Politics & Current Events
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Re: Liberals or Conservatives: Who?s Really Close-Minded?
And it just makes sense numbers wise. You get people who in that net who you may not normally.
My family is extremely low-income living in rural Mississippi. As low-income, Black people you'd statistically give them to the Dems, except that they are ultra social conservative so they always vote Repub, or not at all, but never Dem because Dems like the gays.
I'm tired.
I'm going to play angry birds.
I will say this discussion has done something for me--I will be drafting a letter to send to my reps, the Republican party of Nevada, etc., stating my beliefs, and asking them not to focus on the social issues driven by religion, and refocus our efforts on the fiscal issues that are driving our country into the ground.
<a href="http://www.thenest.com/?utm_source=ticker&utm_medium=HTML&utm_campaign=tickers" title="Home D
See! That's really all we really wanted.
All I know is that when a thread like this comes up, many of the Libs on the board try their best to have a discussion, while many of the Rs spend the time deflecting, denying, and acting like martyrs. Before you get the hump, read back through the thread and see. Meanwhile, others just drop in, say something bollocks, then bounce off. I would point out that I am referring to Sisugal, but she wont read it, so who cares? lol.
So yeah, I will cop to being close minded on things. I am alright with that. I am also fairly unreasonable (which I have noticed is only a problem if its my own opinion, and not gods, but thats another topic).
But perhaps I would be less like this if I heard some explanations? Only, I never do.
Just "Oh look, we are being grouped in as anti gay" and "here we go with the persecution".
On the other hand, if the party you support is so anti gay, why is it a surprise when the other party thinks its supporters are anti gay? If the party you support keeps trying to take away women's rights, why is it a surprise when the other party thinks you want to take away women's rights? And so on and so forth.
As a liberal, I move that we require pedantic_wench to change her sig. It makes me have dirty thoughts and then I can't debate anything.
I haven't read every word, but I think given this hypothesis that liberals in metropolitan areas are in good company, and conservatives in metropolitan areas have to learn how to live with them, it makes sense.
But it does discount huge, huge parts of the country that are not laid out like that. It's very city centric. I live in the DC area, but I meet a whole lot of conservatives. I have diplomatic or tongue-biting conversations all the time. I certainly know when to stay quiet, when to speak my mind in a very guarded fashion, and when to go balls to the wall liberal. I certainly don't shoot off about liberal stuff all the time.
I have learned many things about conservatives on this board; mainly that conservatives and liberals both like people and want them to do well, but have different ideas about how that's done efficiently.
I understand being anti-abortion. I really do. I just don't agree with it. I understand why people are religious, and even seriously so, but I don't believe it myself. I don't understand being anti-gay, but I've tried really hard to understand it.
And finally, "conservative" and "liberal" are really huge terms for what people believe. It's really not a blanket statement. I had a conversation last night where one girl who identifies as conservative is really just against taxes and the deficit, but is pretty socially liberal. There was another girl who claimed to be liberal was really pretty dim on everything.
I'm not sure how "science" can really reveal who has a monopoly on "closed mindedness" or what that even means in itself.
I'm trying to find out where the data for the book comes from. I suspect they are collecting data from web-based nation-wide surveys, because the author has written several other papers using that data. If that's the case, I would suspect it's not just urban participants on the coasts, though I can't find stats on the locations.
Now I'm going to have to read the book.
Find me here instead!
The difference being the conservative will listen to NPR, but the liberal will not watch FOX news.
ETA: Liberals support tolerance for differences - except if the difference is conservatism.
I don't know why you still know how to make me LOL even though I shouldn't be surprised by such generalizations sourced from your ass. But you do! Kudos.
It would be really interesting to see where the data came from. I just plucked the idea about the metropolitan areas from the article, but there could totally be other places involved as well.
My concern again is the self reporting. People lie and idealize all sorts of things. We all do.
Wrong. I watch Fox News in the evenings. I listen to Rush Limbaugh occasionally and Sean Hannity every drive home, which generally means I listen to the first half hour of Mark Levine as well. I am tolerable of the differences of conservatism but my frustration lies with what cee-jay posted. When it comes to policy differences, I feel when legitimate questions are posed we don't get the full answer. Not that dems are better, but because I understand that position I don't have as many questions on the policy positions.
Example...To this day I still don't know what happens if we repeal Obamacare and go to a "voucher" type system. I have yet to know what the $ value of the proposed voucher was based upon and if it is enough to cover the insurance premiums. Is it intended to cover the amount or just offset some of the costs? What happens to people who can't supplement the rest? What happens to people during the period where we are waiting for the free-market to take hold and reduce the costs? And lastly, how does this avoid a significant spike in the uninsured? I freely admit it...I don't get it. But unless these are completely stupid questions that are not worthy of a response, I have yet to see an answer from any of the conservative sources that I do watch / listen to. I don't see how any of this makes me closed-minded. And as much as I think Obamacare has holes, I at least know what those holes are and the potential consequences. I don't even see acknowledgement of the holes in the conservative position put forward. When this is pointed out however, it is called good political strategy. And round and round we go.
Cookie, you're the one exception in the nation. Her point still stands.
I don't know why all conservatives oppose gay marriage but I can tell you why I do. My religion tells me that acting on homosexuality is a sin. I chose to follow my religion but I didn't make the rules. Even if I don't think the rules are fair I believe that God made them and that it's not up to me to question him.
I teach my children about my religion. When they grow up it's up to them what to believe but I feel it's my responsibility to teach them what I believe to be the truth. I worry that if gay marriage were legal that they school I send my child to would tell them that acting on homosexuality is ok and an equally vaild lifestyle. I don't agree with that and I'm not ok with an authority figure like the school telling my child that. I understand that don't have to send my child to the public school but that costs extra money. I'm not going to vote for something that may make public school not a good fit for my family anymore.
I don't really care what other people do in their own bedroom who how they choose to live their life. It's not that important to me to debate why I don't agree with gay marriage or do anything to prevent it from becoming legal but if I where given the opportunity to vote I wouldn't vote for it. I'm fine with other people having a different belief system than I do but I'm not going to vote against what I believe just because so many other people think I should.
To sum up: I believe God says homosexuality is a sin. I chose to follow God and his rules even if I don't think they are fair. I don't care what other people do but that doesn't mean I agree with what other people do. I'm not going to vote for something I don't agree with.
I wonder if its actually the Republican label that the cons on this board still label themselves as, which maybe they shouldn't based on how much their views differ from the party? I'm a liberal but I'm not a Dem and I hesitate to defend the Dems on too much stuff (like civil unions vs. actual marriages) when I just flat out disagree.
How much stuff do you have to differ from your party on before you stop identifying with it?
I must admit, I'm pretty intolerant of this argument.
Anything you can achieve through hard work, you could also just buy.
Wut??
You really believe that the narrow definitions as interpreted from a book that was itself interpreted from other languages centuries after it was originally written to should be the basis for making laws that govern society?
The funny thing to me is that there are a ton of issues in the Bible that are spelled out much more clearly that people haven't fought to have codefied into law.
Click me, click me!
Hey ya gotta give Sabrina69 props for owning her piety.
And just to make it dirty, the Bible is very clear that while you can get divorced under certain circumstances, you aren't supposed to remarry.
Sabrina's H has an exwife iirc.
Good thing we didn't put that into law.
Click me, click me!
Do you believe that getting drunk and marrying someone you've known for 10 minutes in Vegas, then divorcing the very next day is an OK and equally valid lifestyle? Because that's perfectly legal, yet I'm pretty sure schools don't teach this.
The leap from "gay marriage is legal" to "public schools teaching that homosexuality is OK" is puzzling to me.
I think this entire article is useless without a definition of what "open minded" and "closed minded" mean. To me, they mean a willingness to listen to other opinions and genuinely consider their position (and change your own position if the facts are persuasive enough). But absolutely nothing in this guy's research supports the conclusion that conservatives are more likely to do this than liberals.
OMG. Religious beliefs don't get to dictate what I do in my personal life.
*insert gif of head exploding here*
It's tough. I do agree with you, but I think sometimes people may be reluctant to do this, or be open about doing this, for the wise assumption that they'll be accused of backpedaling. Which of course isn't fair. But I suppose it also depends on tone and delivery of the 'backpedaling'.
Click me, click me!
So how can you justify having a spouse with an ex-wife when the Bible also says that divorce is a sin?
Do you just pick & choose what parts of what God says to agree with?
If you're as hypocritical as it appears at least own it.
I'm confused about this too. I didn't even think the actual text of the OP was about open/close-mindedness. It was mostly about understanding the opposing viewpoint. I think he made a good point about Cons frequently shutting down about their viewpoints and libs being more vocal. I know I do that. Reeve even snarked about it here -- that PCE libs tried to have a discussion and the Rs dismissed it. I know I dismissed it b/c "Rs are close-minded b/c they're intolerant" is not an attempt at rational debate to me, it's just insulting, which makes me run for the tall grass. That is exactly how I respond IRL too. So I wouldn't be surprised if it's true that some Cons viewpoints are less understood than a lib's. Whether that translates into open/close-mindedness I frankly don't care. And how this thread became consumed with gay marriage I really don't get, but that's par for the course.
Anyway, the article itself states that, "To be ?close-minded? is, according to the dictionary, to be ?intolerant of the beliefs and opinions of others; stubbornly unreceptive to new ideas.?
Someone up-thread said she thought the author missed the point of his own book and I totally agree. What does "understanding" someone else's opinion have to do with being tolerant of it?
Anything you can achieve through hard work, you could also just buy.
Anything you can achieve through hard work, you could also just buy.