Politics

[FireArrow]

Except I don't think that's what its intention was. It pointed out good things and flaws in both candidates. Plus I just thought it was interesting.

That seemed to of been the message the author was trying to get across (along with don't vote for trump and that other guy). Maybe I'm wrong though.

Changing the subject, can someone enlighten me on the Religious Liberties some of the republicans have listed under issues they want to fix? I'm not aware of any laws/changes taking away peoples freedom of religion, but if there are I definitely would like to see them gone. I'm just afraid it's euphemism for "let's reunite church and state and ensure we never become a secular society."

[blueflower999]

Changing the subject, can someone enlighten me on the Religious Liberties some of the republicans have listed under issues they want to fix? I'm not aware of any laws/changes taking away peoples freedom of religion, but if there are I definitely would like to see them gone. I'm just afraid it's euphemism for "let's reunite church and state and ensure we never become a secular society."

I think a lot of this has to do with that Kim Davis nonsense, and I agree that I don't understand a lot of it. Some definitely comes from the whole notion that every group in America constantly has to be the victims, the oppressed, the discriminated-against (whether actually true or entirely fabricated), and spend more time whining and name-calling than going out and fighting for what they believe in!

[FireArrow]

I think a lot of this has to do with that Kim Davis nonsense, and I agree that I don't understand a lot of it. Some definitely comes from the whole notion that every group in America constantly has to be the victims, the oppressed, the discriminated-against (whether actually true or entirely fabricated), and spend more time whining and name-calling than going out and fighting for what they believe in!

Ugh don't even bring up Kim Davis. But yeah, I agree. I hate how our society is "if you aren't the oppressed, you're the perpetrator!" It just makes everyone go around trying to prove that they're a victim so they don't end up as the bad guy.

[mikey]

Why is it that when I read liberal viewpoints they just seem wrong, like, in what world is deficit spending ok

and that's how I figured out I was conservative

[Pianist Da Sootopolis]

Religious liberty as it pertains to the Kim Davis case is essentially the notion of being exempt from certain laws on a religious basis.
Unfortunately, that's not how a secular government works; when a religious conviction can override the law of the land, government loses damn near if not all of its authority

[mikey]

I've never actually heard of a christian religion that forbids from signing a marriage license for homosexuals.  What she did wasn't ok.

Religious liberty as it pertains to the Kim Davis case is essentially the notion of being exempt from certain laws on a religious basis.
Unfortunately, that's not how a secular government works; when a religious conviction can override the law of the land, government loses damn near if not all of its authority

If there were a law that said, everyone needs to drink beer each morning or they'll be arrested, then I wouldn't follow that law and instead choose to go to prison.

[FireArrow]

Why is it that when I read liberal viewpoints they just seem wrong, like, in what world is deficit spending ok

and that's how I figured out I was conservative

Yes, not spending too much money is a conservative value (unless you're bush?), but since when was deficit spending a liberal viewpoint? That sounds like something a conservative would say to bash liberalism, not something a liberal would say.

If you're actually interested in the difference between liberal and conservative view points rather than opinionated propaganda from one side, I'd suggest reading this.

[Pianist Da Sootopolis]

I've never actually heard of a christian religion that forbids from signing a marriage license for homosexuals.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church

If there were a law that said, everyone needs to drink beer each morning or they'll be arrested, then I wouldn't follow that law and instead choose to go to prison.

Yes, and you would be right to do so. However, drinking beer every morning actually affects your life, letting two gay dudes down the street get married does not.

[mikey]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church Yes, and you would be right to do so. However, drinking beer every morning actually affects your life, letting two gay dudes down the street get married does not.

that's why what she did wasn't ok, and what I did was ok

[Altissimo]

Yes, and you would be right to do so. However, drinking beer every morning actually affects your life, letting two gay dudes down the street get married does not.

to play devil's advocate, that's not enough of an argument for the government to be able to accept it. Plus, lots of conservatives think that same-sex marriage does affect them.

[FireArrow]

You mean the slippery slope of "what's next, beastiality being legal?"

[Dude]

Probably something about "Oh, our children will see this and want to imitate it and that would be wrong"

[blueflower999]

Yes, not spending too much money is a conservative value (unless you're bush?), but since when was deficit spending a liberal viewpoint? That sounds like something a conservative would say to bash liberalism, not something a liberal would say.

It might not be what they say, but it's what they do. Government entitlement programs (that liberals support and conservatives generally do not) now take up a huge portion of our budget and essentially prevent us from using tax dollars for important things. Like, oh IDK, paying off our massive debt.

[FireArrow]

It might not be what they say, but it's what they do. Government entitlement programs (that liberals support and conservatives generally do not) now take up a huge portion of our budget and essentially prevent us from using tax dollars for important things. Like, oh IDK, paying off our massive debt.

That, once again, sounds like something a conservative would say to bash the other party, it's truth is very limited.

I've found an unbiased source (unbiased meaning he hates both parties equally, so more of a neutral bias I guess?) It's not the most... scholarly of websites out there, but I found his opinion rather interesting and enlightening.

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-liberals-justify-spending-well-beyond-revenue-on-a-government-scale-but-not-on-a-personal-one

I think what I'm trying to say is that what one party says about the other is either not true or a gross exaggeration. It's like asking ISIS their opinion on Christianity - you're probably not gonna get an accurate answer.

[Pianist Da Sootopolis]

It might not be what they say, but it's what they do. Government entitlement programs (that liberals support and conservatives generally do not) now take up a huge portion of our budget and essentially prevent us from using tax dollars for important things. Like, oh IDK, paying off our massive debt.

It's interesting to note that the states that take up the most welfare are also the ones who generally oppose minimum wage hikes- for an obvious reason. When you don't pay people a living wage, they have to go off of government benefits.