You know, before now I would have said no, of course it dosen’t matter - but my current is voting for Jim DeMint.
Jim DeMint.
I have not yet wanted to sit down and discover how I really feel about that. I’ve had sex with somebody who’s voting for DeMint?!
It’s not necessarily a matter of lack of tolerance. I feel more strongly about this election and the direction our country has gone in over the past four years and will go in over the next depending on who is elected than I have felt about any public issue in my life. I can tolerate someone who disagrees with me, even possibly remain friends with them. But if I were to discover that someone with whom I believed myself to be in love disagreed with me on such a basic, important issue as this, I would have to believe that he wasn’t the person I had thought him, and I seriously doubt that I could continue to actually feel romantically in love with him. I would feel the same way if I suddenly discovered that my SO was actually a White Supremecist, or believed that the earth was flat, or that he had been abducted by aliens and rectally probed. It would reveal such a profound difference in our world views that I believe I would be unable to continue the relationship.
Tolerance of other viewpoints is one thing. Being in love with someone is another. I can tolerate that with which I could not be in love.
Mr. Urbanchic is voting for the “wrong” presidential candidate. So am I. We’re both voting for different candidates, by the way.
I’m a Republican and he’s a Democrat. Amazingly, most of our political discussions are quite civil.
If mr. malkie supported Bush, there would be such a moral disconnect between us that I doubt we could maintain a close friendship, let alone a relationship.
Fortunately, he feels the same way and we happen to both be on the same side of the aisle (the side that isn’t morally bankrupt, go us!).
Oy! wrote
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but that’s pretty much dictionary definition of intolerant. “My views are so right, that the only definition of the other side is “evil”. I refuse to date/marry/be very close friends with person X because of their personal views.”
More proof of my point. You just said “anyone who doesn’t share my view on who should be the next president is on par ethically with a white supremist and intellectually with a flat-earth believer.” I dare you to stand back and look at yourself. It’s not very pretty from the looks of your post.
Am I reading this correctly? Everyone who supports Bush is morally bankrupt? What a tolerant and enlightened view. Go You! for having such lofty ideals.
As far as the OP goes while political beliefs are important it is not my biggest concern. In fact political beliefs probably do not rank within the top 20. Unless she turned out to be a neo-nazi I really don’t think it matters all that much.
Slee
Hello? Do you recognize the difference between being in love with someone and accepting them as your friend, neighbor, co-citizen?
You’re damn right I don’t like some people because of their personal views! Don’t you? Do you greet with love and open arms every person you meet - the axe murderer, the child molester, the anti-American fanatical terrorist who believes we should be destroyed? (And, yes, I’m using extreme examples, as I did in my earlier post, to make a point.)
As my fellow citizen, my fellow human being, you have the right to hold any view you like, and I will defend that right against all comers, including those who agree with me in other areas. But it is absolutely legitimate for me to decide that I’m really not all that taken with you, based on those views. On what better basis than beliefs and actions should I base my view of another person?
In what possible way can you consider this intolerance? I don’t wish to deprive people who disagree with me of anything except political power, and that in a perfectly legitimate way. I am willing to have people who disagree with me as my neighbors, my co-citizens, my co-workers, and even, in some cases, my friends. I’m not claiming anything about the supporters of the opponent of my candidate except that they must think and feel and make judgements in a way that is so different from mine that I could not be in love with one of them! If I thought I was in love with a man, and discovered that he was in fact planning to vote for the other guy, this would tell me that I had not understood him well enough before and had been deceiving myself about how he thought and felt in general.
Gee, Bill H, I’m sorry to disappoint you there, guy. But hey, you’re already married anyway. 
Oy! wrote
Extremist examples make my case, not yours. When you say that you consider people who don’t share your political views the equivalent of white supremicists, believers of a flat earth, axe murderers, child molesters and anti-american fanatical terrorists, you’re not making much of a case for being tolerant.
So, I’ll never make it as your lover, but maybe if I’m really really lucky, I could be your friend. Lucky me! Heck, if we worked together, you wouldn’t even quit or try to get me fired. You’re even “willing” to have me to stay in your country. Now, if that’s not tolerance, I don’t know what is.
Pity all around.
I am not saying that someone who supports my opponent is the moral equivalent of an axe-murderer, etc. I am trying to get across to you that what a person believes, thinks, and does is a perfectly valid basis for determining whether or not you like or especially love them. Since I don’t know enough about you to know what attitudes or actions you would personally find distasteful, I’m forced to choose things that are pretty universally disliked.
You used the word intolerant. Why don’t you define the term for us? To me, not being in love with someone, or even not really liking them much socially is not intolerance; it’s simply the fact that people choose friends and lovers. Intolerance is a lack of willingness to interact in normal, acquaintance or business-friendship ways with a person. I wasn’t asking you to be grateful that I grace my neighbors and co-workers with my shining presence despite their misguided political beliefs; I was trying to explicitly make clear that I do not (and have no desire to) violate the standards of tolerance as i understand them.
Do I have to fall in love with someone of a political stance I find incomprehensible and dead wrong in order to meet your standards of tolerance? Why are you trying to make me out as a bigot for choosing my friends based on their thoughts, feelings and actions? How do/did you choose your friends and even more importantly, your wife?
Dragging this back to the OP, if she wants to vote for the other candidate, that’s just fine. She’s a grown-up and is entitled to her own opinions.
When we first got married, we decided we’d register as different parties so that we could vote in both primaries. At primary time, we look over the candidates and see if we can agree on a Democrat and a Republican. She votes for one and I vote for the other.
When it comes to the election, we talk over all the candidates and initiatives. Usually, we agree, and that’s two votes working together. Sometimes, we disagree, in which case we vote opposite sides. So be it. We’re two different people and we respect each other’s opinions.
Give it up, Oy. He’s going to continue to take your words out of context to justify his aberrant reading of them, so don’t waste your breath.
–Cliffy
P.S. In case it’s not obvious, I agree withOy!.
Oy! wrote
Well, I presume you aren’t a bigot. But to answer your question, the way we got here was:
These were your words. You said that if you were a Democrat, and you found out your SO was a Republican, that it would affect you in the same way as if you’d found they were an extreme racist or an extreme dolt.
Perhaps you didn’t mean such a strong statement. Or perhaps I read into it deeper than you meant. In either case, that’s why.
They have things in common with me. Some of them (but not many) have only their politics in line with mine. Some of them enjoy music, some enjoy computers, some enjoy cooking, etc. They all have something in common with me. But I can’t imagine eliminating one of my friends (or my wife or past girlfriends) if I found out their politics differed from mine. I mean maybe if they were a neo-Nazi or some crazy nonsense. But because they were a Republican/Democrat and I was the opposite? That just seems extreme to me.
It seems extreme to me too, though I suppose if the person were a rabid Republican/Democrat who was constantly making an issue of it, that would change things.
I guess some people take these things far more seriously. Personally, if I had to filter out every friend (or potential romantic interest) if they thought differently than me on the “big” issues (like religion and politics), I’d have very few friends at all.
“Republican” is not the same as “Bush supporter.”
And there is a big distinction there. Being a Republican, or a certain religion, or anything of that sort is great.
But supporting Bush specifically requires one to be fundamentally disconnected from most that is worthwhile and good in the world. I don’t think I could date anyone who supported him, though I wouldn’t even think twice (or once) about dating a Republican if I knew she didn’t support Bush.
I’m married to someone who often votes differently. It does not make me love him less and I don’t feel compelled that he should mirror all of my opinions. When we discuss issues we are in agreement on our core values. I think the voting disparity comes as much as anything from interpretation of what we hear.
If we can agree to disagree with our colleagues and friends I see no reason not to extend this openness to those we love.
MrPict and I will most likely be voting for different candidates again. Political disagreements have not adversely affected us for the past 32 years and won’t this year either. We’ll probably go out to the polls together and then out to breakfast and watch the returns on TV Tuesday night. No matter who gets elected at some future date the ‘loser’ will likely razz the ‘winner’ over some bonehead move made by the ‘winner’s’ candidate. Such is life.
However, my mother has informed me that she is definately not voting for that ‘Larry’ fellow. Not based on his politics but because he has that bitch wife. I try to avoid political discussions with her. And I will not go out of my way to help her get a ride to the polls.
Cheers
First of all, I never said anything about my brand of politics, except to joke that you personally were out of the running. For all I’ve said in this thread, I support the Constitution Party.
That’s a big deal to me, because I’ve made a real point of avoiding a statement of my politics or my exact reasoning as to why a supporter of my preferred candidate’s opponent would make a person unlovable to me precisely because I’ve wished to avoid making a political statement in this thread, at the OP’s request.
I will say this one last time, and then, as Cliffy recommended, I’m out of here. I used the White Supremacy, etc. examples because I don’t know you personally well enough to know what would be a deal breaker in terms of thoughts, beliefs, or actions for you. If that wasn’t clear in my first post, it should certainly have been clear in my next.
I’m a very cerebral, as opposed to physical, person. I live in my head. The way people think, reason, feel - that’s what’s important to me. I’m also a sincere US patriot, and it is my firm belief, which I believe to be very much supported by the facts (as opposed to deliberate emotional manipulation) that the candidate I oppose poses enormous danger to my country. I believe that people who are supporting that candidate are either allowing themselves to be manipulated by rather transparent mechanisms, or working to deceive themselves as to the actual character of that candidate, in order to justify their support of him. I do not wish to argue this; I’m simply stating my opinion - no, my firm conviction. Given that this is the case, I have trouble even respecting a person who supports that candidate, and if I found that someone I thought I was in love with supported him, I would have to believe that I had been mistaken in his character (the lover, not the candidate - I have a lot more facts on the candidate!).
Since you have not chosen to respond to my request to define the term ‘intolerace’, and have (it seems to me) repeatedly and deliberately misconstrued what I said, I can only assume, Bill H that you, presuming me to be a Democrat, decided to get some political digs in without having to make it obvious that you were being partisan. Nice example of tolerance there.
I’m done here. Feel free to blacken my beliefs to your heart’s content.
Nightime wrote
Yeah, like I said. Anyone who views those holding an alternate viewpoint as “fundamentally disconnected from most that is worthwhile and good in the world” – even if that other viewpoint is shared by some 50% of the population – is pretty much dictionary-definition of bigot.
bigot: “A prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own”
I’m not sure you understand what "tolerant’ means, Bill. “Tolerant” doesn’t mean you sleep with people who deeply offend you. It means you put up with them. You give them their fundamental right to exist, even if their very existence, for whatever reason, sets your teeth grinding. You don’t have to love them, or like them. You just have to … tolerate … them.
Oy is entirely in the right here, you are entirely in the wrong.
I don’t believe 50% of the population support Bush.
Most people don’t even know enough about him to really support him. Even those who think they support him are usually just deceived as to what he really stands for, and as such it just shows that they have been taken in by an admittedly very skillfully campaign of lies.
For those who truly support Bush, and truly know what he stands for, I can say that they stand against almost everything I hold to be good.
That isn’t “intolerance.” It is disagreement.
I would still fight for their right to their beliefs.