Liberalism and Political Correctness Heralds the Destruction of America

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
Are people really that young or un educated, the pc crowd started a long time ago, before most of us where born.

YouTube old George Carlin stand up, he started talking about the pc issue in the 60s, i understand that back then the media was alot smaller and most had no clue what was going down, but plz educate yourself.

Yes and Mr Bruce. Shows up these early comedians were live social vents. Prophets in a sort of way if not simply court jesters.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

However you put it, I agree that to save the woman's life it is necessary.

That logic can be used to further the leftist agenda.

Forced sterilizations are still lawful in America.

The Iowa Supreme Court agreed, interpreting the relevant Iowa statute (correctly, I think) as requiring court approval for the vasectomy. But it’s worth noting that the court accepted that such vasectomies of the intellectually disabled can indeed be approved, if a court agrees.

www.washingtonpost.com...

This logic will continue, if allowed. The implementation of Obamacare, will soon come to the conclusion- that what a person does with their body is no longer up to that individual, because everyone must bear that cost. We will see the reemergence of forced abortions on the 'undesirables'. We are already seeing the push beyond 'to save lives'.

The woman's sickle cell disease is very serious and the baby must be terminated very soon to reduce the risk of her losing her life, they say.

www.dailymail.co.uk...

While abortion rights advocates might well point to Zika-linked microcephaly as evidence that the U.S. needs to liberalize abortion laws, disability rights advocates might argue otherwise. On the issue of abortion, the feminist and disability rights movement often come into uncomfortable conflict as they struggle to accommodate both the rights of a woman to control her own fertility and the rights of people with disabilities to exist.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

Like I've stated, leftists are pushing for mandatory abortions of 'undesirables'. This is not something I concocted, it is reality. The reemergence of eugenics will slowly come to acceptance, and widespread use due to liberal thought.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Just because some people do not want to accept diversity and instead fight it the entire way doesn't mean diversity is a bad thing, it just means some people do not want to cooperate or compromise.

Cooperation is not diversity. Diversity cannot compromise; to compromise means less diversity.

Cooperation is unity. Many acting together as one. Compromise leads to cooperation, which is unity.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: GodEmperor

Unfortunately, there is no way to eliminate political parties. In the most strict definition, a political party is a group of people with similar beliefs. That cannot be outlawed because there will always be people with similar beliefs.

May I suggest we use the term "collusion" to describe the problem? It appears to be more accurate and can be outlawed.

TheRedneck

Furthermore, without significant changes to our election process, we'll likely always have two major parties (see Duverger's law).

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: TheRedneck

Just because some people do not want to accept diversity and instead fight it the entire way doesn't mean diversity is a bad thing, it just means some people do not want to cooperate or compromise.

If diversity cannot be accomplished then we won't make it very long before we kill each other off. Like I said, if diversity is doomed to fail then so is our species.

Splane to me, and I am asking you cause you are all over it, what is the value of diversity? For the west? As GodEmporer has asked this question but apparently hes to messed up to get a respected response.

If you think about it you and others are saying that american society is doomed without it, Why?

By the way I see folks from all over the world recent every day. They were not around here when I was born or coming up so how is this all helping me now.....and them? Are they gaining anything from now being neighbor to my self?

originally posted by: theantediluvian

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: GodEmperor

Unfortunately, there is no way to eliminate political parties. In the most strict definition, a political party is a group of people with similar beliefs. That cannot be outlawed because there will always be people with similar beliefs.

May I suggest we use the term "collusion" to describe the problem? It appears to be more accurate and can be outlawed.

TheRedneck

Furthermore, without significant changes to our election process, we'll likely always have two major parties (see Duverger's law).

What would you suggest? More parties? Just asking. Maybe force rotation of parties....lol

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Just because some people do not want to accept diversity and instead fight it the entire way doesn't mean diversity is a bad thing, it just means some people do not want to cooperate or compromise.

Cooperation is not diversity. Diversity cannot compromise; to compromise means less diversity.

Cooperation is unity. Many acting together as one. Compromise leads to cooperation, which is unity.

TheRedneck

Red Neck......I personally don't see exactly what you mean by compromise? I personally represent over 200 years of american linage......why should I even discuss much with someone just getting off the boat in the last 20 years let alone compromise? And compromise what?

Liberals blaming conservatives, conservatives blaming liberals. I am so tired of this cold war. The two ideologies have grown farther apart over time and I think it is by design to keep us bickering among ourselves instead of directing our view to the real problem, which is the people in power. Here's a note.. not all liberals think the same, and neither do all conservatives.

The politically correct attitude is nothing but a name to being offended and both sides are guilty. Don't stand to the anthem on a national stage and see how many people who hate this pc culture all the sudden get enraged for someone not being pc.

This system of things promotes suffering and has a destiny that is doomed. We have all been brainwashed and programmed since birth. I struggle with this realization every day and try to look to the future in an attempt to find a way out of it. We are all shaped by the system and blame our fellow slaves for the problems of the world, instead of pointing at the system that oppresses us.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
I have a 15-year-old daughter. I am teaching her how to be a productive, caring, and fair citizen of this world.

I am teaching her that there are different cultures, and people who don't look at things quite the same way she does. I am teaching her that these different cultures can all live together in peace, and still have their own way of looking at things. I am teaching her the importance of things like equality under the laws.

I am teaching her that there is suffering and that we will all be judged (and will judge ourselves) some day on how we deal with that suffering - whether we ignore it in favor of our own well-being, or whether we try to do what we can to end that suffering. I am teaching her to stand up for her own AND for others' rights - but only in non-violent ways.

I am teaching her that it is wrong to kill, lie, steal from or otherwise hurt others. I am teaching her to be kind and thoughtful of others' feelings.

Could you teach her how to cook and get stains out of clothes while you're at it? I'm sure your future son in law and grandchildren will appreciate those things just as much as her sainthood.

I am teaching her to be responsible with the environment when it comes to her carbon footprint

You should just let the banks handle that one. Today my ATM told me exactly how much I'd be reducing my carbon footprint by not printing out a receipt. Neat huh?

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: Gryphon66
OP's thesis uses the tactics of every demagogue ... referring to a vast phantom menace while utterly unable to give specifics as to who, what, when and where.

OP isn't talking about real people ... OP is talking about gross ideology.

Another day at the ATS rock.

LOL. Ok allow me. Let me ask toward this new spirit of "diversity" and saying this without prejudice, let that be understood.

Postulation: Could the United State have went on without the introduction of Muslims, Buddhists, even Catholics ect religiously as well as the importation of Communalism i.e. other political influential philosophies with its various faces. Did we really need, do we really need, all this world wide cultural addendum?

This is not a trick question.....how does the Buddhist Temple down the road here, two of them actually, add value to american society and not to mention the people that brought them there? And did we really need them here or are they simply just "here now" due to our international interventionist foreign policies, their failure and our now trying to make excuses for them.

Come on, come on.

I haven't made any comment favoring diversity, so you're barking up the wrong tree there. However, answering your question, it is obvious that our Founders were well aware that there were different religions in the world, and that in time, as the country grew, the nation would change from a basically English Protestant population. Communism hasn't "been imported" any more than capitalism or socialism were. Our economy has always been a mixed economy.

Who's "we" ... you and your 200 years of nativist history? They're here. They've been here. This country would not have been built without immigrants from all over the world. That's historical fact.

You're asking irrational "what ifs"? What if the South had won the Civil War? What if Great Britain hadn't been distracted with European wars and actually committed sufficient troops and resources to put down the American Rebellion? What if the Tunguska Event happened in New York or Chicago or Washington DC instead of the Russian wildlands? What if the supervolcano in Yellowstone had erupted last year?

What if, what if ... you're talking about sheer supposition. You don't know the answer, and neither do I.

originally posted by: Logarock

Maybe force rotation of parties....lol

That might not be such a bad idea.

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: Logarock

Maybe force rotation of parties....lol

That might not be such a bad idea.

Just make parties illegal.

That's an even better idea, right?

Of course we have that little First Amendment right to assemble thingy to overcome. Rats.

advocating anarchism without chaos?

originally posted by: kaylaluv
I am teaching her that these different cultures can all live together in peace, and still have their own way of looking at things. I am teaching her the importance of things like equality under the laws.

If you believe that every culture on earth can all be in the same pot then you are deluded about the real world and how all of its cultures really are....

SOME EXAMPLES:
*Radical Islam / Sharia Law can't seem to coexist with anybody (EU perfect example).
*American Democrat's / Progressives whatever can't seem to coexist with conservatives / libertarians / etc.
*Communists CAN'T coexist with any other ideology.

The list surely goes on. See any parallels above? Note how American progressiveness sort of bridges the gap between the other two?

EDIT: You CAN have all races & such in one pot under the same culture, but not all ideologies not without social group warfare.

Your last bit there is interesting, as here in the US all minorities and related group types now have equal rights across the board, anti-discrimination laws are entirely in their favor over white men, women & minorities have better odds of getting college educations & good jobs, and yet still not happy. Instead, they're OUTRAGED. Black president? Nope still OUTRAGED, so outraged they've triggered a literal race war complete with riots and mass murder.

And if that's not weird enough, if anybody speaks out against these crazy trends and such we get told we're crying like victims. We warn it's going to re-ignite white nationalism pitting everybody against each other 'forever' as far as anybody knows, and we get shouted down and demonized as "racists".

a reply to: TheRedneck

Cooperation does not mean that someone changes who they are or how/where they were raised, it means to compromise with others who have different views. Those different views still exist but cooperation enriches everyone (not just one side) regardless of their views. You can have unity in diversity, it's not much different than two completely different people liking the same sports team. They may disagree on who they're voting for but they'll be right there together cheering their team on. The team we should all be rooting or is humanity regardless of what culture or ideology someone shares.

a reply to: Logarock

If you think about it you and others are saying that american society is doomed without it, Why?

Because we are already a diverse nation and to get rid of diversity means we have to get rid of those who fall outside of the chosen mould somehow. That is not a Republic, a Republic listens to ALL citizens, it does not silence the ones deemed to be unwanted, that's called totalitarianism.

If we silence those deemed unworthy, we have lost the way of what America was founded upon: all men being created equal and deserving equal treatment. That's why America is doomed without diversity.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

You can have unity in diversity

I am curious what you mean by this. Is this similar to the 'unity' proposed by the Democrat Overlords?

The first is to establish three largely autonomous regions with a viable central government in Baghdad. The Kurdish, Sunni and Shiite regions would each be responsible for their own domestic laws, administration and internal security.

www.nytimes.com...

"Biden proposes partitioning Iraq into three region"
www.nbcnews.com...

Ahh, so is the Democrat version of Unity and Diversity, through segregation and apartheid?

How quaint. So Diversity is to amplify the differences so much, that America segregates itself into different regions? Oh this is rich, I suggest people look into this partitioning of Iraq - it will put into light Why the Obama administration has funded ISIS terrorism. Don't believe me?

Galbraith says that the Sunni Awakening still remains very hostile to the Iraqi government, and the government sees the Awakening as a bigger threat than al-Qaida. The incoming Obama administration will bring Vice President-elect Joe Biden into the fray, which Galbraith calls "very encouraging." Biden "has been the prime proponent of a decentralized Iraq, and although in the campaign Sen. McCain described [Biden's] plan as a 'cockamamie' idea," Galbraith says, "it is in fact what the Bush administration has done." In 2007, the Bush administration financed a Sunni army — the Awakening — and Galbraith says this is responsible for the success so far in Iraq. Biden would take this to the next step and encourage the Sunnis to form their own region, which would control that army, just as the Kurdistan region controls the Peshmerga, or the Kurdistan army, Galbraith says.

www.npr.org...

It should be noted, I've previously pointed out the Republican party are Leftist. Under the Obama admin, the next step is to form the Islamic caliphate. Funny how the left, says one thing but their actions are in direct conflict with their words. Why are these cultures not compatible with each other, why does the Left feel that these Muslim factions need to be segregated?

Please enlighten us, but what do I know, I'm just 'messed up in the head'

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

all men being created equal and deserving equal treatment. That's why America is doomed without diversity.

This is essentially a non-existent reality in America.

I forget the name, a man recently got out of jail spending 3 months for raping a woman. Now I could bring up a myriad of examples where people have been sentenced to far longer for similar crimes.

How exactly is that equal?

According to your own logic, we are already doomed.

How can you call it equal treatment, when Hillary Clinton faces no penalties, for something many of us peasantry would spend years in solitude for?

Where is this equal treatment you speak of? I don't see it.

a reply to: GodEmperor

I never said anything about Hillary Clinton nor do I support her, she obviously is in the pockets of those running things with Trump being the kind of person Hillary did/does business with. Hillary Clinton and diversity are two different subjects entirely.

And just so you know, in the case of Clinton I don't see any equal treatment, does that mean it's an excuse to wipe out one extreme in favor of the other extreme though? No it doesn't, that is just a deflection to ignore the points I made.

Is your solution for people like Hillary getting unfair treatment to completely wipe out any other ideology other than your own? That's not a Republic, it's a dictatorship.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

How about the previous comment? About the current administration?

Are you also not in support of the current administration and their views on Unity in Iraq? From the post above the one about Hillary.