General American Politics Thread

[rairii]

I can't be alone in being disappointed with the average conservative christian, right? I have no clue how a significant portion of the christian constituency in this country can defend profligate consumerist culture, support a system that rewards greed and exploitation, uphold policies that oppress the needy and marginalized, and vote for violent, xenophobic sociopaths. These are more issues I have with American conservatism than christianity, but honestly, it absolutely baffles me how any christian can claim moral authority over anyone while also being a conservative.

[Im_CIA]

I don't this is restricted to just "Christian" conservatives.  

 

Everyone is a hypocrite, but some are more than others. 

[rairii]

1 hour ago, Im_CIA said:

I don't this is restricted to just "Christian" conservatives.  

 

Everyone is a hypocrite, but some are more than others. 

I don't either, but it's been a specific point of frustration for me lately in light of the Georgia and Alabama abortion bills. I feel like there's a particularly frustrating hypocrisy in people seeking to reduce others' civil liberties on moral grounds when they're also proponents of a very immoral system (especially by christian standards). Obviously I'm in no place to say who's really a christian and who isn't, considering I haven't practiced christianity in a decade, but I doubt a lot of these people really take their christian values to heart.

[BTGBullseye]

The thing is, abortion is literally killing a person. Just because they haven't left the womb, doesn't make them any less a person. I am unfamiliar with the exact wording of the bills you're referencing, but giving up a baby for adoption is not a difficult process. (it's answering a few questions when delivering the baby) There are also numerous resources to assist with the pregnancy itself, so that shouldn't be an issue either.

[rairii]

14 hours ago, BTGBullseye said:

The thing is, abortion is literally killing a person. Just because they haven't left the womb, doesn't make them any less a person. I am unfamiliar with the exact wording of the bills you're referencing, but giving up a baby for adoption is not a difficult process. (it's answering a few questions when delivering the baby) There are also numerous resources to assist with the pregnancy itself, so that shouldn't be an issue either.

Let's get this out of the way first: Abortion is not the same as murder. Let's not muddy the waters by assigning moral equivalence between the two. If they were truly morally equivalent then we would treat them as such, but this largely isn't the case. There are a few exceptions, the Georgia bill for example carries a penalty of life in prison, however even this isn't truly congruent with murder in the same state as that can be anywhere from 10 years to a death sentence depending on the charge. The language the Georgia bill uses also defines miscarriage as an "abortion", so if we're being logically consistent with the language used here, that should probably make a miscarriage carry the same sentence as unintentional manslaughter. If that sounds hyperbolic, then honestly, you might want to re-evaluate what your issue with abortion truly is.

 

Second: I'm not really even speaking on whether or not abortion is morally okay. I'm not "pro-abortion", I don't think anybody truly is except perhaps some odd edgy misanthrope who thinks overpopulation is an issue of concern. However, I'm not in favor of stripping someone of their bodily autonomy (including use of hard drugs, rehabilitation would be more productive than incarceration), and I'm not in favor of creating victims of circumstance. My point is that you shouldn't claim moral authority on a topic like abortion while also being a purveyor of perhaps the worst culture of excess on the planet. Abortion shouldn't even be a discussion in the country that invented the televangelist and megachurch.

[rairii]

Also I feel that I should add: Abortion is not a particularly interesting topic of debate, because honestly, I truly feel it's one of those things that just isn't debatable. You can certainly try, you can argue the morality of it for days, but it's honestly futile because there's moral justification both for and against it. What it boils down to is less about morality and ethics and more about pragmatics and how libertarian you are. If you were to look at gun control from a similar standpoint, guns cause more death of fully developed humans than abortion does, and yet conservatives will gladly drop the question of ethics to speak strictly about whether or not gun control is actually effective and what alternative measures could be taken to reduce gun violence (albeit they are rather lazy on this one and typically default to 2nd amendment purism). That same energy simply isn't shared in the abortion debate. If you're anti-choice, you're most likely arguing strictly on ethics and not on whether or not abortion bans are actually effective, and the fact of the matter is, abortion legislation is simply not effective.

[BTGBullseye]

On 5/18/2019 at 8:39 AM, Annie said:

Let's get this out of the way first: Abortion is not the same as murder. Let's not muddy the waters by assigning moral equivalence between the two. If they were truly morally equivalent then we would treat them as such, but this largely isn't the case. There are a few exceptions, the Georgia bill for example carries a penalty of life in prison, however even this isn't truly congruent with murder in the same state as that can be anywhere from 10 years to a death sentence depending on the charge. The language the Georgia bill uses also defines miscarriage as an "abortion", so if we're being logically consistent with the language used here, that should probably make a miscarriage carry the same sentence as unintentional manslaughter. If that sounds hyperbolic, then honestly, you might want to re-evaluate what your issue with abortion truly is.

 

Second: I'm not really even speaking on whether or not abortion is morally okay. I'm not "pro-abortion", I don't think anybody truly is except perhaps some odd edgy misanthrope who thinks overpopulation is an issue of concern. However, I'm not in favor of stripping someone of their bodily autonomy (including use of hard drugs, rehabilitation would be more productive than incarceration), and I'm not in favor of creating victims of circumstance. My point is that you shouldn't claim moral authority on a topic like abortion while also being a purveyor of perhaps the worst culture of excess on the planet. Abortion shouldn't even be a discussion in the country that invented the televangelist and megachurch.

First off, it is the same as murder to a LOT of people... Mainly because it is ending the life of a sapient being just for convenience sake. There's a reason why when someone murders a pregnant woman, they are treated to two counts of murder.

 

Second, if that's the wording in the bill (remember, I mentioned that I have not read them) then the bill is moronic. Miscarriages have nothing whatsoever to do with abortion.

 

Third, you just got done talking about the morality of it, and then try to claim you aren't talking about its morality... Pick one and stick to it, don't be a liar.

 

Fourth, "bodily autonomy" is not stripped from someone just because you won't let them legally murder someone. With a rare few exceptions, that person chose to make that life, and they should have to live with the consequences of that decision.

 

Lastly, where did this "worst culture of excess on the planet" stuff come from, and what has it to do with the abortion stuff?

[rairii]

59 minutes ago, BTGBullseye said:

First off, it is the same as murder to a LOT of people... Mainly because it is ending the life of a sapient being just for convenience sake. There's a reason why when someone murders a pregnant woman, they are treated to two counts of murder.

Doesn't matter who it counts as murder to, the lack of consensus alone should make one err on the side of "not murder", along with the fact that it's effectively a parasite without the capability to speak or engage in deep or emotional thought. And before you try to argue that fetuses aren't parasites, do realize that I'm not arguing semantics here. Do note the use of the word "effectively".

1 hour ago, BTGBullseye said:

Third, you just got done talking about the morality of it, and then try to claim you aren't talking about its morality... Pick one and stick to it, don't be a liar.

You're intentionally misrepresenting what I said. Very intellectually dishonest. I never said I wasn't talking about the morality of abortion, what I said was that I'm not discussing whether or not abortion is morally okay. I never gave an answer on whether or not it was because it truly depends on circumstance. HOWEVER, it's no skin off my nose who chooses to get an abortion and I find a certain moral hypocrisy in the anti-choice position, at least in the vast majority of cases. If anti-choicers want a seat at the table, maybe they should reconsider their very anti-life perspectives that food and universal healthcare aren't basic human rights. Maybe they should show more compassion to homeless youth rejected by their parents and by society often for being LGBT+.

 

1 hour ago, BTGBullseye said:

Fourth, "bodily autonomy" is not stripped from someone just because you won't let them legally murder someone. With a rare few exceptions, that person chose to make that life, and they should have to live with the consequences of that decision.

Again: it's not murder and I'm not going to argue from the perspective who draws moral equivalence between abortion and murder. And yes, bodily autonomy is quite literally stripped from you when a legitimate medical procedure whose effects range from ending pregnancy-related health complications to literally saving lives becomes illegal.

1 hour ago, BTGBullseye said:

Lastly, where did this "worst culture of excess on the planet" stuff come from, and what has it to do with the abortion stuff?

I get the feeling you haven't been following along at all. We have reached a stage of capitalism where churches are run for profit by TV personalities with private jets, where money is no longer considered the root of all evil, where companies use figures who stood against capitalism in advertising. I promise you Jesus and your average Conservative would've had very different views between a homeless drug addict and Jeff Bezos, but Christians still do tend to be conservative.

I don't want to come off as though peoples' faith is any of my business, but peoples' political views have direct impact on people, including me (not abortion laws specifically but conservatives tend to be socially authoritarian which I'm not okay with). When I find out people holding frankly evil political views also worship a figure whose teachings American conservatism directly contradicts, you best believe I'm going to call that shit out.

[BTGBullseye]

So you're completely unwilling to hear any point of view that opposes your own, and consider it... Got it. Good luck ranting to yourself.

[rairii]

2 hours ago, BTGBullseye said:

So you're completely unwilling to hear any point of view that opposes your own, and consider it... Got it. Good luck ranting to yourself.

This is why nobody likes you, mate. You cop out and insult the other person when the pressure of an argument sets in. Don't you think that's more indicative of someone who isn't willing to listen? Why can't you just concede instead of being a condescending hypocrite?

Edited May 21, 2019 by Annie (see edit history)

[Kraken]

So is no one going to bring up the obvious use of abortion if it's a case of rape? Or is that a (in my opinion completely legitimate) motive for abortion that also applies to basically mean "Carry your rapists' baby and give it up for adoption"? Cause I don't know, it feels like having a constant reminder every day for 9 months that you got raped is pretty mentally unhealthy. Like sure we can argue about the morality of it all we want but I would say having to babysit for someone because they're an asshole you had interaction with is a pretty universally disliked idea.

 

Also I feel like having it open as an option is fine? Let people have that option because in all honesty it really doesn't concern you unless you're actually the one carrying the baby. I would also say the father gets a say in it but if he really wants a baby that bad he should probably look somewhere else or actually discuss it with the person beforehand rather than doing some evil shit like poking holes in the condom behind their partner's back. At that point when they do shit like that they should immediately lose any say in the matter. (Sarcasm) God, to think it would matter to actually have consent in relationships. How unthinkable. (/Sarcasm)

 

Also I think we should drag in the fact that religious conservatives lose their shit whenever they see homosexuality depicted normally, despite the fact that a big part of Christianity is not judging other people. Like I haven't been to church since I was 9, but I think it's a pretty well understood idea that Jesus and God aren't assholes that are going to smite you on sight or some shit as soon as you diverge from what you assume God wants you to do. Cause the whole point of Christianity is FORGIVENESS, which a few people seem to lose out on. Though I feel like part of this is something we can blame on the 200 sects of Christianity where they focus more on one part of the Bible than the other, instead of taking it all in in one go. That and apparently the Bible has always been really questionably translated, so I'm wondering how much more has been lost in translation from Hebrew. I just feel like it's a massive failure on Religion's part to actually... say the message it's supposed to be.

[BTGBullseye]

10 minutes ago, Kraken said:

So is no one going to bring up the obvious use of abortion if it's a case of rape? Or is that a (in my opinion completely legitimate) motive for abortion that also applies to basically mean "Carry your rapists' baby and give it up for adoption"? Cause I don't know, it feels like having a constant reminder every day for 9 months that you got raped is pretty mentally unhealthy. Like sure we can argue about the morality of it all we want but I would say having to babysit for someone because they're an asshole you had interaction with is a pretty universally disliked idea.

While I feel it still isn't right to commit murder (it is murder, as it's the intentional ending of a sapient being's life) as a response to rape, there are many out there that feel it is an appropriate response. Can we at least agree that that is such a rare occurrence, that it really shouldn't be legislated for as if it happens daily?

10 minutes ago, Kraken said:

(Sarcasm) God, to think it would matter to actually have consent in relationships. How unthinkable. (/Sarcasm)

Consent should be in all things, but reality kinda shits all over that. Still, there should be severe punishments (like prison) for humans intentionally violating another human.

16 minutes ago, Kraken said:

Also I think we should drag in the fact that religious conservatives lose their shit whenever they see homosexuality depicted normally, despite the fact that a big part of Christianity is not judging other people. Like I haven't been to church since I was 9, but I think it's a pretty well understood idea that Jesus and God aren't assholes that are going to smite you on sight or some shit as soon as you diverge from what you assume God wants you to do. Cause the whole point of Christianity is FORGIVENESS, which a few people seem to lose out on. Though I feel like part of this is something we can blame on the 200 sects of Christianity where they focus more on one part of the Bible than the other, instead of taking it all in in one go. That and apparently the Bible has always been really questionably translated, so I'm wondering how much more has been lost in translation from Hebrew. I just feel like it's a massive failure on Religion's part to actually... say the message it's supposed to be.

That is a remarkably small minority of assholes that call themselves "christian". Homosexuality itself isn't even a sin, only the act of sexual intercourse outside of marriage is. (marriage is 1 man, 1 woman, according to Christ's teachings) I have nothing against people that feel that way for people of the same sex, but please don't pretend it's even as "normal" as crippling anxiety and depression. (they have a much higher incidence than homosexuality)

[Kraken]

2 minutes ago, BTGBullseye said:

That is a remarkably small minority of assholes that call themselves "christian". Homosexuality itself isn't even a sin, only the act of sexual intercourse outside of marriage is. (marriage is 1 man, 1 woman, according to Christ's teachings) I have nothing against people that feel that way for people of the same sex, but please don't pretend it's even as "normal" as crippling anxiety and depression. (they have a much higher incidence than homosexuality)

God I wish it were that easy. But Alabamans are losing their shit about a gay wedding in a kids cartoon. So my bar isn't set very high about religious people.

[BTGBullseye]

22 minutes ago, Kraken said:

God I wish it were that easy. But Alabamans are losing their shit about a gay wedding in a kids cartoon. So my bar isn't set very high about religious people.

You do know how few in number those protesters actually are in regards to both the christian population and the general population, right? They are the noisy few. The squeaky wheel. The nail that's sticking out just a little too far. The abject morons that occur in every single group ever.

[rairii]

On 5/21/2019 at 7:38 PM, BTGBullseye said:

While I feel it still isn't right to commit murder (it is murder, as it's the intentional ending of a sapient being's life) as a response to rape, there are many out there that feel it is an appropriate response. Can we at least agree that that is such a rare occurrence, that it really shouldn't be legislated for as if it happens daily?

Consent should be in all things, but reality kinda shits all over that. Still, there should be severe punishments (like prison) for humans intentionally violating another human.

Agreed. We should also stop funding research towards all rare diseases because 2/100,000 annual cases for ALS is too rare for us to give a shit.

Again, why are you just okay with creating victims of circumstance? Why should we just ignore when bad shit happens to people because it "doesn't happen often"?

 

And what is "sapient" supposed to mean? If that's the single defining feature that makes a human fetus so valuable, that removing it even in cases of rape or incest is considered "murder", then how would you define sapience?

On 5/21/2019 at 7:38 PM, BTGBullseye said:

That is a remarkably small minority of assholes that call themselves "christian". Homosexuality itself isn't even a sin, only the act of sexual intercourse outside of marriage is. (marriage is 1 man, 1 woman, according to Christ's teachings) I have nothing against people that feel that way for people of the same sex, but please don't pretend it's even as "normal" as crippling anxiety and depression. (they have a much higher incidence than homosexuality)

There are also a remarkably small minority of Christians that live "according to Christ's teachings" so I'm not too terribly worried about the consensus on gay marriage.  And it should be noted that "incidence" isn't entirely what's discussed in regards to what's "normal", there's no reason to discuss how many gay people there are per capita, so let's not act in bad faith here. "Normal" in a typical, good faith sense usually denotes a state of health, and whenever we colloquially refer to something as "not normal" we're usually saying, generally speaking, that something is wrong.

 

Are LGBT people normal in the sense that there's nothing physically or mentally wrong with them? It's not a defining feature of being LGBT but being LGBT doesn't specifically denote being physically or mentally unhealthy, so maybe.

Are LGBT people abnormal in the sense that something is "wrong with them"? Again, being LGBT doesn't denote having something wrong with you, so no.

Are people suffering from anxiety or depressive disorders mentally or physically healthy? No, because if they were they wouldn't have a disorder.

Do  people suffering from anxiety or depressive disorders have something wrong with them? Yes, for the same exact reason.

 

I feel like bringing up "normalcy" in LGBT+ related discussion denotes a certain type of homophobia/transphobia in addition to ableism. If you truly do, for some odd reason, only care about how common LGBT people are, then by all means you can ignore all of this. I simply have my doubts.

On 5/21/2019 at 8:10 PM, BTGBullseye said:

You do know how few in number those protesters actually are in regards to both the christian population and the general population, right? They are the noisy few. The squeaky wheel. The nail that's sticking out just a little too far. The abject morons that occur in every single group ever.

A squeaky wheel still implies 25% of the population. Christians can be extremely annoying especially when paired with American conservatism, and that's the reality for LGBT+ people everywhere. The cultural push for LGBT+ acceptance has been met with resistance from religious groups nationwide and their reasoning for not affording that acceptance to them has been nothing but excuses. LGBPA people are mostly there, but it's hard for them to find excuses for why trans people shouldn't be given the same respect. I've been told I'll never be a woman because god made me the way I am and I should just be happy from myself, or been given passages from the bible that don't even specifically say being trans is wrong, just that "crossdressing" is wrong which has largely gone completely ignored by society EXCEPT in regards to trans people specifically. This isn't some uncommon occurrence with a loud minority, this is an everyday thing for me.

[BTGBullseye]

12 hours ago, Annie said:

Christians can be extremely annoying especially when paired with American conservatism, and that's the reality for LGBT+ people everywhere.

Considering just how much more annoying an even smaller percentage of LGBT people can get, I don't think you have room for argument on this one.

[rairii]

On 6/15/2019 at 2:42 AM, BTGBullseye said:

Considering just how much more annoying an even smaller percentage of LGBT people can get, I don't think you have room for argument on this one.

Considering that's a red herring and entirely irrelevant, I think I do.

If you want to criticize the LGBT+ community, go ahead and do it. Name one thing that makes LGBT+ people "annoying". I'll wait.

[BTGBullseye]

How about being so annoyingly outspoken that there's a "pride" rally blocking traffic every other month for that 2-4.5% of the population.

[rairii]

4 hours ago, BTGBullseye said:

How about being so annoyingly outspoken that there's a "pride" rally blocking traffic every other month for that 2-4.5% of the population.

I'm nearly certain you've never run in to one of those once in your life. Besides, people are allowed to celebrate shit, get over it.

[BTGBullseye]

Is your reading comprehension off or something? I said you didn't have much of an argument because of how annoying they themselves are, and now you just proved my point by using a strawman argument.

Edited June 18, 2019 by BTGBullseye (see edit history)