Politics and Dating.

EmBleve wrote:

bennett13 wrote:

EmBleve wrote:

I realize that this is a generalization and a stereotype, but I believe that it is based on surroundings and area also. In my neck of the woods, so to say, I find this to be somewhat accurate (merely based on what I have seen in my little bitty life!!--not a sweeping generalization). That said, it just depends on the person, so I can't really say that, either. My parents are conservatives, and they're not into hunting or nascar, nor are they '[white] trash'.
Politics and dating: hard to say. Someone mentioned being socially conservative vs. liberal....I think that would be more indicative of compatibility than would political beliefs. But, I guess love could conquer such differences, if each party is willing to compromise.

Why all the hate for hunters? You folks do know that a majority of hunters are big on wildlife conservation, right?

I wasn't expressing hatred for hunters...yes, I've heard the rationale that it controls the population. I don't support it, but I can see the point. I just thought that Gob's observation was interesting. Hunting for sport is big around where I live and grew up, and I can honestly say that every single person whom I have ever known to hunt leans to the right, which I guess makes sense.

It does make sense. Hunters lean to the right because (with the exception of bow-hunting) you need a firearm to hunt. Liberals tend to be more anti-firearm than conservatives. So, you're right...it does make sense. But honestly...why lump hunters in with NASCAR fans? I'm a hunter (and a conservative) and I HATE NASCAR!

bennett13 wrote:

It does make sense. Hunters lean to the right because (with the exception of bow-hunting) you need a firearm to hunt. Liberals tend to be more anti-firearm than conservatives. So, you're right...it does make sense. But honestly...why lump hunters in with NASCAR fans? I'm a hunter (and a conservative) and I HATE NASCAR!

but if hunters are conservationists ... why support the right who are anti-conservationists (see alaska) ... also, why are hunters against registering your guns? ... why is that so contentious?

polaris_x wrote:

bennett13 wrote:

It does make sense. Hunters lean to the right because (with the exception of bow-hunting) you need a firearm to hunt. Liberals tend to be more anti-firearm than conservatives. So, you're right...it does make sense. But honestly...why lump hunters in with NASCAR fans? I'm a hunter (and a conservative) and I HATE NASCAR!

but if hunters are conservationists ... why support the right who are anti-conservationists (see alaska) ... also, why are hunters against registering your guns? ... why is that so contentious?

Because the average hunter is your typical stupid Republican. Not that all Republicans are stupid, only 98% of them.

Sadly, only Republicans and Libertarians tend to support legalization of guys. These foolish small-town Repubs are convinced that the institution is on their side. Why registering guns is an issue is beyond me. Moderate regulation is a necessity.

Also, conservationists and environmentalists are ridiculously egotistical, thinking that the world needs their help. The world is going to be just fine. We humans and all the other stupid animals, well, we're going away soon. This giant piece of rock and water has about another 5.7 billion years to go.

Also, don't feel bad, Republicans and Libertarians, because those on the left have their heads just s far up their asses.

johnny america wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

bennett13 wrote:

It does make sense. Hunters lean to the right because (with the exception of bow-hunting) you need a firearm to hunt. Liberals tend to be more anti-firearm than conservatives. So, you're right...it does make sense. But honestly...why lump hunters in with NASCAR fans? I'm a hunter (and a conservative) and I HATE NASCAR!

but if hunters are conservationists ... why support the right who are anti-conservationists (see alaska) ... also, why are hunters against registering your guns? ... why is that so contentious?

Because the average hunter is your typical stupid Republican. Not that all Republicans are stupid, only 98% of them.

Sadly, only Republicans and Libertarians tend to support legalization of guys. These foolish small-town Repubs are convinced that the institution is on their side. Why registering guns is an issue is beyond me. Moderate regulation is a necessity.

Also, conservationists and environmentalists are ridiculously egotistical, thinking that the world needs their help. The world is going to be just fine. We humans and all the other stupid animals, well, we're going away soon. This giant piece of rock and water has about another 5.7 billion years to go.

Also, don't feel bad, Republicans and Libertarians, because those on the left have their heads just s far up their asses.

I agree with your 98% stupidity comment, but certainly don't believe it's restricted to the Republican party...I would apply that number to the entire American population (I love this country, but a quick look at what everyone's watching on television these days will confirm this statistic).
The problem with gun registration is that it's the first step toward prohibition. If guns are outlawed, it makes it a lot easier for the government to take them if they're registered and the government knows where they are. The problem with this is that only law-abiding citizens will register their guns, so the end result would be an unarmed law-abiding populace left at the mercy of the still-armed criminal element. If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns.

bennett13 wrote:

I agree with your 98% stupidity comment, but certainly don't believe it's restricted to the Republican party...I would apply that number to the entire American population (I love this country, but a quick look at what everyone's watching on television these days will confirm this statistic).
The problem with gun registration is that it's the first step toward prohibition. If guns are outlawed, it makes it a lot easier for the government to take them if they're registered and the government knows where they are. The problem with this is that only law-abiding citizens will register their guns, so the end result would be an unarmed law-abiding populace left at the mercy of the still-armed criminal element. If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns.

Where did I say it was restricted to Republicans?

I shoveled the same criticisms onto the Democrats and Libertarians. Also, I forgot the Socialists.

Basically, anybody who votes.

johnny america wrote:

Lol, so, the Dems give a shit about the environment?

I'll tell you what the Democrats care about: the interest groups that have them by the balls. In this case, look up which companies stand to make the most off of 50+ dollar lightbulbs, and then, research who they pay money to while on the campaign trail.

Any positive environmental side effects that this initiative may have (which will not be much), will be purely incidental and are far from what Democratic politicians actually care about.

relatively speaking yes ... i agree that both dems and repubs suck in general but if we are talking about conservation - i'd say dems are more so than republicans ...

johnny america wrote:

Well, that's not saying much.

Democrats, like Republicans, care about two things: power, and money.

i agree but still the point is valid! ...

Here's an interesting question for you musicians out there...could you be in a band or work with someone who has different political views? That is, could you put all the political bullshit aside and just make some killer music together?

your_move_now wrote:

Just on the abortion and religion issues...
Abortion: in various states of Australia the abortion law differ from state to state. Do you believe in abortion if the woman is raped? That woman is not looking at a second option and has not made a choice. However if you do believe she can have one then surely you believe that a foetus isn't a baby and hence where is the problem with the termination? And don't you think there are enough unwanted and uncared for children in the world? What kid wants parents that don't want it?
Religon: I'm pretty sure that Freedom of Religon and also Athieism (not sure that's a world but you get my drift is an important part of the US. By using christianity as a basis in government surely that undermines all the other religons more than having an athiest base.

I would say that most conservatives believe that abortion is sometimes appropriate... In situations of rape or when the mother's health is threatened. If the parents don't want it, they can put it up for adoption. I know at least 3 couples off the top of my head that had to struggle to find a baby to adopt. Abortions from rape victims make up less than 1% of all abortions. Over 95% of all abortions are done as birth control. That is the problem. It’s a lack of personal responsibility.

Having an atheist government basis appeases only a small portion of our country. Approximately 80% of the country is Christian. “Other” religions only make up about 6%. So why try to appease such a small portion of the country at the expense of the rest of the country?

Ok but the question is whether or not Abortion is actually killing a baby or not. and If you say that it is ok in certain circumstances then i have to believe that you're saying that it's not because I don't like to thinkl that you would say it is ok to kill a child under any circumstances. If it's not a child then I cannot understand any problem you would have with abortion in general. So what if there may (or may not because we all know that abstinance is the only 100% effective form of birth control) have been some irresponsibility in the conception. If it's ok sometimes then you have to be saying it's not a child. If it's not a child then it's not a problem. And before we get into it, at 12 weeks it is not a child. Anyone who has seen what an early term misscarraige looks like can attest to that.
And as far as adoption goes I would think from a personal pov that it would be at least as guilt inducing as an abortion with the constant concern about what had happened to your child with no actual control over it.
I have to ask where you get your statistics from when it comes to 80% of citizens identifying as christian. I highly doubt that that number go to church and practice the religion at all times. I'm also surprised to learn that if your numbers are correct the number of Jewish people is so low. Aside from whether or not the numbers are correct it doesn't change my main point which was that Freedom of Religon is a basic right in the US. How can this right exist if the governing body has a clear religious preference?