Unfix it. It's not just politicians, but it is the people that vote for them. Those people make up the parties. I stand by my original statement regardless of who is offended. The easiest way to stop this is by not voting for the politicians responsible.
A good question about liberal and conservative politics re: Constitutional rights
- Thread starter Raoul Duke
- Start Date
Unfix it. It's not just politicians, but it is the people that vote for them. Those people make up the parties. I stand by my original statement regardless of who is offended. The easiest way to stop this is by not voting for the politicians responsible.
This.
I've met very few voters who weren't completely ignorant of the Constitution, in addition to being completely ignorant of who/what they voted for.
Just read the platforms of each Party, if you want.
For example, the Oklahoma Republican Party makes shredding the First Amendment the first priority of its platform. Section I-A takes a position that not only should "non-Biblical" marriage be prohibited (which, by the way, they should really look up Biblical marriage examples), but "Biblical" marriage should be subsidized by the government. According to the OKGOP, non-straight-and-narrow people should not be legally allowed to be teachers, managers of a business where minors are employed, child advocates for the judicial system, etc.
And then you get into their desire to censor "undesirable" content.... Also, after reading their platform, I would not feel welcome if I were non-Christian as non-Christian interests are either not mentioned or even expressly derided. The platform's section on Freedom of Religion is much more about Freedom of Christianity than Freedom of Religion or Freedom of Expression.
According to many Oklahoma Republicans, if you don't agree with that entire platform without question, you're a RINO.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Messages
- 2,168
- Reaction score
- 46
The relevance to the question is they are both Constitutionally protected rights.
Religion is something you have projected into the discussion. Might I remind you that the same Constitutional right to freedom of religion also guarantees the right to freedom from religion.
The stalwart standard bearers of conservatism routinely attack abortion rights while fiercely defending gun rights, while the stalwart standard bearers of liberalism routinely attack gun rights while fiercely defending abortion rights. Conservatives do everything in their power to effectively regulate abortion rights out of existence, while liberals do everything in their power to effectively regulate gun rights out of existence. Any media characterizations of liberals and conservatives is nothing more than a reflection of that.
There are no hard answers to my question, but maybe there is an easy one. Liberals and Conservatives are nothing more than different sides of the same coin. They are hypocrites who only support the Constitutional or civil rights they agree with or suit their own political purposes and agendas. More alike in the cynical strategies and tactics they employ to subvert Constitutional rights than they are different. Maybe it's just that simple.
So then you assume all members of a party are voting for the politicians in office. Again, labeling ll members of a party is silly and pushes people away. Kind of like calling people "libtards" and such would push people sitting on the fence about an issue away from your side. Many registered republicans I know did not want Romney as the candidate nor did they vote for him in the primary. Lumping everyone together is just stupid.
Raoul duke: Abortion is not a constitutionally protected right and it dang sure isn't religion. Comparing it to gun rights is apples and oranges.
You attack entire groups of people, calling them names, then you wonder why you can win people over to your way of thinking. Do us a favor, and please don't talk to anyone on the fence about gun rights. Leave that to people who won't attack and make braod generalizations about entire groups.
You attack entire groups of people, calling them names, then you wonder why you can win people over to your way of thinking. Do us a favor, and please don't talk to anyone on the fence about gun rights. Leave that to people who won't attack and make braod generalizations about entire groups.
To the OP... there are no "constitutional rights".
Rights are a part of our humanity. Constitutions (State or Central) are LIMITING BY-LAWS of the corporations the people create so that our natural rights aren't infringed by our servants (who always become power hungry despots).
Liberals and Conservatives seek one thing... control of others. As much as I dislike what other people do, it's none of my business what they do so long as their actions don't intrude upon my rights to be free. Do evil, deal with Karma eventually.
Rights are a part of our humanity. Constitutions (State or Central) are LIMITING BY-LAWS of the corporations the people create so that our natural rights aren't infringed by our servants (who always become power hungry despots).
Liberals and Conservatives seek one thing... control of others. As much as I dislike what other people do, it's none of my business what they do so long as their actions don't intrude upon my rights to be free. Do evil, deal with Karma eventually.
How is medical privacy not protected by the Constitution? Why should the state force doctors to engage in psychological warfare on behalf of the state while at the same time encouraging (and perhaps in some cases, intimidating) them to not disclose certain details about a pregnancy to their patients or treat them in what the physician believes to be the safest manner given the circumstances?
Equating elective abortion to privacy rights is much the same as comparing slavery to property rights...
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Messages
- 2,168
- Reaction score
- 46
According to Roe vs. Wade abortion is constitutionally protected, in much the same way the ruling in District of Columbia vs Heller protects the right of an individual to possess a firearm on constitutional grounds.
Liberals and conservative are the labels they choose, how is that derogatory or calling names?
Funny, how you chastise me about making generalizations about entire groups then turn around and usurp yourself spokesperson for one, telling me to basically shut up and suggesting that everyone on OSA agrees with your point of view. I guess, by your example, that is how I should be trying to win people over to my way of thinking?
In reality, not a liberal or conservative bubble, all I really did was ask a question that provoked people to think a bit more critically while stepping outside of the dogma of their own bubbles and comfort zones. Sorry if that was a traumatic experience for those of you who haven't been out of there for years or even decades.
I have to wonder how many of the angry responses to this question that are directed at me have to do with the fact that some folks don't like to be confronted with how much alike they are, when compared to the people they hold hostility towards. Especially when this response to the question is designed to deflect attention away from the question instead of providing an honest effort to come up with an answer to a question they don't want to try to answer or even be asked.
Last edited:
Similar threads
