ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags conservative , LGBTQ , LGBTQ rights

Reply
Old 29th January 2019, 05:17 PM   #121
Apathia
Illuminator
 
Apathia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 4,960
Originally Posted by Magrat View Post
Upon rereading through this thread, I am reminded why I had left for so long. So, cheers for that I guess.

https://media.giphy.com/media/mIvrv5Qe0kHlu/giphy.gif

Perhaps this phenomenon wherein people will go to any lengths to prevent coherent discussion will be a subject of a future book.

Thank you again to those who have contributed thoughtfully to my question, I appreciate the assistance.
There are those here who want to share, and those who want to win or be right. To enjoy the ISF you have to walk around the obstructions.
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections."
Justice William O. Douglas

"Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures."
Author Unknown
Apathia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th January 2019, 05:21 PM   #122
Magrat
Mrs. Rincewind
 
Magrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Lancre Kingdom/Adirondack Mountain Region, NY
Posts: 4,181
Originally Posted by Apathia View Post
There are those here who want to share, and those who want to win or be right. To enjoy the ISF you have to walk around the obstructions.
Never been a patient person and I am especially impatient with fools. People who aren't foolish but are choosing to act foolish are by far the worst. They don't realize how much more they have to offer.
__________________
Non ergo nothi tere vos usque.

Magrat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th January 2019, 05:25 PM   #123
Apathia
Illuminator
 
Apathia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 4,960
Originally Posted by GnaGnaMan View Post
And this is where my rambling gets to a point. The feeling that minority rights take away from majority rights is firmly rooted in US history. When slavery was abolished it was objectively true. Exploitation of the black minority continued in various ways to the civil rights era in living memory. There are many recent examples where minority rights truly take away a majority privilege.
Yes. The loss of White Privilege is seen by White Nationalists as a loss of Liberty.
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections."
Justice William O. Douglas

"Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures."
Author Unknown
Apathia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th January 2019, 05:52 PM   #124
Apathia
Illuminator
 
Apathia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 4,960
Originally Posted by Magrat View Post
Now that does make sense. Along with the zero sum mentality that was mentioned earlier.



You're friends with my dad?! No wait, my dad did vote for the Oompa Loompa.

Maybe because I grew up in the 80s, maybe because were I am from is 99% white (because nobody who had another option would move here), maybe because I have ways spend most of my time reading and not watching the news etc... etc... I really cannot understand that. I mean...well, I guess I probably don't have to explain it. The gap between the boomers and their children is a very, very large one. (although my husband is technically a boomer, he doesn't have that racist stereotype mentality that my parents have)

I'm a "boomer," born 1951, and so is the afore mentioned friend. One aspect of the "conservative mindset" I've noticed is that the novel, the exceptional, and the different attract me. But repel him. I'm thrilled that Human sexuality is fluid, but he's appalled every time Human Sexuality isn't the simple Male/Female. He complains that LGBTQ+ adds too many letters, and so confuses the young on what they are supposed to be, and the mature on how they are supposed to relate to strange others. I love a diverse, and fluid world, he loves set structures and easy categories. I want people to be unique. He wants people to conform.
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections."
Justice William O. Douglas

"Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures."
Author Unknown
Apathia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th January 2019, 06:01 PM   #125
Apathia
Illuminator
 
Apathia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 4,960
Originally Posted by Magrat View Post
Never been a patient person and I am especially impatient with fools. People who aren't foolish but are choosing to act foolish are by far the worst. They don't realize how much more they have to offer.
I have no tolerance for the disingenuous, the trolls, and those who make a win/lose of the discussion. So I politely ignore engaging with them.
A few years back I wrote a parody of obstructionism at the JREF. A guy makes a simple commonsense, even tautological statement and the super skeptics tear into him with deliberate misunderstandings. It's way back in the archives now, and I don't wish to resurrect it. But pettiness in the name of skepticism was one of the first disappointing things I encountered here.
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections."
Justice William O. Douglas

"Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures."
Author Unknown
Apathia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th January 2019, 06:41 PM   #126
Magrat
Mrs. Rincewind
 
Magrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Lancre Kingdom/Adirondack Mountain Region, NY
Posts: 4,181
Originally Posted by Apathia View Post
I have no tolerance for the disingenuous, the trolls, and those who make a win/lose of the discussion. So I politely ignore engaging with them.
A few years back I wrote a parody of obstructionism at the JREF. A guy makes a simple commonsense, even tautological statement and the super skeptics tear into him with deliberate misunderstandings. It's way back in the archives now, and I don't wish to resurrect it. But pettiness in the name of skepticism was one of the first disappointing things I encountered here.
Replying to this and the previous post. I don't necessarily seek out novelty but I look at people as individuals, rather than categories. So whatever adjectives the person has, that's separate from themselves. I know, makes no sense. Im not good with words lol



The key point for me is my child is trans and queer. I love my child more than I love seeing the world as binary.

Second post: Im not sure the pettiness is in the name is skepticism. I think it serves other purposes.

eta according to most recent data, f to m trans youths like my son have a 58% suicide rate. Not attempts. Successes. For the most part that is because of lack of familial support. it will not be my son.
__________________
Non ergo nothi tere vos usque.


Last edited by Magrat; 29th January 2019 at 06:43 PM.
Magrat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th January 2019, 07:55 PM   #127
Apathia
Illuminator
 
Apathia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 4,960
Originally Posted by Magrat View Post
Replying to this and the previous post. I don't necessarily seek out novelty but I look at people as individuals, rather than categories. So whatever adjectives the person has, that's separate from themselves. I know, makes no sense. I'm not good with words lol
This makes perfect sense to me. I look at people as individuals, and in their own uniqueness. It's why I sometimes tell my Conservative friend, "There are as many sexualities as there are people."

What I was trying to say that while my Conservative friend is happier with a solid, binary world, I love diversity. And deeper than that I love individuality.
I've never identified myself with a group. Groups come secondary for me, and I love the individuals more than the group. I never found my people just a feeling we all connect regardless of groupings.

Quote:
Second post: Im not sure the pettiness is in the name is skepticism. I think it serves other purposes.
Indisputably

Quote:
eta according to most recent data, f to m trans youths like my son have a 58% suicide rate. Not attempts. Successes. For the most part that is because of lack of familial support. it will not be my son.
Bless you!
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections."
Justice William O. Douglas

"Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures."
Author Unknown
Apathia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th January 2019, 10:19 AM   #128
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 15,106
Originally Posted by Apathia View Post
There are those here who want to share, and those who want to win or be right. To enjoy the ISF you have to walk around the obstructions.

I've found the "ignore" feature to be helpful in that regard. Not as helpful as I'd like it to be, but it does remove some of the troll noise.

One thing I've noticed about the conservative mindset is just how fragile it is, and how prone to taking offense at anything that challenges its worldview in the slightest. There's also a profound element of the Golden Age Fallacy to it.

In fact, it seems to be particularly prone to lashing out at any perceived change to its delicate worldview. The conservative mindset is one that is locked into a picture of how the world should be, and that world is a very simplistic one, with clear black-and-white morality, easy to understand, and most importantly, easy to control. Anything that is too different, too out of their personal experience, or threatens to change or complicate their world, and thus make it harder to control, is inherently bad and should be resisted and/or dismissed. Further, anything that challenges that worldview is automatically taken as an attack on them personally, because they have invested so much of their personal self-worth and energy into that worldview. The comments in this thread are pretty solid evidence of that; but more, that's why religions as a rule, especially the major religions, are so heavily conservative and resist any attempt at change or reform.

They can seem to be perfectly agreeable people as long as they're not challenged, because anything that is not brought to their attention, does impinge on their consciousness, can be safely ignored and presumed not to really exist.

Robert Anton Wilson made a pretty good observation when he said that the world seems to be divided into neophiles and neophobes; those who love and embrace the new, and those who fear and resist the new. Evolutionarily, both viewpoints have their purpose.

Most people are neophobes, because in evolutionary history novelty was most often linked to danger, so sticking with the familiar was safer. In modern humans, this translates into conservatism, isolationism, xenophobia, and social conformity. They dislike non-conformists and diversity.

A smaller percentage are neophiles. Since a group that is never willing to try something new will stagnate and is in greater risk of dying out due to environmental changes or population pressures, some small number must be willing to seek out novelty and test it. They have a far higher acceptance of diversity and non-conformity, and tend themselves to be non-conformists. Neophiles often have a considerably lower individual survival rate than neophobes, but groups with a larger number of neophiles more readily expands and adapts to changing conditions.

Few humans are pure neophobe or neophile, but tend to lean very strongly in one direction of another. Humans are unique in that they tend to assign value judgements to neophobia and neophilia, with the greater mass of neophobes dismissing, deriding, demonizing, and even attempting to purge their cultures of neophiles. But throughout history, nearly all great advancements in science and technology, art, and culture have come from those who leaned more strongly toward the neophile side.
__________________
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams
"The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf
"Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon

Last edited by luchog; 30th January 2019 at 10:26 AM.
luchog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th January 2019, 10:37 AM   #129
Magrat
Mrs. Rincewind
 
Magrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Lancre Kingdom/Adirondack Mountain Region, NY
Posts: 4,181
Thank you for your posts,both of you!
__________________
Non ergo nothi tere vos usque.

Magrat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th January 2019, 11:09 AM   #130
Apathia
Illuminator
 
Apathia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 4,960
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
I've found the "ignore" feature to be helpful in that regard. Not as helpful as I'd like it to be, but it does remove some of the troll noise.

One thing I've noticed about the conservative mindset is just how fragile it is, and how prone to taking offense at anything that challenges its worldview in the slightest. There's also a profound element of the Golden Age Fallacy to it.

In fact, it seems to be particularly prone to lashing out at any perceived change to its delicate worldview. The conservative mindset is one that is locked into a picture of how the world should be, and that world is a very simplistic one, with clear black-and-white morality, easy to understand, and most importantly, easy to control. Anything that is too different, too out of their personal experience, or threatens to change or complicate their world, and thus make it harder to control, is inherently bad and should be resisted and/or dismissed. Further, anything that challenges that worldview is automatically taken as an attack on them personally, because they have invested so much of their personal self-worth and energy into that worldview. The comments in this thread are pretty solid evidence of that; but more, that's why religions as a rule, especially the major religions, are so heavily conservative and resist any attempt at change or reform.

They can seem to be perfectly agreeable people as long as they're not challenged, because anything that is not brought to their attention, does impinge on their consciousness, can be safely ignored and presumed not to really exist.

Robert Anton Wilson made a pretty good observation when he said that the world seems to be divided into neophiles and neophobes; those who love and embrace the new, and those who fear and resist the new. Evolutionarily, both viewpoints have their purpose.

Most people are neophobes, because in evolutionary history novelty was most often linked to danger, so sticking with the familiar was safer. In modern humans, this translates into conservatism, isolationism, xenophobia, and social conformity. They dislike non-conformists and diversity.

A smaller percentage are neophiles. Since a group that is never willing to try something new will stagnate and is in greater risk of dying out due to environmental changes or population pressures, some small number must be willing to seek out novelty and test it. They have a far higher acceptance of diversity and non-conformity, and tend themselves to be non-conformists. Neophiles often have a considerably lower individual survival rate than neophobes, but groups with a larger number of neophiles more readily expands and adapts to changing conditions.

Few humans are pure neophobe or neophile, but tend to lean very strongly in one direction of another. Humans are unique in that they tend to assign value judgements to neophobia and neophilia, with the greater mass of neophobes dismissing, deriding, demonizing, and even attempting to purge their cultures of neophiles. But throughout history, nearly all great advancements in science and technology, art, and culture have come from those who leaned more strongly toward the neophile side.
especially in regard to the conservative desire to package life as subject to control.

I'm comfortable with manually ignoring trolls and reactionaries. I've occasionally replied to some of our best here, and. I like the option.

Disclaimer: I'm not talking about a political, fiscal conservatism here but reactionaries. Alas the reactionary fringe has taken over the Republican Party.

Another feature I see in the "conservative mindset" is the bubble. People may be suffering but like my conservative friend, the perspective from inside the bubble is basically, "Things are OK for me. Their difficulties aren't real or their fault." The suffering and injustice has to get into their bubble first before they can be empathetic about it.
Unless such a conservative has, for example, an LGBTQ+ person in their own circle, and especially as a loved one, they haven't a clue of injustice toward the other and in many cases hostility. It has to impact them under their own roof. Then that same energy of controlling and protecting what is mine speaks up for the oppressed.
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections."
Justice William O. Douglas

"Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures."
Author Unknown

Last edited by Apathia; 30th January 2019 at 11:13 AM.
Apathia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th January 2019, 11:34 AM   #131
Magrat
Mrs. Rincewind
 
Magrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Lancre Kingdom/Adirondack Mountain Region, NY
Posts: 4,181
Originally Posted by Apathia View Post
especially in regard to the conservative desire to package life as subject to control.

I'm comfortable with manually ignoring trolls and reactionaries. I've occasionally replied to some of our best here, and. I like the option.

Disclaimer: I'm not talking about a political, fiscal conservatism here but reactionaries. Alas the reactionary fringe has taken over the Republican Party.

Another feature I see in the "conservative mindset" is the bubble. People may be suffering but like my conservative friend, the perspective from inside the bubble is basically, "Things are OK for me. Their difficulties aren't real or their fault." The suffering and injustice has to get into their bubble first before they can be empathetic about it.
Unless such a conservative has, for example, an LGBTQ+ person in their own circle, and especially as a loved one, they haven't a clue of injustice toward the other and in many cases hostility. It has to impact them under their own roof. Then that same energy of controlling and protecting what is mine speaks up for the oppressed.
My mother's response to my son being lgbtq is "no she's not" and to say I am encouraging him too much. Like I got bored one day and thought, you know what would be cool? My kid has been saying stuff about being a boy trapped in a girl body as long as he could speak. But my mother apparently chose to ignore all that and now is suddenly shocked my child is trans. Her bubble has very thick walls!!!
__________________
Non ergo nothi tere vos usque.

Magrat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th January 2019, 12:27 PM   #132
Apathia
Illuminator
 
Apathia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 4,960
Originally Posted by Magrat View Post
Thank you for your posts,both of you!
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections."
Justice William O. Douglas

"Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures."
Author Unknown
Apathia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th January 2019, 12:38 PM   #133
Apathia
Illuminator
 
Apathia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 4,960
Originally Posted by Magrat View Post
My mother's response to my son being lgbtq is "no she's not" and to say I am encouraging him too much. Like I got bored one day and thought, you know what would be cool? My kid has been saying stuff about being a boy trapped in a girl body as long as he could speak. But my mother apparently chose to ignore all that and now is suddenly shocked my child is trans. Her bubble has very thick walls!!!
It's a zone of safety from things one would be too disturbed to admit.

"Human Kind can not bear very much reality." T.S. Elliot

We all have our bubbles, but some are thicker and more opaque than others. But the good news is that for most of us our bubbles can expand.
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections."
Justice William O. Douglas

"Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures."
Author Unknown
Apathia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th January 2019, 12:54 PM   #134
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 19,946
Originally Posted by Apathia View Post
I'm a "boomer," born 1951, and so is the afore mentioned friend. One aspect of the "conservative mindset" I've noticed is that the novel, the exceptional, and the different attract me. But repel him. I'm thrilled that Human sexuality is fluid, but he's appalled every time Human Sexuality isn't the simple Male/Female. He complains that LGBTQ+ adds too many letters, and so confuses the young on what they are supposed to be, and the mature on how they are supposed to relate to strange others. I love a diverse, and fluid world, he loves set structures and easy categories. I want people to be unique. He wants people to conform.
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
I've found the "ignore" feature to be helpful in that regard. Not as helpful as I'd like it to be, but it does remove some of the troll noise.

One thing I've noticed about the conservative mindset is just how fragile it is, and how prone to taking offense at anything that challenges its worldview in the slightest. There's also a profound element of the Golden Age Fallacy to it.

In fact, it seems to be particularly prone to lashing out at any perceived change to its delicate worldview. The conservative mindset is one that is locked into a picture of how the world should be, and that world is a very simplistic one, with clear black-and-white morality, easy to understand, and most importantly, easy to control. Anything that is too different, too out of their personal experience, or threatens to change or complicate their world, and thus make it harder to control, is inherently bad and should be resisted and/or dismissed. Further, anything that challenges that worldview is automatically taken as an attack on them personally, because they have invested so much of their personal self-worth and energy into that worldview. The comments in this thread are pretty solid evidence of that; but more, that's why religions as a rule, especially the major religions, are so heavily conservative and resist any attempt at change or reform.

They can seem to be perfectly agreeable people as long as they're not challenged, because anything that is not brought to their attention, does impinge on their consciousness, can be safely ignored and presumed not to really exist.

Robert Anton Wilson made a pretty good observation when he said that the world seems to be divided into neophiles and neophobes; those who love and embrace the new, and those who fear and resist the new. Evolutionarily, both viewpoints have their purpose.

Most people are neophobes, because in evolutionary history novelty was most often linked to danger, so sticking with the familiar was safer. In modern humans, this translates into conservatism, isolationism, xenophobia, and social conformity. They dislike non-conformists and diversity.

A smaller percentage are neophiles. Since a group that is never willing to try something new will stagnate and is in greater risk of dying out due to environmental changes or population pressures, some small number must be willing to seek out novelty and test it. They have a far higher acceptance of diversity and non-conformity, and tend themselves to be non-conformists. Neophiles often have a considerably lower individual survival rate than neophobes, but groups with a larger number of neophiles more readily expands and adapts to changing conditions.

Few humans are pure neophobe or neophile, but tend to lean very strongly in one direction of another. Humans are unique in that they tend to assign value judgements to neophobia and neophilia, with the greater mass of neophobes dismissing, deriding, demonizing, and even attempting to purge their cultures of neophiles. But throughout history, nearly all great advancements in science and technology, art, and culture have come from those who leaned more strongly toward the neophile side.
I do think it's interesting that a lot of what you both are saying was recognised by the early 1950s - see my post below quoting from a book from then:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...5#post12579325
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th January 2019, 01:50 PM   #135
TomB
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 492
Originally Posted by Magrat View Post
TomB but my question was, what is being lost by the person making the cake? I never asked should they be allowed to deny. I want to know how their rights are being infringed.

Example: If my neighbor builds a fence between our properties and it is a foot onto my side, I can say he has infringed upon my property, and point to it.

What exactly is being lost in baking a cake? To my mind youre only losing if you dont bake it.

eta specifically making a wedding cake for a gay couple. I can sorta see if the cake has writing/pictures whatever you object to, but a wedding cake is just a cake. Im assuming for sake of argument it doesnt say HAPPY GAY WEDDING or have two intertwined vaginas or something.
The highlighted is not what you asked. You asked (relevant portions highlighted):
Quote:
I am politically and socially liberal (which I am presuming is relevant, but please correct me if it is not), and I don't understand how giving rights to one person impacts my rights. For instance, as a straight woman, I cannot see how giving gay people the right to get married impacts me. It doesn't remove my right to get married.

Could anyone explain this? Having read it, I am coming to see how a mindset like this would support anti-LGBTQ actions. what I am asking is, could you explain why you would see things this way? What is being taken away from you? thank you.
That was answered with an explanation of where that viewpoint comes from. The idea that they lose the right to choose their actions in certain circumstances.

You asked for information and it was provided. Your response seems to indicate a desire to debate the validity of that viewpoint. Am I expected to argue against you and defend that viewpoint? I won't because It's not my viewpoint.

You see, although I understand that rights are infringed upon whenever choices are limited, I don't agree that bakers should get to deny service. When two people's perceived rights come into conflict, someone's rights are going to have to take precedence. In this case, I think the customer's right to be served trumps a baker's right to deny service.

But each case is a little different. Most of the people I know who describe themselves as conservative think the baker was being a jerk and side with the gay couple. But opinions on that do not necessarily predict opinions on the conflict between a trans person's right to the bathroom/locker room of their choice and a woman's right to the expectation of sex specific bathrooms. Again, I know people who call themselves conservative who agree with the trans person and people who call themselves liberal who take the opposite view.

People, like life, are complicated. People don't fit into neat little liberal or conservative boxes. It depends on the issue and the perspective they are looking at it from.

For reference, Dick Cheney on gay marriage (with a more conservative statement on the issue from Obama at the end): https://www.nationalreview.com/corne...-jim-geraghty/
TomB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th January 2019, 04:13 PM   #136
Magrat
Mrs. Rincewind
 
Magrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Lancre Kingdom/Adirondack Mountain Region, NY
Posts: 4,181
Originally Posted by TomB View Post
The highlighted is not what you asked. You asked (relevant portions highlighted):


That was answered with an explanation of where that viewpoint comes from. The idea that they lose the right to choose their actions in certain circumstances.

You asked for information and it was provided. Your response seems to indicate a desire to debate the validity of that viewpoint. Am I expected to argue against you and defend that viewpoint? I won't because It's not my viewpoint.

You see, although I understand that rights are infringed upon whenever choices are limited, I don't agree that bakers should get to deny service. When two people's perceived rights come into conflict, someone's rights are going to have to take precedence. In this case, I think the customer's right to be served trumps a baker's right to deny service.

But each case is a little different. Most of the people I know who describe themselves as conservative think the baker was being a jerk and side with the gay couple. But opinions on that do not necessarily predict opinions on the conflict between a trans person's right to the bathroom/locker room of their choice and a woman's right to the expectation of sex specific bathrooms. Again, I know people who call themselves conservative who agree with the trans person and people who call themselves liberal who take the opposite view.

People, like life, are complicated. People don't fit into neat little liberal or conservative boxes. It depends on the issue and the perspective they are looking at it from.

For reference, Dick Cheney on gay marriage (with a more conservative statement on the issue from Obama at the end): https://www.nationalreview.com/corne...-jim-geraghty/
No, actually that is what I asked...what is lost. I understand what you said. That's just not what I was asking. I did post about nine billion follow up posts clarifying what I was trying to find out. I do not understand how the rights are being infringed upon. Im not interested in debating whether or not they are or who you agree with or debating the law. I am asking for theories on the mindset of the individual quoted in the op.
__________________
Non ergo nothi tere vos usque.

Magrat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th January 2019, 04:47 PM   #137
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,702
Originally Posted by Magrat View Post
If you look for bias, you shall find it.



Can you explain to me how baking a cake for someone infringes on your rights? Does God dock you a Good Boy Point? It makes legitimately zero sense to me... As an atheist, I would happily take money from a christian couple that was getting married. Baking a cake for which you are paid does not endorse anything or support anything. If anything, refusing to provide services for a large part of the population will just ruin your business.



Please, can you explain how it infringes on your rights to bake a cake? what exactly are you losing by making money from a customer?



I can even kinda see if it required participation in the actual wedding but...baking a cake?? If I am quite honest it just makes the bakery sound dead ass petty.

Yes itís petty. But people have a right to be petty, no? If we, through the law, force a baker to bake a cake he doesnít want to, we are certainly infringing his right to refuse service. You may think such infringement is just, but itís still an infringement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th January 2019, 05:03 PM   #138
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 15,106
Originally Posted by Apathia View Post
Another feature I see in the "conservative mindset" is the bubble. People may be suffering but like my conservative friend, the perspective from inside the bubble is basically, "Things are OK for me. Their difficulties aren't real or their fault." The suffering and injustice has to get into their bubble first before they can be empathetic about it.

Very much so. There's a very strong belief that anything bad that happens to someone outside their circle, the "other" happened because they deserved it, for being too different. Especially religious conservatives. During the AIDS crisis, conservatives insisted that it only affected Gay people, and was therefore G-D's judgement on their "lifestyle". When it comes to charity for the poor, they're happy to help out someone in their circle, someone they know or who is otherwise close to them (friend of a friend) or a member in one of their groups (churches, fraternal organizations, etc.); but for the poor in the abstract, there's a feeling of "they're poor because they're lazy", especially when it comes to minorities.

Quote:
Unless such a conservative has, for example, an LGBTQ+ person in their own circle, and especially as a loved one, they haven't a clue of injustice toward the other and in many cases hostility. It has to impact them under their own roof. Then that same energy of controlling and protecting what is mine speaks up for the oppressed.

That highlighted part has not been my experience. In some cases, yes, that does happen, people re-examine their beliefs; but more often than not, they entrench, double-down on those beliefs. That's why LGBTQ youths are many times more likely to be abused, or to become homeless, than heterosexual, cisgendered youths. Had I understood as a teen I was trans, and had come out to my parents, I have no doubt I would have been severely beaten, probably forced into some sort of religious "conversion therapy" program, and/or forcibly ejected from my home. That's a common experience for far too many LGBTQ teens.

Back when I was young, interracial marriage was still highly controversial in much of the US. I have several friends who were threatened by their parents for dating someone of the wrong ethnic heritage as teenagers, including one who was thrown out and disowned.

Conservatives are all too ready to turn that hostility onto their own children, if their children dare to violate social norms. There is something about the conservative mindset that also sets itself at odds with empathy, and often overrules it.
__________________
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams
"The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf
"Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon
luchog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th January 2019, 05:17 PM   #139
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 15,106
Originally Posted by TomB View Post
People, like life, are complicated. People don't fit into neat little liberal or conservative boxes. It depends on the issue and the perspective they are looking at it from.

For reference, Dick Cheney on gay marriage (with a more conservative statement on the issue from Obama at the end): https://www.nationalreview.com/corne...-jim-geraghty/

One must be careful about quoting politicians as though their public statements were an accurate statement of their personal beliefs, or even fully representative of a particular worldview. Regardless of how they may feel about a particular issue, there will always be that element of playing to the crowd and/or toeing their party line, in order to maintain their position and power.
__________________
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams
"The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf
"Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon
luchog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th January 2019, 06:18 PM   #140
TomB
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 492
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
One must be careful about quoting politicians as though their public statements were an accurate statement of their personal beliefs, or even fully representative of a particular worldview. Regardless of how they may feel about a particular issue, there will always be that element of playing to the crowd and/or toeing their party line, in order to maintain their position and power.
Of course.
But I used Cheney because he is a public figure who is definitely known to be conservative, and who was not, in that statement, toeing the party line. Not knowing the people involved, I have no idea what he actually believes.

However, his views line up with several otherwise conservative people I know. My sister-in-law who is very conservative (probably voted for Trump) and whose husband is an evangelical minister didn't have an issue with her daughter marrying her girlfriend. (Though there were some concerns about how it would affect her husband's position.) Meanwhile I know some otherwise very liberal people who are anti-abortion.

My point is that people are often a mix of liberal, conservative, or something in-between varying from issue to issue.
TomB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th January 2019, 06:57 PM   #141
Apathia
Illuminator
 
Apathia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 4,960
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
I do think it's interesting that a lot of what you both are saying was recognised by the early 1950s - see my post below quoting from a book from then:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...5#post12579325
Ninjaed!

Thanks for re-posting this.
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections."
Justice William O. Douglas

"Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures."
Author Unknown
Apathia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th January 2019, 08:07 PM   #142
Apathia
Illuminator
 
Apathia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 4,960
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
Very much so. There's a very strong belief that anything bad that happens to someone outside their circle, the "other" happened because they deserved it, for being too different. Especially religious conservatives. During the AIDS crisis, conservatives insisted that it only affected Gay people, and was therefore G-D's judgement on their "lifestyle". When it comes to charity for the poor, they're happy to help out someone in their circle, someone they know or who is otherwise close to them (friend of a friend) or a member in one of their groups (churches, fraternal organizations, etc.); but for the poor in the abstract, there's a feeling of "they're poor because they're lazy", especially when it comes to minorities.

That highlighted part has not been my experience. In some cases, yes, that does happen, people re-examine their beliefs; but more often than not, they entrench, double-down on those beliefs. That's why LGBTQ youths are many times more likely to be abused, or to become homeless, than heterosexual, cisgendered youths. Had I understood as a teen I was trans, and had come out to my parents, I have no doubt I would have been severely beaten, probably forced into some sort of religious "conversion therapy" program, and/or forcibly ejected from my home. That's a common experience for far too many LGBTQ teens.

Back when I was young, interracial marriage was still highly controversial in much of the US. I have several friends who were threatened by their parents for dating someone of the wrong ethnic heritage as teenagers, including one who was thrown out and disowned.

Conservatives are all too ready to turn that hostility onto their own children, if their children dare to violate social norms. There is something about the conservative mindset that also sets itself at odds with empathy, and often overrules it.
I've seen otherwise bigoted people get it when it impacts one of their own. But you are right. The ones on the reactionary end will disown members of their families. For them the bubble contracts.

F., the right wing friend I've spoken of takes empathy as just being an emotional snowflake singing kumbaya. He doesn't do much empathy except for those very close to him. He's stated that Conservatives are smarter than Liberals, because they don't get carried away by their emotions. A conservative, according to him, can see the "rational" utility of separating migrant children from their parents as a deterrent.

Yes, your right. More often they double down the hostility. And that grieves me for the penumbra of their hate falls on me as well. It sends the message that I don't have the right to be an individual person. And that's very important to me since I've always felt a mismatched puzzle piece in the wrong box.
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections."
Justice William O. Douglas

"Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures."
Author Unknown
Apathia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th January 2019, 08:10 PM   #143
Apathia
Illuminator
 
Apathia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 4,960
Originally Posted by TomB View Post
My point is that people are often a mix of liberal, conservative, or something in-between varying from issue to issue.
Yes that's always an important point when we are talking Liberals/Conservatives.
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections."
Justice William O. Douglas

"Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures."
Author Unknown
Apathia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th January 2019, 08:14 PM   #144
Apathia
Illuminator
 
Apathia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 4,960
I said something up the line about people confusing privilege as liberty. If your race or ethnicity is no longer special with perks of being the societal norm, for many that seems a loss of liberty.
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections."
Justice William O. Douglas

"Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures."
Author Unknown
Apathia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2019, 06:11 AM   #145
GnaGnaMan
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,403
This has turned more into an attempt to build a stereotype than an effort at understanding.

First of, you just don't know if a reaction to political disagreement is part of a conservative mindset or just how political disagreement is normally handled in your culture, unless you troll people you agree with. (Admittedly, beating children is a conservative thing.)

---

Just because someone is instinctively neophobe does not mean that they become politically or religiously conservative. It just means that they avoid new experiences. Actively being a dick to LGBT people is likely to expose you to new situations. It's not an obvious consequence of being a neophobe.

Some people worry about what cellphones or facebook will do to a generation growing up with it. That's conservative on some level but not associated with political or religious conservartism.

As we age we find it harder to learn new things. We may not have any other choice but to avoid the new but that does not mean that we become hostile to it. But maybe if the environment encourages hostility then we may find that we save face by adopting that attitude rather than admitting our deficiencies.

---

If you want to understand why religion is associated with the right you must look at history. Europe's monarchs were defenders of that faith. Governments prosecuted atheists and apostates. In return the churches gave spritual support to the monarchs who supposedly ruled by the will of god. It was a symbiotic relationship.
As a result european revolutionaries are by default opposed to religion. When the French Revolution killed the king the other european monarchs formed the Holy Alliance and started a religious war against France. Diderot is quoted: "Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest."
If you have religious groups that consider child beating to be mandatory then that will be associated with the right.
__________________
It makes no difference whatever whether they laugh at us or revile us, whether they represent us as clowns or criminals; the main thing is that they mention us, that they concern themselves with us again and again. -Hitler
GnaGnaMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2019, 06:45 AM   #146
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 24,801
Originally Posted by GnaGnaMan View Post
.....If you want to understand why religion is associated with the right you must look at history. Europe's monarchs were defenders of that faith. Governments prosecuted atheists and apostates. In return the churches gave spritual support to the monarchs who supposedly ruled by the will of god. It was a symbiotic relationship.
As a result european revolutionaries are by default opposed to religion. When the French Revolution killed the king the other european monarchs formed the Holy Alliance and started a religious war against France. Diderot is quoted: "Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest."
If you have religious groups that consider child beating to be mandatory then that will be associated with the right.
It's really important that you guys understand this is NOT the perspective over here, where being conservative is not the opposite of being liberal, nor says anything at all about religiosity. Conservatism over here really boils down to your view of government debt and the size of the public sector, and really not much more than that. Here atheism, which exceeds 50% of the population, is weakly associated with education rather than any neophobia or any political affiliation. And of course, it was a Conservative government in the UK which brought in gay marriage. The stuff about nobles versus the church would evoke rolling eyes and mutterings of "a plague on all their houses" if we were ever to hear such stuff (most unlikely).
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.

Last edited by MikeG; 31st January 2019 at 06:46 AM.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2019, 07:07 AM   #147
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 45,106
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Yes itís petty. But people have a right to be petty, no? If we, through the law, force a baker to bake a cake he doesnít want to, we are certainly infringing his right to refuse service.
Just like when Cracker barrel is forced to serve blacks.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2019, 07:10 AM   #148
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 45,106
Originally Posted by Apathia View Post
I've seen otherwise bigoted people get it when it impacts one of their own. But you are right. The ones on the reactionary end will disown members of their families. For them the bubble contracts.

F., the right wing friend I've spoken of takes empathy as just being an emotional snowflake singing kumbaya. He doesn't do much empathy except for those very close to him. He's stated that Conservatives are smarter than Liberals, because they don't get carried away by their emotions. A conservative, according to him, can see the "rational" utility of separating migrant children from their parents as a deterrent.
Yep, and how else was germany supposed to solve their jewish problem? I mean they tried to export them but no one would take them, and then they get all upset over people they clearly didn't care about. Simple dispassionate solution that.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2019, 07:13 AM   #149
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 45,106
Originally Posted by Apathia View Post
I said something up the line about people confusing privilege as liberty. If your race or ethnicity is no longer special with perks of being the societal norm, for many that seems a loss of liberty.
Yes and no. It seems to be a rejection that their birth gave them a leg up in the world. Kavanaugh really hits that well when he claims unlike minorities he got into Yale on just hard work. Of course he was also a legacy. And largely they don't see the hypocrisy there.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2019, 07:17 AM   #150
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 45,106
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
It's really important that you guys understand this is NOT the perspective over here, where being conservative is not the opposite of being liberal, nor says anything at all about religiosity. Conservatism over here really boils down to your view of government debt and the size of the public sector, and really not much more than that.
Do they actually do anything about debt other than drive it up there like they do here? Or do they actually try to behave in anything like a fiscally responsible manner?
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2019, 07:25 AM   #151
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 24,801
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Do they actually do anything about debt other than drive it up there like they do here? Or do they actually try to behave in anything like a fiscally responsible manner?
I'm really anxious about Rule 11 having whinged about it so much here in the past, so this is perhaps a discussion for elsewhere. The answer is that they try to, but don't always succeed......and if there is a party which will attempt to keep taxes low and debt low, it is the conservatives, but at a social cost which isn't always palatable.
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2019, 07:28 AM   #152
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 15,106
Originally Posted by GnaGnaMan View Post
This has turned more into an attempt to build a stereotype than an effort at understanding.

Oh please. Everything I have said about conservatives in this country come from my own direct experiences. I was raised in a staunchly conservative, religious-right family, attending hardline-religious-right churches up until I was in my early '30s. These are not stereotypes, these are actual personal observations of people I grew up with and around, viewed through the lens of someone who bought into it up until I started attending college and was more widely exposed to other worldviews.

It is very, very difficult to exaggerate the reactionary-conservative mindset. As individuals they can certainly vary, but as a group (bringing in-group/out-group into play) they are very consistent, and tend strongly toward extremism.

All you have to do is go listen to their pundits like Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Jerry Fallwell, Franklin Graham, and so on. These are not the nutcase fringe, these are mainstream figures with literally millions of followers. Followers who fully believe that natural disasters are sent by G-D to punish the US for legalizing gay marriage, and punish other nations for following "false idols". People who believe that Hillary Clinton was involved in a child sex ring run out of a DC pizza shop. People who literally see Americans, particularly white Americans as "G-D's Chosen People". People who go into outrage about the "War on Christmas". People who fear that there are hordes of atheists and Muslims and hippie new agers who are literally trying to destroy them, and they only survive and hold on to power because it is "G-D's will". And with Trump, they've effectively resurrected the "divine right of kings" for the modern age.
__________________
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams
"The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf
"Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon
luchog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2019, 07:57 AM   #153
Lithrael
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,440
Originally Posted by Magrat View Post
I asked...what is lost.
The ability to snub people who need a good snubbing. It’s their role as a good member of society to snub people who are screwing up society (by being gay, doing the miscegenation, indulging in divorce, check boxes as appropriate for what is Ruining Our Country this time) to show that kind of thing doesn’t get a pass around here. Usually because they decided God Really Cares About That so to do any less makes them feel like their doing-right-by-God-o-meter is flagging. That much of the rest of society decided That isn’t so bad makes them feel like society is getting ruined. Who is going to do all the snubbing?? Who is going to gatekeep our society?? It’s down to me. *rolls up sleeves*

ETA: most likely underlying that is the basic human ‘change bad’ butting up against ‘change ok’ as y’all have been discussing. They think society really needs that gatekeeping or it’ll all just go to hell. It’s one thing to ignore what Those Guys Are Doing Over There, the problem is too big for you to tackle alone, but actually raising your hand to participate with them like normal welcome members of society? Well that would make you complicit in the ruining of society. Or just the offending of God or what have you.

Last edited by Lithrael; 31st January 2019 at 08:27 AM.
Lithrael is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2019, 08:18 AM   #154
GnaGnaMan
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,403
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
It's really important that you guys understand this is NOT the perspective over here, where being conservative is not the opposite of being liberal, nor says anything at all about religiosity. Conservatism over here really boils down to your view of government debt and the size of the public sector, and really not much more than that. Here atheism, which exceeds 50% of the population, is weakly associated with education rather than any neophobia or any political affiliation. And of course, it was a Conservative government in the UK which brought in gay marriage. The stuff about nobles versus the church would evoke rolling eyes and mutterings of "a plague on all their houses" if we were ever to hear such stuff (most unlikely).
Bollocks. Of course anglicans prefer the conservative party.

It's true that there is no republican atheistic tradition in british politics. That's because these things were illegal. Historically anglicanism and conservatism are still aligned for the reasons given.


Liberal means different things in the US and in the UK (and in other countries) for historical reasons. Do not confuse the different meanings.
__________________
It makes no difference whatever whether they laugh at us or revile us, whether they represent us as clowns or criminals; the main thing is that they mention us, that they concern themselves with us again and again. -Hitler
GnaGnaMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2019, 09:10 AM   #155
GnaGnaMan
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,403
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
Oh please. Everything I have said about conservatives in this country come from my own direct experiences. I was raised in a staunchly conservative, religious-right family, attending hardline-religious-right churches up until I was in my early '30s. These are not stereotypes, these are actual personal observations of people I grew up with and around, viewed through the lens of someone who bought into it up until I started attending college and was more widely exposed to other worldviews.

It is very, very difficult to exaggerate the reactionary-conservative mindset. As individuals they can certainly vary, but as a group (bringing in-group/out-group into play) they are very consistent, and tend strongly toward extremism.

All you have to do is go listen to their pundits like Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Jerry Fallwell, Franklin Graham, and so on. These are not the nutcase fringe, these are mainstream figures with literally millions of followers. Followers who fully believe that natural disasters are sent by G-D to punish the US for legalizing gay marriage, and punish other nations for following "false idols". People who believe that Hillary Clinton was involved in a child sex ring run out of a DC pizza shop. People who literally see Americans, particularly white Americans as "G-D's Chosen People". People who go into outrage about the "War on Christmas". People who fear that there are hordes of atheists and Muslims and hippie new agers who are literally trying to destroy them, and they only survive and hold on to power because it is "G-D's will". And with Trump, they've effectively resurrected the "divine right of kings" for the modern age.
Ok. So you have uncovered the conservative mindset. Now what? What solutions can you develop using your insight?
__________________
It makes no difference whatever whether they laugh at us or revile us, whether they represent us as clowns or criminals; the main thing is that they mention us, that they concern themselves with us again and again. -Hitler
GnaGnaMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2019, 09:26 AM   #156
ahhell
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 2,005
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
Oh please. Everything I have said about conservatives in this country come from my own direct experiences. I was raised in a staunchly conservative, religious-right family, attending hardline-religious-right churches up until I was in my early '30s. These are not stereotypes, these are actual personal observations of people I grew up with and around, viewed through the lens of someone who bought into it up until I started attending college and was more widely exposed to other worldviews.

It is very, very difficult to exaggerate the reactionary-conservative mindset. As individuals they can certainly vary, but as a group (bringing in-group/out-group into play) they are very consistent, and tend strongly toward extremism.

All you have to do is go listen to their pundits like Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Jerry Fallwell, Franklin Graham, and so on. These are not the nutcase fringe, these are mainstream figures with literally millions of followers. Followers who fully believe that natural disasters are sent by G-D to punish the US for legalizing gay marriage, and punish other nations for following "false idols". People who believe that Hillary Clinton was involved in a child sex ring run out of a DC pizza shop. People who literally see Americans, particularly white Americans as "G-D's Chosen People". People who go into outrage about the "War on Christmas". People who fear that there are hordes of atheists and Muslims and hippie new agers who are literally trying to destroy them, and they only survive and hold on to power because it is "G-D's will". And with Trump, they've effectively resurrected the "divine right of kings" for the modern age.
I grew up with a couple of thuggish black guys and all you have to do is listen to rap to.............
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2019, 09:58 AM   #157
Apathia
Illuminator
 
Apathia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 4,960
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Yes and no. It seems to be a rejection that their birth gave them a leg up in the world. Kavanaugh really hits that well when he claims unlike minorities he got into Yale on just hard work. Of course he was also a legacy. And largely they don't see the hypocrisy there.
Taking away the perks and advantages of "the landed gentry" in the lest seems to them a persecution. A Class War!

I suppose the same is the mindset of most Evangelical Christians find their religion isn't allowed to dominate in a secular society.
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections."
Justice William O. Douglas

"Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures."
Author Unknown
Apathia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2019, 10:04 AM   #158
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 47,338
Originally Posted by GnaGnaMan View Post
Ok. So you have uncovered the conservative mindset. Now what? What solutions can you develop using your insight?
At the very least if we came up with a method of making Thanksgiving dinner with older relatives less agonizing that would be awesome.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2019, 10:08 AM   #159
GnaGnaMan
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,403
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
I grew up with a couple of thuggish black guys and all you have to do is listen to rap to.............
On second thought, can you see anything wrong with that comment?
__________________
It makes no difference whatever whether they laugh at us or revile us, whether they represent us as clowns or criminals; the main thing is that they mention us, that they concern themselves with us again and again. -Hitler
GnaGnaMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2019, 10:08 AM   #160
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
 
Hellbound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not in Hell, but I can see it from here on a clear day...
Posts: 13,129
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
At the very least if we came up with a method of making Thanksgiving dinner with older relatives less agonizing that would be awesome.
That's why you should be a conservative.

You de-fund Medicare and Social Security, and stand against any sort of universal health care. Then the older relatives die off quicker because of the lack of adequate health care and you get a peaceful Thanksgiving!

It's the Circle of Life.
Hellbound is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:54 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.