Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by JollyRoger, Dec 20, 2015.
That seems to be a class issue, I'm not sure how that has anything to do with your original comment:
Perhaps. But since those commenters are usually also spouting how the "libruls" are ruining America they at least self identify as conservatives.
I think what we have here is a difference of viewpoint in that you are looking for what the spokesmen of conservatism have to say while I am looking at the rank and file. Generally speaking those spokesmen want the support from the rank and file but would rather they kept to themselves rather than disgracing the movement by demonstrating the underlying truths.
It may very well be that the vast majority of people saying these things are conservatives and it may also be, although it is less likely, that a majority of conservatives thinks like that.
I just don't see how this is an issue of color-blindness, I don't see them claiming that "White people are in power because they are superior!" or things like that.
I would cautiously guess that a person's conservatism develops when the person has something to conserve in the first place. And that somehow kind of puts the person into some class.
I don't insist on anything, but how wrong you think I can possibly be with a guess like that?
Just keep in mind that if you believe what this list says, you'll be just as misinformed about liberal beliefs as you're complaining they misunderstand conservative beliefs.
You aren't looking. Operate down among the rank and file for a while. You find that the same people who are totally arrogant about having achieved the monumental accomplishment of buying a house are also the ones ranting about the libruls and are also the ones who have figured out that strategically placing a space between the n and the i allows them to slide a word past the auto censor that they would never dream of using if they weren't protected by the anonymity of the internet...except in company with their fellow conservatives, and even then they are under a sheet.
If your reference to a Priest means Catholic, then the priest was very poorly educated in catholic theology.
No that one definitely was not Catholic. It was either an Orthodox or some Evangelist, it was about 20 years ago and I honestly don't remember the source of that particular nonsense. Anyway, maybe the "priest" was a wrong word to use in either case but for not knowing a better one I decided to just put it with lowercase "p" as a generic name. Was that a wrong move?
So you've been exposed to heresy then, Daw. Report it to the nearest Inquisitor and it'll be dealt with expediently.
Not sure I'd go w/ "most", but for many (plurality, maybe even?) I think it's more they're in denial and like to use "Christianity" to over their bigotry. You can give yourself license to be a jerk if you dress it up in a velvet glove... or at least try to.
Including "conservatives", but thanks for the list, that was a funny read.
So it seems, but I'm afraid that the limitation period is long over for that...
Seems like St. Peter will deal with him, instead.
There's a redundancy at the end there.
No, there are and have been priests since long before Jesus, it's just in the states priests are normally though of as Catholic. (I think )
You mean Obama is Muslim?
Given he's raised by his maternal grandparents, who were Christians. The chance that he converted to his father's faith is low, not mentioning his father had alcoholism problem, which makes his Islamic faith even less credible.
This is kind of Hard since they don't believe in such things.
He was being silly. An incredible number of people believe Obama is secretly a Muslim
You can bet that there are secular conservatives. Not nearly as many as the religious kind, in the U.S. at least, but they exist. There are also many conservatives who don't take the Bible literally, are socially conservative, but believe in accepted scientific concepts like gravity, evolution, etc. Again, not many, definitely more than secular conservatives, but not many. But they exist.
To take a stab at the OP, they're actually trying to unite the left and right with a "common enemy".
From their viewpoint, liberals should be against Muslims because their society/culture/religion is extremely illiberal and thus at odds with liberalism in general. Meanwhile conservatives dislike them for other reasons, usually a simple intolerance of other religion.
Unless an Islamic horde is at the gate, the united front against Muslims seems nonsensical as there're bigger fishes to fry.
Separate names with a comma.