[stealthfighter]

	Originally Posted by thod To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	What's difficult? It's already been explained. Me and mine are more important than those distant from me. Thus I will not give up all my possessions to save an African village. I will give a contribution. If it's not enough, tough, they are going to die.

The issue here isn't even about one's willingness to help (one may or may not help) the needy but rather the tendency to treat any act of extending a hand as a demonstration of government overreach, wreckless spending, socialism, communism, which is what I was pointing out in my post commenting on Ray9's post and the one which I reiterated when you mentioned the "limited axiom" problem. In connection to the OP, why do conservatives (who asserts that they are commited to the Christain ideal of individual compassion) often deride any concerted effort to promote social justice, and treat it as a means of "feeding the wildfire." It's that particular contradiction that led to this thread. Yes you have mentioned self-reliance, family-first mindset, sustainability, and futility of effort as justification for not being mindful of other people's welfare but how do you resolve that specific contradiction between your typical action and that religious ideal that you uphold?

[INTJRyan]

	Originally Posted by stealthfighter To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	how do you resolve that specific contradiction between your typical action and that religious ideal that you uphold?

They give a lot to private charity. Seriously, that's how they resolve it, unless they are prosperity gospel believers, and then, god made the poor poor, and who are we to question his work.

[Eridal]

There is a difference in willingly giving aid to help another and someone forcing you to at the point of a gun to give aid to someone. That is the problem with government sponsored welfare it is taking money from people who have legally earned it by the force of the government and handing it out to others based solely on the arbitrary rules and values of the government.

[thod]

It should be fairly obvious. The goal is not to do good, but rather to do no evil. Thus the African can starve because that it not an evil act, it is a non-act. Yet shooting him would be an evil act.

[Maybe to Dream]

	Originally Posted by thod To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	It should be fairly obvious. The goal is not to do good, but rather to do no evil. Thus the African can starve because that it not an evil act, it is a non-act. Yet shooting him would be an evil act.

First of all, you'd be surprised at how many Africans actually enjoy a higher standard of living than you probably do. My relatives would likely be some...

Secondly, didn't anyone ever teach you that inaction is more or less the same as consent? There's a difference between understanding that it's impossible to help everybody and displaying this appalling attitude towards the plight of other human beings. It's unbelievable really.

[StoltenStolten]

Fry and Laurie squeezed the republican values into this awesome 164 second video.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Ray9]

The "evil" rich Republicans vs. The "good" government Democrats. The simplemindedness of the electorate is breathtaking:


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[nowt]

Speaking of the incredibly simpleminded?--

Those are Canucks.

	Originally Posted by Ray9 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	<snip simplemindedness>

[annaelizabeth]

	Originally Posted by Ray9 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	The "evil" rich Republicans vs. The "good" government Democrats. The simplemindedness of the electorate is breathtaking: To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Yeah, kind of like your idea that democrats are all a bunch of morons who love government and want to shell out money to everyone and republicans are geniuses who are wealthy by their own intellectual capacity. The smart republicans vs. the stupid democrats.
Get real.

[paleoeco]

Here's a perfect clarity of the Republican value platform:

Everyone remember the uproar over the idea that Ann Romney has never "worked a day in her life" story? Remember that?

And
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
....

Originally Posted by from Article

House Republicans emphatically agree with Mitt Romney that stay-at-home moms work just as hard as anybody in the workforce. But when it comes to applying that standard to mothers on welfare, they draw the line. Romney weighed in on the work of stay-at-home moms last week after Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen suggested that Ann Romney, a stay-at-home mom, had "never worked a day in her life." Mitt Romney defended his wife's choice to stay home with their five sons by saying, "All moms are working moms." "Well, I agree," Rep. John Mica (R-Fla.), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, said of Romney's comment. But when Mica was informed of a Democratic bill that would allow child rearing to count toward the required "work activity" that must be performed by recipients of Temporary Assistance to Needy Families -- the federal program born out of welfare reform in 1996 -- he had a change of heart. "It's a stretch. It's a stretch. It's a stretch," Mica told The Huffington Post earlier this week. Specifically, the bill, called the Women's Option to Raise Kids (WORK) Act, would allow low-income mothers with children ages 3 and under to stay at home with their children and continue receiving benefits. It will be introduced by Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.) and has about half a dozen Democratic cosponsors.

And the article keeps going. Oh yeah, they're all for saying mothers who stay at home to raise children are working, except when it comes to actually helping mothers stay at home to work raising children.

These are also the same people who claim that having a mother stay at home to raise the children is what makes children successful and keeps them out of trouble. And yet, they do everything in their power not to help poorer mothers do this.

[Paul Siraisi]

Originally Posted by annaelizabeth To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I am having a really hard time understanding the Republican right wing version of Christianity that they seem to propose. I am a liberal and a Christian. One of our basic teachings is to look out for those less fortunate. The republican Christians seem to go the other way on this, in so much as blaming the poor for their condition (lazy, unmotivated, etc...). They block programs to help the poor at every turn. They don't want universal health care for everyone (since most of them can afford the high premiums - screw everyone else.) They are against any form of socialism policy - which is ironic because many of the rural repubs are on food stamps, va benefits, disability, etc.....They look down on anyone different from them (homosexuals, immigrants, lower class workers, etc...) They want tax cuts for wealthy while cutting services for people making $8.00 per hour. Then they rant and rave about their religious convictions and how the left doesn't have any, when many on the left are Christian and do actually follow the Christian teachings. WTF is going on with them? I'm serious. This has been bothering me for a while. Can anyone enlighten me on this please?

What about helping the poor do you believe requires the government to force everyone else to help the poor? As a Christian, do you not get that YOU are supposed to help the poor?

[Subgenius]

A democrat's christianity is about as equally valid as a republican's christianity. It's a 2000 year old system that hasn't been true to it's name since it's mythical founder supposedly lived. There are a plethora of different sects that have all claimed validity since it's inception. The fact that your being a liberal and a christian and someone being a republican and a christian shouldn't even have to be discussed because of the separation of church and state. So you having a christianity dick measuring contest about validity is unamerican.

OP, Jesus totally loves America because he was here. Mormons say so. Are you saying their religion is wrong? They seem to be pretty republican. So logically, Jesus must have been pretty republican.

[maskling]

that is one way to read Haidt, yes i reckon so. but the first thing i notice about that list is that the first two items, "protect from harm" and "fairness" are inherently good things. they are good in and of themselves.
the remaining 3 items are not inherently good or bad. they can be either depending on context. loyalty, obedience and purity can be fucked-up immoral things if they service medieval backwardness. Stalin, the Taliban and Jim Jones all used these three items to enforce group loyalty and keep the peer pressure on followers. they are all tools of control, not tools of goodness.

so as a liberal, i give very little creedence to loyalty, obedience and purity. if you like being controlled, by all means, go with them!

[annaelizabeth]

Originally Posted by Subgenius To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

A democrat's christianity is about as equally valid as a republican's christianity. It's a 2000 year old system that hasn't been true to it's name since it's mythical founder supposedly lived. There are a plethora of different sects that have all claimed validity since it's inception. The fact that your being a liberal and a christian and someone being a republican and a christian shouldn't even have to be discussed because of the separation of church and state. So you having a christianity dick measuring contest about validity is unamerican. OP, Jesus totally loves America because he was here. Mormons say so. Are you saying their religion is wrong? They seem to be pretty republican. So logically, Jesus must have been pretty republican.

Separation of church and state? You should try telling that to the GOP who bring up religion at every opportunity. If they didn't make it such a selling point for their party, none of this would even be mentioned. It's not unAmerican at all for me to be calling them out on it. They brought it upon themselves by their own words.

[Autumnleaf]

The Republican values are the same as the Democrat values. Just compare Bush to Obama. Pro war. Pro out of control government spending. Pro government spending on healthcare. Pro low interest rate and low taxes. If you think the two are different in a meaningful way then I don't know how you justify it.

[LadySpock]

I don't think that we can expect consistency from any political party. What we can expect is deceit and opportunism.

Idealism disappoints.

[Arcanist]

Evangelicals need their own party. Since they've infested the Republicans, I'm forced into a third party or no party at all and we all know that those don't count in MURKA.

[JTG]

	The Republican value platform

Fuck bitches. Get money.


"Bitches" in this case means "women" or "weaker people" or both. Fucking the latter is seen as acceptable desirable in an individual, while fucking too many of the former is scorned but practiced anyway.

---

	Originally Posted by Arcanist To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I'm forced into a third party or no party at all and we all know that those don't count in MURKA.

This is why we need to do away with the electoral college. As it stands, we do have some independents and "third" parties in office, but since they stand virtually zero chance of ever gaining the presidency, they always end up assimilating into the established parties or petering out.

Of course, the powers that be (Dems and Repubs) benefit from this, so they both have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo - at least in this respect.

[LadySpock]

Republican values:

Here are a few key points...

1) The poor are poor because they are lazy, stupid, or both.
2) Racism doesn't prevent anyone from achieveing anything.
3) A woman's place is in the home - unless she's a single mom.
4) Husbands can & should have affairs - especially if they earn enough money to do it. The ideal affair partner will be half the man's age plus 7...and blond.
5) Abortion - no. Death Penalty - yes. War - orgasmic yes (Killing is OK if you've been born already.)
6) Domestic violence does not exist.

[Autumnleaf]

Originally Posted by LadySpock To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Republican values: Here are a few key points... 1) The poor are poor because they are lazy, stupid, or both. 2) Racism doesn't prevent anyone from achieveing anything. 3) A woman's place is in the home - unless she's a single mom. 4) Husbands can & should have affairs - especially if they earn enough money to do it. The ideal affair partner will be half the man's age plus 7...and blond. 5) Abortion - no. Death Penalty - yes. War - orgasmic yes (Killing is OK if you've been born already.) 6) Domestic violence does not exist.

Where are you from? I've never met a Republican like you before.

[LadySpock]

Brooklyn, New York

One of my parents is a quadroon from England & the other is an albino Eskimo with ADD.

Stay jiggy

[StoltenStolten]

Originally Posted by LadySpock To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Republican values: Here are a few key points... 1) The poor are poor because they are lazy, stupid, or both. 2) Racism doesn't prevent anyone from achieveing anything. 3) A woman's place is in the home - unless she's a single mom. 4) Husbands can & should have affairs - especially if they earn enough money to do it. The ideal affair partner will be half the man's age plus 7...and blond. 5) Abortion - no. Death Penalty - yes. War - orgasmic yes (Killing is OK if you've been born already.) 6) Domestic violence does not exist.

In short, hypocrisy.

Hey, it's a country started by slave owners who wanted to be free. Double standard, that's the core of it.

---------- Post added 04-24-2012 at 11:20 AM ----------

	Originally Posted by StoltenStolten To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	In short, hypocrisy. Hey, it's a country started by slave owners who wanted to be free. Double standard, that's the core of it.

That said, the people benefiting from republican "values" - rich, smart and ruthless - have my respect. I find them morally lacking, of course, but the pure ability, skill, power... to control the masses. I can not help but admire it.

For the regular people who fall victim to it all, I have nothing but contempt.

[thod]

The few that can see through it are no better off. They engineer things such that you either join them or suffer. The smart pleb gets to be a foreman instead of a peasant if he complies, but never anything more.

[StoltenStolten]

	Originally Posted by thod To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	The few that can see through it are no better off. They engineer things such that you either join them or suffer. The smart pleb gets to be a foreman instead of a peasant if he complies, but never anything more.

Indeed. Thus I dont respect morons who fall for "trickle down economy" and bullshit like that.

As personal advice, I recommend you take that foreman job. It's not like you can bring down capitalism.