• 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!

Would Jesus be a Liberal?

Which of these political leans would Jesus be?

  • Liberal

    Votes: 40 44.0%

  • Conservative

    Votes: 12 13.2%

  • Moderate

    Votes: 7 7.7%

  • Potato

    Votes: 32 35.2%
  • Total voters
    91
I think he would probably piss himself laughing at how stupid we were and then change some water into wine and drown his sorrows
 
MKULTRABOY said:
As of yet you haven't expressed any 'point' as you haven't said anything logically valid.
Click to expand...

I apologize if you don't possess any. The point is Hatuey's claim about Milton Friedman's influence on massacres across the world is completely unsubstantiated and implicitly ignores the opposing ideologies that influenced the leaders responsible for the most egregious human tragedies in the 20th century.

I never made that claim. What assertion, I never made any, I was asking you to explain why Hatuey's statement was wrong. Now you are assigning his statement to me because you couldn't make valid arguments about communism.
Click to expand...

You asked what's wrong with it and defended it. I replied that there is no evidence for it and is dishonest on it's face. You have continued to evade it while failing to make any point of your own.

Somehow I feel more people died to German fascism though. As if shrugging off 'total deaths' to communism makes a case for looking over capitalism's transgressions in the first place.
Click to expand...

I won't quote the death totals that resulted from the policies in China and the Soviet Union, I'm sure you know them. I'm not making a case for ignoring the abuses of capitalism. I'm asking which ones Hatuey attributes to Milton Friedman and the Chicago school of economics.

Well 'Communism' 'Stalinism' and 'Maosim' are not massacres in any way they're political regimes or ideologies.
Click to expand...

Yeah, no ****. Hatuey never said free-market capitalism was a massacre; this statement is just more of your irrelevant semantics. Do you have a point you're trying to make?
 
Conservative Jesus:

conservative+Jesus.jpg
 
Rhapsody1447 said:
I apologize if you don't possess any.
Click to expand...

Sorry, try again. You. are. not. even. forming. correct. sentences. Am I getting across?

The point is Hatuey's claim about Milton Friedman's influence on massacres across the world is completely unsubstantiated and implicitly ignores the opposing ideologies that influenced the leaders responsible for the most egregious human tragedies in the 20th century.
Click to expand...

Why would an 'opposing ideology' even have to do anything with a discussion on milton friedman? Something tells me it's to deflect flak from the fact that capitalism, imperialism, and fascism are responsible for more death, atrocity, and slavery. By the way. I don't even care about milton friedman.

You asked what's wrong with it and defended it. I replied that there is no evidence for it and is dishonest on it's face. You have continued to evade it while failing to make any point of your own.
Click to expand...
Correct, I am not making a point, I was wondering what the **** yours was.

I won't quote the death totals that resulted from the policies in China and the Soviet Union, I'm sure you know them.
Click to expand...
Don't worry, do I know them.
I'm not making a case for ignoring the abuses of capitalism.
Click to expand...
Yes, abusing those nations that eventually went communist, and then continuing to do so.

I'm asking which ones Hatuey attributes to Milton Friedman and the Chicago school of economics.
Click to expand...
Perhaps they arent attributed to, but substantiated by milton.

Yeah, no ****. Hatuey never said free-market capitalism was a massacre; this statement is just more of your irrelevant semantics. Do you have a point you're trying to make?
Click to expand...

How is it irrelevant if you can't form a cogent sentence?
 
MKULTRABOY said:
Why would an 'opposing ideology' even have to do anything with a discussion on milton friedman? Something tells me it's to deflect flak from the fact that capitalism, imperialism, and fascism are responsible for more death, atrocity, and slavery. By the way. I don't even care about milton friedman.
Click to expand...
Fascism? It's generally accepted that Stalin and Mao killed far more people than Hitler ever did.
Capitalism? It's also common knowledge that all of the above decried capitalism.
 
MKULTRABOY said:
Correct, I am not making a point
Click to expand...

Glad we finally got that out of the way. You're just here to make noise in a pathetic attempt to defend the failures of your ideology.

Something tells me it's to deflect flak from the fact that capitalism, imperialism, and fascism are responsible for more death, atrocity, and slavery.
Click to expand...

Moving the goal posts is your strategy then, gotcha. Once again you fail to connect Hatuey's statement about Milton Friedman and the Chicago school of economics with imperialism and fascism. Since you can't seem to find any evidence for your wild attacks against capitalism I'll make it easy for you.

Here is the 20th century: The worst genocides of the 20th Century
Here is pre-20th century: http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.TAB2.1A.GIF, http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.TAB2.1B.GIF

Why would an 'opposing ideology' even have to do anything with a discussion on milton friedman?
Click to expand...
Don't worry, do I know them.
Click to expand...
Perhaps they arent attributed to, but substantiated by milton.
Click to expand...
How is it irrelevant if you can't form a cogent sentence?
Click to expand...
Right, and you accuse me of not making sense.
 
Last edited:
MKULTRABOY said:
Something tells me it's to deflect flak from the fact that capitalism, imperialism, and fascism are responsible for more death, atrocity, and slavery.
Click to expand...
Capitalism, imperialism, and fascism, eh?

I can see imperialism and fascism, since they are both based upon the initiation of violence. But capitalism?

From the wiki page on capitalism: There is general agreement that elements of capitalism include private ownership of the means of production, creation of goods or services for profit or income, the accumulation of capital, competitive markets, voluntary exchange and wage labor.

I'm unclear on how any of these elements are responsible for death, atrocity, or slavery, or more importantly what alternative would not involve death, atrocity, or slavery.
 
Peter Grimm said:
If Jesus Christ were alive today, would he be a liberal, conservative, or something else? Why?
Click to expand...

Jesus explicitly avoided being connected with the political movements of his day. I imagine that wouldn't change.
 
Catawba said:
Conservative Jesus:

conservative+Jesus.jpg
Click to expand...

actually, the funny thing is, that's actually Liberal Jesus :)

now if you want a Conservative fellow in the New Testament, then you are looking for the kind of guy noted for being more generous than others, but doing it personally as opposed to waiting on a government program to do it on his behalf. Such a person would have the kind of individual initiative and grit to not only seek out and take on the harder cases, but would likely be the kind of person to be personally very successful, and capable of supporting his private charitable work. He would join with other private individuals to take care of others, and utilize the profit motive where applicable to get them to do so.

Someone like this guy.
 
cpwill said:
actually, the funny thing is, that's actually Liberal Jesus :)

now if you want a Conservative fellow in the New Testament, then you are looking for the kind of guy noted for being more generous than others, but doing it personally as opposed to waiting on a government program to do it on his behalf. Such a person would have the kind of individual initiative and grit to not only seek out and take on the harder cases, but would likely be the kind of person to be personally very successful, and capable of supporting his private charitable work. He would join with other private individuals to take care of others, and utilize the profit motive where applicable to get them to do so.

Someone like this guy.
Click to expand...



Your capacity for self-delusion is very impressive!!!
 
I think Christ was beyond profit motive... please don't much it up with your Satan bound ideology.
 
Black_Zawisza said:
No wonder you oppose libertarianism, if that's what you think it is. Strawman.
Click to expand...

so the existence of massive poverty next to massive wealth is not justified by right wing Libertarianism?
 
cpwill said:
actually, the funny thing is, that's actually Liberal Jesus :)

now if you want a Conservative fellow in the New Testament, then you are looking for the kind of guy noted for being more generous than others, but doing it personally as opposed to waiting on a government program to do it on his behalf. Such a person would have the kind of individual initiative and grit to not only seek out and take on the harder cases, but would likely be the kind of person to be personally very successful, and capable of supporting his private charitable work. He would join with other private individuals to take care of others, and utilize the profit motive where applicable to get them to do so.

Someone like this guy.
Click to expand...

Left wing Libertarians and anarchists don't expect the government to do anything for them either... They believe in voluntary societies, and that's more or less how I view Jesus. He didn't comment on government or politics... and why should he? If everybody actually followed and lived by his philosophy, government wouldn't be necessary for the very reasons modern Conservatives argue it is necessary.
 
SheWolf said:
so the existence of massive poverty next to massive wealth is not justified by right wing Libertarianism?
Click to expand...
No, it doesn't necessarily do so. Personally, I feel that the global distribution of wealth as it stands today is a tragic thing. And I try to alleviate the problem in my own small way.

But I cannot take from wealthy people who've earned their money honestly in order to fund a War on Poverty. It violates the non-aggression principle. :shrug:
 
Black_Zawisza said:
No, it doesn't necessarily do so. Personally, I feel that the global distribution of wealth as it stands today is a tragic thing. And I try to alleviate the problem in my own small way.

But I cannot take from wealthy people who've earned their money honestly in order to fund a War on Poverty. It violates the non-aggression principle. :shrug:
Click to expand...
It also violates God's commandment of Thou shalt not steal.
 
Centinel said:
It also violates God's commandment of Thou shalt not steal.
Click to expand...

Please. Lets try and stay in the realm of intellectual honesty. Taxes afe not theft.
 
megaprogman said:
Please. Lets try and stay in the realm of intellectual honesty. Taxes afe not theft.
Click to expand...

If taxation were applied to benefit each citizen equitably, your point might be valid. As it stands, taxation does not benefit everyone to the same extent. Taxation should pay common expenses of the governed (defense, education, commerce regulation, and other common benefits of government). The taxation system that we currently have takes from one for the benefit of another. That is theft, it's just that the government is taking the money from me to give to another rather than the other holding me at gunpoint.
 
lizzie said:
If taxation were applied to benefit each citizen equitably, your point might be valid. As it stands, taxation does not benefit everyone to the same extent. Taxation should pay common expenses of the governed (defense, education, commerce regulation, and other common benefits of government). The taxation system that we currently have takes from one for the benefit of another. That is theft, it's just that the government is taking the money from me to give to another rather than the other holding me at gunpoint.
Click to expand...
I agree 100%, Lizzie, except for the last part, your government actually is holding you at gunpoint, in every sense of the word.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom