Why are you a Republican or Democrat?

[BannedForViews]

Unless you completely avoid interacting with other individuals, which you obviously don't, exercising this absolute notion of freedom can only lead to diminishing the freedom of others. This is an inevitable conflict wherever two or more people are present, as any action by one constitutes a possible infringement upon another. This is an inherent constraint of society.

Let's stay on topic here. Obviously when there are more than 2 people interacting, it is increasingly possible that someones natural rights will be infringed on, but that isn't what we were discussing.

You said "It's silly to blame taxation for rich people not wanting to work more when half the benefit of being rich is that you can afford to spend more time engaged in leisure and enjoying yourself, which is ultimately what people are working for in the first place." I then said something about workaholics and most people who earn large sums of money are not the people that spend it, it is more often their family (spouse, children, grandchildren through inheritance) because those people are busy working due to being workaholics. You said "It's extremely unlikely I'll ever be sorry we prevented people from turning into workaholics." Then I said "whether or not you are sorry is irrelevant because it isn't for you to decide."

Your point is that you won't feel bad people work less because taxes are higher or those that earn more money, but as I stated it isn't your right to tell them they cannot earn more and work for it if they want. Punitive taxes are inherently immoral and indefensible because you are robbing people of their limited time (time does equal money). The only argument for these taxes are appeals to emotion, which are not logically valid. If you are okay with the fact that you have no logical or moral authority to support your claim that is up to you, but it doesn't make you right and me wrong.

People do not owe their lives to others. You cannot require someone be at the behest of another without them voluntarily agreeing to it, or force. Force is not a valid reason. This hasn't stopped humans using it from the beginning of humans, but it also doesn't validate it.

[GennGreymane]

1. I don't think women should work until the kids are out and away. A nuclear family will help cut down on obesity, boost education, empathy, reduce poverty, reduce violence etc.
2. That is correct but American has some of the highest welfare pay outs to. You should compare pictures of people in welfare lines from back in the day to now. People back in the day were embraced to be on welfare, now a days some people try whatever they can to get welfare assistance.
3. I don't want a government that micromanages. Social pressure can achieve that. You can't have people doing whatever they want. You have to have standards to have a nation/civilization. Otherwise its just anarchy. People would do it themselves if they had a choice. Most people want a nice family, they want a parter to grow old with. Yes there are some people who don't want it but can you say thats because of how broken it is right now or that they really don't want it?
4. It was working well before JFK threw the floodgates open.
5. Yes businesses will always try to influence the government but we were able to combat that with educated and vigilant voters (hint hint not everyone can vote if you want it to work) You can't have people who have no care for a country, that vote only for handouts themselves to drown out of the few that do
6. Failsafes are fine and should always be there but when a minority starts asking for special rights and money and telling the majority to do this or that is where I have a problem.

Just because a term was made later doesn't mean the actual thing wasn't already present. Biology we come up with terms all the time does that mean that the cell/animal/event wasn't there before that term came to be.

1. The difficulty of that is now a days, both parents have to work. Most of the obesity in this country is due to most food being horrible, combine that with a lack of actual physical education. Education started to decline because funding for schools became a lot less. The other things you bring up are not something you can measure, but can easily exist without a nuclear family. Poverty has always been around, and was around when the nuclear family was a thing. What really reduced poverty in the 1950s was the US being the manufacturing center of the world, not because it was simply better, but because most of the competition was reduced to rubble in the war. For example, once japan rebuilt, America started to decline in terms of manufacturing. Same with Europe rebuilding. Its easy to have a lot of people employed when your country has the only working factories and infrastructure. As for empathy... what are you even talking about? Empathy has always existed.

2.Payouts to who? How can America have the highest payouts in welfare, but Europe have it even higher? That is logically impossible. You cant give out the highest, and have someone give out more. People are embarrassed by welfare, and people back then tried to get as much as they needed too. You also negated the point of Americans working more to move to entirely different issue. Which is logically odd to do...

3. People are doing that just fine without the government micromanaging. Also I literally have no idea what you are saying in the last sentence.

4. The US does not really have an integration issue. People have always lived in areas dominated by a particular background when they first move here. It was true in the 1880s and its true now.

5. Once again, what are you talking about? You are going into something so subjective its illogical to even attempt to continue this point. Whose voting that hates the country? People you dont like, or are there really people out there who actually hate america and go out of their way to vote in large enough numbers to fuck up the process?

6. Are you switching from "the minority" to "minorities"? they are different things. The Minority can mean a political party, political group, etc. Minorities can mean racial and ethnic background.

The nuclear family failed due to inflation. before ww2, the nuclear family was not really a thing, women worked before the nuclear family was really a thing. Women would work on farms and in factories. Then we had the idea of the nuclear family where Women could be at home. But then inflation, and other factors made it impossible to really do.

[FrostyMage]

I am not a Republican because I disagree with the GOP on too many issues. I do however think that leftists are the ones who are doing their best to stir up racial tension in this country. I also do not believe for a second that Islam is a religion of peace. It doesn't respect our way of life and we shouldn't be forced to respect it. With that being said I believe in things like universal healthcare, higher wages, and affordable college which so many Republicans are against. I am pretty liberal but I do not prescribe to all of that SJW BS. I would consider voting Republican if they'd drop their extreme platform and move over to the center.

[BannedForViews]

"Moral authority" is in and of itself an emotional appeal due to the fundamentally arbitrary and feelings based nature of morals.

Moral authority is authority premised on principles, or fundamental truths, which are independent of written, or positive, laws. As such, moral authority necessitates the existence of and adherence to truth. Because truth does not change, the principles of moral authority are immutable or unchangeable, although as applied to individual circumstances the dictates of moral authority for action may vary due to the exigencies of human life. These principles, which can be of metaphysical and/or religious nature, are considered normative for behavior, whether they are or are not also embodied in written laws,[1] and even if the community is ignoring or violating them.[2] Therefore, the authoritativeness or force of moral authority is applied to the conscience of each individual, who is free to act according to or against its dictates.

Moral authority has thus also been defined as the "fundamental assumptions that guide our perceptions of the world".[3]

You couldn't be MORE wrong, but clearly all you are intent on doing is responding with unfounded quips that are designed to make you appear like you know what you're talking about, when in actuality you do not.

- - - Updated - - -

I am not a Republican because I disagree with the GOP on too many issues. I do however think that leftists are the ones who are doing their best to stir up racial tension in this country. I also do not believe for a second that Islam is a religion of peace. It doesn't respect our way of life and we shouldn't be forced to respect it. With that being said I believe in things like universal healthcare, higher wages, and affordable college which so many Republicans are against. I am pretty liberal but I do not prescribe to all of that SJW BS. I would consider voting Republican if they'd drop their extreme platform and move over to the center.

SO you would consider voting for Republicans if they were Democrats, not Republicans.

What does "I believe in things like universal healthcare, higher wages, and affordable college" mean? What do you believe in them? That they should exist? Why, just because they sound nice? Who should pay for them, and why?

[Felya]

The most amusing thing about this thread and any other thread that involves gun control in this forum:

Person 1: Democrats don't want to take your guns, you're just paranoid!

Next 20 Democrat-leaning people: The Constitution was written long ago and people no longer need guns. We need to be like much of Europe and Australia!

Which is it, really?

It's confusing rhetoric with reality...

[Deleted]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-32...3qtOVN8CY3M7Fw

What are these fuckers? They seem fun.
Not from murica myself, but they must be some from some kind of political party, right?

[NineSpine]

No. While I don't think it's going to usher in some horrible apocalypse in which the only rule of law is crime like some people say, I think it's an unnecessary forfeiture of freedom and therefore one that should not occur. I would do as I often do and point out that there are actually many European countries with fairly high rates of gun ownership, comparable to the US even (though the number of weapons owned is not), which have virtually no gun crimes at all. That's because I think the gun control argument is essentially misguided and is a bad way of addressing the actual underlying causes of crime, which are primarily socioeconomic in nature.

You're right and you're wrong. While many of the underlying issues are indeed socioeconomic, you can't ignore that those countries with gun ownership have extensive gun control regimes to control those guns, even though they let people own them. None of the countries you are referring to have gun laws comparable to the U.S.

[NineSpine]

Cool, I don't actually own a gun. I used to when I lived in a more dangerous neighborhood but sold it as soon as I moved. I support smart reforms that can't be used as building blocks for an outright ban. I value the inherent threat to totalitarianism that the second amendment represents, and I (like many others) consider it a red line for the social contract in America.

The second amendment represents no such threat to totalitarianism. The problem is that you can't defend the second amendment on those grounds, while denying others to moral legitimacy to use guns to solve their problems. For example, if someone decides the U.S. is currently tyrannical for not allowing them to have slaves and child brides, where do you get the moral legitimacy to say they cannot use their guns to kill political leaders to get what they want? The idea of the second amendment as a protection against totalitarian government is inherently begging the question, because you have to start by assuming only you get to decide what is proper governance.

- - - Updated - - -

I know some do, but I am not familiar with the details of every country. I think we could largely offset a need for purely legal solutions by adjusting the gun culture in this country to more heavily promote responsible and rational firearm use, as opposed to the fear mongering the NRA largely engages in right now.

I mean, ultimately, I am more concerned with achieving specific outcomes than the exact means of getting to those outcomes, so virtually all of my suggestions are flexible pending presentation of compelling evidence of effectiveness or ineffectiveness.

I don't think you can change that gun culture without using the state to enforce the notion of guns as dangerous, through better regulation. This is similar to how having licenses for driving promotes and spreads the idea that driving without a license is dangerous and bad.

[ITER]

1. The difficulty of that is now a days, both parents have to work...impossible to really do.

1. Most parents have to work because after WW2 women flooded the market. More workers for the same job means less everyone gets paid. Also women buy the most things many of which are useless items. Women are more materialistic than men, part of their programming. Thats why advertisement is geared towards women. When men controlled the purse strings there was more saving. This added to people thinking that luxuries were necessities. People wouldn't need 2 incomes if Americans didn't spend so much on useless things. Also there is the 2 income trap were most of the income of one of the parents is spent on daycare and other things that the mother would do for free so its a net gain of zero. Poor women always had to work because they would starve other wise, but middle class american women didn't need to until feminism said women should not be at home but working after ww2. Before ww2 women would work some secretary-type job then get married then stayed at home. Allowing those jobs to go to a younger girl and repeated the cycle. They didn't take up male jobs so the wages didn't stagnate because there wasn't a ton of workers fighting for a few jobs. Also you had manufacturing jobs back then which could allow a man without a college education to provide for a family. Those are gone thanks to globalization, having first world workers competing with slave labor. You can measure DV, child abuse, poverty, teenage pregnancy, gang involvement, drugs, dropping out of school and they are lowest in nuclear families compared to all others. Obesity has been linked to the mother working because she isn't home to make dinner so they just get fast food or some other crap.

2. I said some of the highest. If you are a single mother you get a certain amount of money from the state, if the father can't pay or you are in poverty, for every child you have as long as you keep your job income less than a certain amount. You get free food, phones, rent money, healthcare etc. it adds up. Ill have to double check on this but i think some mothers were getting paid 80k a year (money plus benefits) in New York for simple having kids. They would do that until they could jump on social security.

3. People can do just fine without the government interference. But the government keeps wanting to butt in and tell people what they can and cannot do, what they can can cannot say or think. Its not bad in America yet, but people have been arrested for questioning feminism in Canada as well as pushing guys in the UK(think its the UK) now if they ask a women out and she doesn't like it. You have the "yes means yes" laws in California. You have men being kicked out of college because of the say so of a girl.
You wouldn't have to force anyone to form a nuclear family. Most people want it naturally. Most people want to find a partner and have children. Its the natural thing to do. I was curious about the people who say they don't. Do they not want to because its a genuine feeling or is it because they see how bad its gotten and say its just not worth it.

4. Yes but they tried to integrate and eventually did (european descendants). We started implementing immigration laws because of Chinese immigrates who would create chinatowns. Latinos and muslims don't integrate they just create their own country and expect us to change for them. Compare some communities before and after the law pasted in 1965 that through open American to immigrants outside the european world. Not all immigrants are equal.

5.People might not hate the country but they don't vote for whats best for it. You can only have a democracy until people realize they can vote themselves things from the treasury. That is the entire left's plan. Flood American with more immigrants promise them things and then stay in power and profit. Yes I know illegal immigrants can't vote but that why the left wants to speed up the process. The left destroyed the african american community to keep them on an IV drip(welfare) so they always get there vote. Same thing thats happening in Europe. Politicians think the immigrants will keep voting for them as long as they keep promising them things. You have all these people voting for free stuff and they just drown out the people wanting to stop it (generally the hard working middle class american who has seen their living standards plummet).

6. They really are one and the same. Each minority group has their own lobbyist groups and they try to impose their will on Americans by saying they are oppressed because white people are mean so therefore they need special rights like affirmative action in school and businesses. All the minority groups fall under the umbrella of the left. Racial and ethnic backgrounds are really the same when it comes to human's minds. Thats why racism is not really about skin color. It is about what the culture the skin color represents.

I hope that answered some of your questions. I'm not the best at conveying ideas.

[GennGreymane]

1. Most parents have to work because after WW2 women flooded the market. More workers for the same job means less everyone gets paid. Also women buy the most things many of which are useless items. Women are more materialistic than men, part of their programming. Thats why advertisement is geared towards women. When men controlled the purse strings there was more saving. This added to people thinking that luxuries were necessities. People wouldn't need 2 incomes if Americans didn't spend so much on useless things. Also there is the 2 income trap were most of the income of one of the parents is spent on daycare and other things that the mother would do for free so its a net gain of zero. Poor women always had to work because they would starve other wise, but middle class american women didn't need to until feminism said women should not be at home but working after ww2. Before ww2 women would work some secretary-type job then get married then stayed at home. Allowing those jobs to go to a younger girl and repeated the cycle. They didn't take up male jobs so the wages didn't stagnate because there was a ton of workers fighting for the a few jobs. You can measure DV, child abuse, poverty, teenage pregnancy, gang involvement, drugs, dropping out of school and they are lowest in nuclear families compared to all others. Obesity has been linked to the mother working because she isn't home to make dinner so they just get fast food or some other crap.

2. I said some of the highest. If you are a single mother you get a certain amount of money from the state, if the father can't pay or you are in poverty, for every child you have as long as you keep your job income less than a certain amount. You get free food, phones, rent money, healthcare etc. it adds up. Ill have to double check on this but i think some mothers were getting paid 80k a year (money plus benefits) in New York for simple having kids. They would do that until they could jump on social security.

3. People can do just fine without the government interference. But the government keeps wanting to butt in and tell people what they can and cannot do, what they can can cannot say or think. Its not bad in America yet, but people have been arrested for questioning feminism in Canada as well as pushing guys in the UK(think its the UK) now if they ask a women out and she doesn't like it. You have the "yes means yes" laws in California. You have men being kicked out of college because of the say so of a girl.
You wouldn't have to force anyone to form a nuclear family. Most people want it naturally. Most people want to find a partner and have children. Its the natural thing to do. I was curious about the people who say they don't. Do they not want to because its a genuine feeling or is it because they see how bad its gotten and say its just not worth it.

4. Yes but they tried to integrate and eventually did (european descendants). We started implementing immigration laws because of Chinese immigrates who would create chinatowns. Latinos and muslims don't integrate they just create their own country and expect us to change for them. Compare some communities before and after the law pasted in 1965 that through open American to immigrants outside the european world. Not all immigrants are equal.

5.People might not hate the country but they don't vote for whats best for it. You can only have a democracy until people realize they can vote themselves things from the treasury. That is the entire left's plan. Flood American with more immigrants promise them things and then stay in power and profit. Yes I know illegal immigrants can't vote but that why the left wants to speed up the process. The left destroyed the african american community to keep them on an IV drip(welfare) so they always get there vote. Same thing thats happening in Europe. Politicians think the immigrants will keep voting for them as long as they keep promising them things. You have all these people voting for free stuff and they just drown out the people wanting to stop it (generally the hard working middle class american who has seen their living standards plummet).

6. They really are one and the same. Each minority group has their own lobbyist groups and they try to impose their will on American by saying they are oppressed because white people are mean so therefore they need special rights like affirmative action in school and businesses. All the minority groups fall under the umbrella of the left. Racial and ethnic backgrounds are really the same when it comes to human's minds. Thats why racism is not really about skin color. It is about what the culture the skin color represents.

I hope that answered some of your questions. I'm not the best at conveying ideas.

I stopped reading after your first two sentences... it made no sense to your argument before....you're right... you are not the best at conveying ideas.... it literally makes no sense to the topic before.

I decided to read your last paragraph

No, you cant initially discuss "the minority" in the political sense, to have me answer it, and then switch to "racial minority". That makes no sense and discredits what you said before, which means you made me waste time in discussing it with you.

[Stormspellz]

They got it. So now they need to shut up if they really wanted equality.

Then tell state level GOP to stop trying undo what the SCOTUS ruling

Right...so when the Government has a council for girls and women but won't have one for boys and men thats no influence. When government officials are always talking about this women's issue or this one thats not anything either?

more rhetoric with out facts, all generic what ifs

Except most of them want better lives in their cultures so they come here wanting handouts then recreate their cultures. They don't want to be Americans. Have you ever seen communities go from an American community to a different country. Please look at South Florida as a perfect example. They want their better life at the expensive of my country, sorry but thats not okay.

What do you mean they don't exist. France has no go zones. Britain has said they know of Sharia Courts operating. Pew research has said majority of muslims want to enact sharia law in the west. 99% of all terrorism is Islamic, the white/christian terrorism is not significant compared to thousands/millions Islam kills each year.

You are trying to tell me that if an owner of a business wants to run it a certain way that is wrong? He/She shouldn't have the right to do that if it makes somebody's feelings hurt?

American is multiculturalism, there is nothing wrong with people honoring their heritage in private manors, its not your country its our country. those "sharia courts" you speak of are community organizations with no legal binding power. Its like your local soft ball league passing judgment on a situation. That isn't a sharia court, further more can you name this "no go zone" or even one of these supposed courts or "south Florida", once again you speak in vague rhetoric. In the US 94% of terrorist attacks have been committed by none Muslims since 1980 (FBI stats) Ironically most "terrorist" attacks have been from eco terrorists. Muslims terrorist attacks have taken what 75 people? since 9/11 when we average something like 11,000 murders a year.

are you telling me its ok for a business not serve someone for being black? christian? white? brown? jew?

[jellmoo]

Well, as a Canadian I'm neither, but were I American I would likely default to Democrat as I'm left of center and tend to fall more in their camp. That being said, I'm anti-gun ownership, so I might actually fall outside of even that demographic...

[Sky High]

registered as Democrat but not really in that boat anymore. /shrug

[Stormspellz]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-32...3qtOVN8CY3M7Fw

What are these fuckers? They seem fun.
Not from murica myself, but they must be some from some kind of political party, right?

Gotta love wanna be lawyers

[ITER]

I stopped reading after your first two sentences... it made no sense to your argument before....you're right... you are not the best at conveying ideas.... it literally makes no sense to the topic before.

I decided to read your last paragraph

No, you cant initially discuss "the minority" in the political sense, to have me answer it, and then switch to "racial minority". That makes no sense and discredits what you said before, which means you made me waste time in discussing it with you.

Sorry but you talked about ww2 effecting jobs. I answered your question. Don't try to respond to my argument by pretending its not comprehensible. You didn't bother to try. Since you didn't give me the respect of trying to understand my arguments and try to refute my points I am going to assume you can't because you don't have any logical and factual arguments.

It does pertain to what we were talking about before.

[Bighud44]

Sounds like a dumb reason... "I don't like what some people say" also what's the republican platform? "No gay rights, because my God says you aren't equal. No you can't have an abortion even though you were raped becuae it goes against my God and my beliefs. Fuck welfare, fuck social spending, even thoguh my constituates are the poorest and make up the largest number of people actually receiving money from the government. Why should we care about education?"

- - - Updated - - -



What's restricting gun rights to you? Demanding universal background checks?

You prove my point. You go off stating things as facts with no proof. NO WHERE in any Republican platform does it say that gay people dont have rights. (we just dont agree with that lifestyle and the rational that the supreme court used, doesnt make us hate anyone, we just dont agree. Like obviously you dont agree with us, but since your liberal you are allowed to disagree but since I am republican my disagreement is hate to you) NO WHERE does it say that gays arent equal. (Sorry to tell you but DOMA was put in place by a Democrat). NEVER has one republican said "My God" and not "Our God".

Back up your statements with facts....Republicans arent against welfare or social spending. They want it toned down. In America we have more people on welfare now than ever before. More that have been on it for years. And thats the Democrats fault. Also how do you figure that Republicans make up the most people on welfare? Its the other way around.

And sorry but the only restriction on gun rights is if your a convicted felon or mentally unstable. You may not agree with it, which is your right if your an American, but its my constitutional right.

[GennGreymane]

Sorry but you talked about ww2 effecting jobs. I answered your question. Don't try to respond to my argument by pretending its not comprehensible. You didn't bother to try. Since you didn't give me the respect of trying to understand my arguments and try to refute my points I am going to assume you can't because you don't have any logical and factual arguments.

It does pertain to what we were talking about before.

No I spoke about the nuclear family, which includes the time period. You are discussing women's programming. It makes no sense to discuss it that way. I gave you plenty of respect. I attempted to have an actual discussion with you, however, you keep choosing to change definitions and the argument, which makes it a waste of time for me to honestly continue. All I ask is for you to stay consistent in what you are saying in terms of well terms and definitions.

[NineSpine]

You prove my point. You go off stating things as facts with no proof. NO WHERE in any Republican platform does it say that gay people dont have rights. (we just dont agree with that lifestyle and the rational that the supreme court used, doesnt make us hate anyone, we just dont agree. Like obviously you dont agree with us, but since your liberal you are allowed to disagree but since I am republican my disagreement is hate to you) NO WHERE does it say that gays arent equal. (Sorry to tell you but DOMA was put in place by a Democrat). NEVER has one republican said "My God" and not "Our God".

Back up your statements with facts....Republicans arent against welfare or social spending. They want it toned down. In America we have more people on welfare now than ever before. More that have been on it for years. And thats the Democrats fault. Also how do you figure that Republicans make up the most people on welfare? Its the other way around.

And sorry but the only restriction on gun rights is if your a convicted felon or mentally unstable. You may not agree with it, which is your right if your an American, but its my constitutional right.

Opposing gay marriage means opposing equal rights for gays, which is a violation of the 14th Amendment.

- - - Updated - - -

You prove my point. You go off stating things as facts with no proof. NO WHERE in any Republican platform does it say that gay people dont have rights. (we just dont agree with that lifestyle and the rational that the supreme court used, doesnt make us hate anyone, we just dont agree. Like obviously you dont agree with us, but since your liberal you are allowed to disagree but since I am republican my disagreement is hate to you) NO WHERE does it say that gays arent equal. (Sorry to tell you but DOMA was put in place by a Democrat). NEVER has one republican said "My God" and not "Our God".

Back up your statements with facts....Republicans arent against welfare or social spending. They want it toned down. In America we have more people on welfare now than ever before. More that have been on it for years. And thats the Democrats fault. Also how do you figure that Republicans make up the most people on welfare? Its the other way around.

And sorry but the only restriction on gun rights is if your a convicted felon or mentally unstable. You may not agree with it, which is your right if your an American, but its my constitutional right.

Also, the number of people on welfare is down:
http://www.cbpp.org/sites/default/fi...-12tanf-f2.jpg

Maybe you should "Back up your statements with facts"

[Crissi]

Can I vote neither? Because I'm really neither, although my family is historically Republican pre 2008. Socially more moderate liberal, economically moderate conservative. So Dino / Rino territory.

Rather annoying getting yelled at to pick a side though. I'm a huge believer in moderation and compromises, and I hate extreme positions

[Bighud44]

Not every response needs to be fawned over. If you say something that is simply not true and sounds stupid, people might fire a shot across the bow.

Nothing that I said isnt true...Its in the Liberal play book to attack when they dont get their way....Just look at most post on here. Republican = Racist, Bigot, woman hating etc etc. Yet look at history. It was Republicans who voted to abolish slavery...here is a link of just a few items Libs need to look at..http://russp.us/racism.htm