# What are society's \*real\* points of disagreement? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 18, 2018, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409 "2018-05-18T17:03:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Lamoral](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lamoral/32/16078_2.png) [@Lamoral](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamoral)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2018, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409/41 "2018-05-18T21:22:03Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > I have never encountered the guns-protect-me-from-blacks angle you speak of. It seems to be more about criminals, period. Numerous YouTube videos show gun supporters exulting in the comment sections as the footage shows some bad guy - of any skin color - being mowed down by the “good guy’s” gunfire. Indeed, such schaudenfreude seems to be remarkably race-free; it’s all about cheering as the white/Hispanic/Arab/Asian/black perp gets nailed. Yeah I just recently joined a shooting range to practice rifle and pistol marksmanship (they also offer “tactical” type shooting, which I am not interested in). I notice a lot of black members there, and I am 90% sure the actual owner of the place is black - either an owner, or a high-up employee who spends a lot of time bantering with the customers, I didn’t ask, but in any case, it’s not exactly a hotbed of racial tension. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2018, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409/42 "2018-05-18T21:22:14Z")
> [@DavidwithanR](#): > > (All you need to settle the voter registration thing is a referee who isn’t an American. The whole rest of the world gives the so-called “issue” a big yawn, not because of not being from the US, but because the truth is easy to see.) Not sure if voter registration vs. voter ID are being regarded as two separate issues here, but I once asked a Taiwanese person her view of the Voter ID in America issue and her response was that of \*course \*ID should be required to vote, why is this even a question? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2018, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409/43 "2018-05-18T21:22:31Z")
Here’s a 7 page thread I started on a very similar subject from a couple of years ago: > **[Differing assumptions that are the basis of liberal and conservative positions](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=791652)** > > On the assumption that most people who think about politics and support one side or the other are generally honest in their beliefs, I’d like to explore why so many people differ so strongly. I think, for most folks, it comes down to a fundamental... ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2018, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409/44 "2018-05-18T21:29:47Z")
> [@Jacquernagy](#): > > I believe the divide on gun rights is very much a “real point of disagreement.” For most of the anti-gun people it is very much about safety, protecting children, reducing crime, and generally making society less scary. But for most of the pro-gun people it’s _also_ about those same exact things, except from the perspective that guns help them rather than hurt them. A lot of anti-gun people (I don’t mean “in favor of reasonable restrictions”, I mean outright against the idea of guns) seem to think they’re some kind of death talisman that the very pro-gun (by which I mean, in favor of virtually NO compromise on gun control) people hang onto like it has magical powers. Well, they DO. But they don’t see it as a death talisman, they see it as a vital equalizer and enabler of an individual to defend him or herself from deadly force instead of delegating that ability to the government. > > This is a true point of disagreement collectively in America; neither the NRA nor the more vehement gun-control advocates who call for Australia-style bans and confiscations, are helping reduce this polarization. Right now the Democrats have the most to lose from engaging with the issue though. I’m of the opinion that pro- and anti- gun people disagree on the facts: the effects that guns have on the relative safety of individuals and society. Being unable to agree on the facts of the matter pretty much eliminates the possibility of agreeing on the conclusions. ---
**Author:** ![Aspidistra](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspidistra/32/3894_2.png) [@Aspidistra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspidistra)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2018, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409/45 "2018-05-18T22:39:58Z")
@Velocity - I like your list, and I’d add in one more core issue that underlies a lot of different political debates. Just World or Unjust World. A lot of economic disagreements get derailed early because people don’t recognise that they’re coming at the argument from different points on the just-unjust spectrum ---
**Author:** ![kenobi\_65](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kenobi_65/32/13178_2.png) [@kenobi\_65](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kenobi_65)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2018, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409/46 "2018-05-18T23:11:59Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > Not sure if voter registration vs. voter ID are being regarded as two separate issues here, but I once asked a Taiwanese person her view of the Voter ID in America issue and her response was that of \*course \*ID should be required to vote, why is this even a question? I think that the two issues are closely intertwined. One underlying issue is that voter registration (and the specifics on voting, in general) in the U.S. is something that varies from state to state. Unlike many countries (including Taiwan), we also don’t have an official [national ID card](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_identity_card_policies_by_country), and it’s estimated that [11% of Americans don’t have a government-issued photo ID](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/getting-a-photo-id-so-you-can-vote-is-easy-unless-youre-poor-black-latino-or-elderly/2016/05/23/8d5474ec-20f0-11e6-8690-f14ca9de2972_story.html?utm_term=.0d1c9d5208d8). ---
**Author:** ![DavidwithanR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3bc359/32.png) [@DavidwithanR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DavidwithanR)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2018, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409/47 "2018-05-18T23:14:53Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > Not sure if voter registration vs. voter ID are being regarded as two separate issues here, but I once asked a Taiwanese person her view of the Voter ID in America issue and her response was that of \*course \*ID should be required to vote, why is this even a question? My response was based on the faux-hysterical ranting claiming that a significant level of fraud was actually going on. ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2018, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409/48 "2018-05-19T00:24:39Z")
Personally I think the driving force behind a lot of arguments boils down to “I got mine and unless you follow a set of rules I prescribe you don’t deserve to get yours.” ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2018, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409/49 "2018-05-19T01:45:51Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Here’s a 7 page thread I started on a very similar subject from a couple of years ago: > > [Differing assumptions that are the basis of liberal and conservative positions - Great Debates - Straight Dope Message Board](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=791652) That was a good thread. I see similarities here, in that folks have a lot of trouble articulating the positions of their opponents. ---
**Author:** ![Ashtura](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ashtura/32/2963_2.png) [@Ashtura](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ashtura)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2018, 5:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409/50 "2018-05-19T05:06:10Z")
> [@senoy](#): > > I think the unsaid argument in the gun control debate is ‘Black people are going to come here and try to kill me and I want to kill them first’ vs ‘No they aren’t, you’re a racist turd.’ Projecting much? You say that like no black person has ever legally owned a gun. Unless you’re also saying black gun owners are also thinking that. Are you? ---
**Author:** ![tnetennba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2018, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409/51 "2018-05-19T16:52:06Z")
I feel like the OP is onto something but the suggested “real” issues are not far beneath the surface of the purported ones. It might be more about why we talk past each other and (as Bone says) have such a poor job understanding/articulating what our opponents are saying (to be fair, most people have a hard time arguing their own positions in a non-circular way, I believe it because it’s what I believe). ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2018, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409/52 "2018-05-19T19:15:10Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > Well, there is one side that claims that if someone identifies as a particular gender, that they are that gender. And they are factually correct since that’s what gender means, while the other side keeps conflating it with sex. They reject the tons of research into the issue to show that what gender one identifies with and one’s apparent sexual characteristics do not necessarily match. It’s still facts versus feelings: this person feels like they are a woman to me, so they are a woman, no matter what the science actually says. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2018, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409/53 "2018-05-19T19:47:13Z")
I don’t disagree with the OP that there are underlying issues that are the real ideas we are arguing. But I think your attempt at elucidating them is quite far off. Let’s see: Creationism vs. Evolution is not about God. It is about religion vs. science, and how they interact. Creationism tends to reject science, while Evolution allows it. Beneath that, it’s about traditionalism vs. new knowledge. That’s why the Fundamentalists, who reject modernism, also tend to reject evolution. They reject the ability of man to learn more about reality, and instead claim that their religion is the only Truth. So, beneath all of that, it’s about what is Truth. Yes, on an intellectual level, the abortion issue is about the rights of the fetus vs. the mother. But that is not remotely what the “debate” is really about. The answer there would be to balance one and the other, and lead to an easy solution of “abortion is okay before the fetus has a brain” or “abortion is okay until viability.” But that’s not where it goes. The actual underlying issues are about personal autonomy, sexual freedom, religion and how it influences life, and how religion can be exploited. The cake issue is not about whether one should obey God or man. That is merely what one side wants the argument to be, because they feel they have a stronger argument that “God” is the answer. But the problem with that is that there is no agreement that God says one way or the other either. No, the underlying issue there is freedom of religion vs. other concerns–in this case, freedom to not face discrimination. And that is much hairier, since there is always an argument that freedom of religion can go too far if it causes harm to another person. (The obvious example is a religion that tells you that you must murder to please God.) But even this underlying issue requires another big issue: “what exactly counts as discrimination?” Fortunately, on this one, the liberals at least are pushing things to be argued at that exact level, and the latter seems to be the exact legal question, because the answer to the first one is already decided: freedom of religion is not a freedom to discriminate. I’m also not clear entirely on gun control, but I will say that one big underlying issue is rural vs. urban needs. There is an argument that more people in one place changes the need for guns. There is also an idea of whether the Constitution grants rights, I guess, since that’s a lot of the argument for guns. It’s a right because the constitution says it is, rather than rights preexisting. And I guess there’s also just a fear of tyranny and feeling of empowerment issue. Taxation is not that, though. That’s the surface level. The actual underlying level is more about why taxes exist and the role of the government. At an even lower level, it’s about how much individual autonomy should there be versus collective control? And Voter-ID is definitely not about whether voter fraud is a significant threat. That has a factual answer: no. Could it be I guess is more debateable, but the rational answer is that “there are no signs of such in the immediate future, and we could look into that later.” The underlying issue there is exactly what Democrats say it is and some Republicans have admitted. It is an attempt to hold onto power when democratic support is slipping by putting up more barriers to entry to voting, creating more friction in the process. The only debate, if you can call it one, is whether such actions are something that a political party should try to do. The answer, however, is fairly clearly “no,” so the actual debate is obscured by other tactics. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2018, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409/54 "2018-05-19T21:21:03Z")
> [@senoy](#): > > Lemaitre is quoted as saying that the theory was directly a result of reconciling science with Thomas Aquinas’s creatio ex nihilo. It was religion that drove the theory and science that had to catch up. Originally, it was dismissed because the scientific thought of the time was that the universe was infinitely old. Like the atomic theory of Democritus, it was a case of someone being correct more or less by accident. Plus, which science at the time said that the universe was infinitely old? It is not like the Jewish creation myth was the first one. The Big Bang theory came up - and won out - based on evidence, not based on what someone said over a thousand years before. I don’t think Hubble’s work - or Gamow’s - was religiously motivated in the least. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2018, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409/55 "2018-05-19T21:24:28Z")
> [@senoy](#): > > I think the problem is your wording. ‘Creationism’ is simply the idea that the world/universe was created with intent and didn’t simply ‘happen.’ Almost all Abrahamic religionists are ‘creationists.’ > > What you’re referring to is ‘Young Earth Creationism’ which is a literal reading of Genesis and posits a world between 6 and 12 thousand years old. This is not the view of most Christians (although in the US, it’s roughly half and half - essentially Evangelicals and conservative Catholics are YEC and Mainline Protestants and liberal Catholics are not.) Today in the US at least creationism means YEC. If you call the astronomers in the Vatican creationists they’d probably be very upset with you, and for good reason, and I’m sure they all believe God set things off. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2018, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409/56 "2018-05-19T21:31:45Z")
Taxes in the US is not about fiscal responsibility, it is about what the government should be doing. If you think the government should be doing the minimal amount, then big tax cuts that blow up the deficit are fine since you hope that forces cuts to spending which is a feature, not a bug. It is why so many think the US has a high tax rate. It seems high if you want less government spending, not because it is high relative to other first world countries. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2018, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409/57 "2018-05-19T21:40:17Z")
> [@senoy](#): > > The science-y stuff actually came out of the religious belief, not vice versa. I have a book of collected science writings from Copernicus to Laplace. The striking thing about it is that in the beginning almost every writer wrote of their work in terms of religion. As time went on references to god were dropped. In the early 19th century, many clerics worked on science particularly in the expectation of supporting their belief in God. Their work turned out not to support that belief, with Darwin (not a cleric, of course) providing the finishing blow. Evolution did not disprove god, but did eliminate the need for God in the development of man. Evangelicals at the time were suspicious of the scientific project to verify god, and their suspicions were well justified as it turned out. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2018, 12:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409/58 "2018-05-21T12:37:23Z")
Hans Rosling has taught me to be very, very wary of any attempt to frame anything as only one of two options. ---
**Author:** ![BrotherCadfael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@BrotherCadfael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrotherCadfael)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2018, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409/59 "2018-05-21T13:56:57Z")
> [@Robert Heinlein](#): > > Political tags - such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth - are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists acting from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort. \*\*Both \*\*liberals and conservatives have their share of people who want to control others – in the bedroom, in the boardroom – and their share of people who want to live and let live. From my observation, just how strong the controlling faction in either wing is varies from year to year. At the moment, the conservatives feel pretty strongly about gay marriage, but have pretty much given up on who does what to whom in private. The liberals have pretty much given up on much of the old redistributionist, class-warfare stuff, but feel pretty strongly about controlling speech (hate crimes, campaign finance). Note that I say that both sides have “pretty much given up on” – this doesn’t mean they don’t TALK about those issues, but they have pretty much given up on actually implementing these issues into law. (This is a rehash of something I posted several years ago. It seemed relevant to this thread.) ---
**Author:** ![tnetennba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2018, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409/60 "2018-05-21T14:29:56Z")
The very fact that you see it as “controlling others” and not “protecting people” shows a fundamental worldview that is different from mine. Take the FDA as one example. Nobody gets excited about the FDA because they want to “control others,” but because they see a real need to protect people from unsafe food and drugs. If you only see it as “controlling,” I think that’s getting at the heart of this question, those fundamental deeper differences. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-societys-real-points-of-disagreement/814409.md?page=4)