It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Liberal Bigotry

page: 23
45
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 11:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gothmog
Seems to me , this entire thread has been on topic. It does state "Liberal Bigotry" in the topic . And it is coming out here thick and heavy....


If you mean "bigotry directed at liberals" I certainly agree.




posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 11:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: jimmyx

I hear you jimmyx, and it is very tempting to take our own beliefs as the one truth and relegate everyone else's to the trash heap.

Notice above, poncho stated their beliefs about liberals, and I commented that if you switched liberals and conservatives, I felt almost identical. That's a great example of our own individual filtering systems; poncho thinks that liberals are obviously worse and I think the same of conservatives.

That's why, I TRY to focus only on evidence that is verifiable and avoid merely stating my opinion.

We all have opinions; those opinions do not automatically rise to the level of fact.

Belief is not knowledge.

Does that make sense?


well of course it makes sense, to me anyways. to others in this thread it doesn't. by the way, it's only going to get "rougher" as election 2016 comes into play...



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 11:34 AM
link   
I know some people that basically want total anarchy and to live off-grid, in cabins in the woods. Minimal interaction with other people and no government whatsoever. They truly believe in this.

The problem is, the rest of the world is going to keep marching ahead. We can hide in our cabins and cut off ties to the rest of the world, but we'd be essentially putting our collective heads in the sand.

What happens when China, Russia, or another super power decides America looks ripe for take over because we have no government and no way to effectively mobilize an army?

I can hear it now ... "We'll fight guerrilla style in the woods with semi-automatic weapons!"

Yeah...OK, keep deluding yourself. Look how easily the colonists pushed back the Native Americans with their superior weapons. The same would happen, as the rest of the world would continue to technologically advance.

The same argument is applied to reducing our military. If we suddenly stop spending on new warfare technologies -- the rest of the world won't. Eventually we'd be out gunned and out matched by another power.

And if I'm a bigot for thinking that entire line of living off-grid in a cave with anarchy is bogus...



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 11:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Gryphon66

I don't think the ends are justifying the means here. I don't think the ACA is helping the people it is designed to help. Yes, it is nice that people with pre-existing conditions can get coverage now, but I feel like we sacrificed SOOOO much to get this for coverage that pretty much amounts to you paying the insurance company to allow you to have free preventative care (like THAT was ever the most expensive part of health care...)


I understand it is not optimal. I still feel betrayed and angry. I don't disagree with what you are saying.

I guess I'd have to reply "small moves."

Someday we'll get where we need to be.


Hopefully... But somehow I don't see that happening until the US government is prepared to kill the health insurance industry in order to implement a REAL health care solution.



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 11:41 AM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Technically, bigot and bigotry refer to "intolerance" which we all know is a veritable semantic tennis-ball.

If the phrase "not reasonable or possible for the majority of Americans" is equal to intolerance ... well, I'm a bigot as well.

What you're saying makes sense to me.



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 11:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

And you know what? There are just as many morons on the extreme left living in utopia-fantasy land.

Do I think we could be a hell of a lot closer to a utopia where all basic needs are met? Yep. Do I think it can happen over night? Absolutely not. If major steps were continually taken at regular intervals, I'd give it about 200-300 years. The human species needs generations of people to adapt their thinking from "me, my planet, myself" to "ours, our planet, our people".

Idiots are everywhere, left...right...up...down.

Balance is key, and it seems to be quality sorely lacking in politics or social planning these days.



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 11:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Ok then why aren't you for taking marriage out of government altogether? Why is preventing gays from marrying more important than that?

You think that taking unfair advantages away from Christians in the states is being intolerant to them, when in reality it is just evening the playing field.

Complaining about people being intolerant of bigots while excusing the words and actions of the bigots.

These are all Republican ideals guy.

I wonder if your wife knows what REAL Libertarianism is. REAL Libertarians aren't against gay marriage, but their solution is supposed to differ from Republican or Tea Party solutions. Take marriage out of the government. REAL Libertarians aren't against abortion. They would be for a woman's right to choose. REAL Libertarians are against the Drug War, against the war on terror, for isolationism. For the 2nd Amendment. For fiscally conservancy. For stricter interpretation of the Constitution (including tax law). A REAL Libertarian would be against Republican intrusions on liberty JUST as much as they are against Democrat ones.

By the way, yes, I understand that you are for some of the things above, but I know I've argued against you for other points.

Libertarianism is socially Liberal and fiscally conservative. Just honoring the conservative side of Libertarianism doesn't make you a Libertarian. It just makes you a Tea Party Republican.

I'm not calling myself a Libertarian...I'll leave that to you or others. Some of your response sounds like you may have not read my list correctly. Or I misunderstood your meaning.

Anyway...you likely took our prior "encounters" as generalizations. I can disagree with...lets say...black people rioting in one thread based upon the idea of destroying property, the appearance of being violent, etc...while still understanding why and maybe even supporting the reason (a black man being shot). I can argue the reaction while still being personally pissed for the event that started the reaction. I dissect things and may argue individual points while not arguing the general issue.

I wouldn't be surprised if you have misunderstood where I was coming from. You wouldn't be the first. I can argue (as a general example) that "black people create many of their own problems by their actions" while still agreeing that "that black man should not have been shot". Again...just an example.
edit on 6/30/2015 by WeAreAWAKE because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Fair enough. I've seen people make those mistakes about me before and it pissed me off too. So if that is the case then I apologize. I don't like it when it is done to me, so I shouldn't be doing it to other people.



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 12:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Fair enough. I've seen people make those mistakes about me before and it pissed me off too. So if that is the case then I apologize. I don't like it when it is done to me, so I shouldn't be doing it to other people.

No problem...you may be surprised to hear this, but I actually think you and I are much alike in our personalities and methods of debate. And I don't think our opinions are that far off. If we met in a bar and we were both in good moods...I think we would both walk away smiling about the good but deep discussion.

That, or I would just think you an ass and walk out
(just being funny)



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 12:00 PM
link   
I admit it: I'm a liberal who is intolerant of bigots.



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 12:03 PM
link   
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

I'm a LOT nicer in person. Mostly because I avoid political and religious discussions.



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 12:29 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

We'd all be happier when we accept that there is no utopia.



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 12:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Perhaps you would think it was more than "nice" if YOU or your family member were the one that had the pre-existing condition.

Would you prefer the folks with pre-existing conditions choose poverty as the only way to get healthcare and not die? Stay below the poverty level, not have more than the barest of savings in any account, constantly worry they would lose their coverage anyway due to political maneuverings or policy changes, have the loss of motivation and confidence that comes with knowing you are simply unable to pursue your life's goals and dreams? Is that freedom???

This is EXACTLY the "choice" people had prior to the ACA.

I do not think the law is perfect and am worried that our Congress will simply "do nothing" to fix things that could be fixed to make life better for everyone.

- AB



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 12:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: MystikMushroom

We'd all be happier when we accept that there is no utopia.

Absolutely!!!! And trying to force people to act like they are in a utopia, will never make it a utopia. Personally...I don't think we are ready for utopia and may never be. We are generally jerks to the world



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 12:38 PM
link   
a reply to: AboveBoard

So it's a good thing that we made a ton of people worse off so we can help a bunch of other people? Again I think it's nice/great that people with pre-existing conditions can get insurance now, but this comes at the expense of healthy people's wallets. Namely healthy 20-somes with limited incomes. It's not like the people who could already AFFORD health care are going to pay for this or anything.

That's the point. The ACA has a few good things in it, but all the bad FAR overshadows the good. This is apparent since the bill caters to the health insurance industry instead of dismantling it because it would be unnecessary with universal health care. As a result, health insurance costs have gone up considerably. Again. And when we factor in supply and demand, the costs will go up forever because demand is now legislated to be at 100% of the population.

Like I said, it's GREAT that people with pre-existing conditions have health insurance and I certainly don't envy their positions before the ACA, but I don't think the ACA is the solution that ANYONE should be celebrating. Liberal or conservative.



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 12:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: MystikMushroom

We'd all be happier when we accept that there is no utopia.


For me, having all basic needs (food, shelter, clothing, education, healthcare) taken care of without worry would be a utopia. With automation, robots and AI -- we might get there someday.



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 12:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: AboveBoard
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Perhaps you would think it was more than "nice" if YOU or your family member were the one that had the pre-existing condition.

Would you prefer the folks with pre-existing conditions choose poverty as the only way to get healthcare and not die? Stay below the poverty level, not have more than the barest of savings in any account, constantly worry they would lose their coverage anyway due to political maneuverings or policy changes, have the loss of motivation and confidence that comes with knowing you are simply unable to pursue your life's goals and dreams? Is that freedom???

This is EXACTLY the "choice" people had prior to the ACA.

I do not think the law is perfect and am worried that our Congress will simply "do nothing" to fix things that could be fixed to make life better for everyone.

- AB


Are you OK with the fact that the majority of people (see also middle class) were punished by more than doubling all of their health insurance rates in order for the few like your family who needed this?



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 12:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: MystikMushroom

We'd all be happier when we accept that there is no utopia.


We should be responsible for our own utopias.



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 01:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: AboveBoard
I do not think the law is perfect and am worried that our Congress will simply "do nothing" to fix things that could be fixed to make life better for everyone.

- AB


While you and I have different life experiences that give us a differing opinion on ACA, I can say wholeheartedly that I agree 100% with this sentence.

No, it isn't perfect. And things could be done to improve on it. But that just ain't gonna happen. Its a political landmine, and no one wants to touch it (for good or bad).



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 01:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ketsuko

What is anti-Libertarian is pushing gay marriage bans as legal. THAT is anti-Libertarian. As a Libertarian against gay marriage, your primary position from the beginning should have been to take marriage out of the hands of the state like greencmp always says. That just tells me you aren't a true Libertarian like you like to constantly accuse me of being.


And that's always been my position. Quote me from anywhere here where said otherwise. And don't use my previous post because I laid out my personal feelings, not my political ones. There is a difference. If we are talking law, then yes, the state needs to butt out because that preserves my personal feelings.



new topics

top topics



 
45
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join