Re: Would you allow your son to go to camp where there were openly gay members? [W:19
I don't know what you mean by evidence to the contrary, are you speaking of the evidence it all of totality magically poofed into existence for no real reason. that believe has less evidence. far less superior evidence.
and when you say all conservatives are deluded do you know this because you're clairvoyant are you know every conservative in the world. I knew the dictator would win again. most conservatives didn't think the American people would be stupid enough to elect that moron again.
but just like the Conservatives I spoke to in here you just lump everybody in to group that has the slightest different opinion you.
I've never seen any evidence for Less superior residence
Makes a lot more sense to me than a magical being that just "poofed" into existence. How long do you think it took after that being "poofed" into existence that it decided to create everything? How much time elapsed, and how would you even measure that time? What would you compare it to, since nothing existed prior to the "poof"?
and when you say all conservatives are deluded do you know this because you're clairvoyant are you know every conservative in the world.
Yes I say they are deluded. If you call yourself a conservative, then you are saying that you subscribe to an ideology that can't even demonstrate itself as true. Knowing that, the conservative still clings to an irrational justification of that ideology. That's delusional. It's also irrational. Conservatism justifies itself through appeals to tradition, and the appeal to tradition is a logical fallacy. When you cling to a logical fallacy, knowing that it's a logical fallacy...you're being irrational and delusional.
most conservatives didn't think the American people would be stupid enough to elect that moron again.
That's because they're delusional. Why on earth would they think that anybody would vote for somebody that hates you? Racism is embedded into the conservative ideology. The most fundimental aspect of conservatism is that it strives to preserve existing institutions. They claim to be strict constructionists and constitutionalisists. Fine. The US Constitution was designed for a White supremacist society. It's a racist document. This is evident in Article 1 sec 2, Article 1. sec 9, and Article 4 sec. 2. Look it up. Conservatives always defend the original intent of the constitution do they not?
White Supremacy and racism is foundational to America. It’s codified in our constitution.
Article I Sec. 2.(basing a state’s representation in the House on its Free population and 3/5 of all other persons)
Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.
Article I Sec. 9. (Barring congress from abolishing the slave trade before 1808)
The migration or importation of such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person.
Article IV Sec. 2. (providing for the return of runaway slaves)
A person charged in any state with treason, felony, or other crime, who shall flee from justice, and be found in another state, shall on demand of the executive authority of the state from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the state having jurisdiction of the crime.
No person held to service or labor in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.
By design, the United States was created as a White, male dominated society. Without a doubt, not all of our founders were of this mind, however, there were enough to block any attempt to force it to live up to its stated claim that “All men are created equal”. Clearly, some were more equal than others. If all the states were going to take part in this new venture, then concessions would have to be made to bring others into the fold. Many of our founders were in fact, slave owners. Washington and Jefferson were two of the more notable in this regard. It would take almost another 100 years and a civil war to change that. Lincoln managed to do it, and he was hated in the south for his position. When he was elected, the southern states seceded from the union even before he took office. The view in the South was that the Federal government had no right to tell them how to run their economy and slavery was essential to it.
The articles of secession coming from Mississippi are very clear.
A Declaration of the Immediate Causes which Induce and Justify the Secession of the State of
Mississippi from the Federal Union.
“In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course. “
“Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery– the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.”
Situationally, conservatism is defined as the ideology arising out of a distinct but recurring type of historical situation in which a fundamental challenge is directed at established institutions and in which the supporters of those institutions employ the conservative ideology in their defense. Thus, conservatism is that system of ideas employed to justify any established social order, no matter where or when it exists, against any fundamental challenge to its nature or being, no matter from what quarter. Conservatism in this sense is possible in the United States today only if there is a basic challenge to existing American institutions which impels their defenders to articulate conservative values. The Civil Rights movement was a direct challenge to the existing institutions of the time, and conservatism as an ideology is thus a reaction to a system under challenge, a defense of the status – quo in a period of intense ideological and social conflict.
The very notion of a race of people that was; at our beginnings as a country, only considered to be 3/5’s of a human being, now having equal footing with those that actually believed in this idea, is a direct challenge to a long held social concept. It denied the idea of white supremacy as legitimate. It’s surprising how many people still cling to this idea, and will go to extreme lengths to perpetuate it.
The idea that a person that could have been your slave at one time, could today be your boss, or even President of the United States, is more than some people can deal with on an emotional level. White supremacy as an institution is renounced, discredited, and dismantled, and that is a major blow to an existing order, and conservatism is always a reaction to a challenge to an existing order. These are people that desperately need somebody to look down to in order to validate their own self-worth. “Sure, life is tough. But at least I’m White.” They can no longer rely on a policy that used to be institutionally enforceable. When that is removed by law, hostility is the result; hostility for those that have been emancipated by law and elevated to equal status, and hostility for the law itself including those that proposed it and passed it.
Your reference to the "dictator" or the "moron" are pretty typcial reactions from a person that lost an election. The fact is that he's neither a dictator or a moron, but conservatives never let facts get in the way of their opinion, do they?
