Apropros the recent mood of the board

[bobbyfairbanks]

Big difference bud in being a Libertarian and Conservative. Go read up what being a Libertarian is. Expand your mind.

I finished that last post with Say what you mean and Mean what you say.
You sound a lot like the people sitting on the hill.

[mcantar18c]

Big difference bud in being a Libertarian and Conservative. Go read up what being a Libertarian is. Expand your mind.

I finished that last post with Say what you mean and Mean what you say.
You sound a lot like the people sitting on the hill.

As far as etchics/morals go, they're pretty similar. Where they differ is on how much gov't should be involved in enforcing those. This is why I brought up the gay thing... my personal opinion is that its wrong, disgusting, etc., however I don't believe the gov't has any place in the matter. This is more of a libertarian line of thinking. Conservatives are more of the idea that because it is wrong, disgusting, etc. it should therefore be outlawed. I fall somewhere between those two sides on most things, in that I don't care what someone does behind closed doors until their actions to infringe on others. As drugs go, I don't think they should be legal as they lead people to harm others (as proven in my last post... I can find links if you want). This is a conservative stance on the "war on drugs," libertarians only look at the fact that someone destroys nothing but their own body in the act of introducing a drug to their system and so there's no reason they should be illegal... they don't look at the effects drugs have on behavior, which effects the lives of others.

As for sounding like people on the hill... go pour the sand out of your ears.

[CMP_5.56]

Who is to say a conservative can't be a libertarian? I'm pretty damn conservative, but my views on politics and government are well in line with the libertarian party. Believing there should be less government in general, and that government should not infringe on your personal life what so ever, does not mean you have to be left leaning. I dont give a damn what anyone does as long as they don't try to take my rights or the rights of others away. But im much more conservative ethically, morally, and economically than any liberal. The libertarian party is all about not having those lines exist, am I right?

[GunsRBadMMMMKay]

Liberative Conservatarian in lieu of taking any sides

So no one believes that there may or may not be plans in place to push racial, political, and religious differences through mainstream media, keeping those things at the top of everyone's minds? Like if everyone stopped arguing about these things long enough to see how much we're (as the working or "common" class) getting screwed TPTB wouldn't have some serious problems on their hands? Yes, it's an idealic view and not very plausible....with everyone getting along and all - but is entirely possible.

[Ranger]

As much as I would hate to admit it often times, I can many times associate with Libertarian more than Conservative. I believe in smaller government and believe that morality should not be legislated. Smoke what (or who) you want. However, I have my limits and there is a lot of gray area that is not addressed by either party. I won't get into a political debate, but I believe the gist of the OP is "can't we all just get along".

I agree with Hoosier to some extent, and that is that we have failed ourselves by not finding the common ground and instead just sticking to our guns and not even letting someone else discuss the commonality. I'm equally as guilty of this and become more so as time (and my age) progresses. I'm not sure "the Man" is bringing us down, I thing we have brought ourselves down. We have climbed our little mountains and said "this is MINE, you are not allowed".

By the way, we are not alone, the world all falls into this pit. No matter where you look, the same problem exists - the difference being that we in America are not punished for doing so.

This doesn't mean I'm going to run up to a liberal and give them a big wet sloppy kiss - frankly I would rather clobber one - so I'm part of the problem.

[Zundfolge]

This doesn't mean I'm going to run up to a liberal and give them a big wet sloppy kiss - frankly I would rather clobber one - so I'm part of the problem.

Thing is that's perfectly normal.

As for the recent mood of the board:

Look, whether some people like it or not, a gun forum is going to be populated primarily with Conservatives and Libertarians ... when a liberal comes here and turns every thread they post in into a liberal vs conservative/libertarian debate there does come a point where one has to wonder if they are in fact a troll.

Let me use a parallel example.

My aunt is a vegetarian. She's also an Evangelical Christian and a Tea Party Conservative.

If she goes to a vegetarian forum and starts debating politics, she's really trolling to a certain degree because regardless of the fact that there are vegetarian conservatives, MOST vegetarians are liberals. She knows this, and as such keeps her posts to things like recipes and tactics for keeping her hair from falling out and avoids debates on unions, homosexuality and gun control.

I'm not saying that liberals can't be pro gun and enjoy hunting and the shooting sports. There is no political requirement for gun ownership ... however if you are a liberal that shoots and you come here expecting to convert everyone here to liberalism you're wasting your time and at some point just peeing on the carpet.

Hell, I'm not even saying that the liberals should "know their place and keep their mouths shut", but for chrissake turning EVERY thread into a bare knuckle brawl just gets old and at some point you're no longer contributing to the community here, you're just here to piss people off.

If that's what you wanna do, fine ... just don't act all surprised and indignant when people start putting you on their ignore list.*

Honestly I doubt that most folk here would be as in your face about their politics if we were all sitting around the table in person sipping cervezas.



*Note that this is not directed at the OP; Hoosier ... who could probably be classified as one of these "gun toting liberals" but 1) he's usually able to make a decent argument (even though he's wrong ) and 2) he contributes to the discussions NOT about politics as much (if not more) than the political ones.

[Ronin13]

As far as etchics/morals go, they're pretty similar. Where they differ is on how much gov't should be involved in enforcing those. This is why I brought up the gay thing... my personal opinion is that its wrong, disgusting, etc., however I don't believe the gov't has any place in the matter. This is more of a libertarian line of thinking. Conservatives are more of the idea that because it is wrong, disgusting, etc. it should therefore be outlawed. I fall somewhere between those two sides on most things, in that I don't care what someone does behind closed doors until their actions to infringe on others. As drugs go, I don't think they should be legal as they lead people to harm others (as proven in my last post... I can find links if you want). This is a conservative stance on the "war on drugs," libertarians only look at the fact that someone destroys nothing but their own body in the act of introducing a drug to their system and so there's no reason they should be illegal... they don't look at the effects drugs have on behavior, which effects the lives of others.

As for sounding like people on the hill... go pour the sand out of your ears.

God that's good! I agree, and one of the things many do not get, and here is where I draw some lines- if drugs only harm those that do them, then tell me why driving while high on pot has the potential to be as dangerous to everyone on the road as alcohol? I've seen case studies, tests, and non-partisan research that proves marijuana (the "harmless miracle drug") slows reaction time and motor response. So on the same lines as mcantar, I'm fine with whatever choices one makes, but the second it adversely effects anyone else (like any of the examples depicted above) it should be illegal.

I would never deny the right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness to anyone because of their sexual orientation, but please, stop f*cking bothering me about it. I get it, you're proud of who you are and who you love, no need to rub my face in it... It's not like I would run around saying "Yay! I love Mary Jane Rottencrotch! I make sweet sweet love to her every night! I'm a raging straight man! I'm allergic to any penis that is not my own! Blah blah blah"
Annoyed by them yet? Yes I am. Would I deny them their right to do what makes them happy as long as it doesn't infringe on others' rights? Hell no, this is America. Just because you don't agree with a view doesn't mean you can silence it. Best example: The KKK has just as much right to say what they feel as anyone else. Just because you don't agree doesn't mean you have any right to deny them their rights.

[Hoosier]

Hoosier ... who could probably be classified as one of these "gun toting liberals"

The funny thing is, outside a forum like this which is so skewed towards one political view, I'm seen as the libertarian/more-conservative type.

Around here, though, I'm the commie bastard, apparently. Wanting to raise taxes to pay down the debt, unheard of!



H.

[Hoosier]

God that's good! I agree, and one of the things many do not get, and here is where I draw some lines- if drugs only harm those that do them, then tell me why driving while high on pot has the potential to be as dangerous to everyone on the road as alcohol? I've seen case studies, tests, and non-partisan research that proves marijuana (the "harmless miracle drug") slows reaction time and motor response. So on the same lines as mcantar, I'm fine with whatever choices one makes, but the second it adversely effects anyone else (like any of the examples depicted above) it should be illegal.

Not sure what point you're driving at here. All but the most ardent Libertarians believe that driving under the influence should be illegal, regardless of what the intoxicant is. There are some, more fringe, who believe driving while intoxicated should be legal. Their line of reasoning goes, there's no such thing as a traffic "accident", someone made a mistake and materially hurt others against their will -- thus breaking the law. Until you actually hit someone, it's legal. The viewpoint you expressed above would be (I think) defined as classic libertarianism, and at odds with current US drug policy.

sexual orientation ... stop f*cking bothering me about it ... no need to rub my face in it ... I'm a raging straight man! I'm allergic to any penis that is not my own! Blah blah blah

Wow, where do you run in to people like that? Are you attending a lot of gay pride parades? Watching non-stop LOGO on TV?

Hell no, this is America. Just because you don't agree with a view doesn't mean you can silence it.

I like the quote by Voltaire, "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

H.

[Omicron]

This came across my Facebook today, and seemed appropriate given the level of vitriol every debate ends up looking like:

"The Republicans think everyone who doesn't agree with them is a Social bastard, and the Democrats think everyone who doesn't agree with them is a Fascist bastard, and that's just what The Machine wants! It cannot succeed unless it turns neighbor against neighbor! Shake hands with your partisan neighbor, and agree that this machine is your common enemy."

H.

That's an excellent quote. Who should I attribute it to?