Stop the Hate

[Jeff Wrangler]

For instance, you're never going to get me to concede to the RR that Roe v Wade should be overturned.  And it's not because I'm pro-abortion.  I think if sex education were properly implemented, there'd be little to no need of abortion services.  I feel the way I do because I believe very strongly in a woman's right to privacy and reproductive freedom.

I believe I'm with you here, Lynne. If you'll pardon the metaphor, to me abortion is like locking the barn door after the horse has been stolen.

Is that extreme?  I don't see much middle ground.  I'm even opposed to required parental notification because there are too many cases where a male family member is the father.  A sad state of affairs, but I would rather place the trust in the young woman to make the decision that is best for her, hopefully with some counseling from professionals involved.

For myself I've never been able to come to a satisfactory conclusion on parental notification. I see what you're saying about a family member, but I'm still troubled by the notion of a young teenager undergoing a surgical procedure without her parents knowing about it.

OTOH, a morning-after pill? That doesn't trouble me.

[Monika]

Yes, I agree Karen.  Anti-gay and anti-abortion positions seem to be fundamental to a lot of social conservative platforms.

I agree

[Monika]

Lynne, I believe it is. For rigid liberals and entrenched conservatives, there is no middle ground regarding the issues (which we don't need to list, cause' we know em'). With no middle ground or flexibility, we remain at odds. This is why peaceful negotiations regarding ideals or tyrany have rarely worked as long as man has walked this earth. What has worked is war because there is no middle-ground.

If I were to say I am extremely conservative (which no one here has said he/she is, and I don't think there is one that is a Bettermost member), what would one assume.  I'm an atheist. I vote for equal rights. I have and will continue to vote for Democrats if they stand for fiscal conservatism and my idea of what government is or isn't.  Extreme liberalism has as many negatives as extreme conservatism in the eyes of a right-leaning individual and for this discussion, I'm not thinking of bin Ladens & McVeighs, but they are true extremists and my statement got people thinking.

When the only thing people have in common is these threads, we become icons and avatars. When we post an ideal and it flies in the face of someones values/beliefs there seems to be this need by some to prove the other wrong. I don't reckon if we all had the wherewithall to get together once a week or month for drinks, etc., the constant hot topic would be politics, religion, and trying to prove each other wrong. When we know where each other is coming from, decide if other social components are compatible with ours, and move on.

Brad

To say that one is extremely liberal does not mean that one is an extremist. The word "extreme" is used in many contexts and people´s understanding of it varies.
In this case, however, it´s pretty clear that the posters intended the word to mean "very"

[louisev]

At the far left of the political left are what are referred to as "progressives."  Progressive politics centers on reform of and change from traditional and conservative (historical models), and emphasizes a change to the old and worn out ideologies, including the traditional ideological stances of both conservatism and liberalism, and based upon the concept that the world is dynamic and needs dynamic changes in the political sphere to meet them.

I would be one of those.  In fact, there is an entire slice of political independents that are known as Independent Progressives, and that is where my politics are.  Unfortunately for us progressives, however, the Democrats have a tendency to want to keep the power structures of the government about where they are, and perpetuate their own place within them.  The progressives' choice for a presidential candidate in 2004 was Howard Dean, and they reluctantly backed Kerry once Dean fell out of the race.  Progressives were divided unequally between Edwards and Obama early in the 2008 primaries, but Obama appealed far more to moderate independents and so he gathered more steam than Edwards early on because he had a broader base of support.  Generally speaking, progressives did not show much support for Clinton due to the centrist triangulation policies of Bill Clinton during his administration.

[pnwDUDE]

At the far left of the political left are what are referred to as "progressives."  Progressive politics centers on reform of and change from traditional and conservative (historical models), and emphasizes a change to the old and worn out ideologies, including the traditional ideological stances of both conservatism and liberalism, and based upon the concept that the world is dynamic and needs dynamic changes in the political sphere to meet them.

I would be one of those.  In fact, there is an entire slice of political independents that are known as Independent Progressives, and that is where my politics are.  Unfortunately for us progressives, however, the Democrats have a tendency to want to keep the power structures of the government about where they are, and perpeturate their own place within them.  The progressives' choice for a presidential candidate in 2004 was Howard Dean, and they reluctantly backed Kerry once Dean fell out of the race.  Progressives were divided unequally between Edwards and Obama early in the 2008 primaries, but Obama appealed far more to moderate independents and so he gathered more steam than Edwards early on because he had a broader base of support.  Generally speaking, progressives did not show much support for Clinton due to the centrist triangulation policies of Bill Clinton during his administration.

The above description of your politics makes much more sense in understanding where you stand. Sounds like your not extremely liberal after and that was my point.

Brad

[louisev]

The above description of your politics makes much more sense in understanding where you stand. Sounds like your not extremely liberal after and that was my point.

Brad

well there shouldn't be a lot of confusion about what I stand for since I listed in my original post just about every political position I support.  And I would stress that progressives, particularly "independent progressives" are considered the "extreme left wing."  We're the ones who don't get upset when you call us socialists, because there is a lot to be said for the aims of social democracy.  And we know Obama is not a socialist.

[brokeplex]

I take Jeff's comment to mean that the social conservatives in the Republican party feel no hesitation at having government control/restrict/meddle with the rights of gay people and the rights of women to make their own medical decisions, along with their doctors of course. 

Some "social conservatives" do wish to stop same sex marriage from becoming a reality, so do some "liberals" like Obama.

Most social conservatives are less interested in protecting a woman's "right" to an abortion than they are protecting the "rights" of the unborn baby who can't speak for him or herself.

I am not a social conservative, and neither from what I can tell is Kaiser, but we are both conservative and right of center.

Conservatives come in all shades of the rainbow, some of the colors are bright and glowing, some are more muted pastels.

[pnwDUDE]

well there shouldn't be a lot of confusion about what I stand for since I listed in my original post just about every political position I support.  And I would stress that progressives, particularly "independent progressives" are considered the "extreme left wing."  We're the ones who don't get upset when you call us socialists, because there is a lot to be said for the aims of social democracy.  And we know Obama is not a socialist.

According to progressiveindependent.com, you're not quite near the extreme left as they (and I) am referring too. After looking at their site, now I'm very curious why someone like you who is knocking on the Socialist door would/could vote for B. Obama, who is IMO close to the right of the Dem notch.




Brad

[brokeplex]

Nobody is interested in what goes on in bedrooms, unless it is illegal with a minor or illegal due to criminal ssault. Nobody is interested in obgyn offices either, unless the law is being broken. To label an entire party and conservative-thinking people with a broadstroke that suggests they are akin to 'Hitlers' willing executioners' and would, based on the sentiment expressed, endorse raids on gay households and doctors' offices has a ring of hysteria and offensiveness to it.

The conservative positions on gay issues and abortion extend over the same range as those of anyone else--from very much opposed to very much in favor. Yes, conservatives generally fall on that scale in different locations than their so-called liberal colleagues, but both issues have a ton of gray space where most people land.

Do not forget Mr. Clinton on gay marriage and gays in the military... and Mr. Obama on gay "marriage". Most people have little issue with civil union rights that mirror a man/woman marriage. And don't forget more than just "social conservatives in the republican party" voted Yes on Prop 8.

What are the other issues? Adoption. Clerical. Instiutional (eg BSA). Adoption seems to be working out well. Clerical...Ah, the liberal view is that church and state should be completely separate, so this should not be an issue; Churches should do what they want. Institutional issues are also working just fine; the public sector institutions have no barring policies, and even private concerns tend not to; they all obey the law or get sued.

Abortion is the only procedure that apparently gives rise to the omnibus claim that conservatives want to control the relationship between women and their docs. One would think that such a claim could only come if abortions are 90% or more of all reasons to be in a obgyn office, but that is not the case. Is it?

again, the range of postions on abortion is broader than labeling conservatives as intrusive nut cases. Most people, left and right, are not in favor of late term abortions, which Roe v Wade allows...in fact up to the point of labor.

just as it is between the genders, there are a few more similarities than differences among the spectrum of people who lean left or right, and the labeling of half or more of the nation as private-life-intruders for some perverse control need is just plain hysteria.

there seems to have been a lot of broadbrush painting on this thread.

the position that conservative = social conservative = Republican is absurd.

the position that either party's platform is relevant beyond as paper liners for Parakeet cages is also absurd.

those who are self-identified as conservative have a spectrum of opinions on all the issues, and many conservatives do not affiliate with any party at all.

[louisev]

well thank you for asking, Brad.  I voted for Obama because he had a clear and focused agenda for a) ending the war in Iraq b) restoring progressive taxation and eliminating corporate welfare and giveaways to the rich c) restoring the rule of law and closing Gitmo d) instituting health care reform e) supporting the middle class and sensible domestic economic policy f) he had good advisement from the best economic team available led by Paul Volcker, the SUCCESSFUL former head of the Fed g) he is not a Washington pol and h) he's honest and intelligent.

Edwards was my second choice, and I am sure glad we dodged the bullet with that one.

And yes, I am tickled silly so far with how he has done.