I think youre full of LIEberalism! Pull your head out of your ass! It is quite stated that People tend to turn to conservatism than liberalism!
It's quite stated----duh---random appeal to masses != constitute an argument. Your original argument was as people get older, they turn to conservatism. Since it's fun to make generalizations based off of that, therefore, I can also come up with a stupid, spurious correlations to have fun as well!
Though both do happen! I did not, as you say, consider an ENTIRE group of people as a monolithic block! Liberals do not have an iron grip on logic, look at Kennedy, Durban, Kerry, Dean!
That's a good recognition, because I never said they have an iron-grip on it. You, however, are running around like a conservobot thinking conservatives are the penultimate incarnation of reason; they aren't.
The bring so sence to the table! Only pure rhetoric!
Nonsense. Conservatives spew rhetoric just as much as any other politician. Bull******** is part of the political job requirements.
A majority of liberals want more funding going into welfare right? Well doesnt that suggest that more people will go on welfare?
There is nothing wrong with have a welfare system, although it needs to be reformed. Welfare is necessity if you have any grasp of ethics, but then again, I doubt that's on your mind.
They get more money for no work right? While if we lower the funding, it would drive more people to find jobs, lowering the unemployment rate, and make this country better!
That's actually a nonsequitor. There are lots of poor who do work who are on welfare. They don't make enough money. Then again, Conservatives falsely assume that all poor are stupid, lazy. That's simply not true.
But no, many believe the government should support them!
Yes. You should support people temporarily who honestly need help. It is the morally correct thing to do. Many people in poverty, as I mentioned, are working. They do have jobs. Many more have children. You cannot assign a life of poverty to kids who did nothing. Even if their parents
are lazy, you cannot change human nature. For a political group that frequenly uses the rhetoric "Think of the Children!" You seem not to give much of a **** about them.
What have they done to support the government?
The government exists to serve the public; the public doesn't exist to serve the state. Do you think they do?
What about Gay rights? They would rather have the gay community FEEL better and let them get married instead of taking into consideration FAMILY values and the True institution of marraige!
On one hand you try to pretend that conservatism is all about logic and reason, but then you blurt out imbecilic conservobot rhetoric like the above.
You blithly spurt off bullshit about "tradition" and "familiy values" as if you have a monopoly on it. Instead of focusing on important issues, Conservatives focus on the irrelevant. This is the
only time I agree with Libertarians and Objectivists. Government has ****-all right to tell individuals how to lead their personal lives unless they are causing suffering to others. This isn't plato's repubic where the elite rules atop an Ivory Tower discussing the approprite "virtue" of the citizenry. Maximizing personal liberty serves the most Utility, and such concept is the only valid rule by which people should abide, and it is the only thing which government should socially promote. We don't need the nanny.
I have seen what you conservatives claim to be family values, and it's nothing of the sort. You want to maintain a neo-troglydite society in which "bitches" are subservient to men, barefoot and pregant, "niggas" be whipped, gays be in the closet, and the male be back at the forefront of the household ready to beat his children and wife into submission. Instead of focusing on pain and suffering, death and poverty, you focus on stupid **** like preventing people from seeing pornography, seeing titties on tv, having sex, worshiping as tey please, and being "ungodly." None of which is any of your buisness. Keep your values to yourself if you value them so much; don't force them on others and others won't force theirs on you.
Your "true menaing of marriage" is bullshit anyway. You don't know what the "true" intention of marriage is. Marriage is a legally binding contract between one or more consenting adults in which union serves economic, emotional interests. Marriage is both secular and religious, depending on the culture. However, there is no reason to assume that Religion = marriage. That's simply false. Even if marriage always were one mand + one woman, that premise does not logically lead to the conclusion you are after. Check your premises, as Ayn Rand would say.
Family values is a very needed thing in america. So many problems with young ones these days are started with the family!
I don't want your familiy values. My family is fine.
That is a known fact, no matter how you look at it! Liberals base there public policy off emotion, which in turn (as the welfare example above) does not accomplish the main goal! Is that logical?
False. Your conservative belief isn't "logical." All you are doing is changing the focus of authoritarianism. Conservatives bloviate about how socialist and evil liberals, yet all the while you are authoritarian socially. You want to promote your traditionalist, authoritarian social philosophy. Your entire diatibe about gays and family and marriage is an emotional appeal via tradition. That's illoogical. Liberals do make mistakes, but I would rather have personal liberty and economic regulation, than state capitalism and social authoritarianism.
"There are many highly logical liberals, and if you ever actually read Pew Research, you will find that Liberals constitute the most intelligent, informed voting block although they only mak up about 15-18% of the total voting population."
I never said there was no logical liberals! I know there are plenty, but how often have you seen it in the past 10 years? I know there is illogical conservatives as well. If Liberals are the most intelligent as you quote, Why do they only make up 15-18% of the voting population?
First of all, the fact that they are small is mutli-tiered, but that's also deceptive. Why? Liberals make up a larger portion of the population and the registered voting block than do either pro-gov't conservatives OR social conservatives. However, just because a group is small does not make itunintelligent. Secondly, however, the Liberals are growing in size. According to Pew,
This group has nearly doubled in proportion since 1999.
However, there are very few of them when dealing with the total as there are very few of other groups within major parties. If you check the Pew Forum Research governing voter typology, most groups are small overall in the whole. The Democratic Party and the Republican party are made up of many small sub-sections. IE. Liberals, New Democrats, Populists, Conservatives, NeoConservatives, Disassociated, Libertarian etc.
Most Liberals consider themselves Independent, while some are in Repubicans and some are in Democrats. If you consider the Democratic Party "liberal" don't, since Liberals are only one group among many who are in the Democratic Party--as well as the Republican party! Liberals are highly critical of the Democrats and policy. For example, according to Pew,
"Liberals are particularly negative in their assessment of the Democratic Party leadership. Just 23% of Liberals say the leaders are doing an excellent or good job [...] Among Democrats, Conservative Democrats are the least critical of the leaders' performance. So, if you want to stick blame, look at the Conservative Democrats, who think Democrats are so great.
According to Pew, Liberals have a very weak identification with the Democratic Party.
" their identification with the party is the weakest among Democratic groups"
There are many things I like about the Liberal Philosophy. Have you ever heard of John Rawls? Further, I agree with these core Liberal values. YOu might not, but I cannot make you.
[They are] The most secular, and take the most liberal views on social issues such as homosexuality, abortion, and censorship. They differ from other Democratic groups in that they are strongly pro-environment and pro-immigration.
Out of all groups, they are the most socially libertarian. I like social libertarianism. I don't care what you do in private if you are not going out and hurting others. The government has no business in your personal affairs. LEGAL immigration is good, and a careful, balanced look at the environment is also beneficial.
http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=949
