The Insane "Social Justice" Thread II

[jamil]

"Because we actually like other humans"

No, she doesn't. She only likes the other humans who live in the same bubble that she does. She obviously does not like people who are ideologically different from her. And the same could be said of rural people, although, depending on the region and culture, rural people are typically way more friendly. But they tend to to care much for people who are ideologically different. This is a human thing, not a urban/rural thing. She thinks she likes people in the city. I'll bet not all.

"Rural areas aren't safe for anyone other than straight white people"

It's no safer for a straight white person, say, in inner city, than it is for a non-white or gay person to live in rural areas. That's not to say a person's immutable characteristics should put them in any greater peril, or depending on region. But, she's trying to make a point that's not evident, which is that rural people are more racist than urban people are.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Alabama Public Television refuses to air Arthur episode with gay wedding

 

[JettaKnight]

Alabama Public Television refuses to air Arthur episode with gay wedding

In Controversial Episode, Arthur's Teacher Comes Out As Conservative Christian

 

[Kutnupe14]

Alabama Public Television refuses to air Arthur episode with gay wedding

That's Alabama for you... but to be fair, I too would oppose a children's show depicting such if it was on public television. If you want to show something like that put it on cable. Yes, I understand, it's the "wrong" way to think, and not very accepting.... but I am from Alabama, and one of the few remaining true conservatives.

 

[jamil]

I'd like to see everyone's definition of "true conservative". Given your position on some issues, I kinda suspect that your definition would likely be outside a standard deviation from the mean.

 

[MarkC]

I'd like to see everyone's definition of "true conservative". Given your position on some issues, I kinda suspect that your definition would likely be outside a standard deviation from the mean.

As I was putting together a presentation for work, it occurred to me: Don't we each consider ourselves to be the "reasonable" person? Anyone to the right of me is a "right wing crazy," and to the left a "flaming liberal."

I was thinking that when I came upon Jamil's post, and it was like serendipity.

Unfortunately, most of us conservatives are not "conservative" enough for some of the true believers.

 

[spencer rifle]

Unfortunately, most of us conservatives are not "conservative" enough for some of the true believers.

HERETIC!

 

[jamil]

As I was putting together a presentation for work, it occurred to me: Don't we each consider ourselves to be the "reasonable" person? Anyone to the right of me is a "right wing crazy," and to the left a "flaming liberal."

I was thinking that when I came upon Jamil's post, and it was like serendipity.

Unfortunately, most of us conservatives are not "conservative" enough for some of the true believers.

Makes me think of differences between conservatives, liberals, and progressives, and the roles they play in society's evolution. I draw the distinction between the latter two because progressives, to the extent that they're authoritarians, aren't very liberal at all.

It's understandable that conservatives tend to conserve tradition. Tradition changes over time because liberals tend to push new ideas, like, we shouldn't enslave people. Then later, we shouldn't have laws that discriminate because of race. Conservatives are the ones that resist the change. And that's not a bad thing either. Eventually, if it's a good idea, they'll go along with it. It's the extreme conservatives who don't.

Conservatives fill an important role in keeping Overton's window from shifting insanely. It's a sort of check on overly rapid social evolution. So that's where the problem is with progressives. Those ****ing activists subvert the role of conservatives in checking rapid societal progression towards an insane end. Let the best ideas tend to win over the conservatives, and then society can progress in a sane direction as it integrates the newer ideas into tradition. But no. Progressives want their ***damn change now. Even if they're full of ****.

Here's an example of how this works. Liberal: You know, we shouldn't call people who have special needs retarded. Progressives: Yes, that's violence. Let's ban the r-word so no one can harm people ever again with it. Conservatives: No. How about we teach people personal responsibility and how to treat people so that we don't have to ban words words. Progressives: Hitler! Using the r-word is violence! We must cancel you. Conservatives: **** you, retard.

 

[KG1]

Conservatives reticent to change automatically means to progressives that they want to preserve negative things such as racism and they will be labeled as such.

 

[JettaKnight]

As I was putting together a presentation for work, it occurred to me: Don't we each consider ourselves to be the "reasonable" person? Anyone to the right of me is a "right wing crazy," and to the left a "flaming liberal."

I was thinking that when I came upon Jamil's post, and it was like serendipity.

Unfortunately, most of us conservatives are not "conservative" enough for some of the true believers.

I always just thought it was a coincidence, or probably because I'm so smart that I found the exact true point on the political spectrum.

 

[rob63]

As I was putting together a presentation for work, it occurred to me: Don't we each consider ourselves to be the "reasonable" person? Anyone to the right of me is a "right wing crazy," and to the left a "flaming liberal."

I was thinking that when I came upon Jamil's post, and it was like serendipity.

Unfortunately, most of us conservatives are not "conservative" enough for some of the true believers.

It’s kind of like driving. “We” are doing it right. People going faster are lunatics and people going slower are idiots.

 

[jamil]

Conservatives reticent to change automatically means to progressives that they want to preserve negative things such as racism and they will be labeled as such.

Yes. I think that's right. And I think progressives aren't equipped to understand it any other way than that.

 

[jamil]

It’s kind of like driving. “We” are doing it right. People going faster are lunatics and people going slower are idiots.

That was a hilarious routine by George Carlin back in the day.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

It’s kind of like driving. “We” are doing it right. People going faster are lunatics and people going slower are idiots.

Well that's just the truth.

 

[jamil]

Yeah. Anyone who doesn't match my speed is WRONG!

And, if you're going the same speed as me, why are you in my lane? GTF over *****.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Conservatives reticent to change automatically means to progressives that they want to preserve negative things such as racism and they will be labeled as such.

When I see the things that conservatives are resistant to today, I think of the way society is beginning to shift more towards the "anything goes", "if it feels good do it" attitude. Religious views aside (I'm not terribly religious, but Sodom and Gomorrah comes to mind), look at what was going on in the Roman Empire before the fall... People tend to speak of biblical references as "myth", but not many dispute the history of Rome. Hedonism was rampant. Orgies were common (they don't call them "Roman orgies" for nothing.) There was a steady movement towards "anything goes". That's what concerns me about how I see the direction our society is moving. Some call it "inclusiveness" while others call it "perversion". I tend toward the latter. Sorry, just random thoughts that occur to me...

 

[jamil]

I think in terms of laws, they should be very liberal. I think conservative behavior in individuals is more conducive to a functioning society than a society which enforces moral standards through a bunch of laws.

 

[MarkC]

I always just thought it was a coincidence, or probably because I'm so smart that I found the exact true point on the political spectrum.

Right! Here's someone who gets it!

But.... what happens when the two of us eminently reasonable people get together but then disagree on something?

 

[jamil]

Right! Here's someone who gets it!

But.... what happens when the two of us eminently reasonable people get together but then disagree on something?

Then one of you is outed as divergent, then everyone's out to get you.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

I think in terms of laws, they should be very liberal. I think conservative behavior in individuals is more conducive to a functioning society than a society which enforces moral standards through a bunch of laws.

Oh I'd much rather society encouraged good behavior rather than enforcing it through laws. Unfortunately that's not the reality of how things currently work. I think the increasing number of states that are adopting "heartbeat abortion laws" may be indicative of a societal shift. And that may be a Polly-anna viewpoint but there does seem to be a disturbance in the force.