-
Practice your interview with the new SDN AI Interview Coach. Choose a school, answer by voice or typing, and receive a personalized feedback report. Available now to all SDN members. Try the AI Interview Coach.
Conservative or Liberal
Started by elektroshok
I would consider myself Moderate Liberal. Liberal on social issues, Keynesian on fiscal issues, slightly conservative on foreign policy, except for Israel, Iran, and Venezuela (meaning I think Russia and China are threats and not friends and our military needs to be able to stand up to them if God forbid they make hostile moves), and generally center leftish on everything else. I am pro-choice, support the 2nd Amendment, the death penalty, and nuclear power.
My Ambien is starting to hit me so please read with a sympatheic eye.
I don't think they would disagree with him at all. The grown up reality is, if your economy is not sound your heart can bleed for all the great causes in the world but you won't be able to do anything about them. The world operates on the basis of money and without it you can't do anything substatial short of donating your time.
Our current national situation is really going to demonstrate the point quite cleary very soon. Unless the government is planning to inflate our way out of the astronomical deficits we have it will basically collapse our economy. Things are looking really bad. On the other hand the medical profession is looking even more appealing based on requirement for all societies. No matter how bad it gets you'll be in good shape.
You're going to come out of here with a uS MD degres, a station that will allow to practice almosr anywher inb rhe wrolrI'm getting some lgjt halucinationss heren I can't see alll rhw I'll hace to come back tokmorrow unndrerbeterrt circimcstamxes to correct muzd;clg
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
What was your basis for that? While it could be true for those in academic medicine that's about end of the line for tha type . Once MD get out in to the world the become conservative. It's a natiual progression as people get oldder they become more comservativer. Ambien discloauew
I would
This is astonishing. Marx and Engels professed that they would have to muder millions, possobly 10% of the popution, that might not agree with thier plan or were not likely to benefit the collective. These people were sociopaths that should have been lobotomized long ago. I'd say that's an ideology we should exterminate ASAP.
As far as it goes, these two choices are at the extreme opposites of each other. I consider myself independent, but a little more to the right than the average constituent. I guess that means I should pick conservative then.
(And to top it off, the polls are dead even now after I voted)
(And to top it off, the polls are dead even now after I voted)
Never said that all christians vote GOP. My best friend is christian and a die hard liberal. I however am saying that the GOP's face is that of a white christian male who believes the world is 6000 years old and believes the nation was founded on juedo-christian values. This was the reason why i decided the GOP was just not my type of group.
I would go out on a limb and say that most christians do vote GOP; your friend is an exception. Also, not all republicans are rich white men and not all democrats are hippies, so you shouldn't base your opinion on stupid stereotypes. Stereotypes are a tool by the media to funnel their own propaganda.
Also, I don't know how anyone can believe that judeo-christian values didn't play a part in the foundation of this country. All of the founding fathers were openly Christian men.
"This country is in no way founded upon the christian religion." Treaty of Tripoli.
anyway our founding fathers were hardly christian.. they were more or a group of deists.
Like i said, their method of solving the problem was irrational; this is because it was never tested before.
They however were the first people to figure out the biggest problem in humanity. The source of all conflict and why it all happened.
You my friend are not reading in the context of Marx & Engels. They lived in a world where everything traditional and good was replaced by a new system of hierarchy the industrial era.
And on the basis of killing 10% of the population? Most social changes come violently and people will die. Anyway that is streaming into communism and stalinism. Marxism doesnt really talk about killing ppl as much as trying to reshape the worlds social classes.
So i'll say again, Marx was brilliant because he found the problem. He left you all the solve it.
Take a intro to sociology or economics class. You'll figure out that Marx is probably in the top 10 most important figures in human history.
Yes yes.. because russia poses some sort of threat to us? The only threat they pose to us is the use of a nuclear bomb. If they use 1 nuke its safe to assume a whole pipe line of **** will be coming towards us. We will not be able to safely defend against that.... But since russia knows that using nuclear weapons would probably scorch the earth and destroy it.. we have little to worry about russia.
China? yah.. they just have to spray some sort of slow release poison or better more put some strand of biologically enhanced smallpox on the **** they export to us. And boom they will utterly kill amount of us. However China needs us because we support there economy with our *****ic desire to buy cheaply made poo.
2nd amendment... regulate it.. i want someone to pass a competency test before they are allowed to legally own even 1 gun.
Death penalty.. hmm.. no particular stand point on this.. Though blower if 10 years later you find out he was innocent.. too late i guess?
Nuclear power.. hmm personally i like it.. but there's not thhat much uranium in the world, its a 100 year alternative. Im more interested in putting research into reusable energy.
overall you get about 85% of your politcal ideology from your parents 😀.
89-89
pretty awesome imo
pretty awesome imo
Liberal. I am slightly fiscally conservative, but wouldn't mind having 40% of my salary go to make the country better. But of course if we are using a lot of that money for "defense," forget it.
I should just add that I was born in Europe, and there US conservatives would be considered crazy. There is something about the drive for money and material items that makes the US different.
I should just add that I was born in Europe, and there US conservatives would be considered crazy. There is something about the drive for money and material items that makes the US different.
Wow that's enlightened. Let's allow ourselves to be exposed to the terrorists of the world by cutting defense.
Yeah, b/c we need more ballastic missles/tanks/f-35's/etc to take out those pesky "terrorists."
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Yes because building up our defense is actually going to stop sleeper cells? Im all for putting money into homeland security.. to bad most of our defense budget probably goes to.. iraq/afgan...
Yes, some of the founding fathers were deists but most were chrisitian-deists. They still attended Chrisitian services regularly. Deism was more of an intellectual viewpoint rather than a religion. Furthermore, Governor Morris, the author of the constitution was known for being an outspoken Christian.
Um.. Deism.. god existed one time... but then decided he really couldn't give a f*&k about us so he's no longer here anymore. I dont think that could really work with the christian religion. Yes, people like Ben Franklin attended christian services.. and afterwords talked about how ridiculous they were.
In the end result the founders of the nation were free-masons and as such were deisitic in there beliefs at most, hardly christian in any conventional sense. Unless you believe that going to church somehow merits someone the status of a christian.
Governor Morris was a christian,.... alright.. but did his christianity bleed into the constitution and dominate it and eradicate any possibility of religious freedom or separation of church and state? If the US was founded by christian values we'd have a state religion written into our constitution like other european nations whom did not have separation of church and state.
Your first paragraph is completely generalized and opinionated, and, yes, I am saying that attending church every Sunday for a long period of time merits the status of (at the very least) Christian morals and ideals.
Governor Morris was absolutely for separation of church and state as I am now. The point being that the European constitutions were prohibiting its citizens from participating in Christian denominations apart from the state's choice Christian denomination. Thus, those citizens came to the United States where they hoped they could practice whatever Christian denomination or religion as they pleased. Governor Morris and the rest of the founding fathers were aware of this and saw the problems that a state religion imposed.
As a rational person, I just don't see how any of the founding fathers could check their Christian morals and ideals at the door and only bring with them their secular views when they discussed the foundation of this country.
"Separation of church and state," as the general public now interprets it, has nothing to do with the constitution nor the priciples upon which the US was founded.
Religious freedom, certainly, even the freedom to not be religious, but "the separation of church and state" comes from a letter from Thomas Jefferson to a church in Connecticut, and the context is more along the lines of "the government does not have the right to interfere with your church business." It sounds anti-religious so people took it up and love to now use it as banter to "prove" how "secular those founding fathers were 🙄."
This is not directed to you, but it is easy to see who goes by what they are taught through public education (poorly, I might add) versus those who study history for themselves IN CONTEXT. But this goes both ways and means that one cannot just take social church attendance as proof of religious idealogy or belief in a particular system of theology.
Last edited:
Well seeing as i got a 5 on the ap world,euro exam and 4 on the ap us history exam.. I do think i know a little something about history 😀. Though.. I'm more into history of the Old world and history revolving around social changes... and the conquerors of the world ( Nappy, Caesar... so on)
Look.. im not down talking the religious here or anything, but i've done tons of reports on Jefferson and Washington on there personal religious affiliation and lives. They were simply not religious people in the sense of a die hard christian they were deists ( i,e not secular).You can argue that they were and thats cool, we're all entitled to our own opinions right? As ol'volty said i may not agree with what you say but i'll die for your right to say it.
On the topic.. i think the only non-religious secular founding father ( well he's not a founding father just important in our history) was Thomas Paine. Not really a founder but he was important...
Simply being said, if you want to take into account the philosophy of the age of enlightenment effect on the revolutions. It visibly evident that we started moving away from religion and deism was the popular thing.
But again we all have our own opinions.. in the end result our founding fathers made this nation for US ALL.
And yes i know that sep of church and state isnt in the constitution, but its such a pilliar of our nation that we can safely use consituion and sep of church and state together in the same sentence.
Look.. im not down talking the religious here or anything, but i've done tons of reports on Jefferson and Washington on there personal religious affiliation and lives. They were simply not religious people in the sense of a die hard christian they were deists ( i,e not secular).You can argue that they were and thats cool, we're all entitled to our own opinions right? As ol'volty said i may not agree with what you say but i'll die for your right to say it.
On the topic.. i think the only non-religious secular founding father ( well he's not a founding father just important in our history) was Thomas Paine. Not really a founder but he was important...
Simply being said, if you want to take into account the philosophy of the age of enlightenment effect on the revolutions. It visibly evident that we started moving away from religion and deism was the popular thing.
But again we all have our own opinions.. in the end result our founding fathers made this nation for US ALL.
And yes i know that sep of church and state isnt in the constitution, but its such a pilliar of our nation that we can safely use consituion and sep of church and state together in the same sentence.
Last edited:
I voted conservative, but I am a Libertarian..
Same here.
👍
I'm sure you can also appreciate how American music history at least somewhat compliments this view...
PS: My school used Laitz (sp) for music theory... isn't he a faculty member at your school? (I saw your school on your mdapps)
Precisely the same for me as well, although I picked Conservative because I am a registered Republican. Definitely consider myself a Libertarian.
Agreed.
Yeah, I graduated in 2004, but I'll never forget having to do a keyboard audit (as a non-piano playing brass musician) for the man. 😳
I would classify myself as conservative on fiscal issues and... ALSO ON SOCIAL ISSUES!! 😱 It appears that the vast majority of you seem to have the impression that social conservatives are all ignorant and are halting the progress of humanity. I mean, who in their right mind would DARE to suggest that life may in fact begin at conception?!! And why can't they just abandon their convictions and accept the fact that homosexuality is natural and should be openly embraced?!
By the way, Haiti was Sarah Palin's fault.
By the way, Haiti was Sarah Palin's fault.
haha... I hear you. My trumpet teacher told me some stories over the years about how difficult his grad school studies were up there....
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Umm... Alright.. the fetus has a soul/life.. thats not the problem, is it worth giving birth to a child so it will never have love in its life and end up in a foster home like one of my friends? He still has nightmares about foster homes!
And with the homosexuality part? Ok your an *******. No one has to go say its perfectly natural or we should all be gay. But is respect too much to ask? I mean gays are still tax paying citizens, they should by no means be treated like second class citizens.
Im sorry your kinda a bitch..
Because most 'intelligent' conservatives don't hold sentiments such as the dude above. Honestly.... its people like him that have killed the GOP post-Reagen.
Ok, you're right, I'm sorry. Let's just destroy the fetuses of those mothers who we deem to be unfit parents. I mean, after all, you are the rightful judge of which lives are worth living, because you clearly recognize that it is impossible for the child of a crack-addict to amount to anything and live a fulfilling life. And I believe that homosexuals, like all human beings, should be treated with the utmost respect. I am just saying that their lifestyle doesn't need to be endorsed. And I very much appreciate how tolerant you are of those who have different opinions than you.
And dude, your grammar sucks. your =/= you're. Fix that before you write your personal statement.
Umm no.. I'm saying that if a mother want to abort a baby it typically means that theres probably a reason. Maybe the baby will stay with the mother and get love. But will you tell me that its better to have the baby given off to a foster home if the mother doesnt want it? Frankly your twisting my words, I'm saying that after seeing my friend who honestly is the biggest supporter of freedom to abortion. He's a person that saw way too many people die in foster homes or end up ****ed up. I will agree abortion is wrong, i will not disagree on this. But when the life of the child will be compromised by foster homes, then whats the point of giving birth to a child? Where are the government programs that help these children adjust to life? I have yet to see some, adoptions are too few, especially since GOP stand on gay adoption is it shouldn't happen.
Anyway abortion is a cascading theme. Its about the theme of erosion of rights. What right does the government have to say on what i do with my body? If they can say i cant do this. How long till they say you cant do another thing that you see as a civil liberty? How long until the government banns all marriage and just makes it a civil union which you have to go through bureaucracy to do? You see the government would probably like that to keep people from marrying friends for a green card or other things. I mean really there will be a time when the government will be able to erode your liberties because you didnt stand up for abortion or gays. If you dont want to think about others, well think about yourself!
Its like the poem about the holocaust.
First they came for the gypsies, i did nothing cuz i want a gypsy. Then they came for the jews but i did nothing because i wasnt a jew. Then when they came for me no one could stand up and help me.
No one's endorsing homosexuality, maybe they just want some civil rights? But hey separate but equal has such beautiful implications right?
I really cant say anything on this.. I honestly dont think your that bad of a guy.. but you need to really open your eyes and see that this world is some **** and if you dig deep enough you can see that if you dont help dig the others out of ****. You will be in the **** later. Its like the loop of globalization, sure some ppl benifit right now... but later when your job is exported then you see how horrible it is.
Im tolerant of people who respect others. When someone bluntly and utterly shows no respect they deserve none. I dont feel the urge to die for your right to talk sorry, have a nice day🙂.
Last edited:
Yes.
Yeah, last I checked gay people weren't segregated?
How have I shown disrespect? I merely have different opinions than you.
I don't mind political debates, and I believe that this thread is a good place to do it. However, I'd ask that you don't make comments about people's "intelligence" because they have views differing than yours. It doesn't contribute anything to the conversation.
You know what I'm sick of? Everybody needing to be politically correct at all times. People are way too sensitive these days. You speak your mind and you get crucified for it. Last time I checked free speech is a right in this country.
Sorry i will say that these topics i feel strongly about because they tie into my life and my experiences.
And im sorry i cant facilitate and support bigotry, i was raised to believe that love and understanding is the only way problems can be fixed. Bigotry and me simply dont mix.
I will agree too much of political correctness sucks. However some political correctness is how peoples avoids conflict.
Agreed. Everybody could use an internal edit center.
Well unfortunately some ppl arent wise enough to release the implications of what they say and how it can effect others.
I mean i remember in intro psych we did a experiment on testing, if your called names which make you feel degraded and or stupid. Your testing scores will drop by a lot. Our words are just as painful and potent at hurting others as are our fists.
Your friend, if he is now with a family who loves him, isn't that better than having not been born at all? And again, are you the rightful judge of whether "it's simply not a life worth living"?
No. It's not.
No, I didn't. In fact, I said that as human beings, they are worthy of our utmost respect. I just disagree with you that such a lifestyle is moral.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
lifestyle. That's demeaning.
It's a pc way of saying "ewwwww!"
Lifestyle? I just don't get it.
Do you think all LGBT folk go and rage all night, do tons of drugs, and have lots of casual partners?
a) that's not the case (I'll offer myself up...been in incredible relationship for over 3 years, don't go clubbing, never done drugs, etc etc)
b) last time I checked, all of my straight male friends are more promiscuous, binge-drinking, drug-trying than any of my LGBT friends.
Lifestyle.
Whatever. And you wonder why people are still terrified of coming out? Sigh.
Morality is a personal spectrum. If you dont believe its moral thats alright. I dont believe britny britny should be able to get married too.
Morality honestly, whats not moral about having 2 loving adults love each other? I mean really? I understand culture has socialized you into a person who doesnt see it as moral without any real reason.
I personally think that if 2 loving ppl are in love and homogenous then theres nothing more moral then that..
But again.. the reason why im not conservative is because im not a Christian and i am highly disturbed by the "morality" of that religion.
You're entitled to your own opinions. You are not entitled to your own facts.
Here are the facts:
Currently, 12 states and the District of Columbia have policies that protect against both sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination in employment: California[2], Colorado[3], Iowa, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington in the public and private sector. An additional nine states -- Connecticut, Delaware[4][5], Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Hampshire, New York, and Wisconsin -- have state laws that protect against discrimination based on sexual orientation only.
That means that in many states, it is perfectly legal to fire people on the basis of sexual orientation.
FACT.
ENDA (Employment non discrimination act) would change all of this.
But it has not been passed. It's been stalled.
Why don't you take a minute and educated yourself on these issues.
Otherwise, shut up.
Last edited:
I highly agree. People are socialized into thinking that gays are unfortunately just AIDs carrying defects.
As Auguste Comte once said, humanitiy sucks, we can only make it a better place by trying to understand and accept each other all. <positivism>
Okay, so earlier I only made the statement about the intellect thing because I don't think it does anything except piss people off.
Why is this turning into a huge debate over abortion and homosexuality?
And Serenade, no one is forcing you to support bigotry... you've been just as vocal about your views and concerns as anyone else.
I had a long conversation a month ago with a gay male that was a music major the same time I was. We talked about his concerns about civil rights and things that bothered him. Even though I am a conservative Christian, I do believe that he is entitled to the same rights as anyone else.
Persecution of any group of people is wrong. The God I worship loves every single person the same despite anything I've done wrong, or anything anyone else has done.
I'm not a moral judge, and my religion (if followed by the Bible) doesn't put that role into my hands anyway. If a group of people does something they consider right and I consider wrong, they are perfectly free to do it. I have my own convictions and they have theirs.
Now back to the conversation. He and I talked about what could be done to solve the issues he is so passionate about. And he and I both agreed that there are ways (we talked about several in particular) that would make both groups (for the most part) happy. I'm not going into detail because I don't feel like checking this thread every hour to defend or explain.
I guess my main point is that every conservative isn't a bigot because of their opposing views. What makes them a bigot is how they respond to the opposing view. If I understand the definition of bigotry correctly it is someone who sees their views as the only "right way". If thats the correct definition, then I hope you can see there are bigots on both sides of every issue known to man.
Why is this turning into a huge debate over abortion and homosexuality?
And Serenade, no one is forcing you to support bigotry... you've been just as vocal about your views and concerns as anyone else.
I had a long conversation a month ago with a gay male that was a music major the same time I was. We talked about his concerns about civil rights and things that bothered him. Even though I am a conservative Christian, I do believe that he is entitled to the same rights as anyone else.
Persecution of any group of people is wrong. The God I worship loves every single person the same despite anything I've done wrong, or anything anyone else has done.
I'm not a moral judge, and my religion (if followed by the Bible) doesn't put that role into my hands anyway. If a group of people does something they consider right and I consider wrong, they are perfectly free to do it. I have my own convictions and they have theirs.
Now back to the conversation. He and I talked about what could be done to solve the issues he is so passionate about. And he and I both agreed that there are ways (we talked about several in particular) that would make both groups (for the most part) happy. I'm not going into detail because I don't feel like checking this thread every hour to defend or explain.
I guess my main point is that every conservative isn't a bigot because of their opposing views. What makes them a bigot is how they respond to the opposing view. If I understand the definition of bigotry correctly it is someone who sees their views as the only "right way". If thats the correct definition, then I hope you can see there are bigots on both sides of every issue known to man.
