Political Contradictions

[piste off]

If you're loving me (your neighbor) as you love yourself, you seriously need to consider loving yourself more.

That is a sin and will make you go blind.

R-

[piste off]

Rhode Island has a population of 3 beach bums, 5 corrupt politicians, 3 Brown Profs, and 1 inner city punk. Guess which one is black?

(hint: it's one of the Brown Profs.)

Trick question. The beach bums are probably brown from so much time in the sun, the Brown profs. can't be Black and RI has no inner cities. I am going to have to go with one of the corrupt politicians, most likely the one on the left.

R-

[MyrddinsPrecint]

Trick question. The beach bums are probably brown from so much time in the sun, the Brown profs. can't be Black and RI has no inner cities. I am going to have to go with one of the corrupt politicians, most likely the one on the left.

R-

The beach bums go tanning inside, there are parts of Providence that are pretty damn bad (as well as a few other cities), and there isn't very much of a "right" in Rhode Island (at least not compared to places that actually have a right).

............ The Brown Profs, however? Um... Look at their president: http://www.brown.edu/Administration/President/ . Smith still mourns losing her to Brown.

[Tazz]

Not ALL people in the Conservative states are conservative.. and so there is more reason to "rebel". I would.

People love doing what they not supposed to do.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

People love doing what they not supposed to do.

No I don't.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

"Correlation doesn't imply causation, but it does waggle its eyebrows suggestively and gesture furtively while mouthing 'look over there'."

[academe]

"Correlation doesn't imply causation, but it does waggle its eyebrows suggestively and gesture furtively while mouthing 'look over there'."

Somebody has been reading xkcd.

[I_luv_saber]

I would point out that California, which many take as quite a left state, passed prop 8. There's one for the "other side" for you.

[I_luv_saber]

Well, since everyone else took a swing at this, I guess I will too.

According to THE WORD OF GOD, we are supposed to congregate and worship The Lord.

Congregate and worship is not the same as institute a government-like organization that takes advantage of people. Congregate and worship is more like, IMO, gathering at someone's house (which, btw, was what early Christians did), not gathering at a building that was constructed for thousands of dollars that could have gone to feed hungry children (and is taken from hard-working poor people). Look up "Would Jesus Wear a Rolex (On his Televsion Show)", Ray Stevens. Good song.

Do you really follow ANY of The Rules, or are you really one of those moronic hippies who likes to read his Bible by himself so that he can interpret it to mean the things he already thinks he believes in?

Oh, that's right! We shouldn't read it ourselves... we should just go along with what other people say, because they must know enough that you should trust your fate to them. Less work that way too. Convenient.

I urge you, as a Christian, to redeem yourself and come to Church this Sunday. Things can change for you.

No thanks. I don't believe something because someone else tells me to believe it. If I believe I do so of my own accord.

</trolling>

I corrected it for you.

[academe]

I'll settle for one single piece of empirical evidence suggesting a causal relationship between, say, conservatism and divorce...

Just one.

Rush Limbaugh...

[MyrddinsPrecint]

Somebody has been reading xkcd.

... When it's here, it doesn't have its alt text!

Blasphemy!

[Inquartata]

Well, since everyone else took a swing at this, I guess I will too.

Bah, it's like shooting fish in a barrel. Where's the sport in it?

[tchwojko]

When one group of people sees things in black and white, then grays show up as hypocrisy. When another group of people sees things as gray, then there's little contrast, and things seem wishy-washy.

[I_luv_saber]

Bah, it's like shooting fish in a barrel. Where's the sport in it?

In a word: venting

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!

I would point out that California, which many take as quite a left state, passed prop 8. There's one for the "other side" for you.

I am not so sure that this is a good example, for two reasons:

1. The purported contradiction is at a state level. It is entirely possible that California is the home to political consistent people of both right and left variety. If then their propensity to vote varies in such a way so that the conservatives are more likely to vote on prop8 than the liberals, and it is the other way around on other issues, then one can get such statewide results with only consistent voters.

2. Is voting in support of prop8 and suporting a host of "left" issues - other than those concerning family law - inconsistent on an individual level? I dod not think so. I have grown up where having the opinion combination (the state shouild even out economic conditions a lot+gays should not get any help or recognition from the state) was the norm, not the exception. While I do not agree with that set of beliefs, I do not find it internally inconsistent.


Have a nice time!

Peter Gustafsson

[I_luv_saber]

I am not so sure that this is a good example, for two reasons:

1. The purported contradiction is at a state level.

So were the examples provided. I was under the impression this is what we were discussing, at least in part.

It is entirely possible that California is the home to political consistent people of both right and left variety.

As a matter of fact that is the case here. But, for the most part, California is most definitely a left-leaning state.

If then their propensity to vote varies in such a way so that the conservatives are more likely to vote on prop8 than the liberals, and it is the other way around on other issues, then one can get such statewide results with only consistent voters.

Why would this be the case? My whole point (and the point of this thread, or so I thought) was pointing out the irony that while California is generally fairly leftist and is heralded as such, that strong liberal force either voted for Prop 8, or did not have the will to go out and vote against it. Either way it seems the irony that we were looking to point out here.

Is it a strong argument for political contradiction? No. But neither are arguments from the left against the right, IMHO. It's just pointing out little ironies and goes to show that left and right, Democrat and Republican, in politics (for many), is simply a means to an end and has less to do with actually believing (or sometimes even knowing) the issues involved. It's got more to do with popularity and power.

/cynicism

2. Is voting in support of prop8 and suporting a host of "left" issues - other than those concerning family law - inconsistent on an individual level?

Yes.

Now, if you wanted to make an argument that there is a difference between social liberalism in general and liberalism in economics, then I'd see more where you were coming from. But either way, this is not the case. California is, again generally, fairly liberal in the whole sense of it. If people were, as you say, socially conservative while being liberal in other senses of the word, you would expect California law and policy to generally reflect this (at least if any sizable part of the population was like that). It doesn't.

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!

So were the examples provided. I was under the impression this is what we were discussing, at least in part.

Upon rereading the threadstart, I see that the OP had coached it state-wise. You are right, my bad.

Yes.

Now, if you wanted to make an argument that there is a difference between social liberalism in general and liberalism in economics, then I'd see more where you were coming from.

Well I grew up in a place where it was the norm to be socialist in economical matters, and conservative wrt family law issues. On top of that, religion was/is considered strange, and not in a good way. That is where I am coming from, even if those opinions are not wholly mine.

But either way, this is not the case. California is, again generally, fairly liberal in the whole sense of it. If people were, as you say, socially conservative while being liberal in other senses of the word, you would expect California law and policy to generally reflect this (at least if any sizable part of the population was like that). It doesn't.

Maybe Californians are becoming such, and prop8 was the catalyst needed for a sizeable proportions of its people to identify as such. Time will tell.

"Fairly liberal"? has it not often been said that its coasts are very liberal, while a large part of the inland is conservative? The "Sorting of America" theme, you know.


Have a nice time!

Peter Gustafsson

[I_luv_saber]

Maybe Californians are becoming such, and prop8 was the catalyst needed for a sizeable proportions of its people to identify as such. Time will tell.

"Fairly liberal"? has it not often been said that its coasts are very liberal, while a large part of the inland is conservative? The "Sorting of America" theme, you know.

Pretty close, yes. Although, really, a better description would be that California as a whole is liberal, while the Central Valley is more conservative.

However, in population, the "liberal areas" are far larger in population than the "conservative areas".

For example, according to Wikipedia the population of California (est. 2008) is 36,756,666. Whereas in the Central Valley, there are only 5 cities with more than 100,000 people (the largest being Fresno, at a little less than 500,000), 24 cities with 20-100,000 people, and about 14 cities with less than 20,000 people (this is all, again, according to Wikipedia).

Now, even using the largest estimates, that brings the Valley's population to about a little over 5 million people. Out of 36 million.

Accepting the fact that there are those living outside of the city and accepting the fact that there are conservatives in liberal areas, it still is quite shocking to think that a state whose "liberal area" is about 6-7 times larger than it's "conservative area" could allow such a measure to pass.

Even when accounting for other small pockets of conservatives, this is an overwhelming number. You could even exponentially increase the conservative population, for the sake of argument, and still come to at the very least, 2 liberals to every 1 conservative in this state (as a conservative estimate ). Which means, if the liberals had truly stood by their position as liberals, as they are held here in California, there is no way in hell this measure should have passed. This was either a case of liberals flip-flopping and voting for 8, or standing by and not going out and voting against it. Either way, it's pretty hypocritical, IMO.

As to your first point regarding a shift in culture, I suppose that is possible. But it has not been reflected in any such way aside from this prop, so I stand by my statement that, at least as of now, it is indeed a political contradiction. At least from where I'm sitting.

[Insipiens]

With regards to California in particular (which I don't think was the whole theme of the thread initially), I had the impression that there is a growing Latin American population. Now it may be that a lot of that population is not registered for the purposes of voting.
However, presuming they are registered, it would not be inconceivable that this growing demographic from a catholic culture could be "liberal" regarding health care, worker's rights, pensions, taxes, but "conservative" when it comes to other issues such as "gay rights" they may not be so "liberal."

[I_luv_saber]

Very true that it "could be". But, as of yet, that hasn't been shown aside from Prop 8.

Not to mention, I still see it as highly hypocritical to wave the flag for, say, workers rights, and to vote in favor of Prop 8.