Legit Questions for ATS Liberals…Shed Some Light Please

reply to post by AwakeinNM


What does it matter, if you never elect one?

You are what you elect, whether you like it or not.

reply to post by AwakeinNM

You are confusing fiscal conservatives with Republicans - again.

So you are saying Reagan wasn't a conservative?

Cause Reagan signed the biggest tax increase in our nations history, AND still created huge amounts of debt, and greatly increased the size of government.

Either that or admit that Conservatives are not fiscally responsible, talk the talk, but don't walk the walk, and if you actually believe in fiscal responsibility, then you shouldn't be supporting conservative politicians.

Or maybe you are just another con artist with no sense of right or wrong?

These are questions you should be asking yourself.

reply to post by seabag


The Homosexual and Muslim thing is easily reconciled: We are PRO PEOPLE. People have the right to free expression. WE even see the need for some people to think like Conservatives -- because we all want an employee who does the job, and never asks for a raise is just great for my pocket.

I'm not pro Muslim or pro Gay -- it's just human rights and freedom of expression. Leave them alone -- that's all I care about. I don't want Sharia law nor Baptist Law.


>> Being Pro Choice but anti death Penalty. The EASY EXPLANATION; Life in my book is about consciousness. I don't think "potential human life" is sacred -- because one day some cells off your tongue could be turned into a baby. People on death row are conscious -- and until the last few months, embryos in women's uteruses are unconscious and a POTENTIAL human.

It used to be, the Christians believed the soul entered the body on the first breath and exited on the last breath -- that's why we have the magic "Bless you" when people sneeze but not when they cough -- it USED to be to actually keep demons from taking your soul. The nunneries were often the place where knocked up women of the wealthy would go and have their babies -- hence the 8 month "sabbaticals" to get closer to God. The walls of a lot of these old nunneries have often been filled with the skeletons of little babies. They would "abort them" by never letting them draw their first breath, since in THEIR MINDS, they didn't have a soul yet. I kind of get chills thinking about that situation.

I used to be Pro Death penalty -- but I figure the STATE shouldn't have the right to deny people the right to life -- it's ultimately corrupting and we have too many people on death row who've been proven innocent by DNA tests for us to really say we always have the right person. It's also a lousy tool to reduce murders. So it doesn't really work for society and it costs more in most cases than life in prison.

>> Abortions are NOT the state deciding to take a life -- it's a women deciding NOT to be a mother. In fact, at least half of first time pregnancies never come to term, because a good portion of the fetuses just get reabsorbed. The morning after pill, and after pregnancy options, merely push nature a bit.

If GOD didn't like abortions then HE would not be the number one aborter of fetuses.... and people would say we are playing God by making this decision -- but we play god when we feed people healthy food, use immunizations, sanitation -- when we choose NOT to provide resources because it uses too many taxes.

Actuarials who work for automotive companies, make life and death decisions all the time on the cost to risk analysis of whether a safety feature will save enough lives to limit lawsuits or not. Corporations make life and death decisions all the time.

>> It isn't about the "guilty" criminal or the innocent baby for me -- it's ultimately about what power the state has over people's lives, and we have to INTRUDE on a woman and make sure she doesn't have a miscarriage. The convict is conscious, and a 3 month fetus is not even though if left alone, it MIGHT become a person who is aware. But I want to deal with things as they are -- my potential sperm doesn't need the RIGHT TO LIFE -- because we'd fill this planet up in quick order if they all had it.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

That young girl thinks she is so altruistic saying that everyone should love what they do and therefore doctors should not expect to get paid more than a "street sweeper" to use that guy's example.

This is just pure programmed nonsense. I don't know of any liberals who think like this.

You seem as lost as the girl you are describing.

Choice for the sake of just choice as a form of birth control is foolish. Education in all facets of society is needed to make this go away from being a problem. I did some volunteer work at a women’s clinic and I can tell you there was a large percentage of women using it as a form of birth control. However, there were a few that were in need because of rape or medical conditions that were in need. Those were the ones that I feel needed the guidance and assistance they desperately needed. As for the rest I have to divide into two categories:

Negligence

Poverty

Negligence: Even split at this particular clinic. The folks that were negligent had been there before and knew the routine. They have the money but know that somebody else will help pay for some of it. So they leech on to the system. That was very disappointing. A few dollars at the pharmacy could have eliminated this issue. Mistakes do happen but that many?

Poverty: This was the sad ones to see. They have no money. They have a boy friend that could care less. They did not respect themselves and have simply gave up. They want to do the right thing and keep the child or at the very least give the child for adoption. However, they cannot face the repercussions to their lives from this decision. I have seen some very strong women who just need the chance to learn and I helped a bit with some with astonishing results.

The common theme here is respect. Respect for yourself and others. Communicate your differences in a common respectful way. Educate yourself and the people around you to live and learn from others. R-C-E. Try it. It works wonders. GOD bless.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by AwakeinNM

 

You are confusing fiscal conservatives with Republicans - again.

So you are saying Reagan wasn't a conservative?

Cause Reagan signed the biggest tax increase in our nations history, AND still created huge amounts of debt, and greatly increased the size of government.

Either that or admit that Conservatives are not fiscally responsible, talk the talk, but don't walk the walk, and if you actually believe in fiscal responsibility, then you shouldn't be supporting conservative politicians.

Or maybe you are just another con artist with no sense of right or wrong?

These are questions you should be asking yourself.

Actually I'll say it; Republicans aren't even REMOTELY fiscally conservative in the real world. When this country has been under Democratic leadership, we've consistently had TWICE the growth rate as when Republicans are in charge. The debt also mushrooms under Republicans.

I've got to go do something, or I'd be burying this post with links showing the CLEAR CUT proof that Democrats are better for the economy and incur less debt in the process. It's by a factor of 2 to 1 even if when you remove the MASSIVE failure of Hoover and the Massive success of FDR form the equation.

reply to post by VitriolAndAngst


Well done and well said. You my friend are not any different then me. We are all but tiny specs on this wonderful planet. We must enjoy and ake from it what it has to offer. Any group in numbers can be dangerous if not educated and managed. We have our part to play and hopefully soon others will see that as well. I wish you well. GOD bless.

reply to post by VitriolAndAngst

I do know a few Liberals who consider NPR Liberal -- but I don't. It's major sponsors are all companies that it USED to catch in exposes. ADM, Monsanto, Dupont, Chase -- the list goes on. Every one of those corporations is a major polluter or criminal or both. NPR and even PBS got infiltrated at the top, and taken off of government sponsorships -- so they now have economic advisors from the same sources as does any Wall Street investment mouthpiece.

NPR merely does a good job of reporting the news, and they bend over backwards to be "balanced" as if acting like people who pass for Conservative today had a point to make that was halfway lucid.

LErickson is too polite -- but I'll say it; we honestly think the Right wing in this country is insane. The Democrats are now crooked and sold out to corporations the way the Republicans used to be -- and anyone considered a "real, Conservative Republican" by Limbaugh or the RNC, is pretty much a classic fascist.

Well put, and many of the conservative responses on the thread support this. There is no thinking process, just talking points repeated, with occasional crazy accusations.

I don't know how good of a job NPR does of reporting the news. In my opinion, they completely serve their sponsors, and mainly put out a lot slicker form of propaganda than Faux news puts out.

As far as the Martin Zimmerman case, it has been the worst example of media manipulation to stir up racial tensions that I have ever witnessed.

There is a definite good cop bad cop routine being played on the U.S. public. The DNC works hard to play the race card, so the GOP can pretend that they are the only ones defending white males. When neither side cares about working class Americans.

What were your numbers, DNC 86% corrupt, GOP 99% corrupt. Sounds about right.

In my case, I support personal choice and an internal locus of control that leads to radical personal responsibility and I decry the forced application of an external locus of control that denies freedom, choice and personal responsibility. I think that evil is really a matter of force and control.

The issues I support sometimes seem incongruent unless examined from that perspective. Everytime an issue comes up I ask myself:

1) Is there a choice?
2) Is there force involved?
3) Does the issue involve internal VS external LOC?
4) Is there a victim or property damage?

That's why I am pro choice, pro gay marriage, pro gun, anti government, environmentalist, pro kindness to animals, pro death penalty, anti taxes, pro private property, anti corporation, anti big banks, anti comminist, anti fascist, pro small business and true free enterprise, anti plutocracy, pro democracy....do you see the thread that connects them?

When viewed from the internal VS external LOC paradigm, it makes sense. It has consistency and cohesion. It avoids the false right / left paradigm that TPTB use to divide us and imitate the illusion of choice.

BTW....

The Republican / Democrat paradigm is false. They are the same party with the same ends in mind.
Republicrats all...

Originally posted by Propulsion

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by seabag

 

Liberals want fewer laws.

They want LIBERTY one of the main tenants of the Constitution ...and freedom.

People should be able to self govern to a large extent and rather than have a government making all these rules outlawing this and criminalizing that Liberals think that within reason (this is key) everything should be allowed in moderation.

I'm and independent libertarian with some conservative over tones

. I try to look at both sides of the isle. But it seems more to me, that liberals want more Gov. in their lives than conservatives..

Conservative groups like Exxon, the Koch Brothers and the NRA are banding together forming groups like the American Legislative Exchange Council, (ALEC) and pushing more laws through various State legislatures and using the successful passage in one State as a sales pitch for creating the same partisan legislation in neighboring States. Conservatives also pass laws restricting who can marry, what constitutes a family for adoption and family services, as well as laws governing female reproductive rights. Not sure what more interference they can be and still say they are for less control and less government in peoples lives.

Originally posted by PapaKrok
BTW....

The Republican / Democrat paradigm is false. They are the same party with the same ends in mind.
Republicrats all...

edit on 9-4-2012 by PapaKrok because: (no reason given)

That is what they would like you to believe.

Sure they both have corrupt members but Someone has to cater to the wealthy industrialist and do their bidding.
You think their money doesn't work for them and they cannot buy a politician or favorable outcomes?

You think Joe Blow, the poor, ordinary, under served middle class worker can buy a politician?
The middle class, the worker and the laborer, are the back bone of this country, and your best politicians will be a hero to those people. Where are the heros? They are certainly not with the GOP- patron saint of the CEO.

They certainly will not favor the rich Corporate heads over the worker, at every avenue and juncture.
Who are the ones who dog and demonize the environmentalist?
Who is supporting a corporations right to pollute no matter what this costs future generations.
They are the ones limiting workers right to organize, and pushing anti union propaganda.
They are the ones limiting a victims right to sue and passing laws against class action lawsuits so that drug companies won't go bankrupt killing masses of people.
They are the ones trying to privatize Health Care so that it is run as a profit generating enterprise and not a human right.
They are the ones who want to privatize the Prison system an make that a profit generating enterprise with mandatory minimums.
They are the reason we have slashed funding for handicapped, elderly, schools, police, fire and emergency services and all this so we will not have to stoop to the horrid recourse of asking the wealthy to pay the same rate tax rate on their income everyone else has to.

Guess what party this might be?
Now base your answer on actual policies and legislation sponsored not empty and hollow pro Americana rhetoric. Base your answer on the two parties platforms.

reply to post by PapaKrok


While I'm not surprised anybody still uses the old canard of "Republican and Democratic politicians are the same!", I'm not sure how it can be stated without joking in the year 2012. The 2010 election and subsequent Republican majorities in the U.S. House of Representatives and across the U.S. in various state governments have obliterated that notion once and for all.

Not in my lifetime have I seen so many regressive anti-immigrant, anti-worker, anti-women pieces of legislation being proposed and passed in such a short amount of time. Do you really think Democratic politicians want to force non-natural citizens to always carry their identification papers at all times or face punishment? Do you really think Democratic politicians want to bust government unions and make it harder for workers to get proper benefits? Do you really think Democratic politicians want to force women to be subjected to various unnecessary and humiliating procedures should they opt for an abortion procedure? Well, do you?

Do you think that Democratic politicians in the U.S. House of Representatives would kill Medicare for those under 55 years of age and give them some lower paying voucher system for their care in their senior years? Do you think they'd propose budgets that cut billions from various poverty, senior, and disabled programs as we've seen Republicans in the last year? I really am curious as to your answer here.

You might be able to make your case when it comes to something like war. However, I want to note a couple suppositions here. Do you really think Al Gore would have gone to war with Iraq? Do you really think we would not currently be engaged in a decades-spanning invasion and occupation of Iran right now if John McCain was the current President?

reply to post by eboyd

i actually spent over an hour thoroughly and intelligently responding to your first post with very logical and factual information, and that response is just a few posts above this one, and you basically brushed my commentary off here as if i said nothing and gave no logical explanations for my position. you act here as though myself and others on the left are stupid and i am seriously offended by this post. 

you ask why you get no intelligent responses from people of the left persuasion, but my response and a few others that i have seen have been thoroughly thought out, and should have at least given you reason to respond. instead you act like you are above such reasoning. that is EXACTLY why you get no intelligent responses.

After re-reading your post and my response I must say that I think my response to your post is adequate. I don't believe I 'brushed your commentary off' in the least. Your response was similar to others and I responded accordingly. 

Thanks!

reply to post by VitriolAndAngst

I'm not pro Muslim or pro Gay -- it's just human rights and freedom of expression. Leave them alone -- that's all I care about. I don't want Sharia law nor Baptist Law.

Well, if the left "leaves Muslims alone" to express themselves with Sharia all of us infidels are going to have a lot of problems, friend.

Being Pro Choice but anti death Penalty. The EASY EXPLANATION; Life in my book is about consciousness. I don't think "potential human life" is sacred

That sums it up - Those lives are not sacred to liberals. 

I used to be Pro Death penalty -- but I figure the STATE shouldn't have the right to deny people the right to life. Abortions are NOT the state deciding to take a life -- it's a women deciding NOT to be a mother. 

The state doesn't determine innocence or guilt nor do they decide who gets the death penalty. These issues are decided by a jury of your peers. If it was the state making these calls I would totally agree with your argument. 

Originally posted by seabag

Well, if the left "leaves Muslims alone" to express themselves with Sharia all of us infidels are going to have a lot of problems, friend.

I am unaware America has a huge problem with Sharia Justice ruining society. This is what makes
your thread trollish, unemployment and poverty are much more cogent and pressing issues, but
you have decided to hon in on an issue that is not, legitimate. If 20 people a week were being castrated
due to Sharia in the US, I might take you seriously, but Jeez man, more people are attacked by
dogs. So this is why it such a silly thing to fear at this point...

That sums it up - Those lives are not sacred to liberals. 

I consider choice to be more important, than a being that is not conscience by
all measures of conscience ness. I do think it is a barbaric process, but I think woman
ultimately have the right to rule their own bodies and that includes what is in it.

The state doesn't determine innocence or guilt nor do they decide who gets the death penalty. These issues are decided by a jury of your peers. If it was the state making these calls I would totally agree with your argument. 

I do not trust the justice system in all cases... I also believe in redemption, while I also think
some people are beyond redemption. But in the cases where redemption is plausible, I do
not think you can reform people if you treat them worse than animals. If you do that, it is
a waste of money, because you in turn create a machine for callous criminality and pay
to do it. The punishment is losing time, adding the losing your humanity part is where
America has is wrong, you might as well shoot people.

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by eboyd

 

i actually spent over an hour thoroughly and intelligently responding to your first post with very logical and factual information, and that response is just a few posts above this one, and you basically brushed my commentary off here as if i said nothing and gave no logical explanations for my position. you act here as though myself and others on the left are stupid and i am seriously offended by this post. 

you ask why you get no intelligent responses from people of the left persuasion, but my response and a few others that i have seen have been thoroughly thought out, and should have at least given you reason to respond. instead you act like you are above such reasoning. that is EXACTLY why you get no intelligent responses.

After re-reading your post and my response I must say that I think my response to your post is adequate. I don't believe I 'brushed your commentary off' in the least. Your response was similar to others and I responded accordingly. 

Thanks!

you seem to be a very ignorant person. i presented logical arguments and you acted as though they weren't worthy of your responses. if you refuse to acknowledge actual sensible arguments then it is obvious to me that your motives in making this thread were simply to mock liberals. you haven't addressed a single point throughout this entire thread. rather you continue in your ignorant ways mocking people who believe differently from you. your logic is not impervious. stop being so damn arrogant.

Originally posted by braindeadconservativesThis is what makes
your thread trollish

i agree. do you know if there is some way to report this idiot to the moderators for this thread? such bigotry and trolling truly shouldn't be allowed on this forum.

reply to post by Frith


While the Democrats have their problems, there are clearly differences between the two parties, and the Republicans are far more for big government, and government interference in how we live our lives.

Conservative claims that the Republicans are for smaller government are pure fantasy. They refuse to look at the reality of what Republican politicians actually do. They promise one thing, but deliver another.

Originally posted by Jobeycool


Do you realize all the rights you fight for in America as a liberal would be gone under Sharia Law.Factual 100% true.

That is not even a little bit true.
I wish you people would educate yourselves about Sharia law just a little. That would help. Listening to FOX news does not count.

Tell me again why I am not threatened by my Muslim neighbor who does follow Sharia law? I am not a dead infidel yet.