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.

 

Is Conservatism a Mental Illness?

page: 3
34
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 07:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Liquesence

Is it that the majority of educated people are or just the majority of educated people in academia?

I've not seen the numbers on the ones in the private sector.



Good point.

Maybe that speaks volumes in itself.

The question is...why?


When I was in middle school, we used to participate in a competition called Creative Problem Solving. You received a hypothetical problem that needed solving. If I remember correctly, one was how a town should deal with the issue of latch-key children.

There were three main phases:

1. The first phase was to brain-storm wildly, any and every idea you could think that might address the problem. I now think of this as the "liberal" phase, and it's what liberals are best at - coming up with potential solutions.

2. You then came up with a set of criteria by which you judged your potential solutions. Usually four or five main points like cost similar things that might a solution more or less practical to enact. This is what I might call the "conservative" phase - judging how likely something is to work and/or be practical is what conservatism is supposed to be about if the solution is worse than the status quo in our judgment then we wait for something better.

3. Formulating the proposal was where you created a write-up based on what your criteria judged to be the best solution. This is the actual compromise phase because both sides had to agree on a solution as necessary and then hammer out some real details.

Of course, this is all a really round about way to come to my point which is that at some stage in the game the process of give and take and dialogue between the brainstorming and the criteria/judging broke down. Someone decided it had to be my way or the highway or someone interpreted someone's refusal as that kind of thing. Now we are where we are and no one will listen.




posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 08:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Liquesence

If you're comfortable in your ideology, does it matter what someone else calls you?


No, I don't care at all. But if by being comfortable in my ideology I try to change things that negatively affects others by making them conform to mine (both right and left), then there is a problem.


Then you're in luck.

The liberal/socialist/progressives are running things.



And conservatives are trying to ruin things for people when it doesn't affect them at all. Why do conservatives seem to care so much about what other people do when it doesn't affect them?


If someone tries to kill someone else, I have no say in the matter, but on a moral basis, I try to step in because sometimes, it's the right thing to do.


So what about the whole, you know, gay marriage thing? That comes to mind.


When have I ever been against that?

Please show me where I said that I am against gay marriage.

I'll wait.


Never said you were.

But conservatives in general are up in arms against it, including most of the presidential candidates. That's the point.


Nope.

People object due to religious reasons.

And that crosses all ideologies.

If republican candidates want to pander to religious folks on both sides, it doesn't make it a conservative stance.

Unless you're suggesting that all conservatives are anti-gay Christians.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 08:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Liquesence

If you're comfortable in your ideology, does it matter what someone else calls you?


No, I don't care at all. But if by being comfortable in my ideology I try to change things that negatively affects others by making them conform to mine (both right and left), then there is a problem.


Then you're in luck.

The liberal/socialist/progressives are running things.



And conservatives are trying to ruin things for people when it doesn't affect them at all. Why do conservatives seem to care so much about what other people do when it doesn't affect them?


If someone tries to kill someone else, I have no say in the matter, but on a moral basis, I try to step in because sometimes, it's the right thing to do.


So what about the whole, you know, gay marriage thing? That comes to mind.


When have I ever been against that?

Please show me where I said that I am against gay marriage.

I'll wait.


Never said you were.

But conservatives in general are up in arms against it, including most of the presidential candidates. That's the point.


Be careful when you say that.

Liberals often say they are great at nuance, but there is nuance here you are missing.

I'm not against letting gays have their ceremonies.

So are you so sure that conservatives are all so against gay marriage in terms of barring gays from having what they want legally.

Or are they up in arms over what they perceive to be the threat to their own personal religious freedoms as a result?

There is a difference and an important one.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 08:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

And conservatives are trying to ruin things for people when it doesn't affect them at all. Why do conservatives seem to care so much about what other people do when it doesn't affect them?


I agree.

Let the big city Liberal governments cultivate their own failures.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 08:09 PM
link   
Continuing to argue over the relative merits of conservatives and liberals is a mental illness. Whichever one we elect, the middle class shrinks, the wealth gap expands, rights disappear, and justice depends on how much money you have.

But the next guy or gal will make it all better, right? Provided those evil other people don't stop him or her, which always seems to happen somehow.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 08:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Liquesence

If you're comfortable in your ideology, does it matter what someone else calls you?


No, I don't care at all. But if by being comfortable in my ideology I try to change things that negatively affects others by making them conform to mine (both right and left), then there is a problem.


Then you're in luck.

The liberal/socialist/progressives are running things.



And conservatives are trying to ruin things for people when it doesn't affect them at all. Why do conservatives seem to care so much about what other people do when it doesn't affect them?


But that's hardly unique to conservatives.

Why did it matter if someone bought a soda beyond a certain size?
Why did it matter what a kid at school ate?
Why does it matter if a parent deems their child old enough to walk to the park alone and play there?
Why does it matter if someone chooses to not wear a helmet on a motorcycle or a seatbelt in a car?
Why does it matter if someone decided not to buy health insurance?



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 08:17 PM
link   
I guess our founding Fathers were mentally ill then. I think most of the people that helped found the country were conservative, it took incredible fortitude to survive colonization. Just like growing a business. I know a lot of successful business owners who are conservative, they seem pretty normal to me. I fall somewhere in the middle of the political divide, but I have met crazies in both parties.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 08:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: CB328



Conservatism is a political philosophy


It is not just a political view, people who say that are lying or very ignorant. Conservatism is a personal and societal characteristic as well, though really almost anything can be described as conservative or liberal.

Both extremes are bad, why does no one call for more centrism?
YES the more true "Constitutionalists the merrier" one big happy party that might agree with each other (get along) just as our forefathers envisioned.
edit on 2-8-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 08:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Liquesence

If you're comfortable in your ideology, does it matter what someone else calls you?


No, I don't care at all. But if by being comfortable in my ideology I try to change things that negatively affects others by making them conform to mine (both right and left), then there is a problem.


Then you're in luck.

The liberal/socialist/progressives are running things.



And conservatives are trying to ruin things for people when it doesn't affect them at all. Why do conservatives seem to care so much about what other people do when it doesn't affect them?


If someone tries to kill someone else, I have no say in the matter, but on a moral basis, I try to step in because sometimes, it's the right thing to do.


So what about the whole, you know, gay marriage thing? That comes to mind.


When have I ever been against that?

Please show me where I said that I am against gay marriage.

I'll wait.


Never said you were.

But conservatives in general are up in arms against it, including most of the presidential candidates. That's the point.



Or are they up in arms over what they perceive to be the threat to their own personal religious freedoms as a result?

There is a difference and an important one.


Key word: perceive.

Their religious freedoms are NOT threatened by gay marriage. At all. Gay marriage doesn't affect them at all, except in their minds.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: artnut

Our founding fathers were quite "liberal" for their day and age. They were very forward-thinking and progressive compared to their contemporaries. They would have been considered "liberal" in their day by the establishment.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 08:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Liquesence

If you're comfortable in your ideology, does it matter what someone else calls you?


No, I don't care at all. But if by being comfortable in my ideology I try to change things that negatively affects others by making them conform to mine (both right and left), then there is a problem.


Then you're in luck.

The liberal/socialist/progressives are running things.



And conservatives are trying to ruin things for people when it doesn't affect them at all. Why do conservatives seem to care so much about what other people do when it doesn't affect them?


But that's hardly unique to conservatives.

Why did it matter if someone bought a soda beyond a certain size?
Why did it matter what a kid at school ate?
Why does it matter if a parent deems their child old enough to walk to the park alone and play there?
Why does it matter if someone chooses to not wear a helmet on a motorcycle or a seatbelt in a car?
Why does it matter if someone decided not to buy health insurance?


Valid points.

I don't think gov't should dictate what we can or can't buy (soda size), those are personal opinions.

And true, both sides want to, to some extent, control what people do, but, for the sake of argument, i present this: banning or regulating soda size is an attempt to address what continued consumption of large quantities of sugars does to a person's health over time (even if they should have the right to sugar themselves to death with cray food and drink).

The gay marriage argument is different. Completely different, and not in the same ballpark.

The same with pot legalization.
The same with what used to be the argument over alcohol and its sale on Sunday.
The same with abortion (we're prolife but we'll support the indiscriminate killing of people in other countries because they don't actually matter).

Two different issues. Once involves pursuit of happiness and equality under law, the other doesn't. Even if both involve government "interference."

Conservatives seem to try to impede this equality under law.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 08:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: artnut

Our founding fathers were quite "liberal" for their day and age. They were very forward-thinking and progressive compared to their contemporaries. They would have been considered "liberal" in their day by the establishment. [/quotThe

They were also conservative in their beliefs about a lot of things, especially fiscally. I know a lot of conservatives, and quite honestly, most just want to live their lives without much government intrusion. What you do in your own home is your business, just don't push it on me is what I hear. I concede that they were liberal for their time, but also with a lot of conservative viewpoints.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 08:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

People have Mental Illnesses , Not Political Philosophies . Lesson Over Kid............



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 08:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: artnut

Our founding fathers were quite "liberal" for their day and age. They were very forward-thinking and progressive compared to their contemporaries. They would have been considered "liberal" in their day by the establishment.

Absolutely true, this; some see the Republican Party NOW as being what USED to be liberal in thinking in the 1800's. What happened; now we have an opposing party of social democrats 'progressives' that are dangerous, socialism doesn't work (LITERALY .gov pays them to exist).
edit on 2-8-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 08:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

And you are being narrow on purpose.

It isn't about the singular act. If my neighbors decide to have their ceremony, no, not affecting me directly. It's the larger political context.

Do the schools start teaching my child it's normal and natural, that to hold the belief that marriage between man and woman is unnatural and bigoted?

In society where some groups are protected, how do other groups maintain their freedom of conscientious objection? Can someone whose livelihood demands they take part in the wedding stay true to their faith and be forced to serve a gay wedding? I don't see how.

These are just some of the worries.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 08:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Liquesence

If you're comfortable in your ideology, does it matter what someone else calls you?


No, I don't care at all. But if by being comfortable in my ideology I try to change things that negatively affects others by making them conform to mine (both right and left), then there is a problem.


Then you're in luck.

The liberal/socialist/progressives are running things.



And conservatives are trying to ruin things for people when it doesn't affect them at all. Why do conservatives seem to care so much about what other people do when it doesn't affect them?


But that's hardly unique to conservatives.

Why did it matter if someone bought a soda beyond a certain size?
Why did it matter what a kid at school ate?
Why does it matter if a parent deems their child old enough to walk to the park alone and play there?
Why does it matter if someone chooses to not wear a helmet on a motorcycle or a seatbelt in a car?
Why does it matter if someone decided not to buy health insurance?


Valid points.

I don't think gov't should dictate what we can or can't buy (soda size), those are personal opinions.

And true, both sides want to, to some extent, control what people do, but, for the sake of argument, i present this: banning or regulating soda size is an attempt to address what continued consumption of large quantities of sugars does to a person's health over time (even if they should have the right to sugar themselves to death with cray food and drink).

The gay marriage argument is different. Completely different, and not in the same ballpark.

The same with pot legalization.
The same with what used to be the argument over alcohol and its sale on Sunday.
The same with abortion (we're prolife but we'll support the indiscriminate killing of people in other countries because they don't actually matter).

Two different issues. Once involves pursuit of happiness and equality under law, the other doesn't. Even if both involve government "interference."

Conservatives seem to try to impede this equality under law.


Understand this -

You cannot have both equality and liberty. It is impossible. Think about it for time and you might begin to understand why.

So you have to think about which is most important to you.

I would rather be independent and have my personal liberty than be forced into perfect equality under the law. Because make no mistake, social justice is that attempt to do that - enforce equal outcomes on all, perfect equality, and that makes the world a tyranny.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 08:54 PM
link   
a reply to: artnut

They also didn't live in a global economy with television, radio, and the internet. Goods they bought were made locally for the most part, not in China and part of an integrated, multinational supply chain.

The world is now a global community, it's not even close to the same world Jefferson and Washington lived in. Why do we expect the same morals, values, and beliefs should be translatable into a world that isn't even remotely the same?



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 08:55 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

Republicans are progressive liberal socialists?



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 08:56 PM
link   

edit on 20Sun, 02 Aug 2015 20:56:57 -050015p082015866 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 08:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

You are also operating here off the paradigm that attempts to meddle in the lives of others are always motivated by perfect selflessness and good intentions on the progressive end and only by selfishness on the conservative end.

Believe it or not, we both seek the same things, but we do come at them from different angles.

Conservatives tend to think that the individual is best suited to judge how to solve their own problems. And when you enact big government solutions, you rob them of that capacity or the need to be motivated to do it. Basically, government action and solutions on the mass scale rob people of their innate dignity by making the assumptions they are incapable of doing it for themselves as they are currently structured. They are permanent hand outs, not temporary hand ups.

We can argue about why this might be and whom this benefits.




top topics



 
34
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join