Lost in the exchange of posts was the original point; that trangendered people are not getting the same rights as cisgendered people.
That’s bigotry. And people who think it’s a good idea are supporting bigotry. We shouldn’t admire people for standing their ground and fighting for what they believe in when what they believe in is bigotry. It’s great when you fight for a good cause and it’s terrible when you fight for a bad cause. The fighting itself isn’t what decides the worthiness of the cause.
They do. congress members are not subject to recall.
But at least they kicked him off the committees. It’s too bad the Democrats haven’t done the same with Omar for her many anti-Semitic comments.
It is almost like they are even more founded in bigotry that the conservatives! Right? I mean that IS the standard. If she has said things that can be interpreted as racist or bigoted that means all liberals and everything they do and stand for is founded in bigotry.
John Wayne Gacy was a Democrat so I guess that means all Democrats are serial killers.
Ted Cruz denies that he was the Zodiac killer so until you catch him in the act I guess that means the Republicans hold the moral high ground.
Trump has become everything around here, it’s an obsession that has quite poisoned all Trump, thread after Trump of Trump has Trump the Trump.
The sooner Trump Trump and Trump Trump Trump, Trump.
The Moral Foundations Theory covers this, by quantifying the different set of values that correlate to philosophical views such as “Liberalism” and “Conservatism”
Jonathan Haidt has written (and spoken) at length on the topic, i.e:
["Jonathan Haidt has an interesting talk on TED on where differences from liberals and conservatives originate from.
He notes that “being open to new experiences” is a key predictor of these divisions. Liberals crave novelty, new ideas, travel. Conservatives like dependability, routine, order and are low on openness to new experiences. "](The moral roots of liberals and conservatives | Social Capital Blog)
That’s all a pretty far cry from Steve King literally declaring that white people are better than non-white people and that white supremacy shouldn’t be considered a bad thing.
Well, he’s the President of the United States, because conservatives voted for him, and conservatives in general seem to be doing a pretty piss-poor job distancing themselves from him. If conservatives don’t want the general image of conservatism to be dominated by Trump, then conservatives need to put their money where their mouth is and kick Trump out.
If he is, it’s your (conservatives’) own fault. You made him the central fact of American political life, you refuse to repudiate him, you enable his toxic approach to governance, and then you complain that liberals insist on associating him with conservatism.
Either sack up and get rid of him, or quit whining that you keep getting unfairly tainted by association with him.
Right, I am an American Conservative and Trump’s my guy, except I am not and with your assumptions you just demonstrated that you are, in fact unfairly tainting people by association.
You just proven my point, how toxic anti-Trump zealotry is for polluting most discussions here.
:dubious: So what are the discussions about conservatism that you want to have that Trump is irrelevant to? Where are all the conservative-launched threads about fundamental issues in conservatism that don’t have anything to do with Trump?
Oh right, there aren’t any (except, arguably, discussions of gun rights, which contrary to your assertion are generally not “polluted” by anti-Trump posters trying to drag Trump into them).
Certainly discussions on the SDMB are skewed towards a US perspective, because of the demographics of the posters. But allowing for that, it’s not anti-Trump “zealots” who are skewing discussions of conservatism toward Trump. It’s Trump himself who’s sucked all the air out of the conservative room, and it’s conservatives who put him there.
US conservatism now is effectively all about Trump, due to conservatives’ own choices, and conservatism outside the US is mostly what Americans consider centrism. When non-US conservatives such as yourself and Sam Stone, for example, come here to talk about conservative issues, it’s generally US conservatism you talk about, as in your own recent post about Jonathan Haidt.
Yup, your chosen ideology is effectively now all about Donald Trump. Too bad, and I’d be embarrassed too if I were you, but it’s not the fault of liberals.
A simple “sorry for making assumptions about you” would had been shorter, instead you double down by telling me what my “chosen ideology” is (all about Trump apparently), this exchange began with you responding to a post of mine complaining how everything is made to be about Trump, the irony of this state of affairs is, evidently, lost on you.
In addition, for a second time is as many post, you are doing what you said you weren’t, unfairly tainting people by association.
Just so you know, telling people what they think and believe is very likely to make them dismiss you entirely about anything else, how can I trust you to present information and arguments when you the audacity to tell me to my face, so to speak, something that isn’t true about myself?
I am me and you are not, don’t presume to substitute my “chosen ideology” for whatever you think it must be, specially when it’s done in order to demean.
FYI, Haidt’s quote is about universal (i.e. not limited to the US) Liberal and Conservative psychological traits, anyone can go and read post #84 again and see that your description of it as " it’s generally US conservatism you talk about, as in your own recent post about Jonathan Haidt. " doesn’t match reality:
It is about both Liberalism and Conservatism moral foundations and it’s not centred on the US, I suppose you didn’t read the linked article because it says explicitly:
“What’s fascinating is that if you chart individuals across parts of the world you find that in all societies, conservatives treat all these five factors as moderately important; liberals however focus almost exclusively on the harm/caring or fairness/reciprocity principles. In most societies, the increase in attention given by Conservatives to factors like Respect, Authority, Order, Purity rises much more sharply than the attention to Caring and Reciprocity falls. Haidt describes conservatives as having a 5-channel moral equalizer.”
Bolding mine, so pop goes your characterization of it being about US Conservatives.
FWIW, , from the quote I posted the Liberal (“Liberals crave novelty, new ideas, travel…”) part matches my own traits; but I guess you’ll come along shortly to tell me otherwise.
Bringing that up is an actual contribution to the discussion on the foundation of Conservative values (much as it was poisoned from the get go), as opposed to the umpteen iteration of “Trump is a poopy-head”.
Do you have any evidence that Kirk was disguising his meaning? Of course not. The idea that someone would go to such lengths to avoid bigotry while promoting it is a bit far-fetched. Why not explicitly endorse bigotry? If anything it would have earned him more followers considering the time during which he was writing.
Even if he was writing as a secret bigot, the fact that he had to be secret in order to appeal to conservatives disproves the idea that conservatives are founded upon bigotry.
In any case I’m glad someone read it. Haidt was mentioned upthread and he has also pointed out that conservatives understand leftism much more than liberals understand conservatism.
“Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.”
Or
“It’s all about the Benjamins baby.”
Alleging that American politicians get paid to support Israel, in response to journalist Glenn Greenwald. 10 February 2019
Or
“I am told every day that I am anti-American if I am not pro-Israel. I find that to be problematic and I am not alone. I just happen to be willing to speak up on it and open myself to attacks.”
Or
“I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is okay for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country.”
Those are criticisms of the government of the nation of Israel, *not *of the Jewish people. Not the same thing, friend, not at all, even if it’s sometimes convenient to conflate them.
Do you see a discrimination problem with declaring a country to be beyond criticism on religious grounds?
Riiighhhttt. Because the whole dual loyalty thing about the zionists isn’t at all anti-Semitic, and the all about the benjamins isn’t any sort of comment about the Jews being money hungry.
You know there’s a lot more? She’s been saying stuff like this for a long time.
Not good. Not representative of liberals at all, IMO.