Who will be last to come out of denial:

[emilynghiem]

Of the following groups, which do you think will be the last to come out of denial, if ever, after the other groups have made peace by recognizing both sides of these conflicts:

A. People who either (a1) deny there is racial profiling or discrimination among police or prisons,
or who (a2) deny the media bias in reporting more white on black crime, than black on black.

B. People who either (b1) deny that SOME homosexuality is innate (and may not be able to change) or who (b2) deny that SOME homosexuality is unnatural and unwanted (and possible to change in some cases).

C. People who deny (c1) either "right to life" or "right to health care" are both faith-based beliefs that discriminate by creed if imposed by govt (c2) or the same with beliefs in gay marriage or traditional marriage as equal beliefs that cannot be established by govt so as to discriminate against the other.

D. People who believe in (d1) legalizing marijuana but banning high sugar drinks; or in (d2) banning conversion therapy for minors, but allowing minors to undergo transgender reassignment and abortion.

E. People who believe (e1) only leftwing/liberals contradict their own policies and are in denial, but not the right; or (e2) only rightwing/conservatives are in denial and project blame on others, but not the left.

F. People who either (f1) protest Obama and ACA mandates violating Constitutional limits on govt but won't question Bush's 30 trillion dollar decisions to go to war against Iraq or (f2) vice versa.

G. People who either (g1) deny there is a God and attack anyone who pushes this without proving it first, while insisting that Global Warming is proven and attacking anyone who questions that and wants proof or (g2) vice versa.

H. Other - please specify

 

[September]

I am in denial about Disney raping Star Wars.

I keep tryin' to convince myself that it isn't happening... you know, tryin' to imagine myself in a beautiful galaxy far far away... but the pain, the damage that is being done... there is nothing I can do to block it out... and there is no forgetting. It's overwhelming. I'm on the verge of a Mindbreak.


​

 

[emilynghiem]

I am in denial about Disney raping Star Wars.

I keep tryin' to convince myself that it isn't happening... you know, tryin' to imagine myself in a beautiful galaxy far far away... but the pain, the damage that has been done... there is nothing I can do to block it out... and there is no forgetting. It's overwhelming. I'm on the verge of a Mindbreak.
​

if it's any comfort, Lucas screwed up his own series long before Disney or anyone else got to it. Just stick to the original, and don't even entertain the later adaptations.

Imagine going to a movie showing with a live orchestra playing the score, and live in that world. Don't even waste brain cells worrying about any other version. The original was the real thing, a timeless statement that stands on its own. It had its flaws that were forgiveable because everyone wanted to believe. So that innocence is what lives on.

Thanks for posting, you are always so thoughtful and deep. Appreciate that very much!

 

[Mac1958]

.

H - Hardcore partisan ideologues, about pretty much anything that doesn't fit in their ideological cocoon.

.

 

[deltex1]

They're all one and the same...like the ones who won't nuke Iran but will let Christians die.

 

[emilynghiem]

They're all one and the same...like the ones who won't nuke Iran but will let Christians die.

Good point. I wonder if it's because those Christians will go to heaven anyway.
But if nukes come out to play, then we all fry in hell.

 

[emilynghiem]

.

H - Hardcore partisan ideologues, about pretty much anything that doesn't fit in their ideological cocoon.

.

Thanks Mac1958
So do you think all the specific examples of stuckness will stay stuck?
Do you think if even in one case, people could let go, the same light might shine on the other cases?

With me, when drifter pointed out my bias about drug users, then I could start checking other similar cases; I could go back and understand what g5000 was saying about voting rights and voting fraud vs. voter ID laws. Even though I still retain my bias, and can prove my points, these are not proven yet to the opposing sides, so until then, they have equal rights to their BELIEFS. One set of beliefs cannot override another, but both would have to be proven right or wrong and reach an agreement; so it isn't a competition between beliefs or creeds to outnumber or outbully the other. Either prove it, to reach agreement, or separate beliefs from each other and don't impose one over the others. Same with homosexuality gay marriage, same with drug use or with insurance mandates. It's not fair to demonize or penalize certain beliefs without proof these cause harm, as long as people agree to take responsibility for their beliefs.

What I hope is the same way prolife advocates have come to terms with Constitutional arguments behind the prochoice stance in govt, that the right to health care advocates will also understand the concept of liberty and choice that is denied by imposing federal insurance mandates. Why can't the same concept behind prochoice apply to both right to health and right to life as beliefs that "some people insist" need to be mandated through govt while others don't?

If the rightwing prolife believers can accept why prochoice is more Constitutionally inclusive, why can't the left accept the free market approach to health care as more Constitutionally inclusive and prochoice?

It could be the people most vocal about their stances are the hardcore prolife and prohealth who won't budge.
And the ones who will be tolerant and support the opposite views aren't as visible or vocal about it, but give silent support in the background.

I am hoping that where the gay marriage issue drew support from the more liberal Christians who did lobby more visibly, that could be a factor in stopping the demonization and division by showing the crossover.

Somewhere somehow, people are going to make the connection.
I guess it's different for each person which case finally clicks for them, that the biases are mutual
and it isn't onesided. To the other person in the same argument, we look just as onesided to them!