What's up with all the conservatives on here?

Post Reply New Topic

See my separate post on guns here.

So we've gone from guns to abortion? Ok, I have an opinion on that too.

Up until recently, I'd thought of myself as pro-choice because my conclusions lined up more closely with pro-choice conclusions than pro-life, despite the fact that the ideas that lead me to my conclusion are different from most pro-choice people. Recently, it occurred to me that pro-life/pro-choice is a false dichotomy, and that I am only circumstancially pro-choice, so even though my views haven't changed on this subject, the way I would frame them has.

So in most instances I am pro choice. I'm pro-choice in the case of rape, incest, if the pregnancy threatens the mother's life, if the child will have severe disability and if protection was used and it failed to work. I'm also for the father's right to get a "legal abortion" in which the father has no financial obligations to the child but also no parental rights, in any case where the mother could have an abortion if she chooses to, but chooses not to, and the father doesn't want to be a father. If the mother can get out of being a mother, the father should damn well be extended the same choice. You know, financial autonomy and all that.

Anyway, so the only time I'm not pro-choice is if the couple in question had unprotected sex and this results in a pregnancy, and abortion is really just after-the-fact birth control. Now I do think they should be able to get an abortion, but not because "woman's body, woman's choice" (as far as I'm concerned, the choice was already made when you had unprotected sex), but because I don't think it's right to bring a child into the world when the two people who are supposed to be this child's closest allies in this world, want nothing to do with them. I think that is a terrible start to life, and it is only for the reason that the child will have a very bad start in life that I think abortion should be allowed in the case of unprotected sex. I'd be in favour of imposing penalties on anyone, woman or man, who is responsible for multiple abortions occurring as a result of irresponsible unprotected sex.

Equality
the state of being equal, especially in status, rights, and opportunities.

Giving women the right to say I don’t want this baby and responsible it saying ,en don’t have that same right isn’t equality.
Feminism doesn’t equal women, most women aren’t feminism, a lot hate feminism. A lot don’t support abortions. So I’d rather be with a woman who’s nit a feminist and isn’t pro abortion. Semester there’s quite a lot of them to choose from.

No it isn’t I think being asd and liberal is shooting yourselves in the foot.
You saying conservatives are all rich or white nationalist is like so,done saying liberals are all Antifa.

You sew few non liberals who post a lot.but not a lot of different posters. Gun rights isn’t a conservative issue it’s a freedom issue. I’m a constitutionalist if anything. Leave the constitution and bill of rights alone and we won’t have any issues. What’s scary is that supporting the constitution, bill of rights and laws is seen as conservative and horrible thing by so many people.

I have nothing to add to this; it's how I see it, too, including a man's right to not be a father.

Where on Earth do you get the idea that Democrats want to do that???

I would be fine with it if men could get a "financial abortion," providing that such an action would permanently terminate any and all parental rights of the father.

I don’t think you fully understand what “feminism” is. It’s the desire for equality. There are extremists, but that doesn’t reflect the majority of feminists.

When someone says that they don’t like “feminism,” it’s puzzling to me, unless you’re in some fundamentalist group. I have lots of experience with those and have heard “feminism” repeatedly bashed based on religious grounds.

One can say that one wants equal rights for both sexes, but due to inequality based on gender that still persists in a variety of realms, a word that reflects women’s struggle in this area makes a lot of sense.

Well, no. Conservatives and (American-style) liberals differ on WHICH aspects of our lives they want the government to regulate.

Conservatives are more likely to favor continuing the failed War on Drugs, for example (although, these days, this has become an issue that crosses ideological lines to some extent). Also many religious right wingers would like to go back to the days when homosexual sex acts were outlawed, and are, of course, the main ones who want to outlaw abortion.

On the other hand, conservatives want more "freedom" to do things like pollute land and water, which infringes on the rights and lives of the people who live on said land and water.

Which specific regulations, generally favored by liberals but not by conservatives, are bothersome to you?


Indeed eugenics has the potential to become more and more of a issue as genetics research advances. However, to prevent this, what's needed is not to prohibit abortion, but better regulation of the uses of amniocentesis.

@ Sly , yes you are outnumbered when it comes to some of your political views and it will feel like you are being ganged up on , but I can assure you I will not tolerate anyone attacking you on a personal level. Gawd I hate PPR

Everybody to the left of you is not a “liberal”

Let’s see I started a thread about the enabling and cowering of SJW’s, said repeatedly said the left is a long term danger, sided with Sandmann over stolen valor Phillips, when the student strike over gun control happened last year spent a whole thread arguing with Goldfish because I thought the schools not punishing to encouraging it was wrong because 1. I thought students should protest after hours 2. I taught it taught the wrong lesson about what happens in life if you walk out of a job to attend a political protest. I go further then Van Jones and have said the idea the that people not like them are stupid, uncouth, racists, and sexists are not just something progressives say too often, it is the central tenant of current progressive world view.

The people in this section and Autistics in general do not fit into neat tribal boundaries, hell we just don’t fit in. For example Fnord holds a lot of left views but he oft criticizes whining and lazyness. Ezra is very cynical about progressives but has he said he is for positions thought of as conservative a lot?

I don’t think liberal is much of a thing nowadays. By liberal I mean not only more but less then socialist government intervention, but pro union, truly down with the working to middle class, optimistic and positive not cynical about people. Arguably the last true major liberal figure in American politics was Walter Mondale and that was 35 years ago.

This claim is based on what exactly?

Can you give specific recent examples, applicable to most (not just a few) Democrats, for "every single right in the bill of rights"?

It’s also not a sacred document. It was written a long time ago and won’t be entirely applicable in modern times.

I don’t fully get the reverence and fervor it’s given.

I know you're asking for specifics, but I'll preface by saying that generally, "conservatives" have favored less government and an emphasis on individual freedom whereas generally "liberals" have favored more government and more regulation of individual freedom "for the good of the people" as a whole. No question either belief system can be prone to abuse, but I will always favor individual freedom as a tenet over the latter.

Specifics:

At my local rural level. I grew up in this area and moved back here after living in an urban area for approximately 15 years. Traditionally this rural area was "conservative" in that neighbors got along without volumes of regulations, ordinances, etc. It has turned in the last 20 years, coincidentally the time that urban people started moving out here. The leadership's main goal is to increase regulations to the point that recently it was suggested by leadership that land owners should have to get advance permission to cut even a single tree down on their own property and the leadership would decide on approval or denial in advance. The reason given by leadership at the meeting that I attended personally was that trees were a community asset ("I like that tree on my neighbor's property and therefore she should not be allowed to cut it down"). Thankfully, this proposal was preposterous to most of the residents and was resoundingly rejected.

I posted quite some time ago about how "Environmentalism" and "Climate Change fka Global Warming" is the perfect means for controlling the behavior of humanity and in nearly every aspect of their lives. It's perfect because the "umbrella" of such a concept is so broad it defies definition and therefore control and regulation is cloaked under that broad umbrella.

Incandescent light bulbs are bad and are banned. Fluorescent bulbs are better because they use less energy. However, when incandescent bulbs would break, it wasn't a health emergency as it is with a fluorescent bulb breaking due to the mercury gasses that emanate. I hate fluorescent bulbs for that reason. Prior to LED lights coming onto the scene people were being forced to use mercury containing fluorescent bulbs. No.

Taxes. Governmental bureaucracy, bloat and waste at the federal, state and even local levels is a huge problem for me, Mona. I will not accept at face value the mantra of: "Higher taxes are good because they go to help those that need help. You do want those less fortunate or who can't help themselves to be able to be taken care of, don't you?" The idea of that tenet is good. However, taking it at face value and without question is unacceptable to me and always will be if there is no continuous accountability. And there is no accountability, Mona. Not at the federal, state or even local level. Case in point: The local public school system. It's a running dark and sad joke because the argument for as long as I can remember is: "We need more money to fix the schools. Just give us $XX,XXX,XXX and everything will be fixed...................Ok, um, now we REALLY know how to fix the schools so give us $XXX,XXX,XXX and will REALLY fix it this time..............Ok, um.. All the while the school administration grows to an astonishing level of excess.

Incidentally, I don't like the labels of "liberal" or "conservative" because as others have stated, things aren't so cut and dried. However, it's a belief among some "liberals" that home schooling should be outlawed. Again, favoring government over individual freedom. I don't agree with that at all. And a push for such a thing makes me think the agenda must be indoctrination. What other reason would there be?

While generations ago, the idea that "conservatives" = capitalism =greed=pollute the earth for profit may have had some truth to it, the lines aren't cut and dried any longer. Are Google, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft and so many others "conservative" companies? No. Do they eschew profit at the expense of the environment, people, fair labor? No.

I also think we have to be extremely cautious as a society when we talk about regulating speech and ideas. Again, under the auspice of "hate speech" being bad, allowing unquestioned rule making in that regard has potential for being a tool of control and oppression with real consequences. I don't know how you feel, Mona, but ever since I was a child, many people from teachers, learning institutions, etc have tried to tell me (with little to no success, thankfully) that my way of thinking was wrong, shameful, etc and that I should instead think like other people do. Never. Never. Never. Ultimately the last and most important freedom any person has is their freedom to think and express ideas. I think that freedom should be held most dear.

How are you being deprived of freedom of speech?