Are republican voters really just a bunch of nihilists?

[Correll]

Do you believe that Human Rights are God Given or Inherent?

This is a fundamental principle of our Enlightenment Era inspired Founding Fathers.

Modern liberals believe that such Rights are granted to people by the All Powerful State.

Why are you trying to change the direction of the discussion? Stay on track. I will respond to your question when we complete the earlier discussion about Founders and their world.

Why are you ignoring the negative aspects of the Founders' actions?

Why are you trying to restrict the citizens' rights?

We are willing to follow the Founders' opinions where it empowers the citizens of the United States.

Oh, it was not clear to me that your previous post was a direct response to mine.

The "negative aspects of the Founders's actions" are only relevant to the topic as it relates to how "reactionaries" might be trying to turn the clock back on.

Lets look at your list.

SLavery. NOpe. Dead issue.

Antidemocratic hatred. Not completely sure what you mean. I do think that Direction Election of Senators did remove a needed limit on democratic impulses, and the development of lifetime office holding is also a negative. IMO.

Property Restrictions? NO one is moving on bring that back either.

Anti-female? Another dead issue.

Anti-native American? Dead.

Fugitive slave laws? I am all about crushing slavery and the importation of slaves into America. Seal the border.

My comment on the belief on the nature of Human Rights was in relation to the OP, why someone might vote GOP.

If you believe Human RIghts are God Given, the party that thinks they are given to you by the All Powerful State might be offensive to you.

Thank you for your reply. We certainly have folks who are anti-women, anti-color, anti-religion, anti-1st Amendment. The question of where the rights derive is immaterial in our American law: they are found in the Constitution. The issue of human rights as integral to our existence deriving from God is another issue altogehter and one I won't discuss here. Start a thread on it, and I will respond.

Because of the great flaws of the Founders, I am quite willing to accept the good parts and drop the bad parts. They are not to be worshipped or adored. And we should certainly not let their opinions and prejudices then restrict us now.

1. We do not have folks who are "anti-women, anti-color, anti-religion, anti-1st Amendment" in the GOP. Being against an issue that, say feminist claim is "pro-woman" does not make one "anti-woman". Ditto the rest.

2. A basic difference in philosophy between Republicans and Democrats relates directly to the OP/topic, as to why people might vote GOP.

3. God Given or INherent is two ways of saying the same thing vs Granted by Government. THen you are back to #2

4 DIscussing the intent and the competence of the FOunding Fathers with regards to the Constitution is not "whorshipping" them. And it is rare that someone who references them is not prepared to argue the specific case in question on it's merits.

4b on the other hand those that slam Founders for not living up to modern 21st century standards are often trying to marginalize them and dodge substantial debate.

1. You are in denial. We have people in our party that do not serve legitimate women's interests.
2. I agree. The OP title is one of the sillier ones so far this week.
3. Immaterial. We can only look at governing in terms of the secular Constitution.
4. I gave you examples of why the Founders were greatly flawed and not be accepted without serious reservation today.
4b. It is only presentism if I judge them by our standards as how they lived then. What I am doing is saying I don't want may of their standards applied to us now.

1. Name the best example and how he was "anti-woman".

2. Good.

3. Completely relevant. Inherent Rights are part of our Founding Principles and the basis for our current Civil Rights, and internationally the UN Human RIghts Charter.

4. Logical fallacy of Presentism, ie projecting modern morals in the past to judge them by our standards instead of the standards of the day.

4b No one is suggesting to use their moral standards today. Their experience and their impressive success in Constitution writing makes them quite an Authority to cite, depending on the topic at hand.

 

[JakeStarkey]

1.Who is "he"? Groups include social cons who believe that women should preside, teach, or preach in church and in life. An individual comes to mind: Trump. I have not looked, but I bet he is now dropping in GOP women's favors since Carly carved him in the debate.

2. Good.

3. Your opinion. Begin with a definition of Inherent Rights.

4. Logical fallacy of Presentism, ie projecting modern morals in the past to judge them by our standards instead of the standards of the day.

4b You are copying me, Correll. Did you notice the "if"? I don't want their prejudices towards color, women, and the lower classes as part of our society today. That is not presentism. Go look up the definition.

 

[Correll]

1.Who is "he"? Groups include social cons who believe that women should preside, teach, or preach in church and in life. An individual comes to mind: Trump. I have not looked, but I bet he is now dropping in GOP women's favors since Carly carved him in the debate.

2. Good.

3. Your opinion. Begin with a definition of Inherent Rights.

4. Logical fallacy of Presentism, ie projecting modern morals in the past to judge them by our standards instead of the standards of the day.

4b You are copying me, Correll. Did you notice the "if"? I don't want their prejudices towards color, women, and the lower classes as part of our society today. That is not presentism. Go look up the definition.

1. So Trump. Dropping in the polls is not evidence of being anti-woman. I have heard of no issues of his that could be described as Anti-woman.

3. Sure. United States Declaration of Independence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."


Unalienable Rights are the same as Inherent. The UN Human Rights Charter uses that term.

To help you further.

What is INHERENT RIGHT? definition of INHERENT RIGHT (Black's Law Dictionary)

"a term that means the fundamental right a person has. See inalienable right."



Law Dictionary: What is INHERENT RIGHT? definition of INHERENT RIGHT (Black's Law Dictionary)


"Not subject to alienation ; the characteristic of those things whichcannot be bought or sold or transferred from one person to another, such as rivers andpublic highways, and certain personal rights; e. g., liberty."

Law Dictionary: What is INALIENABLE? definition of INALIENABLE (Black's Law Dictionary)


4. Yes you are. YOu are presenting their normal timely views as evidence that they are "deeply flawed". Based on modern standards yes, by their standards no.

4b. And no one is suggesting we do.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

The American Psychiatric Association categorizes Conservatism as a MENTAL ILLNESS.

Scientists have done MRI's on both Liberals and Conservatives and during interview questions while in the MRI machine, the brains of Conservatives light up in the area that deals with FEAR while the brains of Liberals don't.

Conservatives have a brain defect that makes them FEAR much more than normal people.

Righties think everyone is out to scroo them.
Righties think they are the only ones who work for their money.
Righties live in fear that they might have to pay a tax for something that helps OTHER people.

Righties can scream about this all they want but it is just the FACTS.

========

I have to say I just don't understand why anyone below the top 1% of earners vote republican. Republicans in office do nothing for the middle class and poor. I'm sure by now they would realize that Reagan economics has been proven over and over to be a failure. In terms of economics, there really isn't any reason to vote republican. Our crumbling infrastructure system is certainly a non issue with just about any republican. Of course if it was, they would favor a progressive tax system because that is the ONLY way to pay for fixing our infrastructure beyond racking up an even higher deficit.

I guess if you're immature enough to bitch about gay marriage then I can see why you would vote republican. You're all a bunch of middle schoolers trapped in adult bodies so of course you're going to vote for scumbags just as immature. For those that are pro-life, I can also at least comprehend why you vote republican because it is at least a divisive enough issue.

Beyond that, are the rest of you just nihilists? Rather than defend republicans, you just bitch about democrats. I mean my god why do you people even vote?

Even if it it were true that someone had published such a study....you'd really have to question the I.Q. of anyone who believed it.

You are a moron and zit on the face of a great state.

 

[JakeStarkey]

1. Yes, Trump. I can understand a bit his upset with Kelly. His remarks on Fiorina are not acceptable, not what we want in a President. Social con evangelical standards on women not preaching, teaching, or leading (as found in right wing Christian churches) are not acceptable.

2. Good.

3. Thank you. Show me where the Constitution adopts the inherent rights standard.

4. They were flawed by our standards, and presentism does not mean one cannot make judgments about the past, or otherwise we could not condemn the Nazis or the confederacy. In many ways, the Founders were not admirable. We have no need or requirement to set them as examples for today.

4b. Thank you for surrendering the point on presentism.

 

[Correll]

1. Yes, Trump. I can understand a bit his upset with Kelly. His remarks on Fiorina are not acceptable, not what we want in a President. Social con evangelical standards on women not preaching, teaching, or leading (as found in right wing Christian churches) are not acceptable.

2. Good.

3. Thank you. Show me where the Constitution adopts the inherent rights standard.

4. They were flawed by our standards, and presentism does not mean one cannot make judgments about the past, or otherwise we could not condemn the Nazis or the confederacy. In many ways, the Founders were not admirable. We have no need or requirement to set them as examples for today.

4b. Thank you for surrendering the point on presentism.

1. so the best example you have of the GOp being anti-woman is some "remarks"? That's not much to smear the Grand Old Party with.

3 Mmm hard to find explicitly stated. But here it is in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

"Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,"

4. "By our standards" is presentism.

4b Nope. I pointed out that no one is suggesting, "their prejudices towards color, women, and the lower classes as part of our society today."

 

[JakeStarkey]

1. I gave an individual example and a group example, the latter which you ignored. Point to me.

3 So you are for the UN. I would not have guessed. But it is not in our Constitution.

4. "By our standards" is presentism is false. It is a recoginition of difference.

4b Nope. And that is exactly why the Founders, with their great flaws, are not considered as special examples for today's America.

 

[eagle7_31]

I have to say I just don't understand why anyone below the top 1% of earners vote republican. Republicans in office do nothing for the middle class and poor. I'm sure by now they would realize that Reagan economics has been proven over and over to be a failure. In terms of economics, there really isn't any reason to vote republican. Our crumbling infrastructure system is certainly a non issue with just about any republican. Of course if it was, they would favor a progressive tax system because that is the ONLY way to pay for fixing our infrastructure beyond racking up an even higher deficit.

I guess if you're immature enough to bitch about gay marriage then I can see why you would vote republican. You're all a bunch of middle schoolers trapped in adult bodies so of course you're going to vote for scumbags just as immature. For those that are pro-life, I can also at least comprehend why you vote republican because it is at least a divisive enough issue.

Beyond that, are the rest of you just nihilists? Rather than defend republicans, you just bitch about democrats. I mean my god why do you people even vote?

democrats are bigger assholes than republicans for one. For another Democrats only care about illegal immigrants, sore winner gays, black live matters left wingers and left wing feminists.

 

[thereisnospoon]

We vote because if you socialist idiots win we are saddled with nothing but poverty. You always claim prosperity by taxing someone else but that never happens. Look at Venezuela they did the same thing and can't even get toilet paper to wipe their asses now. That's socialism. That's relying on taking from someone else for your benefit and ability to not work.

Taxing the wealthy does not harm the economy. The tax rate for the wealthy in the 50's was 90% yet that was a decade of great economic growth. If you want to stimulate economic growth, you help the middle class. Democrats understand that.

Genius...That 90% tax rate applied to roughly 200 individuals. And it applied only to an amount exceeding a very high amount.
its NEVER coming back. So just stop mentioning it.
Democrats don't understand shit. Democrats have been doing whatever they can to increase the number of people dependent on government.
Democrats don't do anything unless it is advantageous to their political career.
Do you really think those people in DC give a shit if someone makes their way out of poverty?.....In fact an upwardly mobile population is detrimental to the left wing political cause.

200 individuals huh? Where does that come from? Obviously if the number was that low 90% would be way too high lol

Yep...during the early to mid 20th century there were very few multimillionaires.
As for the rest of your whining about 90% tax rates, stop it. It never coming back....Confiscatory taxation does not increase revenue. Expanded economic activity does that. Creation of wealth does that. Creation of jobs does that......The private sector does that.
Stop it......You will never get your way.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Somehow it is ok for these assholes to control the market place while destroying competition. Somehow it's ok with you that they use cheap foreign labor as 95% of our country walks into the fucking poor house.

IN what way is anyone destroying competition?....BTW, your side is INVITING cheap foreign labor into the US in the form of illegal immigration.
You are one clueless individual.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I have to say I just don't understand why anyone below the top 1% of earners vote republican. Republicans in office do nothing for the middle class and poor. I'm sure by now they would realize that Reagan economics has been proven over and over to be a failure. In terms of economics, there really isn't any reason to vote republican. Our crumbling infrastructure system is certainly a non issue with just about any republican. Of course if it was, they would favor a progressive tax system because that is the ONLY way to pay for fixing our infrastructure beyond racking up an even higher deficit.

I guess if you're immature enough to bitch about gay marriage then I can see why you would vote republican. You're all a bunch of middle schoolers trapped in adult bodies so of course you're going to vote for scumbags just as immature. For those that are pro-life, I can also at least comprehend why you vote republican because it is at least a divisive enough issue.

Beyond that, are the rest of you just nihilists? Rather than defend republicans, you just bitch about democrats. I mean my god why do you people even vote?

You are right of course, the Republican masses vote against their own best interests all the time. To understand why you need not look any further than con-media. It is 24/7

Did you ever consider when looking at our debt, our deficit, our future, that perhaps maybe.....just maybe.....there are TOO MANY people voting for their best interest instead of the best interest of our country?

Maybe if you liberals and some conservatives would quit voting for what's in it for you, we might have a better country.

So you take a statement and twist it to fit your agenda. Con-media 101. You'd fit right in at Faux News. Do you fight on the front lines during the yearly 3 months of the 'War on Christmas'? That is a strange war, no fighting for 9 months out of the year. I guess its hard to get people riled up after New Years, what with the holidays being over and all. Can you call it a war though if it only lasts as long as Santa is on his way?

So, try again, what did you think I really meant by conservatives vote against their own best interests, aside from the hyperbole.

Or do I have to get out the Festivus pole.

You made the comment, you tell me what you meant.

I assume (as many discussions with liberals that I've had) you're referring to wealth, or are you a different liberal? LOL!

I didn't twist anything--you did. As for your comment I should be on Fox, thank you very much. Not many people tell me my comments are so good that I belong on the number one cable news network in the country. I'm flattered.....really.....

No, I'm not fighting the war on Christmas this year, are you fighting the war on women????

Ahh, so you think Faux a good gig. Enough said and good luck with your career. If they accept Palin they'll accept anyone so you should do well.

Happy Festivus.

One FNC show gets as many viewers as all of the other cable news shows combined in a single day.
So yeah...Its a REALLY good gig....Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Somehow it is ok for these assholes to control the market place while destroying competition. Somehow it's ok with you that they use cheap foreign labor as 95% of our country walks into the fucking poor house.

IN what way is anyone destroying competition?....BTW, your side is INVITING cheap foreign labor into the US in the form of illegal immigration.
You are one clueless individual.

Business, large and small, INVITES cheap illegal labor.

 

[IsaacNewton]

You are right of course, the Republican masses vote against their own best interests all the time. To understand why you need not look any further than con-media. It is 24/7

Did you ever consider when looking at our debt, our deficit, our future, that perhaps maybe.....just maybe.....there are TOO MANY people voting for their best interest instead of the best interest of our country?

Maybe if you liberals and some conservatives would quit voting for what's in it for you, we might have a better country.

So you take a statement and twist it to fit your agenda. Con-media 101. You'd fit right in at Faux News. Do you fight on the front lines during the yearly 3 months of the 'War on Christmas'? That is a strange war, no fighting for 9 months out of the year. I guess its hard to get people riled up after New Years, what with the holidays being over and all. Can you call it a war though if it only lasts as long as Santa is on his way?

So, try again, what did you think I really meant by conservatives vote against their own best interests, aside from the hyperbole.

Or do I have to get out the Festivus pole.

You made the comment, you tell me what you meant.

I assume (as many discussions with liberals that I've had) you're referring to wealth, or are you a different liberal? LOL!

I didn't twist anything--you did. As for your comment I should be on Fox, thank you very much. Not many people tell me my comments are so good that I belong on the number one cable news network in the country. I'm flattered.....really.....

No, I'm not fighting the war on Christmas this year, are you fighting the war on women????

Ahh, so you think Faux a good gig. Enough said and good luck with your career. If they accept Palin they'll accept anyone so you should do well.

Happy Festivus.

One FNC show gets as many viewers as all of the other cable news shows combined in a single day.
So yeah...Its a REALLY good gig....Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.

Faux News gets about 2 million viewers a day.

ABC, NBC, and CBS each gets 7-8 million viewers a day. That is why you HAVE to couch your bs in 'cable news shows'. LOL

If that makes you feel good go with it.

 

[Billy000]

We vote because if you socialist idiots win we are saddled with nothing but poverty. You always claim prosperity by taxing someone else but that never happens. Look at Venezuela they did the same thing and can't even get toilet paper to wipe their asses now. That's socialism. That's relying on taking from someone else for your benefit and ability to not work.

Taxing the wealthy does not harm the economy. The tax rate for the wealthy in the 50's was 90% yet that was a decade of great economic growth. If you want to stimulate economic growth, you help the middle class. Democrats understand that.

Genius...That 90% tax rate applied to roughly 200 individuals. And it applied only to an amount exceeding a very high amount.
its NEVER coming back. So just stop mentioning it.
Democrats don't understand shit. Democrats have been doing whatever they can to increase the number of people dependent on government.
Democrats don't do anything unless it is advantageous to their political career.
Do you really think those people in DC give a shit if someone makes their way out of poverty?.....In fact an upwardly mobile population is detrimental to the left wing political cause.

200 individuals huh? Where does that come from? Obviously if the number was that low 90% would be way too high lol

Yep...during the early to mid 20th century there were very few multimillionaires.
As for the rest of your whining about 90% tax rates, stop it. It never coming back....Confiscatory taxation does not increase revenue. Expanded economic activity does that. Creation of wealth does that. Creation of jobs does that......The private sector does that.
Stop it......You will never get your way.

Um and despite such a low number, the country thrived on 90%. Are you catching on?

 

[ScienceRocks]

I have to say I just don't understand why anyone below the top 1% of earners vote republican. Republicans in office do nothing for the middle class and poor. I'm sure by now they would realize that Reagan economics has been proven over and over to be a failure. In terms of economics, there really isn't any reason to vote republican. Our crumbling infrastructure system is certainly a non issue with just about any republican. Of course if it was, they would favor a progressive tax system because that is the ONLY way to pay for fixing our infrastructure beyond racking up an even higher deficit.

I guess if you're immature enough to bitch about gay marriage then I can see why you would vote republican. You're all a bunch of middle schoolers trapped in adult bodies so of course you're going to vote for scumbags just as immature. For those that are pro-life, I can also at least comprehend why you vote republican because it is at least a divisive enough issue.

Beyond that, are the rest of you just nihilists? Rather than defend republicans, you just bitch about democrats. I mean my god why do you people even vote?

democrats are bigger assholes than republicans for one. For another Democrats only care about illegal immigrants, sore winner gays, black live matters left wingers and left wing feminists.

I don't like those things either...I am a infrastructure, science, r&d, education and safetynet person! You know things that make life better.

 

[ScienceRocks]

We vote because if you socialist idiots win we are saddled with nothing but poverty. You always claim prosperity by taxing someone else but that never happens. Look at Venezuela they did the same thing and can't even get toilet paper to wipe their asses now. That's socialism. That's relying on taking from someone else for your benefit and ability to not work.

Taxing the wealthy does not harm the economy. The tax rate for the wealthy in the 50's was 90% yet that was a decade of great economic growth. If you want to stimulate economic growth, you help the middle class. Democrats understand that.

Genius...That 90% tax rate applied to roughly 200 individuals. And it applied only to an amount exceeding a very high amount.
its NEVER coming back. So just stop mentioning it.
Democrats don't understand shit. Democrats have been doing whatever they can to increase the number of people dependent on government.
Democrats don't do anything unless it is advantageous to their political career.
Do you really think those people in DC give a shit if someone makes their way out of poverty?.....In fact an upwardly mobile population is detrimental to the left wing political cause.

200 individuals huh? Where does that come from? Obviously if the number was that low 90% would be way too high lol

Yep...during the early to mid 20th century there were very few multimillionaires.
As for the rest of your whining about 90% tax rates, stop it. It never coming back....Confiscatory taxation does not increase revenue. Expanded economic activity does that. Creation of wealth does that. Creation of jobs does that......The private sector does that.
Stop it......You will never get your way.

Um and despite such a low number, the country thrived on 90%. Are you catching on?

In the 40's-60's we had the best educational system on earth, biggest industry, invested far more into science and infrastructure. Why? We had more competition and the unions had more power. People were paid better and that created more businesses...

Our government on the other hand had more revenue to spend on the general society = more jobs.