Discrimination against progressives?

[Gurn Blanston]

I just responded to the first, I am not responding to the second as it is too exclusive of the beliefs of others.

Nothing that YOU would ever be guilty of... 



----------------
Now playing:
Brautigam, Ronald - Hob 16 26 Sonata #41 in A for Keyboard 1st mvmt - Allegro moderato

[Saul]

Nothing that YOU would ever be guilty of... 



----------------
Now playing:
Brautigam, Ronald - Hob 16 26 Sonata #41 in A for Keyboard 1st mvmt - Allegro moderato

LOL!

[Saul]

I just responded to the first, I am not responding to the second as it is too exclusive of the beliefs of others.

Teresa, I have sent you a new PM with Video explanations, please listen to them carefully and objectively, I will be waiting for your response.

Cheers,

Saul

[greg]

Entertaining thread, que no?

[(poco) Sforzando]

I don't have a cat. Wouldn't have one. I had one, but g minor was beyond him.

Nobody's heard of The Cat's Fugue here?

[(poco) Sforzando]

Entertaining thread, que no?

Absolutely delicious.

[71 dB]

Well, that would be nice if it were that simple, right?

It's not simple at all! It's hard work for society and the pedophiles themselves to solve this problem. Doing nothing will solve nothing.

People who go far enough to actually harm a child like that are monsters. I doubt you could get a monster to just stop doing it by simply being empathetic and showing him respect.

It is easy to call pedophiles monsters, isn't it? People want easy solutions (just lock mosters behind bars) but these solutions don't always give us the best results. Sometimes we need complex solutions. Unfortunately

it is difficult for a simple mind to see the benefits of these complex solutions and that's why we don't use them very often. Pity.

As much as I hate to really rag on a member, you have finally pushed me to the brink of madness, Poju.

It is not madness you are feeling but confusion. You are confused because finally a free-thinker tells you an alternate way of dealing a problem. You either deny what I say or then you realize something new (and in best case you became a progressive yourself).

WHAT WORLD ARE YOU

LIVING IN, ANYWAY!   

The same planet you are on. I am just a free-thinker without the obstruction of conservative, liberal or religious mindsets.

Don't you realize that you aren't dealing with 'normal' people here?

How do you define a normal person? Are a people who drive under the influence of alcohol normal? They harm and kill other people so can you call them normal? Who is normal? You? Do you see how many question marks I have here? It is about questioning things. Please, try to find answers on these. Then ask yourself whether I push you on the brink of madness or toward broader understanding.

I understand that pedophiles have got a serious issue. I want society to deal with this issue in an effective and satisfactory manner. Surely you want the same? 

No matter what you view them as; sick, twisted, perverted, poor bastards etc. or "all of the above", it doesn't matter a damn to them. If you don't trust them with your children, you aren't hurting their feelings, you are just making it a little
harder for them to get what they want/need.  But they WILL get it, and that's the bottom line. Even if they hate themselves for it (and I actually believe that some of them do) they will still do it. At some point you need to sit down and introspect a little bit and try to find the places where your value set crosses the line

into the Twilight Zone!

So, you wouldn't choose chemical castration + therapy to be able to live almost normally in society? Wouldn't it be easier to go to a clinic to be treated if they were nice to you?

Some individuals are hopeless cases and the only solution is to lock them up for good. But locking up individuals that can be cured is heartless, ignorant and waste of money. So, let's give people the best possible help to be cured and those who are not willing/capable of that are locked up. This should give us the best solution to this problem I can think of. 

I guess you are much younger than your avatar would indicate.

How old does my avatar indicate me to be? I'm 39.

[Franco]

I am just a free-thinker without ...

any accountability for the consequences of your suggestions.

[Superhorn]

   Why is it that any one with the slightest liberal tendencies and expresses any disagreement with conservative economic ideas and social views is automatically labeled a socialist,Marxist,and communist?  This has happened to me so many times on conservative websites and forums.
   I'm anything but a marxist or communist, and have never been hoodwinked about the former Soviet Union being a "worker's paradise". 
  But any one who doesn't approve of conservative ideas such as lowering taxes as much as possible,totally deregulating business, giving all the tax breaks to the wealthy, getting rid of welfare and all government programs to help the poor,
and isn't anti-choice, isn't a homophobe, is worried about theocracy coming to America, is against government censorship of what we read and view, is opposed to school prayer etc, is automatically vilified as some evil monster.
   The problem is that many of the polticians and pundits,as well as private citizens who call themselves conseevative aren't really conservatives at all. They're reactionaries!  They want to turn back the clock to the time when there was no social security or other government  programs, abortion was officially illegal yet rampant,gay people lived in fear of losing their jobs and being blackmailed,and you could get arrested in some places in America just for buying a copy of Playboy magazine etc.
  But there's no way we can return to the bad old days, and if right-wing extremist politicos get power,they will definitely attempt ot do this,and it won't be pretty.In fact,it will be disastrous for America.
  Obama isn't even a real left-winger. But he is by the standards of today's so-called conservatives.
  If it were a choice in 2112 or 2116 between some one like Palin or Jim De Mint or Michelle Bachmann and a democratic team of Bo the dog and a banana,I'd still vote democratic.That's how bad the republicans are.







                                                                                       











                                                                                          

[Franco]

Obama isn't even a real left-winger.

If that's the case, then, I hope we never have to suffer through the leadership of a "real leftist".  But I tend to think you (mis)underestimate his leftism.

[Josquin des Prez]

   Why is it that any one with the slightest liberal tendencies and expresses any disagreement with conservative economic ideas and social views is automatically labeled a socialist,Marxist,and communist?  This has happened to me so many times on conservative websites and forums.
 

Strawman backed by personal anecdote. I see the quality of this discussion hasn't changed much.

[Bulldog]

   Why is it that any one with the slightest liberal tendencies and expresses any disagreement with conservative economic ideas and social views is automatically labeled a socialist,Marxist,and communist?  This has happened to me so many times on conservative websites and forums.

This does make me wonder why you would spend any time on a conservative website.  Sure, there will be a hostile reception to liberal views.  At the same time, liberal websites tend to be hostile to conservative themes.

[The new erato]

  Obama isn't even a real left-winger. But he is by the standards of today's so-called conservatives.

By Scandinavian standards he is a solid conservative, about 80% to the right in the political spectrum.

[DavidRoss]

By Scandinavian standards he is a solid conservative, about 80% to the right in the political spectrum.

Would you adjust the timing on a Ferrari to the same settings as a Toyota pickup?  Scandinavian countries are to the United States as a church choir performance is to a rock festival.  Your comparison makes no sense.   

[Saul]

   Why is it that any one with the slightest liberal tendencies and expresses any disagreement with conservative economic ideas and social views is automatically labeled a socialist,Marxist,and communist?

Heard of the saying  : It walks like a duck, it looks like a duck, its a duck!?

[MishaK]

Heard of the saying  : It walks like a duck, it looks like a duck, its a duck!?

In your case it's more like: looks like a warbler, sounds like an eagle, walks like an egret, ergo it must be a duck!

[MishaK]

   Why is it that any one with the slightest liberal tendencies and expresses any disagreement with conservative economic ideas and social views is automatically labeled a socialist,Marxist,and communist?

Because in US conservatism, the myth is that the US constitution is not an ephemeral document created by mortal men at a a particular historic time. Rather, it is practically the word of God, and the founding fathers are at least on the level of apostles. Oh, and apparently it ensrhines laissez-faire capitalism without as much as mentioning it with a single word. Ergo, all who disagree are practically heretics. Compromise is impossible, indeed immoral. (Never mind that the rest of the world has long ago figured out that this 234-year old document provides a pretty mediocre way of organizing society in the 21st century, which is why no country that truly democratized in the last half-century used the US constitution as the model - postwar Germany and Switzerland apparently are far more appealing models!)

Of course this is so because moneyed interests find it very useful to support this mythology which soothes the egos of the politically and economically impotent, who like the sounds of words like "freedom" and "liberty". Meanwhile, under the guise of promoting these two hard-to-define concepts, regulations are dismantled and government agencies staffed with pro-industry "watchdogs" (rather lapdogs).

[Josquin des Prez]

Because in US conservatism, the myth is that the US constitution is not an ephemeral document created by mortal men at a a particular historic time. Rather, it is practically the word of God, and the founding fathers are at least on the level of apostles. Oh, and apparently it ensrhines laissez-faire capitalism without as much as mentioning it with a single word. Ergo, all who disagree are practically heretics. Compromise is impossible, indeed immoral. (Never mind that the rest of the world has long ago figured out that this 234-year old document provides a pretty mediocre way of organizing society in the 21st century, which is why no country that truly democratized in the last half-century used the US constitution as the model - postwar Germany and Switzerland apparently are far more appealing models!)

Of course this is so because moneyed interests find it very useful to support this mythology which soothes the egos of the politically and economically impotent, who like the sounds of words like "freedom" and "liberty". Meanwhile, under the guise of promoting these two hard-to-define concepts, regulations are dismantled and government agencies staffed with pro-industry "watchdogs" (rather lapdogs).

This is what liberals actually believe. A very telling introduction to their mindset. Useful idiots unto the last breath.

[DavidRoss]

Because in US conservatism, the myth is that the US constitution is not an ephemeral document created by mortal men at a a particular historic time. Rather, it is practically the word of God, and the founding fathers are at least on the level of apostles. Oh, and apparently it ensrhines laissez-faire capitalism without as much as mentioning it with a single word. Ergo, all who disagree are practically heretics. Compromise is impossible, indeed immoral. (Never mind that the rest of the world has long ago figured out that this 234-year old document provides a pretty mediocre way of organizing society in the 21st century, which is why no country that truly democratized in the last half-century used the US constitution as the model - postwar Germany and Switzerland apparently are far more appealing models!)

Of course this is so because moneyed interests find it very useful to support this mythology which soothes the egos of the politically and economically impotent, who like the sounds of words like "freedom" and "liberty". Meanwhile, under the guise of promoting these two hard-to-define concepts, regulations are dismantled and government agencies staffed with pro-industry "watchdogs" (rather lapdogs).

It's painfully obvious why others must make allowances for the narrow and distorted views of fellows like Saul and "Josquin," but you surprise me, for I never would have expected a reasonably intelligent and worldly fellow such as yourself to believe (let alone promote) such absurdly simplistic and glaringly bigoted claptrap.  I hope the irony of this post conjoined with your forum name is not lost on you.

[(poco) Sforzando]

It's painfully obvious why others must make allowances for the narrow and distorted views of fellows like Saul and "Josquin," but you surprise me, for I never would have expected a reasonably intelligent and worldly fellow such as yourself to believe (let alone promote) such absurdly simplistic and glaringly bigoted claptrap.  I hope the irony of this post conjoined with your forum name is not lost on you.

Ah, now I get it. He's absurdly simplistic and bigoted, you're not. Nothing bigoted about this, huh Dave?

Progressive:  Term applied in the 20th and 21st centuries to political authoritarians who seek to use the coercive power of the state to enslave their fellow citizens in support of the Progressives' pet causes.  Prone to extreme short-sightedness, self-righteousness, and hypocrisy.  Ignorant of history and human nature.  Incapable of rational thought.  Tragically delusional, unwilling to acknowledge or learn from the real-world horrors resulting from application of their ideology throughout the Twentieth Century.

You're playing the same games you've been playing at CMG . . .