So this pitting is just because a small group of people who didn’t share your opinion and who happened to be in the majority at an event you attended had the gall to think that it was likely that you also agreed with them, and to disagree with you when you told them you didn’t?
This sauce is so weak its practically Perrier.
I’ve been in lots of places where people assumed I must be a Republican or a Christian, or what have you. Depending on how I felt at the time I either kept my mouth shut, or politely disagreed with them, but I didn’t feel that they had done anything wrong. If I went to a Catholic service I wouldn’t be surprised if in talking with attendees afterwards they would be telling me to call my congressman to support anti-abortion legislation. Welcome the the real world.
I’m not sure if I understand you. What does the word “word” mean in this context. And are you speaking hypothetically here, and if so, what are the ramifications of this in the real world?
(yes I’m being sarcastic)
There’s also the possibility of corporate funding, allowing us to continue enjoying such timeless classics as The Barber of Shellville, Don GEICOvanni and The Microsoft Flute.
I’ve used this story before, but since it seems necessary again.
When I was young, we had the board game “Monopoly,” as did many of my friends. My friends almost universally played with a “house rule,” in which the money collected from fines, and sometimes even from house and property sales from the bank, went into the center of the board, and was claimed by landing on “free parking.”
That’s not how we played when my house was the locale. Our “house rule” was the actual Monopoly rulebook, which clearly provided that Free Parking was just a resting spot, and garnered the player no money or other benefits. I would argue, when playing at someone else’s house, that we should follow the actual rules of the game. Often I would be outvoted, and the game would use the money-in-the-middle/Free-parking rule.
Taking the money, if I then landed on Free Parking, is not hypocrisy.
(A) So what?
(B) Doesn’t happen with Broadway. Not seeing any Playbill announcements for Air Wicked Freshners.
(C) Why should you pay so I can see the opera?
Catholics being anti-abortion, sure. But expecting me to tell congresspeople to ban abortion? I think that’s not a necessary side-effect at a Catholic church, and is a pretty good analogy.
If I should expect a Catholic church to go to the government to stop abortion[sup]1[/sup], then I could expect at an opera that people will love the arts and thus feel that the government should support the arts.
I disagree with both positions, but they’re analogous.
And your wife was right to stare daggers at you, but she’s wrong about whatever positions she holds to the right of you. I can only imagine the evil views one would have to have.
An easier-to-grasp and real-world switcheroo for us libs is offering us the opportunity to pay more in taxes because we think taxes should be higher. I pay the lowest legal tax I can, but I think taxes should be higher, and I’m not a hypocrite.
[sup]1[/sup]Yes, I know it happens. That’s the point. I’ve even been offered pre-written postcards with [del]my[/del] the correct feelings on abortion that the government should enforce. Not everybody can see the difference between ‘here’s what I think,’ and ‘here’s what I think the government should do.’
Let’s say that your church receives government grants to carry out its Good Works. Your church would not be able to do these Good Works without government funding. You are really a fan of these Good Works and do your part to help them succeed. Let’s say liberals get an ultra-atheistic government installed that wants to abolish all faith-based programs, starting with grants to religious organizations. You are informed of a specific plan while volunteering at your church. Your priest urges everyone to write a sternly worded letter to your state representative to let them know what will happen if the proposal goes forward.
Is your priest wrong for assuming you’d be on board with this?
How else is he supposed to get like-minded individuals to help him protect something ya’ll apparently care about?
Your other issue about people wrongly assuming you share their values because ya’ll have similar interests is something most of us have encountered before. It sure can be irritating sometimes, but it is hardly a “liberal” thing. Ain’t really pit worthy either IMHO, but YMMV.
So there was another opera you could have gone to where everyone agreed to pay the full share thus making moot the need for federal subsidizing, but you decided not to go to that one? No, I don’t understand why you didn’t go to that one Brick.
I disagree with Bricker
.) Regarding the general butt-hurtedness in the OP,
.) About his presumptions about the conservative position. Modern conservatives trend towards libertarianism, but traditional conservatives liked elitist institutions, of which the opera was one.
.) That he handled the situation well. If you are with a bunch of people with a different ideology, it’s better to get calmer and more laid back. Jokes often work.
.) Also, the massive subsidies and spending on sports (considered separately) are noteworthy.
I agree with Bricker:
.) About him not being hypocritical in this instance.
.) That the opera could survive without governmental funding.
Though they wouldn’t survive via higher ticket prices, but rather through tax deductible contributions, an indirect and less visible sort of government largesse. New York City just lost their 2nd opera company. There’s no way they would lose their top tier one. Naturally, I suspect the total supply of opera would shrink in the US, though not to anywhere near zero.
Also, that’s what Bricker could wisecrack about: “Yeah, without the governmental trough, they’d just have to depend on us poor subscription holders! A tragic shame isn’t it!”
Bricker has not stated his opinion but:
.) Local subsidies for opera might be sensible on a business improvement basis. People going to the opera sometimes book a hotel, go shopping, etc.
Because the existence of high culture is a public good. (Not any given performance. But the existence of the institution. Loosely speaking, I’m discussing the fixed costs of cultural production.)
I sort of dislike the opera. But I want Washington DC to have world class cultural amenities, as it is a showcase for America. I’m agnostic regarding existing levels of funding for opera by the federal government, since I don’t know what they are. In other words, I couldn’t say whether they should be cut or increased by oh 50% or less.
But yeah, I do want want the Smithsonian Institution to be supported by taxpayer dollars. It’s a national treasure.