• 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!

Liberals and Conservatives: Are adherents of the rival ideology evil?

Well?

  • I'm a liberal: conservatives are evil

    Votes: 2 4.0%

  • I'm a conservative: liberals are evil

    Votes: 3 6.0%

  • I'm a liberal: conservatives aren't evil

    Votes: 20 40.0%

  • I'm a conservative: liberals aren't evil

    Votes: 11 22.0%

  • Ban Morality Games

    Votes: 14 28.0%
  • Total voters
    50
eohrnberger said:
Agreed.



Kobie, my partner on the other side of the coin! :)

No, liberals are not evil, but some of the things they promote are.
Of course, the same can be said for some of the stupid things that some conservatives promote as well.

Guess that makes me more a centrist of some sort.
Click to expand...

What, exactly, do liberals promote that is truly "evil"? Or conservatives, for that matter?
 
I think extreme partisan hacks are evil, such as a few in this thread. Their hatred and intentional misconstruing of the other side is causing a level of animosity in this country we haven't see in ages. It's also the reason why we can't get anything accomplished in Washington.

I'm a leftist with many conservative friends. I also used to be very conservative up until about two years ago. Life ain't all black and white.
 
shrubnose said:
Anyone who thinks that all members of any group are evil based upon the actions of some members of that group is a bigot. :roll:

Does anyone disagree with that?

Now that we've put this BS out of the way maybe we can move on to some important issues.
Click to expand...

Yea lets move on to banning the guy for stupid threads bwhahahha.

Simpsons-angry-mob-pitchfork-torches.jpg
 
Joe Steel said:
Conservatives are evil.

There. I've said it and I mean it.

The major forces behind conservatism as it exists in America today are willful ignorance and malice. Conservatism demands of its adherents a willingness to accept all manner of injustices without anything beyond a cursory consideration of their causes and further demands a willingness to punish those who aren't part of the mainstream. Witness conservatism's rejection of any attempt to alleviate the pain of the poor who suffer without healthcare and the emotional distress of social outcasts such as gays and lesbians.

Americans never can call themselves civilized as long as they allow conservatism to exist.
Click to expand...

Congratulations. You achieved the pinnacle with this rant.

I hope you stop being poor soon.
 
TeleKat said:
... Conservatives are no more evil than are liberals or libertarians. Members of each group want to make this country a better place to live, they just have varied ways of getting there. And frankly, each group has their good ideas and well as their bad ones. ...
Click to expand...

Your faith in the moral equivalency of the various political perspectives is misplaced. Conservatives and libertarians are focused only on their own, personal, welfare. Liberals, however, are concerned with everyone's.
 
shrubnose said:
Anyone who thinks that all members of any group are evil based upon the actions of some members of that group is a bigot. :roll:

Does anyone disagree with that?

Now that we've put this BS out of the way maybe we can move on to some important issues.
Click to expand...

Kobie said:
What, exactly, do liberals promote that is truly "evil"? Or conservatives, for that matter?
Click to expand...

Continued growth in the size and cost of government.
Continued growth in the needless government interference into people's lives.
Continued growth of dependency on government.
Continued support and growth of protected classes that really don't need it (hate crimes are already crimes after all).
Continued support and promotion of excessively politically correct idiotic policies

Just what I can name off of the top of my head.
 
eohrnberger said:
Continued growth in the size and cost of government.
Continued growth in the needless government interference into people's lives.
Continued growth of dependency on government.
Continued support and growth of protected classes that really don't need it (hate crimes are already crimes after all).
Continued support and promotion of excessively politically correct idiotic policies

Just what I can name off of the top of my head.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting definition of "evil."
 
Joe Steel said:
Would you say some NAZIs were good NAZIs?
Click to expand...

Some Nazi soldiers were simply stuck between a rock and a hard place. They had no choice but to follow orders.

That is typical of any militia. Many soldier may disagree with the objective however they can not simply disobey orders.

I am sure there were some Nazi soldiers who were sickened by the atrocities they had to commit. Humans are truly, TRULY, not as black and white as you want to paint them as.
 
Gathomas88 said:
The death, depravity, chaos, and generally self-destructive impulses the Left likes to confuse with "freedom," perhaps.

Funny thing about that, however. The Left only really seems to respect "choice" so long as the choices made happen fall in line with its own way of thinking.
Click to expand...

Everything you said there can easily be turned around and stated about the "right" as well.

Generally speaking, the “conservative platform” of more individual freedom, smaller government, less government intrusion is just a pack of lies and/or feel-good words.

Anyone who chooses to do something, or behave in a way that’s not goose-stepping right along with the conservative/religious paradigm is “evil”.
Anyone who doesn't believe what you believe, and anyone who doesn't act like you act is “evil”.

Perhaps a working definition of "evil" is required.
 
Joe Steel said:
Your faith in the moral equivalency of the various political perspectives is misplaced. Conservatives and libertarians are focused only on their own, personal, welfare. Liberals, however, are concerned with everyone's.
Click to expand...

What a bull**** generalization to make. There are plenty of compassionate libertarians and conservatives. Likewise, there are plenty of selfish liberals.
 
Joe Steel said:
Your faith in the moral equivalency of the various political perspectives is misplaced. Conservatives and libertarians are focused only on their own, personal, welfare. Liberals, however, are concerned with everyone's.
Click to expand...

That's not true. Conservatives belief that what's best for the individual, and best for the corporation will rise all boats. They genuinely believe this. And they believe the answer to poverty is hard work. I don't think they intentionally want to **** people over. They believe less taxation opens the door for people to invest their own money, and for businesses to invest in their people. This certainly isn't the case as evidence shows, especially in an economic system where capital overrides all other goals (focus on the shareholder above all else).

The problem with this thinking (and I say this as a former conservative who used to believe this) is that while a high tide rises all boats, not everyone has a boat.
 
Joe Steel said:
Your faith in the moral equivalency of the various political perspectives is misplaced. Conservatives and libertarians are focused only on their own, personal, welfare. Liberals, however, are concerned with everyone's.
Click to expand...

Other than all those people they step on. :cool:
 
eohrnberger said:
Continued growth in the size and cost of government.
Continued growth in the needless government interference into people's lives.
Continued growth of dependency on government.
Continued support and growth of protected classes that really don't need it (hate crimes are already crimes after all).
Continued support and promotion of excessively politically correct idiotic policies

Just what I can name off of the top of my head.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I can't tell if you're talking about democrats or republicans here.

Both parties have contributed greatly to everything you've posted.
 
eohrnberger said:
Continued growth in the size and cost of government.
Continued growth in the needless government interference into people's lives.
Continued growth of dependency on government.
Continued support and growth of protected classes that really don't need it (hate crimes are already crimes after all).
Continued support and promotion of excessively politically correct idiotic policies

Just what I can name off of the top of my head.
Click to expand...


It sad that people still don't understand the distinction between a crime and a hate crime.

There is a difference between an opportunist who mugs anybody within reach.

And a culprit who only mugs white men and women because he holds some sort of hate for their race.

One is simply a thug. The other is something else. Hate, Bigotry, and violence to a specific set of people make the crimes different. Often times more violent than it would be if the only intention is to, simply, get something and then flee.
 
Kobie said:
That's an interesting definition of "evil."
Click to expand...
Click to expand...



As long as there are people on this planet who take pleasure in harming other people we will need a government that is capable of dealing with those people.




"Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves." ~ Ronald Reagan
 
Last edited:
shrubnose said:
Anyone who thinks that all members of any group are evil based upon the actions of some members of that group is a bigot. :roll:

Does anyone disagree with that?

Now that we've put this BS out of the way maybe we can move on to some important issues.
Click to expand...

Zinthaniel said:
It sad that people still don't understand the distinction between a crime and a hate crime.

There is a difference between an opportunist who mugs anybody within reach.

And a culprit who only mugs white men and women because he holds some sort of hate for their race.

One is simply a thug. The other is something else. Hate, Bigotry, and violence to a specific set of people make the crimes different. Often times more violent than it would be if the only intention is to, simply, get something and then flee.
Click to expand...

Crime vs. Hate Crime

The mugger of white women is a mugger first, as that crime is committed first. I see no need to clog up the already over burdened legal code with special attributes just to make someone else feel better. The legal code isn't there for that purpose. Punish the mugger more to the severe end of the mugger scale, absolutely. In dire need of a special statute special just for muggers of white women? Hardly required.

We've got 1st degree murder statues. And then we've got 1st degree hate crime murder statues. Both are punishable by life imprisonment. What sort of sense does that make? It's little more than a 'feel good' statute, and utterly pointless. Charge'em with murder, put the punishment at life imprisonment, and be done with it already.
 
eohrnberger said:
Crime vs. Hate Crime

The mugger of white women is a mugger first, as that crime is committed first. I see no need to clog up the already over burdened legal code with special attributes just to make someone else feel better. The legal code isn't there for that purpose. Punish the mugger more to the severe end of the mugger scale, absolutely. In dire need of a special statute special just for muggers of white women? Hardly required.

We've got 1st degree murder statues. And then we've got 1st degree hate crime murder statues. Both are punishable by life imprisonment. What sort of sense does that make? It's little more than a 'feel good' statute, and utterly pointless. Charge'em with murder, put the punishment at life imprisonment, and be done with it already.
Click to expand...


When crimes are assessed by law enforcement, i.e Detectives. A hate crime provides entirely different implications. It is an entirely different crime in of it's self.

The crime was done solely to attack someone because of their immutable characteristic. The vast majority of these crimes are far more violent than any other crime relative to it's form. I.e mugging someone because they are white will be fueled by hatred. The mugging will be more violent - the mugger will persist longer in the beating than he would if he simply wanted to steal and then flee. They also establish further intent to harm others of that same class.

That is why they have a special status.
 
eohrnberger said:
Crime vs. Hate Crime

The mugger of white women is a mugger first, as that crime is committed first. I see no need to clog up the already over burdened legal code with special attributes just to make someone else feel better. The legal code isn't there for that purpose. Punish the mugger more to the severe end of the mugger scale, absolutely. In dire need of a special statute special just for muggers of white women? Hardly required.

We've got 1st degree murder statues. And then we've got 1st degree hate crime murder statues. Both are punishable by life imprisonment. What sort of sense does that make? It's little more than a 'feel good' statute, and utterly pointless. Charge'em with murder, put the punishment at life imprisonment, and be done with it already.
Click to expand...

It all comes down to motivation. I see no reason why we shouldn't recognize the motives for a crime. If you beat someone to a pulp because you want to steal his car, vs. beating someone to a pulp because they are gay, the motivations are different. We prosecute all sorts of crimes based on motivation. This is nothing new.

No one should suffer criminal acts against them simply for being and that is what hate crimes address, and why the punishment for such crimes is generally higher.
 
eohrnberger said:
Crime vs. Hate Crime

The mugger of white women is a mugger first, as that crime is committed first. I see no need to clog up the already over burdened legal code with special attributes just to make someone else feel better. The legal code isn't there for that purpose. Punish the mugger more to the severe end of the mugger scale, absolutely. In dire need of a special statute special just for muggers of white women? Hardly required.

We've got 1st degree murder statues. And then we've got 1st degree hate crime murder statues. Both are punishable by life imprisonment. What sort of sense does that make? It's little more than a 'feel good' statute, and utterly pointless. Charge'em with murder, put the punishment at life imprisonment, and be done with it already.
Click to expand...

Interesting position. Why have a "mugger scale" instead of just a theft statute? Why have different laws for embezzlement, shoplifting, fraud? It is just stealing.
 
Declan said:
Interesting position. Why have a "mugger scale" instead of just a theft statute? Why have different laws for embezzlement, shoplifting, fraud? It is just stealing.
Click to expand...

The motivations against hate crime legislation don't make sense to me. We assign levels of motivations and classifications for every crime under the sun, yet hate crimes somehow don't deserve a category?
 
Declan said:
Interesting position. Why have a "mugger scale" instead of just a theft statute? Why have different laws for embezzlement, shoplifting, fraud? It is just stealing.
Click to expand...

Execute one and all.
 
eohrnberger said:
Crime vs. Hate Crime

The mugger of white women is a mugger first, as that crime is committed first. I see no need to clog up the already over burdened legal code with special attributes just to make someone else feel better. The legal code isn't there for that purpose. Punish the mugger more to the severe end of the mugger scale, absolutely. In dire need of a special statute special just for muggers of white women? Hardly required.

We've got 1st degree murder statues. And then we've got 1st degree hate crime murder statues. Both are punishable by life imprisonment. What sort of sense does that make? It's little more than a 'feel good' statute, and utterly pointless. Charge'em with murder, put the punishment at life imprisonment, and be done with it already.
Click to expand...

"Hate crime". That always makes me pause. As opposed to.....I adore you crime?

If one of my loved ones is killed, his death is no more horrific if he is killed by someone who hates white men than if he is killed by someone who wants to take his care, wants to get into a gang, wants to piss off his ex-girlfriend, or just because he wants to know what it's like to kill someone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom