• 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!

Which party best supports civil rights?

Which party best supports civil rights?


  • Total voters
    46
Um, no, the Constitution is predicated on the existence of natural rights.

Nope, that's nothing but flowery language. There are no such things as natural rights. Maybe it makes you feel better about the world to think that there are, but you're only lying to yourself.
 
You may have to explain to him who those people are. It's pretty apparent he's never heard of them.

I'm quite aware of who they are. It's irrelevant, since that's nothing but an appeal to authority anyway.
 
Their opinions aren't relevant to the situation. Mostly because the situation was no different when they wrote the constitution. Partially because they're dead.
Nope, that's nothing but flowery language. There are no such things as natural rights. Maybe it makes you feel better about the world to think that there are, but you're only lying to yourself.
Have it your way then, kid. If you won't even recognize the basic foundation of rights upon which the Constitution rests, and if you can't even read the Ninth Amendment and understand what it says, it is a waste of time to attempt to converse any further with you on the subject.

:yawn:
 
Even if there were no such thing as natural rights, the very fact that a government presupposes that there are is the greatest benefit to its citizenry.
 
digsbe said:
Which party best supports civil rights?

Whose civil rights? The civil rights of a Protestant, heterosexual, white male from the upper middle class? Or the civil rights of an Islamic, gay, black female who was born into poverty?
 
Even if there were no such thing as natural rights, the very fact that a government presupposes that there are is the greatest benefit to its citizenry.
It also makes it a lot easier to write a bill of rights if you don't have to write down every single right a person has.

I don't know why this is so difficult for some people.
 
Whose civil rights? The civil rights of a Protestant, heterosexual, white male from the upper middle class? Or the civil rights of an Islamic, gay, black female who was born into poverty?
There are no homosexual Muslims. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says so.
 
There are no homosexual Muslims. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says so.

I'm aware. It's an easy thing to claim when you hang them. A lot of Christians leaders also say there are no homosexual Christians. Funny how some people get to decide who does and does not belong to their religion.
 
Have it your way then, kid.

So in other words, you have no actual arguments to make, so you'll just try to marginalize mine by accusing me of being young and not 'getting it?'. Weak.

it is a waste of time to attempt to converse any further with you on the subject.

I couldn't agree with you more.
 
Gov. Schwartzenegger is a staunch supporter of SSM. Is your statement a fact or opinion? I'm a Republican. I support those things. Misconception...or reality. I don't know.

No doubt there are some very progressive Republicans but the poll question was about the two parties and not the individuals and when one examines the records of the two parties since 1976 when the Republican party turned its back on the Equal Rights Amendment one can only conclude the Democratic party has the better record on civil rights.
 
So in other words, you have no actual arguments to make, so you'll just try to marginalize mine by accusing me of being young and not 'getting it?'. Weak.



I couldn't agree with you more.

you get schooled and you start posting even lamer stuff. The bill of rights was written by people who operated under certain assumptions. TO claim that what THEY WROTE is detached from those assumptions is assinine
 
No doubt there are some very progressive Republicans but the poll question was about the two parties and not the individuals and when one examines the records of the two parties since 1976 when the Republican party turned its back on the Equal Rights Amendment one can only conclude the Democratic party has the better record on civil rights.
I am shocked, shocked, that you would come to this conclusion.
 
you get schooled and you start posting even lamer stuff. The bill of rights was written by people who operated under certain assumptions. TO claim that what THEY WROTE is detached from those assumptions is assinine
Pearls before swine, TD. Pearls before swine.
 
I say ‘neither’ party is the best at supporting civil rights. Both parties have created the illusion that they opposing factions when they are the same beast trying to control us all and funnel our money into their pockets.
 
you get schooled and you start posting even lamer stuff.

Okay turtle, you want to delude yourself, go right ahead.

The bill of rights was written by people who operated under certain assumptions.

Then they were mistaken assumptions. Either that or they didn't actually believe in the concept of natural rights either, but it just sounded good on paper.

TO claim that what THEY WROTE is detached from those assumptions is assinine

Now you aren't even making any sense. I'm claiming that their opinions on what they wrote are/were irrelevant in terms of the reality of the situation. No matter what they think the constitution does, it doesn't change the fact that without it recognizing certain rights, we wouldn't have those rights (at least not in a federal sense).

I'm fully aware that the constitution has an amendment that says the rights spelled out in it aren't the only rights we have, and that's actually a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Those 'other rights' aren't defined, so they're difficult to protect, and it's much easier to argue against them, since they're not specifically laid out. That's why when a right is REALLY important (i.e. women's right to vote, no discrimination on the basis of race), we amend the constitution to make sure it's recognized. If what you were saying was true, that would be completely unnecessary, since we already have those rights, and the constitution already recognizes them.
 
Sometimes this site is a crack-up.

I swear...the number of people that view the world and judge the world based on their own pinpoint myopic vision and selfish interests is ASTOUNDING. The level to which they allow their own bias to cloud their world view is equally comical.

Bill Clinton signs DOMA. Obama states that marriage should be between one man and one woman. 70% of blacks in California that voted PRO democrat voted AGAINST gay marriage and in support of prop 8. That same number applies to Hispanics that vote democrat. When asked point blank if people would be HAPPY that their children are gay MOST people give this idiotic song and dance about "I just want them to be happy" but when pinned down MOST people couldnt even bring themselves to say "hell yes...and I'll shout it from the rooftops" because most...MOST...while accepting others and their lifestyle choices still believe it is wrong and not something they would HOPE for their own kids. The reality is that just as many democrats think homosexuality is wrong as do republicans. Just as many liberals as conservatives.

But republicans are wicked and evil because they dont believe in allowing for gay marriage. Or for allowing for sister and brother to marry. Republicans oppress them too (but then...so do democrats). Or Polygamy (hell even homosexuals cant bring themselves to come out in support of THEM...so we ALL judge and oppress now...dont we...).

Forget about the big picture and civil rights. Never mind the fact that for 50+years now liberal policies have DESTROYED minority families. Never mind that liberal polices create crippled and dependent pets of ALL races.

No no...break the world down to opposition to gay marriage. not defense of your lifestyle choice...not acceptance of and not tolerance of homosexuality. No no. Its accept gay marriage or you are a bigot and a homophobe.

How very tolerant and progressive minded of you...
 
I say ‘neither’ party is the best at supporting civil rights. Both parties have created the illusion that they opposing factions when they are the same beast trying to control us all and funnel our money into their pockets.

This is like the 'too cool for school' approach to politics. I just don't see its appeal.
 
This is like the 'too cool for school' approach to politics. I just don't see its appeal.
No; it’s the reality of politics in America.
Oh, the 2 parties might squabble at slight issues but, when it comes to the main issues they are the same in practice. For example, the American people were promised ‘change’ by Obama but as we are seeing Obama’s polices mirror Bush’s policies (even when Obama said he would not be following Bush’s policies or polices of the Republicans). If you want examples, I will provide them. When it comes to the main issues the 2 parties are the same. So, you might want to bury your head in the sand but, I surely won’t.
 
I do not bury my head in the sand. I am an advocate of the consistency model of American politics' existence. I do not deny that it exists. The difference is, I am not cynical about it. On this site, alone, it is one of the most common statements I see, and a fair portion of the time, it's from Libertarians. Fair enough. But consider the implications of a rapidly changing political atmosphere every 2-4 years. The truth is, there is a legitimate limitation for what the executive branch and the political parties are able to do, in large part, because of the views of the American people-whether or not they know it directly. All sorts of issues that people support or do not support may not be immediately concerned on the national scale to them, and when the national scale tries to mess with those issues, the local public naturally reacts, and up the scale.

The image that permeates the American atmosphere regarding government, though well intentioned and with some merit, is perhaps too willing to view its leaders as corrupt individuals "stealing from them." The reality is that power can corrupt, but the "problem" may not even be corruption in a given situation, but rather a reflection of more complex American positions on a various many policies.
 
Last edited:
No doubt there are some very progressive Republicans but the poll question was about the two parties and not the individuals and when one examines the records of the two parties since 1976 when the Republican party turned its back on the Equal Rights Amendment one can only conclude the Democratic party has the better record on civil rights.

The people that turned their backs on the ERA were the broads.

For some reason, the women didn't want to be as equally eligible for the draft, didn't want to pay equal amounts of alimony in a divorce, lose their position as the "natural" care giver in child custody disputes, or lose any of the other advantages they've always had in society.

The feminazis wanted the ERA, not the real women of America.

Oh, and gee, golly, you forgot to include the fact that the Democrats filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1964, or the fact that that filibuster was broken by the Republicans. How convenient for you.
 
How would you give them an "equal playing field"?

Education is the great equalizer. Aren't you a teacher? You should know that.
 
Last edited:
@ Fiddytree
I have reason to be cynical about American politics because, it’s all a dog and pony show. It’s the magnificent illusion of a government of limited powers but, please look around you, the federal/national government is running like it has unlimited powers. It’s all an incumbent playground and when these incumbents are finally ready to retire, they or their party have already created a clone copy to take their place. It is all about ignorance, corruption, and neglect when it comes to our American political system.
 
The majority of republicans are against SSM, and LGBT rights. That's the biggest civil rights movement of today IMO. So I would say democrats.

Obviously you could care less about America as long as all minorities get to rule the country with their agendas.
 
Back
Top Bottom