• 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!

My age is

I am between

  • Total voters
    92
Helvidius said:
I think the quote had more to do with the world in it's entirety, not individuals.
Click to expand...

It's still bull****. The average liberal is no more or less brainless or heartless than the average conservative. It's a false perception based on a very superficial understanding of what separates the two sides.
 
Last edited:
SgtRock said:
Damn you are old dude. That was before the sexual revolution when women who had children out of wedlock were considered sluts, before legalized murder of children, and before filthy liberal hippies stunk up the country with thier poor hygiene, drug use, and lack of morals.
Click to expand...

So, what you're saying is that adding "under God" lead to all sorts of sexual and social immorality? If only we could turn back the hands of time to a saner era.

I'm 45.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
I realize some people stay liberal forever, in my opinion they are just stubborn or refuse to face reality.
Click to expand...

Or, perhaps they've had life experiences that diverge from your comfortable, sheltered suburban white bread Idahoan existence.
 
StillBallin75 said:
It's still bull****. The average liberal is no more or less brainless or heartless than the average conservative.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but I think it is more young people have this idea of what they would want the world to be like and as you get older you realize the world only allows for so much change. I couldn't find context for the quote, but it would be interesting to see what this quote came about in reference to. In fact, I found articles suggesting Churchill never said the quote, but it was somebody else in reference to him.
 
Helvidius said:
Yeah, but I think it is more young people have this idea of what they would want the world to be like and as you get older you realize the world only allows for so much change. I couldn't find context for the quote, but it would be interesting to see what this quote came about in reference to. In fact, I found articles suggesting Churchill never said the quote, but it was somebody else in reference to him.
Click to expand...

That's something I can agree with. The average young person is more idealistic, while as we get older our view of the world tends to be more jaded or cynical. But, at least in a modern American context, I believe it has little to do with liberalism vs. conservatism.
 
Last edited:
No hot pockets votes! I'm so proud of all who restrained themselves. :D
 
BDBoop said:
No hot pockets votes! I'm so proud of all who restrained themselves. :D
Click to expand...

According to Ben Franklin, a woman of any age can still possess a hot pocket.
 
StillBallin75 said:
I guarantee you the result would've been different if you had put "BOOOOOOOOBS!"
Click to expand...

Woman of 20 to 40 - boobs
Woman of 40 to 50 - boo
....................................bs
Woman of 50+ - b
.........................o
..........................o
...........................b
............................s
 
I had a supervisor whose were "way up front and high" <gotta love Seeger> Course, that was after cancer, a double-mastectomy and reconstructive. I hope mine continue in their current state. Knock on wood. :)
 
BDBoop said:
I had a supervisor whose were "way up front and high" <gotta love Seeger> Course, that was after cancer, a double-mastectomy and reconstructive. I hope mine continue in their current state. Knock on wood. :)
Click to expand...

That would, of course, be one of the advantages.
 
MistressNomad said:
Conservatives serve an important function. That function, I believe, is to pace the speed of progression in such a way as to not jolt society too hard. But ultimately, they almost always lose. And the conservatives of the next generation believe what the liberals of the former generation did..
Click to expand...

This is not true. It is true before 1975, but not after. After 1975 the conservatives have been winning. Death Penalty has been reinstated in many states, regulation has been reduced, especially outside the US. Anti-immigration parties are popping up all over Europe and immigration is becoming an issue in the US as well. Also, the radicals ideas in the 70s that school grades should be abolished, or that we shouldn't punish criminals are gone.

Fraser makes an index of economic freedom since 1970. This is the results from 1975 to 2010
New Zealand: 5.6 - 8.3
US: 7.3 - 8.0
Canada: 6.7 - 8.0
Australia: 6.1 - 7.9
France: 5.6 - 7.3
Sweden: 5.3 - 7.3
Israel: 4.4 - 6.7

BTW: There isn't a single developed country with economic freedom of less than 6.7 today. Hence, since 1975 things have been going in favor of conservatives and not liberals economically, and partly socially.
 
As stated in another post, I was mostly talking about social issues.

It won't last. Never does. Conservatism sometimes enjoys brief hikes in popularity (usually accompanied by tons of social strife and poverty), but the over-all trend wins in the end.
 
MistressNomad said:
As stated in another post, I was mostly talking about social issues.

It won't last. Never does. Conservatism sometimes enjoys brief hikes in popularity (usually accompanied by tons of social strife and poverty), but the over-all trend wins in the end.
Click to expand...

Can you provide some links to this?
 
tessaesque said:
Can you provide some links to this?
Click to expand...

There's no long-term trend either way, in my personal opinion. Definitions of conservatism and liberals change over time and space. What was a conservative or a liberal yesterday is different from what a conservative or a liberal is today, because society has evolved and the respective ideologies adapt. There was a time when I, myself, was in favor of DADT. No longer.
 
Again, are black people free? Can women vote? Can women sign for their own homes? Is beating your wife legal? Or your kids? Can poor people get help? Is the death penalty legal in most of the developed world?

We tend to always be lagging a bit on the curve, but we get there eventually.
 
atrasicarius said:
Conservatives always advocate a "return" to "the good old days." The thing is, society gets better over time on average. Even if a specific point is lower than a previous point, what's needed is to move forward, or else society will limit itself.
Click to expand...

I sure don't want to return to any "good old days". There were none. That said though, there are certainly elements from the past that worked and were superior to today, just as there are elements that were inferior. Wanting to take the good elements from then and blend them with the good elements from now and produce a better future isn't the bad thing you pretend it is. Society doesn't get better necessarily. Crime goes up, irresponsibility goes up, these are not good things, nor are they improvements.
 
MistressNomad said:
Again, are black people free? Can women vote? Can women sign for their own homes? Is beating your wife legal? Or your kids? Can poor people get help? Is the death penalty legal in most of the developed world?

We tend to always be lagging a bit on the curve, but we get there eventually.
Click to expand...
  • Most countries gave woman suffrage in 1910 - 1950
  • Slavery was abolised in most countries between 1800 - 1900, apartheid was abolished later but way before 1975 in any developed country.
  • Wife beating was illegal in most states by 1870.
  • Spanking children is legal in many countries, but is probably on the way out, and not a big thing for conservatives.
  • Poor people are getting less welfare now than before. It was much easier to get welfare back in the 80s in most countries
  • Most of the bans of capital punishment in developed countries happened in the 70s or before, many of the countries hadn't done capital punishment for a long time. US nearly banned capital punishment in the 70s.

But fact is, since 1975 we have becoming much more economically conservative. If liberals are always right in the end, and conservatives are just there to pace liberals. Why have we been going the opposite way economically since 1975? Also, all of your examples happened before 1980 and very few people are against them.

On the social side liberals are losing as well. Think about immigration, death penalty in the US, school system, police, etc. You think this is just a lag on the curve? A lag that lasts 30 years? Come on!
 
Camlon said:
  • Most countries gave woman suffrage in 1910 - 1950
  • Slavery was abolised in most countries between 1800 - 1900, apartheid was abolished later but way before 1975 in any developed country.
  • Wife beating was illegal in most states by 1870.
  • Spanking children is legal in many countries, but is probably on the way out, and not a big thing for conservatives.
  • Poor people are getting less welfare now than before. It was much easier to get welfare back in the 80s in most countries
  • Most of the bans of capital punishment in developed countries happened in the 70s or before, many of the countries hadn't done capital punishment for a long time. US nearly banned capital punishment in the 70s.

But fact is, since 1975 we have becoming much more economically conservative. If liberals are always right in the end, and conservatives are just there to pace liberals. Why have we been going the opposite way economically since 1975? Also, all of your examples happened before 1980 and very few people are against them.

On the social side liberals are losing as well. Think about immigration, death penalty in the US, school system, police, etc. You think this is just a lag on the curve? A lag that lasts 30 years? Come on!
Click to expand...

I agree with you on the economic stuff, not so much on the social side. You very conveniently left out gay marriage, racial equality, and women's equality.
 
Last edited:
I'am an old Blue Dog. Over forty.
 
BDBoop said:
I had a supervisor whose were "way up front and high" <gotta love Seeger> Course, that was after cancer, a double-mastectomy and reconstructive. I hope mine continue in their current state. Knock on wood. :)
Click to expand...

Why are you knocking them on wood?
 
StillBallin75 said:
I agree with you on the economic stuff, not so much on the social side. You very conveniently left out gay marriage, racial equality, and women's equality.
Click to expand...

But these are not liberal issues. Racial equality and woman's equality is just as important for conservatives. We just differ in the method to achieve the goal. I don't believe we can achieve equality be forcing companies to hire women and minorities. I believe we need to change our mindset or increase productivity of certain groups. Secondly, racial equality is backtracking in Europe.

You are right about gay marriage. That's why I said partly. But gay marriage is not a big issue outside the US.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom