Culture and Authority: Could this explain Liberal/Conservative split?

[Missouri_Mike]

Hi AzMike I'm glad to see that we agree on more points than we disagree on.
Sorry for giving the wrong impression otherwise.
I think as you come to see how much we agree, you won't see the need
to throw in derogatory terms like "FU off" and referring to certain women as "whores" that just makes you look bad. I can look past that, but some people
can't so I hope you will be more careful in the future not to discredit yourself
by distracting from valid points you make by throwing in unnecessary language like that.

Please see below. Thanks!

1- Men should be accountable, nobody ever claimed they shouldn't be. The problem is when you have a societal norm of whores and men who court them for the fifteen minutes they have to in order to get laid you have these kinds of problems. There's no law you can pass to replace morality. Rape is already against the law. Not sure why you added that in there.

Great we agree, and clearly we do not want to see either men or women abusing the law to accuse the other wrongly if they are acting irresponsibly.

Regarding rape, was I was offering was to expand the degrees of "statutory rape" or have other degrees of rape, where ANY act that leads to unwanted pregnancy,
unwanted children, or unwanted abortion by either partner, can be used to file complaints of some form of "rape" or "relationship abuse" so BOTH partners
are held responsible, not just the woman.

How is it fair to punish the woman and not the man for abortion if
the pregnancy is caused by rape, incest or other coercion?

You are quick to point out cases of women abusing sexual relations
when they don't intend to have the child; but what about men?

Since this level of 'relationship abuse' starts on a private level that is not the jurisdiction of govt to police, that is why it is going unchecked.

What I suggest is that local communities, such as college and school districts,
come up with a policy to address ANY complaints of "relationship abuse" with
required counseling for BOTH parties until the issues are resolved, so regardless
who was the victim, who was the abuser or the abused, who was acting promiscuous or not, the problem is resolved to the satisfaction of the complaining parties. I believe that by holding both partners accountable for any complaints
of abuse, this would catch either men or women who are abusing relationships.
If we can intervene on this level, that would prevent all the focus and weight of the laws disproportionately targeting the women after pregnancy occurs.

2- There is no such thing as a gay marriage. Marriage is a religious based bond between one man and one woman. The government has no reason to be involved whatsoever. No marriage laws should exist and nobody should have to put up with the government defining it. Homosexuals can join together in whatever in the hell they think they have. It's not a marriage and never will be since the normal people can also have their own religion based marriage between a man and a woman without the government interfering. The problem is and always has been the government insisting on making the definitions.

I agree it should be kept out of govt since it is a private matter of personal beliefs.
I do believe churches and private groups/individuals have equal right to conduct marriages according to their beliefs as a spiritual ceremony.

With beliefs, if people in a district or state AGREE on laws, then sure, they can have those even if they involve religious beliefs; but if they cannot agree, they either need to keep laws neutral and all-inclusive, or keep the issues private and out of govt hands.

3- I vote for simply making people who are citizens able to vote with an ID. I don't see a reason for your other bullshit. Party or not a party show a fucking ID that proves you are a citizen and you get to vote. If you can't do that fuck off.

I happen to agree that using ID is the simplest way to verify Voter ID.
You are arguing with the wrong person, and I have no idea who the "FU off"
is directed at because I don't disagree with you.

The reason I bring up Voter ID is that it serves as a way to explain
between liberals and conservatives similar arguments that
'health insurance is necessary anyway' so "no one is losing rights by requiring it."

People are contesting both for their own reasons, and cannot understand
each other's objections.

So I brought this issue up, to try to compare it with the health care mandates.
Even if we don't agree, and we think these cases are completely different
and unrelated, they may help to shed light on why some people feel that
some rights are so "inalienable" they reject regulations that seem common sense to others.

I don't mind Voter ID, but I do mind the health care mandates
that aren't the only way to pay for health care.

Out of respect for people who are saying better means are needed besides Voter ID, I am open to resolving those conflicts, the same way I am asking people to resolve conflicts over ACA mandates that "aren't the only way" and shouldn't be imposed without the consent of people affected.

Any act that ends in unwanted pregnancy is rape? Are you serious?

 

[Disir]

It has to do with recognizing the rule of law. This is something the right seems to have a problem with. The left doesn't depend on the government. The government is the consensus. I know, it's a tough one. It's that republic-y thingy.

Liberals like making a lot of laws based on how they feel about things. They ignore laws, like immigration, that they disagree with. Obama has delayed parts of Obamacare just to try and make it look less harmful than it is. The law means nothing.

Liberals don't care about a consensus among the people. The majority didn't want Obamacare. Dems got their asses handed to them last election, but Obama continues to ignore the message sent by the people.

Liberals are all about authority as long as they can be the ones to dictate.

Proof?

 

[Disir]

Dear Emily,
Thank you for the short autobiographical sketch. As you well know, this is the internet and this cannot be verified. For all I know, you may be a bored transvestite trucker named Frank. This is absolutely fine with me either way but you do see the dilemma. The same can be said for all of the people that you talked to or know. It isn't verifiable and really doesn't amount to much. Super secret knowledge that isn't in the mainstream media doesn't really say much either.

The Green Party Platform looks quite extensive but when you read through it then you come to realize that it is missing in content of how things are to be achieved and if what it is that they want is really a worthwhile endeavor considering this is the United States.

As a Constitutionalist you must be aware of the job that the Supreme Court holds. So, waiting for the Supreme Court to tell that a specific piece of legislation is Constitutional or that falls within this area:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;—And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

would, indeed, be the right course of action as it would dictate how to proceed with the implementation of said legislation. The Tea Party, Libertopians, and the Republicans must go back to actually studying the Constitution before educational outreach. This is a necessary step to progress.

The delegation of the work is already in process via bipartisan committees and legislation through congress. If you are unwilling or unable to read through the legislation then you are largely unaware of what is transpiring. Furthermore, if you are unwilling or unable to locate the money behind the bill then your are shooting yourself in the foot. The Democrats did not defeat the meaning of prochoice with the ACA (I have read your arguments and they fail to demonstrate this). It was the Republicans that refused to even discuss the issue and forced single payer off the table. The Democrats were happy to oblige. It was the Republicans that refused to even read the bill.

 

[emilynghiem]

Hi AzMike I'm glad to see that we agree on more points than we disagree on.
Sorry for giving the wrong impression otherwise.
I think as you come to see how much we agree, you won't see the need
to throw in derogatory terms like "FU off" and referring to certain women as "whores" that just makes you look bad. I can look past that, but some people
can't so I hope you will be more careful in the future not to discredit yourself
by distracting from valid points you make by throwing in unnecessary language like that.

Please see below. Thanks!

1- Men should be accountable, nobody ever claimed they shouldn't be. The problem is when you have a societal norm of whores and men who court them for the fifteen minutes they have to in order to get laid you have these kinds of problems. There's no law you can pass to replace morality. Rape is already against the law. Not sure why you added that in there.

Great we agree, and clearly we do not want to see either men or women abusing the law to accuse the other wrongly if they are acting irresponsibly.

Regarding rape, was I was offering was to expand the degrees of "statutory rape" or have other degrees of rape, where ANY act that leads to unwanted pregnancy,
unwanted children, or unwanted abortion by either partner, can be used to file complaints of some form of "rape" or "relationship abuse" so BOTH partners
are held responsible, not just the woman.

How is it fair to punish the woman and not the man for abortion if
the pregnancy is caused by rape, incest or other coercion?

You are quick to point out cases of women abusing sexual relations
when they don't intend to have the child; but what about men?

Since this level of 'relationship abuse' starts on a private level that is not the jurisdiction of govt to police, that is why it is going unchecked.

What I suggest is that local communities, such as college and school districts,
come up with a policy to address ANY complaints of "relationship abuse" with
required counseling for BOTH parties until the issues are resolved, so regardless
who was the victim, who was the abuser or the abused, who was acting promiscuous or not, the problem is resolved to the satisfaction of the complaining parties. I believe that by holding both partners accountable for any complaints
of abuse, this would catch either men or women who are abusing relationships.
If we can intervene on this level, that would prevent all the focus and weight of the laws disproportionately targeting the women after pregnancy occurs.

2- There is no such thing as a gay marriage. Marriage is a religious based bond between one man and one woman. The government has no reason to be involved whatsoever. No marriage laws should exist and nobody should have to put up with the government defining it. Homosexuals can join together in whatever in the hell they think they have. It's not a marriage and never will be since the normal people can also have their own religion based marriage between a man and a woman without the government interfering. The problem is and always has been the government insisting on making the definitions.

I agree it should be kept out of govt since it is a private matter of personal beliefs.
I do believe churches and private groups/individuals have equal right to conduct marriages according to their beliefs as a spiritual ceremony.

With beliefs, if people in a district or state AGREE on laws, then sure, they can have those even if they involve religious beliefs; but if they cannot agree, they either need to keep laws neutral and all-inclusive, or keep the issues private and out of govt hands.

3- I vote for simply making people who are citizens able to vote with an ID. I don't see a reason for your other bullshit. Party or not a party show a fucking ID that proves you are a citizen and you get to vote. If you can't do that fuck off.

I happen to agree that using ID is the simplest way to verify Voter ID.
You are arguing with the wrong person, and I have no idea who the "FU off"
is directed at because I don't disagree with you.

The reason I bring up Voter ID is that it serves as a way to explain
between liberals and conservatives similar arguments that
'health insurance is necessary anyway' so "no one is losing rights by requiring it."

People are contesting both for their own reasons, and cannot understand
each other's objections.

So I brought this issue up, to try to compare it with the health care mandates.
Even if we don't agree, and we think these cases are completely different
and unrelated, they may help to shed light on why some people feel that
some rights are so "inalienable" they reject regulations that seem common sense to others.

I don't mind Voter ID, but I do mind the health care mandates
that aren't the only way to pay for health care.

Out of respect for people who are saying better means are needed besides Voter ID, I am open to resolving those conflicts, the same way I am asking people to resolve conflicts over ACA mandates that "aren't the only way" and shouldn't be imposed without the consent of people affected.

Any act that ends in unwanted pregnancy is rape? Are you serious?

If one or both partners doesn't agree to the pregnancy, child or abortion caused by the sex
then that is relationship abuse.
So if you want to expand rape to have fourth or fifth degree "statutory" levels of
rape or relationship abuse, people could agree to make laws that recognize this.

if one district wants to police relationship abuse as harshly as rape,
and ban people from living there who don't agree to treat it as harshly as rape,
if they want stricter standards, I would support
that if everyone in that district agrees.

If districts competed to reduce their crime rates by enforcing consistent standards
by agreement, and only allowing residents to live there who agree to sign such
local ordinances and civic association standards, I would encourage that.

Whatever works to make sure people agree what the rules are
so you don't have people taking advantage of others and then saying they did or didn't consent after.

I would even argue to up the ante on these cases of drugging people to rape them
and call for revocation of US citizenship, not just local residency but even giving up
privileges of citizenship. So I would recommend having people sign agreement
when they accept responsibility for citizenship, and lay out terms for revocation
such as committing premeditated crimes with weapons or covering up rape with drugs or
harming the witness or destroying evidence etc. if people cannot agree to these things
they should be screened out in advance as needing criminal therapy and counseling.
So we could identify criminally ill people BEFORE they commit crimes by developing
medical means of screening that are required if someone files an abuse complaint.
And pepole who fail to report a dangerous illness can also be held liable if such
person commits a crime that other people deliberately or negligently cover up.

And start holding people accountable for letting crime and abuse go on and create more victims.

I would make this optional, and give tax breaks or other incentives
to districts that can lower their crime rates by screening out people who can't agree to follow laws.
Instead of charging taxpayers millions if not billions in dollars after crimes occur, people are
murdered and raped, because they didn't report or get help for a dangerous person.

Even just publicizing the fact there are free methods already available that
have helped identify, diagnose, treat and cure criminal illness through spiritual healing
would get more people looking into this voluntarily. Maybe harsher laws aren't necessary
if pepole figure this out and start getting help on their own without being forced to in cases of criminal threats to safety.

I am just suggesting this to show that it can be prevented
if you hold people accountable at the beginning and not wait until afterwards
to try to police people after the fact. Why not intervene at the first sign of abuse
and start requiring screening and counseling when someone is first reported as abusive or harassing.

The victims of serial rapists or killers many times could have been spared
if the sick person had gotten proper treatment when the first cases of abuse or rape were reported.

As more scientific studies on healing methods show that even sick schizophrenic and dangerous
people can be cured, maybe people will choose this voluntarily and we won't need laws forcing dangerous people to get help.

 

[emilynghiem]

Dear Emily,
Thank you for the short autobiographical sketch. As you well know, this is the internet and this cannot be verified. For all I know, you may be a bored transvestite trucker named Frank. This is absolutely fine with me either way but you do see the dilemma. The same can be said for all of the people that you talked to or know. It isn't verifiable and really doesn't amount to much. Super secret knowledge that isn't in the mainstream media doesn't really say much either.

The Green Party Platform looks quite extensive but when you read through it then you come to realize that it is missing in content of how things are to be achieved and if what it is that they want is really a worthwhile endeavor considering this is the United States.

As a Constitutionalist you must be aware of the job that the Supreme Court holds. So, waiting for the Supreme Court to tell that a specific piece of legislation is Constitutional or that falls within this area:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;—And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

would, indeed, be the right course of action as it would dictate how to proceed with the implementation of said legislation. The Tea Party, Libertopians, and the Republicans must go back to actually studying the Constitution before educational outreach. This is a necessary step to progress.

The delegation of the work is already in process via bipartisan committees and legislation through congress. If you are unwilling or unable to read through the legislation then you are largely unaware of what is transpiring. Furthermore, if you are unwilling or unable to locate the money behind the bill then your are shooting yourself in the foot. The Democrats did not defeat the meaning of prochoice with the ACA (I have read your arguments and they fail to demonstrate this). It was the Republicans that refused to even discuss the issue and forced single payer off the table. The Democrats were happy to oblige. It was the Republicans that refused to even read the bill.

Hi Disir and NONE of that gives the Supreme Court or govt the right
to violate Amendment one or Fourteen.

The problem I have found is not all people interpret religion or creed to include political beliefs as protected equally.

then they argue when one party pushes their political beliefs about gays and marriage,
or life of the unborn, or health care as a right, etc.

people cannot help having these views if they are beliefs inherently held.

so that is why I am arguing we need to address this.

if we need to add language clarifying political beliefs and resolving by consensus
or by separation by groups, that's great. let's have a constitutional convention and
bring up the issue of political beliefs and how to handle them since govt cannot be separated
from them.

 

[Disir]

Dear Emily,
Thank you for the short autobiographical sketch. As you well know, this is the internet and this cannot be verified. For all I know, you may be a bored transvestite trucker named Frank. This is absolutely fine with me either way but you do see the dilemma. The same can be said for all of the people that you talked to or know. It isn't verifiable and really doesn't amount to much. Super secret knowledge that isn't in the mainstream media doesn't really say much either.

The Green Party Platform looks quite extensive but when you read through it then you come to realize that it is missing in content of how things are to be achieved and if what it is that they want is really a worthwhile endeavor considering this is the United States.

As a Constitutionalist you must be aware of the job that the Supreme Court holds. So, waiting for the Supreme Court to tell that a specific piece of legislation is Constitutional or that falls within this area:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;—And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

would, indeed, be the right course of action as it would dictate how to proceed with the implementation of said legislation. The Tea Party, Libertopians, and the Republicans must go back to actually studying the Constitution before educational outreach. This is a necessary step to progress.

The delegation of the work is already in process via bipartisan committees and legislation through congress. If you are unwilling or unable to read through the legislation then you are largely unaware of what is transpiring. Furthermore, if you are unwilling or unable to locate the money behind the bill then your are shooting yourself in the foot. The Democrats did not defeat the meaning of prochoice with the ACA (I have read your arguments and they fail to demonstrate this). It was the Republicans that refused to even discuss the issue and forced single payer off the table. The Democrats were happy to oblige. It was the Republicans that refused to even read the bill.

Hi Disir and NONE of that gives the Supreme Court or govt the right
to violate Amendment one or Fourteen.

The problem I have found is not all people interpret religion or creed to include political beliefs as protected equally.

then they argue when one party pushes their political beliefs about gays and marriage,
or life of the unborn, or health care as a right, etc.

people cannot help having these views if they are beliefs inherently held.

so that is why I am arguing we need to address this.

if we need to add language clarifying political beliefs and resolving by consensus
or by separation, that's great. let's have a constitutional convention and
bring up the issue of political beliefs and how to handle them since govt cannot be separated
from them.

If you believe that those rights have been violated and a law is unconstitutional then you, or anyone, can pay the filing fee and attempt to have it addressed.

Ah, yes.......now we are getting to your agenda. Article V.

 

[G.T.]

Emily. You have more of an affinity toward conservatives than you do liberals ..

It wreaks in almost every post you make


The problem with the partisan mind is that even when it sees itself giving concessions to self delude oneself into thinking theyre even handed - its merely an illusion.

 

[Disir]

There is no data that supports spiritual healing works. None. In fact, studies show they don't.
Look here:
Where is the science

And here:
HMS Press Release

But, we have a Republican to thank for trying to open the door to fraud.
Alternative Medicine Providers Show Their Greedy Side - Forbes