• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Americans Continue to Shift Left on Key Moral Issues - GALLUP

So how about j, he shifting left on morals, or staying a steadfast Puritan?

I'm a recovering leftist.

16 years Emotionally sober. *Knock on wood*
 
Last edited:
The one that surprises me a bit is divorce - only 20% see it as morally wrong.
I'd have figured more like 50-50 split. Also, pretty shocked a majority think doctor assisted suicide is morally OK.

I'm more surprised by suicide climbing from 13 to 19--or bothered--or both--this is a 46% increase.
I have some good guesses but don't want to get jumped for them .
 
Oh dear, I'm sorry. From one extreme to the other. I would have never brought it up.

Nope, no extremes. Though I guess it could look that way to people on the extremes.
 
Nope, no extremes. Though I guess it could look that way to people on the extremes.

That makes no sense whatsoever. You moved from the leftist to the rightist. Should have stopped in the middle.
 
as the saying goes.

If You Are Not a Liberal at 25, You Have No Heart. If You Are Not a Conservative at 35 You Have No Brain.

Actually, I have a correction to that:

If you are a liberal at 25, you have a heart. If you are a conservative at 35, you have early onset dementia.
 
Most of these don't surprise me. The US has been shifting left on social issues for a long time... and to the benefit of all people with the exception of rigid reactionary extreme right wingers. What I find interesting is that as social issues have gone left, these social issues have allowed more personal freedom for people... something that extreme right wingers often claim is the hallmark of their position. It is not surprising that we see hypocrisy from that extreme portion of the conservative block.

The two that surprised me were suicide and abortion. I was surprised to see the moral support for suicide go up and for the moral support for abortion go up only slightly.
 
That makes no sense whatsoever. You moved from the leftist to the rightist. Should have stopped in the middle.

STOP IN THE MIDDLE? Gasp! that would have put him with the likes of Presidents Eisenhower and Theodore Roosevelt.Cant have that.:shock:
 
That makes no sense whatsoever. You moved from the leftist to the rightist. Should have stopped in the middle.

I'm not "rightist", and I wasn't all the way to the left either. If your premise here is that we need to both agree that you are in the middle then let's stop now.
 
STOP IN THE MIDDLE? Gasp! that would have put him with the likes of Presidents Eisenhower and Theodore Roosevelt.Cant have that.:shock:

Funny for you to say that when you don't even self identify as in the middle.
 
I'm not "rightist", and I wasn't all the way to the left either. If your premise here is that we need to both agree that you are in the middle then let's stop now.

No j, you and I don't ever have to agree, ;).
 
I'm not "rightist", and I wasn't all the way to the left either. If your premise here is that we need to both agree that you are in the middle then let's stop now.

I dont know.In todays America,if someone says their "Slightly LiberaL",dont you think that they would at least have a nose in the middle tent?:mrgreen:
 
I dont know.In todays America,if someone says their "Slightly LiberaL",dont you think that they would at least have a nose in the middle tent?:mrgreen:

No, most liberals I know think they are moderates. Those far enough removed to admit they aren't moderate are far enough left that they're nowhere near the middle. ;)
 
I was really surprised at the low approval of pornography--I sense a lot of hypocrites there. I'm also disappointed that the 'ick' factor around cloning hasn't dissipated more.
 
So, more proof of the Moral Decline of the US. Clearly our time is limited as with any Democracy when the voting public becomes morally decayed. It is a clear sign of the spread of a pandemic of selfishness and the placement of personal hedonistic desires, or even materialistic desires, above morality. We are now and have been becoming a nation of instant gratification, whether good or evil, and of "what's in it for me" for a long while now. How much time do we have left? God only knows and he hasn't been directly speaking to us for awhile (Since we nailed his son to a cross, go figure).
 
Not surprising, and not something that really bothers me.

Two interesting things that jumped out to me that don't really fit some of the connecting narritives to this...

Abortion is still under 50%. And the only "liberal" moral notion that actually seemed to DECREASE was wearing fur. More people find that to be morally acceptable now (though only 1%) than before. It's the only "liberal" notion that actually went away from the liberal direction on it.

I also feel like this is...somewhat...missing the point on some of these.

To me, some of them aren't necessarily "moral" or "immoral" choices. I don't find divorce "immoral". I don't find having a child outside of wedlock as "immoral". At the same time, I see these as things society as a whole should essentially discourage and urge people to make choices NOT to run into a situation where it is needed. To me there is a difference between saying something is "immoral" and saying something is generally a "negative" thing.

Divorce, as a concept, is negative for example. It's something that, as a society, we should strive not to have in a hypothetical world. Not because people are trapped in unhappy marriages, but rather because people should be in happy ones. Now naturally, that's impossible to achieve, and thus I divorce is necessary and I don't feel like it's "immoral" to get one. But in a general sense, you'd like to see less than more of this.

I'm happy to see doctor assisted suicide over 50%.

Definitely interesting to see how things continue to progress, especially politically as you get new crops of people coming off age. I said in another thread, I still think there's room for social conservatism within politics in the next decade, but the direction, method, and message needs to change. It needs to become a notion that's less about policies and more about perception and personal responsability.
 
that is because they haven't grown up yet to see the consequences of some of these actions.

I'd agree with that to an extent. But you won't stop the phenomena of the influence of the socially conservative traditional upper class values fading in America as less and less Americans have interactions with the top 10%. The average American has never had any close interactions with any American of the top 10% and it shows. They live in the moment. No concept of savings. No real bedrock of social conservatism. No guiding force in their lives. No real bedrock ideology of any kind (even traditional Leftist ideology escapes them). Garden variety liberalism. They see social conservatism as simply "views" and not an actual way of life primarily because they've never met the American upper class who lives such lifestyles. The average American lives in the moment completely. Then again maybe we're ironically getting back to where the founders wanted us at. A point where an elite few wealthy landowners ran everything on a very strict socially conservative ideology from behind the scenes. I'd say we're already there.
 
I'd agree with that to an extent. But you won't stop the phenomena of the influence of the socially conservative traditional upper class values fading in America as less and less Americans have interactions with the top 10%. The average American has never had any close interactions with any American of the top 10% and it shows. They live in the moment. No concept of savings. No real bedrock of social conservatism. No guiding force in their lives. No real bedrock ideology of any kind (even traditional Leftist ideology escapes them). Garden variety liberalism. They see social conservatism as simply "views" and not an actual way of life primarily because they've never met the American upper class who lives such lifestyles. The average American lives in the moment completely. Then again maybe we're ironically getting back to where the founders wanted us at. A point where an elite few wealthy landowners ran everything on a very strict socially conservative ideology from behind the scenes. I'd say we're already there.

I am far from the top 10%. you don't need to belong to them to understand the difference between moral and immoral actions.
they will learn the hard way later in life when they are broke have no money and no retirement.

as I said they haven't grown up enough to learn the consequences of actions and I blame the parents. parents do not teach their kids to be responsible for their actions.
it is always someone else's fault.
 
I am far from the top 10%. you don't need to belong to them to understand the difference between moral and immoral actions.
they will learn the hard way later in life when they are broke have no money and no retirement.

as I said they haven't grown up enough to learn the consequences of actions and I blame the parents. parents do not teach their kids to be responsible for their actions.
it is always someone else's fault.

No I agree with you, you don't have to be rich or even of high class to be socially conservative. Historically though that's where most socially conservative traditions originated. Among the higher classes. (I'm not rich either).


But you see "Lack of class structure" in most Americans today.


-No basic dress sense

-No basic economic sensibilities on how or why things work the way they actually do from a market perspective

-Tattooed (living in the moment)

-Children out of wedlock (living in the moment)

-Total lack of societal class structure 101 meaning that they can never truly understand even the basic underpinnings of politics in this or any country because they don't know anything about class structure (the "DNA readout" of every society)



I mean for example. That entire Gallup list essentially reads as a loss of class stat book. It's simply people losing their class structure and losing the ability to understand and pinpoint class. No wonder Americans are legitimizing children out of wedlock, they're having children out of wedlock! Lol~! If you're going to be a lower class single mother you better legitimize lower class single mothers don't you think? ;)
 
Divorce, as a concept, is negative for example. It's something that, as a society, we should strive not to have in a hypothetical world. Not because people are trapped in unhappy marriages, but rather because people should be in happy ones. Now naturally, that's impossible to achieve, and thus I divorce is necessary and I don't feel like it's "immoral" to get one. But in a general sense, you'd like to see less than more of this.

Wouldn't it be better if it was realised and accepted that life-long coupling isn't 'normal' behaviour for all humans? Western society has made it the norm, or rather the expectation of it has become the norm. To me that's an unrealistic and an unhealthy norm to attempt to impose. The ending of a relationship is always going to be a difficult time in anyone's life, but the pervasive myth of 'till death us do part' is just that for a very large proportion of the population. To my mind the more 'moral' approach would be to make getting married a lot more difficult and a lot less profitable - no state-bestowed financial benefits should accrue - and divorce should be come a lot less stigmatised and legalised. As everyone knows, the involvement of lawyers practically guarantees an acrimonious, stressful and bank-breaking separation.
 
as the saying goes.

If You Are Not a Liberal at 25, You Have No Heart. If You Are Not a Conservative at 35 You Have No Brain.

It's a stupid ****ing saying.
 
It's a stupid ****ing saying.

I bet you think so considering it reflects a reality you would love to ignore. Btw, yeah, that Churchill, a real dumb bunny. :lamo
 
I bet you think so considering it reflects a reality you would love to ignore. Btw, yeah, that Churchill, a real dumb bunny. :lamo

Except Churchill didn't say it.

Quotes Falsely Attributed

Swing and a miss.

What "reality"? Why should I, now that I'm over 35, be against gay marriage, something that does not affect my life in any way? People who parrot that borderline retarded fake Churchill quote simply cannot comprehend why others are not as reactionary as they are, so they simply assume it's an age thing.
 
Except Churchill didn't say it.

Quotes Falsely Attributed

Swing and a miss.

What "reality"? Why should I, now that I'm over 35, be against gay marriage, something that does not affect my life in any way? People who parrot that borderline retarded fake Churchill quote simply cannot comprehend why others are not as reactionary as they are, so they simply assume it's an age thing.

You're correct, you're going against heavier weights intelligence wise than Churchill:

If You Are Not a Liberal at 25, You Have No Heart. If You Are Not a Conservative at 35 You Have No Brain | Quote Investigator

And that last bit is utter nonsense. The reality is, the young who have not experienced real workaday life first hand and personal become much more conservative in their views once they have gained some experience. Not everyone of course. Some remain ignorant their entire lives and haven't the sense God gave a turnip.
 
You're correct, you're going against heavier weights intelligence wise than Churchill:

If You Are Not a Liberal at 25, You Have No Heart. If You Are Not a Conservative at 35 You Have No Brain | Quote Investigator

And that last bit is utter nonsense. The reality is, the young who have not experienced real workaday life first hand and personal become much more conservative in their views once they have gained some experience. Not everyone of course. Some remain ignorant their entire lives and haven't the sense God gave a turnip.

So being socially liberal makes one "ignorant"? That's laughable. I find the opposite to be true -- it's the social conservatives who claim that, say, gay marriage is sending us to hell in a handcart when there is zero evidence it affects anyone not getting gay married in any way.
 
Back
Top Bottom