Paul Harvey says: (1 Viewer)

[Rich]

And they would also be FREE to move to a more liberal community

yeah that's what Cav said about those abandoned to their own fate in the wake of Katrina

 

[Kraj]

Aren't those the same communities that hated blacks and now hate gays too?

I don't believe anyone has been referring to any specific communities, we've been saying all communities should have the right to determine their own religious expression. And no, not all communities that may choose a degree of religious expression in their schools are full of homophobes and/or (former) racists.

They have to be given a chance to think freely though, don't they?

So which are we talking about? Free thinkers or potential free thinkers?

 

[Rich]

So which are we talking about? Free thinkers or potential free thinkers?

Even free thinkers can be persuaded otherwise more especially if they're young and impressionable

 

[Kraj]

Even free thinkers can be persuaded otherwise more especially if they're young and impressionable

Then they're not exactly free thinkers are they?

I find it interesting that your usage of the term "free thinkers" appears to preclude the religious. Wouldn't abolishing personal religious expression in schools prevent individuals from freely choosing to express themselves? Is freely choosing not to engage in religious expression more valid than freely choosing to engage in religious expression? Isn't the choice to relinquish one's independent thought in favor of groupthink a valid personal choice one should be free to make, even if we think that choice is a terrible one?

 

[jsanders]

That's the funny part, all you liberals say your in the middle

I think anyone that applies intellectual vigor to reviewing my words would find me squarely in the middle, with occasional leanings towards one side or the other.

I expect to hear a resounding comment from both sides of the fence on that one.

Which of course will prove my point.

 

[TessB]

oh, c'mon we're all brainwashed in some way.
Our environment shapes us.
We could be conditioned to worship a Coke bottle.

 

[Newman]

Why should it be a Coke bottle?
I want to worship a Pepsi can.

 

[KenHigg]

Ok. But I don't want to see any Pepsi vending machines in the court house!!!

 

[Rich]

Ok. But I don't want to see any Pepsi vending machines in the court house!!!

coke and pepsi machines are being banned in schools here now because the kids become aggressive, insolent and even violent after drinking them.
Is there such a machine in the White House at the minute?

 

[BarryMK]

oh, c'mon we're all brainwashed in some way.
Our environment shapes us.
We could be conditioned to worship a Coke bottle.

Haven't you been already?

 

[TessB]

On some level, that is very true!

 

[FoFa]

Why should a free thinker have to suffer indoctrination in the bible belt?

Or maybe a closed minded individule might be able to see the light of day (dang another slang). But why should 100 kids be dictated to by one, is that not in a loose sense kind of what the NAZI's were all about?

 

[FoFa]

Aren't those the same communities that hated blacks and now hate gays too?

Humm, sounds like a little predujice on your part to me. Seems like someone is jumping to conclusions without any facts. Oh there's a news flash (another slang?)

 

[FoFa]

Even free thinkers can be persuaded otherwise more especially if they're young and impressionable

And that is what free thinking is all about! The only difference I see from your example is who maybe imposing thoughts on the free thinker. So if that free thinker does not go along with your thinking, then all of a sudden it is brain washing?

 

[FoFa]

I think anyone that applies intellectual vigor to reviewing my words would find me squarely in the middle, with occasional leanings towards one side or the other.

As Liberals think....

 

[Rich]

And that is what free thinking is all about! The only difference I see from your example is who maybe imposing thoughts on the free thinker. So if that free thinker does not go along with your thinking, then all of a sudden it is brain washing?

There's a difference between teaching and preaching

 

[Rich]

Or maybe a closed minded individule might be able to see the light of day (dang another slang). But why should 100 kids be dictated to by one, is that not in a loose sense kind of what the NAZI's were all about?

Exactly, now why should one man in a white house dictate to the world?
Why should one old fart in a frock dictate to millions, eh?

 

[cheuschober]

As Liberals think....

Actually, many liberals do... maybe that's where the divider lies...

From what I can tell from my local landscape and from where I came from (respectively urban northeast liberal vs. suburban midwest conservative) the political spectrum tends to dictate that a larger percentage of conservatives are more 'staunchly' conservative versus those who could or would be considered leftists since many of the root philosophies of leftists involve consideration for all parties including that of conservatives (leftists fight for the underdog, conservatives for the 'majority' -- IE, Christians outnumber buddhists). It is easier then to have 'middle ground' liberals (which is sadly mistaken in the US for 'indecisiveness') if only because the gravitational pull of consideration for all parties is applied. It's also not suprising that leftists are in a traditionally weaker fighting stance because they must battle the concept of fighting for the minority while appealing to the majority. When the political landscape is not so polarized as it is now this carries less import since the battles being fought seem more casual and at times, the cause of the minorty grows to that of the majority (vietnam, civil rights just to name a few). But with such a highly polarized landscape (one could question to what extent an overactive media has played a role in this) the appeal for minority protection with a need for majority votes leaves them straddling a rather great divide.

Just my two cents.
~chad

 

[KenHigg]

Actually, many liberals do... maybe that's where the divider lies...

From what I can tell from my local landscape and from where I came from (respectively urban northeast liberal vs. suburban midwest conservative) the political spectrum tends to dictate that a larger percentage of conservatives are more 'staunchly' conservative versus those who could or would be considered leftists since many of the root philosophies of leftists involve consideration for all parties including that of conservatives (leftists fight for the underdog, conservatives for the 'majority' -- IE, Christians outnumber buddhists). It is easier then to have 'middle ground' liberals (which is sadly mistaken in the US for 'indecisiveness') if only because the gravitational pull of consideration for all parties is applied. It's also not suprising that leftists are in a traditionally weaker fighting stance because they must battle the concept of fighting for the minority while appealing to the majority. When the political landscape is not so polarized as it is now this carries less import since the battles being fought seem more casual and at times, the cause of the minorty grows to that of the majority (vietnam, civil rights just to name a few). But with such a highly polarized landscape (one could question to what extent an overactive media has played a role in this) the appeal for minority protection with a need for majority votes leaves them straddling a rather great divide.

Just my two cents.
~chad

Well put (IMHO) Good to see you back in the mix

 

[Kraj]

Not only well put, but also an extremely good point.

How've you been, Chad? Long time, no see. Are you still acting?