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: 28
45
<< 25  26  27    29 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 03:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: beezzer

The really sad thing?

I think most of us probably basically agree on about 80% of life's issues

It's the 10% on either end that is used to keep us ... distracted?


We enter into topics and let our words define ourselves.

To many (most?) I'm about the most conservative person alive. I probably make Dick Cheney look like Bill Mahr.

But in real life? I'm an easy-going middle-of-the-road guy.

You probably are as well.

My family thinks I'm a bleeding-heart liberal.


And more then a bit passive agressive to everyone perhaps?




posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Cherry0

There are different kinds of meditation, the study conducted used "mindful meditation".



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

funny how you say that it's god's definition of marriage that you hold on to, and yet, God was never married, nor was Jesus his son. I guess the experience wasn't for them, nor was it to lead by example. and as far as the birth of gods only son, god impregnated mary, without old joe's knowledge or permission, and broke one of his own ten commandments in the process.....so do as god says, not by what he does himself


edit on 1-7-2015 by jimmyx because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 12:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: jimmyx
a reply to: ketsuko

funny how you say that it's god's definition of marriage that you hold on to, and yet, God was never married, nor was Jesus his son. I guess the experience wasn't for them, nor was it to lead by example. and as far as the birth of gods only son, god impregnated mary, without old joe's knowledge or permission, and broke one of his own ten commandments in the process.....so do as god says, not by what he does himself



They never "married" because nobody had figured out how to issue a big government document yet !!




posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 12:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: jimmyx
a reply to: ketsuko

funny how you say that it's god's definition of marriage that you hold on to, and yet, God was never married, nor was Jesus his son. I guess the experience wasn't for them, nor was it to lead by example. and as far as the birth of gods only son, god impregnated mary, without old joe's knowledge or permission, and broke one of his own ten commandments in the process.....so do as god says, not by what he does himself



They never "married" because nobody had figured out how to issue a big government document yet !!




the ten commandments was the mother of all "big government documents"...as I see it anyway
edit on 1-7-2015 by jimmyx because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 12:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: Cherry0

There are different kinds of meditation, the study conducted used "mindful meditation".


The point of my post was to show the flaw in that study. I used myself as an example. Thus making it a worthless piece, imo of course. I'll give it kudos for trying though.




posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 12:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
It's about keeping the right to object when asked to participate. That I am not so sure about.


It's a good thing that at no time is any religious person or group being forced to marry a same sex couple, right?

This is the problem with your opposition, you're imagining something that is not happening. No religious group is going to be forced into doing anything, and the belief that they will is based on absolutely nothing at all.

If someone of a religious group wants to perform same sex marriages, they have that right.
If a religious group doesn't want to perform same sex marriages, they have that right.
And now, if two people of the same sex want to marry, they have that right


This pleases everyone, or at least it should.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 01:02 PM
link   
While I don't entirely agree with the original post... I think there is some truth to it.

From my own experiences and from what I've seen of late, the "intolerance" from the left is based on their choice of phrases.

Disclaimer: Using something of a broad brush here...

For example, to me it takes little more than common sense for a nation, any nation, to have secure borders. When this topic comes up in discussion, some variation of the word "racist" is used almost immediately. This knee-jerk reaction doesn't actually provide any insight on why those with views opposite mine are valid. Its a way to end the debate before it begins by hurling an insult (which can be quite damning these days whether or not the allegation is true).

Another example is on the global warming/climate change front. It's subtle, but I can't help but think the term "climate change denier" was thoughtfully crafted to induce feelings similar to hearing the phrase "holocaust denier." It also has the built-in feature of presenting extreme man-made climate change as a fact as absolute as the sky is blue. To be fair, I have heard some conservatives refer to some of the climate change folk as "climate change alarmists."

For the most part, regardless of the issue, I've found that the people screaming the loudest about "tolerance" typically turn out to be some of the most closed minded people I've come across.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Cherry0

Ah, personal example. We all should remember that although its tempting to use personal examples (and I'm guilty and no exception) that:




posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 01:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: eluryh22
While I don't entirely agree with the original post... I think there is some truth to it.

From my own experiences and from what I've seen of late, the "intolerance" from the left is based on their choice of phrases.

Disclaimer: Using something of a broad brush here...

For example, to me it takes little more than common sense for a nation, any nation, to have secure borders. When this topic comes up in discussion, some variation of the word "racist" is used almost immediately. This knee-jerk reaction doesn't actually provide any insight on why those with views opposite mine are valid. Its a way to end the debate before it begins by hurling an insult (which can be quite damning these days whether or not the allegation is true).


I don't see people calling for a secure border being called racist. It's usually when they start talking about their opinions on Mexicans that they end up being called racist.


Another example is on the global warming/climate change front. It's subtle, but I can't help but think the term "climate change denier" was thoughtfully crafted to induce feelings similar to hearing the phrase "holocaust denier." It also has the built-in feature of presenting extreme man-made climate change as a fact as absolute as the sky is blue. To be fair, I have heard some conservatives refer to some of the climate change folk as "climate change alarmists."


Well that's what they are. If the truth hurts, too bad. Until a climate change denier actually addresses the SCIENCE around climate change instead of the rhetoric and propaganda originating from the media and politicians, they will ALWAYS be climate change deniers. When you fight science with strawmans, don't expect your argument to be respected.


For the most part, regardless of the issue, I've found that the people screaming the loudest about "tolerance" typically turn out to be some of the most closed minded people I've come across.


Yea... Being intolerant of people saying intolerant things is more intolerant than the original thing being said. That TOTALLY makes sense.
edit on 1-7-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 01:57 PM
link   
dbl post.
edit on 1-7-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 02:18 PM
link   

I don't see people calling for a secure border being called racist. It's usually when they start talking about their opinions on Mexicans that they end up being called racist.


I'm not sure if you're being sincere here or not. In any event, I've see it more times than I care to remember and I have personally have been told that I'm "being racist" for suggesting securing the borders.

Different topic under the same umbrella, I can't recall how many articles I've read which indicate, no, CONCLUDE that the only reason a person wouldn't support the affordable care act is that they are racist and the President is an African American.



Well that's what they are. If the truth hurts, too bad. Until a climate change denier actually addresses the SCIENCE around climate change instead of the rhetoric and propaganda originating from the media and politicians, they will ALWAYS be climate change deniers. When you fight science with strawmans, don't expect your argument to be respected.



At the risk of going too far off topic, its good to see you proving my point. Rather than, say, rationally explain why there are currently records being broken relating to Antarctic ice levels, or why virtually none of the dire predictions over the past several decades have come true, or that time and time again it is found out that data samples were "adjusted" (aka fudged)... you seem to feel fine hurling insults (or at a minimum fine with others hurling insults).


Yea... Being intolerant of people saying intolerant things is more intolerant than the original thing being said. That TOTALLY makes sense.

Example: I've seen many people go on and on about, "Everyone should have the same opportunity"..... then go nuts when you question things like giving certain groups additional points on civil service tests or question affirmative action in some cases.

Or to put it another way, time and time again I've seen people claim to want to have, "Honest and open discussions," yet as soon as an opposing view is raised, they are shouted down or immaturely have insults hurled at them.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 02:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: eluryh22
I'm not sure if you're being sincere here or not. In any event, I've see it more times than I care to remember and I have personally have been told that I'm "being racist" for suggesting securing the borders.


Well if it is so numerous than you can produce a few examples right? How about posting some evidence of this?


Different topic under the same umbrella, I can't recall how many articles I've read which indicate, no, CONCLUDE that the only reason a person wouldn't support the affordable care act is that they are racist and the President is an African American.


Yes, I agree such articles HAVE happened in the past, but they don't really occur much anymore.


At the risk of going too far off topic, its good to see you proving my point. Rather than, say, rationally explain why there are currently records being broken relating to Antarctic ice levels, or why virtually none of the dire predictions over the past several decades have come true, or that time and time again it is found out that data samples were "adjusted" (aka fudged)... you seem to feel fine hurling insults (or at a minimum fine with others hurling insults).


First, this thread doesn't exist to go into how to disprove climate change denialist strawmans, so I shouldn't have to list a bunch of reasons why denialists are wrong. Second, this is all rhetoric started by politicians and the media, NOT scientists. You just proved MY point. Where are your links to scientific studies and data that confirm your points? You just said a bunch of standard denialist talking points that originated from the right wing, but have provided no evidence to actually DISPROVE climate change.

Calling someone a climate change denialist, isn't an insult. It's the truth. I think that the movement to deny science from the right has gotten to critical mass. You don't deserve respect for being able to repeat a bunch of stupid talking points from a right wing fear blog or think that you know better than a scientist who dedicates his life to studying these things. That is just promoting ignorance, and at no point should promoting ignorance be respected. Sorry, but that is the truth. Go educate yourself on what climate science actually says and suggests, then educate yourself on the evidence for it, THEN come back and try to find evidence to disprove it. Finally, publish your findings in a scientific journal for peer review. THAT is how you present a respectable scientific argument.

One more thing, no denialist I've ever seen has come up with a rational reason why the rest of the world isn't having this debate and has already moved on to accept this as fact while the US continues to have this tedious and time wasting debate (hint: the reason is because the parties interested in doing that make a LOT of money off of climate change being thought of as fake, thus nothing gets done to stop it). It really is confusing that this conspiracy is slapping most conspiracy theorists in the face, yet they insist that the problem lies with the establishment, when the REAL culprits are big oil.


Example: I've seen many people go on and on about, "Everyone should have the same opportunity"..... then go nuts when you question things like giving certain groups additional points on civil service tests or question affirmative action in some cases.


That isn't what you were originally talking about.


Or to put it another way, time and time again I've seen people claim to want to have, "Honest and open discussions," yet as soon as an opposing view is raised, they are shouted down or immaturely have insults hurled at them.


If you are going to say something that is viewed as intolerant, don't get butthurt when you get called a bigot. If you want to hold those opinions, fine, but don't expect that there won't be repercussions for having them.
edit on 1-7-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 02:50 PM
link   
Cons have really got to toughen up. I've been called unnatural, ungodly, perverted and a pedophile for years for no reason by people who don't even know me.

I know I'm none of those things ... and so, I may wince a bit, and if I have the opportunity, I may correct them ... but it doesn't keep me up at night.

If you're not a racist ... don't let it bother you when folks call you one.

If you're not a bigot, religious nut, etc. ...

I mean, Cons have been telling everyone else, for years to "just get over" being called every name in the book, claiming that every action to minimize hurtful words is overbearing PC ... and yet, now you're crying over being called bigots and racists?

Hmmm.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 02:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Cherry0

Cherry0 ... did you actually read the study? The correlations are between brain scans of individuals who self-identify as either liberal, conservative, what have you ...

It's not a matter of picking and choosing individual characteristics ... and certainly your sample size of 1 is not compelling counter-evidence.

Besides that, strictly speaking, there are spiritual atheists, and many theories about intelligent design that don't, per se, require faith in YHVH or any other mythical creature. Reincarnation can be explained to some degree by genetic memory ...

/shrug, just a thought. (well, actually five thoughts, but, you know, turn-of-phrase.)



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

So you think I'm the one anomaly and no one else has had a similar experience? I find it hard to believe I'm that special.

I just find it rather abhorrent someone would call anyone with an opposing view as having an unintelligent primitive brain and of being fearful. But please continue on.

I may not always agree with most liberals but I never goes as far as to to make insults such as that. I respect people too much for that.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 03:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cherry0
a reply to: MystikMushroom

So you think I'm the one anomaly and no one else has had a similar experience? I find it hard to believe I'm that special.


Maybe. Maybe not, but that doesn't change the fact that you can't prove anything with a singular personal anecdote.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 03:03 PM
link   
Back on this marriage thing for a second, since Ketsuko is busy ...

I'm planning a marriage to my committed partner of 8 years in the summer of 2017. (He's finishing an MS in Public Health).

Why is my marriage a threat to any Christian's marriage? How does it demean such a marriage more than, say, "no-fault divorce"? I myself am not religious, and so we'll be married in private ceremony; some of my friends are Christian and they've been married/are planning marriages in their churches ... but what is the obsession that gays at large are going to storm the churches seeking marriage?

Most churches are far too ... well, plain ... to serve as venues for most of these folks, anyway, LOL.

************************************************

Follow up question on the Christian god and marriage. Let's forget polygamy in the OT and the directive against divorce in the NT ... YHVH "overshadowed" a young Jewish girl in the first century and impregnated her, out of wedlock.

When you guys are railing on about how holy your god's dictations about marriage are ... do things like that not even give you a second's pause?

I mean as little disrespect as possible, in this instance, asking the question.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 03:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

See that's the only viable argument that Christians have left. That with the overturning of these bans, all of a sudden gay couples will be suing churches left and right to force them to marry them, but as I and others have pointed out, there is no basis for this fear outside of right wing fear outlets.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Right, I hear you ... but to the degree that one can "hear" something in another's online voice ... I think some of these folks are actually AFRAID that we are going to try to force them to marry us in their church and possibly attend the reception orgy.

It's FEAR. It's like they see the fight for equal rights (like, not being arrested for being gay, not being removed from the military for being gay, marriage equality) is all directed at them personally, as a challenge to their beliefs, rather than our own natural human and American desire to be treated equitably before the laws as Citizens of this country.

They aren't really that self-centered ... are they?




top topics



 
45
<< 25  26  27    29 >>

log in

join