I’ve never met those, but I have met a few who hold that a woman has property rights to her own body, in a conservative/libertarian model, and can thus “evict” an “unwanted tenant.”
I’ve also met liberals who are pro-life, given that every individual should have the chance to fulfill his or her human potential. (The “what if you aborted Beethoven” model.)
There is not one single square millimeter of the great map of ideology that some liberal and some conservative don’t find themselves agreeing on!
A conservative might support policies for income equality if he thinks that otherwise, the proletariat’s gonna get all aggravated and radical. (Serfs up!). A liberal supports such policies to advance justice. Ad hoc alliances are, at most, tenuous.
Well, he does sorta kinda clarify his point, in the manner of dumbfucks everywhere, he says that the restaurants which are less hygienic will quickly fall into line because people won’t go. Like he believes that free market solutions just naturally make people smarter. Maybe, in a Darwinian sort of way. a crude form of eugenics…
And how does he expect customers to work out that employees aren’t washing their hands? Perhaps when the local health department shuts the restaurant down after multiple cases of food poisoning?
True. In practice, there is a fairly strong correlation between one’s life/choice viewpoint and a lot of other ideological baggage. There are very rough “platforms” that the majority adheres to. (The most wonderfully paradoxical is, of course, pro-life & pro-death-penalty.) The Venn Diagrams, so to speak, come with some large overlaps.
Although there is that small but significant group who are opposed to abortion, but still “pro-choice” out of essentially libertarian concerns. They think it’s wrong, but don’t support the government’s power to stop it. I find this group to be admirable, for having to reconcile directly conflicting viewpoints (as opposed to pro-life, pro-death-penalty, where the viewpoints don’t actually conflict – damn few fetuses have been sentenced to death by a capital jury!)
Well, in practice that’s already how it works sometimes. Some of my drivers when I worked in pizza delivered for other places and reported to me some pretty massive health violations at some of these places. In the end, they weren’t shut down by health inspectors, they were shut down by lack of business.
That’s my view, but I think it’s actually the majority view. Mario Cuomo had that view. Michael Dukakis as well. There’s really no conflicting viewpoint though. There are a lot of things that are morally wrong but which the government shouldn’t be passing laws against because it does more harm than good. Promiscuity is wrong, and it could even be debated that it’s a public health issue, but we don’t let the government interfere in that.
We’re gonna need a cite that promiscuity is wrong. How many or how much is promiscuity. Two, four, seventy five? If you’re not getting enough, perhaps a different forum would be appropriate.
Perhaps, but true satisfaction is best realized in the maturity and stability of a committed relationship. As Zsa Zsa Gabor pointed out, until a man is married, he is incomplete. Once he gets married, then he is finished.
“… and we don’t need the lady crying cause the story’s sad …”
Why does it seem like that line was written for that guy? And why does the guy who wrote that line not come by and beat the crap out of him? This slackitude must be stopped!