or for roads, public goods which benefit us all.

We fought a brutal civil war to end slavery in this country. We thought it was immoral that the sweat off of one man's brow could be mandated to benefit the welfare of another man. Yet, that's exactly what liberals are foisting on us again - one man must work and the benefits he produces from his work are stolen from him by force and sent to benefit another man's personal consumption of goods and services.

Did you read the post I was responding to?

 

[PratchettFan]

Unqualified agreement. The conservatives of today are not the conservatives of my time. I have been a conservative my entire life, but I am a conservative in the same vein as Goldwater and Buckley. Such people are referred to as RHINOs by the current crop. Goldwater warned us what would happen if we brought in the religious right, and he was right.

LOL! There is no conservatism, absent the Religious Right. As without the Americans, all ya have is THE LEFT!

Amazingly, I agree with you.

The conservative right is dead.

Not dead. Just lost for the time being. As the extremist get more and more crazy they will become a bigger liability. Then they can be assigned to the corner again and we can get on with accomplishing something. It will take a while.

 

[Rikurzhen]

On taxes, I just don't like theft, which is what a tax is. I certanly don't want more of my income stolen to pay for things people should be paying for themselves, like birth control.

My position on guns is if the government can't establish I am a danger, then it is none of their business. I draw the line on weapons which are inherently dangerous. I don't think I should be able to have a 500 pound bomb in my garage, but that is the nature of compromise.

Taxes are not theft. Taking something and refusing to pay for it is theft. So if you use the roads, enjoy freedom won by our military, expect your day in court, want firefighters to extinguish your house or come get you if you slice your leg off, then you need to pay your share of that cost. That does not mean you decide how the money will be spent, just like owning some shares in AT&T doesn't let you tell the CEO how to do his job. If you don't like that deal, you're not a serf tied to the land.

Did you read the post I was responding to?

Why yes, I did. Pezz cites his taxes being used to pay for someone else's birth control and you respond with taxes being used to pay for roads and fire departments.

If you believe that my characterization of your tactic is misleading or in error, please make your case.

 

[Ellipsis]

Funny how I mention birth control and you think of public services. I wonder if ObamaCare pays for prostitution.

Taxes are not theft. Taking something and refusing to pay for it is theft.

I've never taken anything from native americans, so why is my income being taxed to give tribal members a check every month just for breathing?

I pay White'Tax.

So if you use the roads...

I pay registration and tolls for that.

...enjoy freedom won by our military...

I'm in the military.

...expect your day in court...

We pay court fees for that.

....want firefighters to extinguish your house or come get you if you slice your leg off....

We get billed for that. If you slice your leg and the ambulance takes you to the hospital, you have to pay for that either yourself or through your insurance. You are literaly billed for the ambulance service. I know because I got the bill for calling 911 when I thought my infant son broke his ankle. Turns out he wasn't badly injured at all and the ambulance didn't treat him, and they still billed $100 just for them making an appearance.

then you need to pay your share of that cost.

Oh I do, but throgh seporate billing, not through taxes.

That does not mean you decide how the money will be spent, just like owning some shares in AT&T doesn't let you tell the CEO how to do his job. If you don't like that deal, you're not a serf tied to the land.

Yeah, actualy I am.

****
Congress needs a billing code. Adressing core functions of the nation can be billed to tax payers, and a diferent billing code for time used adressing bullshit like ObamaCare or SSM or abortion. The special interest groups can pay for that crap, not me, I have no skin in those games.

Anyway, no, I should not be paying for anyone's birth control. If I want to help a spicific person, then I'll hand them cash. I'm also free to donate to a related charity. The IRS taking money out of my check to pay for slut's birth control (Ms.Fluke) is indeed theft.

But hey, I love compromise, so take my money but use it to force her to have her tubes tied. And no viagra for men until after the vasectomy, either.