Why is it that minorities have to vote right wing to be considered right wing?

[C_Clayton_Jones]

There are tons of black Christians who still believe what white Christians did 30 years ago or even further back, so why is it that the much more modern beliefs of most white Christians are the ones called “extreme” and “right wing” while the much more conservative beliefs of black Christians are considered “progressive”?

Why is it that we have thousands of Arab Muslims in this country that believe in honor killings, want to literally kill gay people and believe that women shouldn’t have jobs or go out in public alone but yet it is only white Christians who dare to occasionally speak up against the ever more radical left that are considering “backward”?

We need a new metric for how we measure ideology in the west that is not racialized. This is not the early 1900s anymore when both parties were white and Christians were largely right wing while anyone else largely wasn’t.

Because far too many conservatives continue to pursue policies predicated on racism, bigotry, and hate.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

1. Enforce border security, deport all "criminal" illegals, no path to citizenship for those here illegally.


2. Civil unions, limited job protections, nothing more.

3. People with a medical or mental condition who need to be treated with respect but not pandered to, ie no requiring new pronouns or such shit.

1. I can agree with, it is a moderate position, except maybe the deporting them all, which is a pipe dream.

2. Nothing moderate about this at all, why should gay people be limited to civil unions vice marriages? This is an extremist point of view, not a moderate one. More than 60% of Americans agree with gay marriage. Now, I also hold an extremist view on this, and that is that the government should not be in the marriage business at all, leave it to the churches. If people want the legal conveniences that marriage gives they can just sign a simple contract. But as long as the government is in the marriage business they need to treat all adults equally.

3. Again, not a moderate position. To assume that people have a medical or mental condition is not a moderate view, it is a bigoted one. I am on board with the no new pronouns thing though.

 

[g5000]

There are tons of black Christians ...

Like the Reverend Jesse Jackson, the Reverend Al Sharpton, and the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr...

]

 

[Correll]

There are tons of black Christians who still believe what white Christians did 30 years ago or even further back, so why is it that the much more modern beliefs of most white Christians are the ones called “extreme” and “right wing” while the much more conservative beliefs of black Christians are considered “progressive”?

Why is it that we have thousands of Arab Muslims in this country that believe in honor killings, want to literally kill gay people and believe that women shouldn’t have jobs or go out in public alone but yet it is only white Christians who dare to occasionally speak up against the ever more radical left that are considering “backward”?

We need a new metric for how we measure ideology in the west that is not racialized. This is not the early 1900s anymore when both parties were white and Christians were largely right wing while anyone else largely wasn’t.

Because far too many conservatives continue to pursue policies predicated on racism, bigotry, and hate.

Your constant race baiting is tearing this country apart.


Why are you doing that?


What do you think the result will be, if you manage to keep this division going, when we become a minority majority nation?

 

[Correll]

1. Enforce border security, deport all "criminal" illegals, no path to citizenship for those here illegally.


2. Civil unions, limited job protections, nothing more.

3. People with a medical or mental condition who need to be treated with respect but not pandered to, ie no requiring new pronouns or such shit.

1. I can agree with, it is a moderate position, except maybe the deporting them all, which is a pipe dream.

2. Nothing moderate about this at all, why should gay people be limited to civil unions vice marriages? This is an extremist point of view, not a moderate one. More than 60% of Americans agree with gay marriage. Now, I also hold an extremist view on this, and that is that the government should not be in the marriage business at all, leave it to the churches. If people want the legal conveniences that marriage gives they can just sign a simple contract. But as long as the government is in the marriage business they need to treat all adults equally.

3. Again, not a moderate position. To assume that people have a medical or mental condition is not a moderate view, it is a bigoted one. I am on board with the no new pronouns thing though.

The positions I posted, are, imo, what a moderate liberal would hold on them.


And no, I am not surprised that you don't hold them.


That is sort of my point.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

1. Enforce border security, deport all "criminal" illegals, no path to citizenship for those here illegally.


2. Civil unions, limited job protections, nothing more.

3. People with a medical or mental condition who need to be treated with respect but not pandered to, ie no requiring new pronouns or such shit.

1. I can agree with, it is a moderate position, except maybe the deporting them all, which is a pipe dream.

2. Nothing moderate about this at all, why should gay people be limited to civil unions vice marriages? This is an extremist point of view, not a moderate one. More than 60% of Americans agree with gay marriage. Now, I also hold an extremist view on this, and that is that the government should not be in the marriage business at all, leave it to the churches. If people want the legal conveniences that marriage gives they can just sign a simple contract. But as long as the government is in the marriage business they need to treat all adults equally.

3. Again, not a moderate position. To assume that people have a medical or mental condition is not a moderate view, it is a bigoted one. I am on board with the no new pronouns thing though.

The positions I posted, are, imo, what a moderate liberal would hold on them.


And no, I am not surprised that you don't hold them.


That is sort of my point.

Your positions are not even moderate for a “conservative” let alone a liberal.

You make up positions that have no touch to reality and then go “see, there are no moderates”.

What a joke

 

[Correll]

1. Enforce border security, deport all "criminal" illegals, no path to citizenship for those here illegally.


2. Civil unions, limited job protections, nothing more.

3. People with a medical or mental condition who need to be treated with respect but not pandered to, ie no requiring new pronouns or such shit.

1. I can agree with, it is a moderate position, except maybe the deporting them all, which is a pipe dream.

2. Nothing moderate about this at all, why should gay people be limited to civil unions vice marriages? This is an extremist point of view, not a moderate one. More than 60% of Americans agree with gay marriage. Now, I also hold an extremist view on this, and that is that the government should not be in the marriage business at all, leave it to the churches. If people want the legal conveniences that marriage gives they can just sign a simple contract. But as long as the government is in the marriage business they need to treat all adults equally.

3. Again, not a moderate position. To assume that people have a medical or mental condition is not a moderate view, it is a bigoted one. I am on board with the no new pronouns thing though.

The positions I posted, are, imo, what a moderate liberal would hold on them.


And no, I am not surprised that you don't hold them.


That is sort of my point.

Your positions are not even moderate for a “conservative” let alone a liberal.

You make up positions that have no touch to reality and then go “see, there are no moderates”.

What a joke

1. I never claimed to be moderate.


2. Why are the positions I describe NOT moderate?

3. Would you like to describe, your version of what a hypothetical moderate liberal would be, then? ON the same issues, and concisely .

 

[cnm]

The positions I posted, are, imo, what a moderate liberal would hold on them.


And no, I am not surprised that you don't hold them.


That is sort of my point.

Hilarious. Who gets to decide the positions of moderate conservatives?

 

[Correll]

The positions I posted, are, imo, what a moderate liberal would hold on them.


And no, I am not surprised that you don't hold them.


That is sort of my point.

Hilarious. Who gets to decide the positions of moderate conservatives?

We can if you think doing so would be revealing or helpful.


You want to go first? Do the three I did. Be nice and concise like I was. Save the bullshit spin, you lefties have so much trouble living without, even for a second.

 

[cnm]

We can if you think doing so would be revealing or helpful.

No, I think it ludicrous for people to assign others' positions for them. I think you make ridiculous arguments.

 

[Correll]

We can if you think doing so would be revealing or helpful.

No, I think it ludicrous for people to assign others' positions for them. I think you make ridiculous arguments.

Who did I assign any positions to?

 

[otto105]

We need a new metric for how we measure ideology in the west that is not racialized.

By 'the west' do you mean America? You could just say that.

No, I mean the west.

As in America, Canada, Western Europe etc.

It is all the same in every western country. The right are always white Christians and those white people who stand with them, and the left is always anyone who isn’t a white Christian. And not to mention the “far right” are always the white people who possess the same group identity that the vast majority of minorities do, which makes no sense unless you hate white people, particularly in Europe where white people invoke their indigenous status and the left doesn’t even acknowledge that is a left wing concept.

That is complete crap.

 

[cnm]

Who did I assign any positions to?

Moderate liberals. Ffs.

 

[ptbw forever]

There are tons of black Christians who still believe what white Christians did 30 years ago or even further back, so why is it that the much more modern beliefs of most white Christians are the ones called “extreme” and “right wing” while the much more conservative beliefs of black Christians are considered “progressive”?

Why is it that we have thousands of Arab Muslims in this country that believe in honor killings, want to literally kill gay people and believe that women shouldn’t have jobs or go out in public alone but yet it is only white Christians who dare to occasionally speak up against the ever more radical left that are considering “backward”?

We need a new metric for how we measure ideology in the west that is not racialized. This is not the early 1900s anymore when both parties were white and Christians were largely right wing while anyone else largely wasn’t.

Because far too many conservatives continue to pursue policies predicated on racism, bigotry, and hate.

Every “progressive” policy is racist.

 

[Correll]

Who did I assign any positions to?

Moderate liberals. Ffs.

I'm not assigning positions to anyone. I'm questioning what positions would MAKE a moderate liberal.


And if they have a voice in the Left today or not.


I say not.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

1. I never claimed to be moderate.


2. Why are the positions I describe NOT moderate?

3. Would you like to describe, your version of what a hypothetical moderate liberal would be, then? ON the same issues, and concisely .

1. Yes we know, you are a winger, through and through.

2. Because they are just a slightly milder version of your own extreme views.

3. A moderate view of homosexuals is they should be treated the same as everyone else, including the right to marry the other consenting adult they love. There is nothing moderate about denying them the same rights as you just because of your own prejudices against them.