I'm going to be a senior this year, and i havent found any schools id be crazy about going to yet. I know I want to go to a liberal arts school. As of now, I plan on going into journalism or psychology. I'd prefer a smaller school in a rural area, but right now I'll take anything i can get =). Do you have any suggestions? Thanks so much!Any good liberal arts schools in the midwest?
Well, for one there's University of Chicago. Not so small and not rural, but definitely primo liberal arts school, and in the Midwest.
For smaller, less urban options: Grinell (already mentioned,) Carleton already mentioned,) Oberlin, Beloit...Any good liberal arts schools in the midwest?
LxG, those are liberal arts colleges.
LACs are a much better educational experience than large universities, I wish more people would realize it!
Check out Macalester (MN), Carleton (MN), Knox College (IL), Grinnell College (IA), Kenyon (OH), Wooster (OH), Dennison (OH).
best: grinnell, kenyon, carleton, macalester.
expand your search!!! new england has the best LACs (amherst, williams, middlebury, bowdoin, etc.) california has pomona, claremont mckenna, etc. good luck!
Notre Dame, South Bend, Indiana
Friday, February 12, 2010
In debating liberal Christians with modern theological ideas, don't you think THIS is the best question to ask?
I talk to people with all sorts of theologies. Many are very liberal and take much of the Bible as metaphorical, allegory, etc. And there are many different views regarding what or who God is and who Jesus is.
One question, if answered, in my mind, resolves a lot of issues:
';What happens to us after we die';?
Because you answer to this says a lot about your personal theology.
Doesn't it?In debating liberal Christians with modern theological ideas, don't you think THIS is the best question to ask?
Yes. A person's answer to that question tells you who is saved, and who isn't. It eliminates the arguments about what is necessary to be saved. For, the only belief necessary to be saved is that Jesus, who is God, died for our sins on the cross and rose from the dead, and by this belief we are eternally secure.
It is important to be right about other things, but the other things aren't matters of eternal heaven or hell.In debating liberal Christians with modern theological ideas, don't you think THIS is the best question to ask?
For me, the more important question is, ';What do you believe the nature of Deity is?';
Asking that question will at least give you a good idea of how educated and open-minded the other person is, so you might have a foundation for debate. Granted, asking what happens after we die would give similar information.
Asking what happens to us after we die seems to me an adjunct to that. My personal answer would be, ';Our bodies decompose. I don't know what happens to our minds.';
In spiritual terms, I think that our minds rejoin 'God' if we are capable of feeling love--but I have no basis for that belief.
Yeah, of course you could still get metaphorical answers. Bill Craig was debating John Crossan one time, and he pressed him on the issue of God's existence. Crossan kept avoiding the question. Finally, Craig asked, ';During the Jurassic period, did God exist?'; Crossan said, ';Meaningless question,'; but he eventually admitted that he didn't think God existed in any objective sense. God was just a theological construct that Crossan superimposed on the universe. ';God'; for Crossan is just a way of looking at the universe, but apart from anybody looking at the universe that way, God doesn't exist.
Because I fought tooth and nail to become a Catholic, I just say ';I am a Catholic, a real, believing Catholic'; And if they have a problem, they have it with the Church and not with me. I know what is essential and what isn't.
In things essential, unity; in doubtful, liberty; in all things, charity. ST AUGUSTINE
Oh, who knows. There are states of being. Dead is one of them. Alive here in the flesh is another. The spirit does not die, so there is also Heaven with spirits and Hell with spirits. The spirits of the dead are sleeping. They know nothing of what is going on. I'd like to skip that and go right to Heaven.
OK, I am a liberal Christian. I do think much of the Bible is metaphorical and allegory. God is the creator of all things. Jesus is God in human flesh. God became flesh and dwelt amongst us. What happens after we die is
We go to be with God.
Absent from the body is to be present with the Lord.
We are refined and purified For He is like a refiner's fire and like fullers' soap.
Not if you don't mind replies full of Bible quotes or the Bible says or you gotta have faith and other crap like that
I agree kool Aid. Excellent post. God bless !
I need to get a life size cross that I can carry around on Halloween because I am going to be Jesus on Good Friday...where can I get on?
we will stop breathing and get buried first.....then await judgment or quickening...
One question, if answered, in my mind, resolves a lot of issues:
';What happens to us after we die';?
Because you answer to this says a lot about your personal theology.
Doesn't it?In debating liberal Christians with modern theological ideas, don't you think THIS is the best question to ask?
Yes. A person's answer to that question tells you who is saved, and who isn't. It eliminates the arguments about what is necessary to be saved. For, the only belief necessary to be saved is that Jesus, who is God, died for our sins on the cross and rose from the dead, and by this belief we are eternally secure.
It is important to be right about other things, but the other things aren't matters of eternal heaven or hell.In debating liberal Christians with modern theological ideas, don't you think THIS is the best question to ask?
For me, the more important question is, ';What do you believe the nature of Deity is?';
Asking that question will at least give you a good idea of how educated and open-minded the other person is, so you might have a foundation for debate. Granted, asking what happens after we die would give similar information.
Asking what happens to us after we die seems to me an adjunct to that. My personal answer would be, ';Our bodies decompose. I don't know what happens to our minds.';
In spiritual terms, I think that our minds rejoin 'God' if we are capable of feeling love--but I have no basis for that belief.
Yeah, of course you could still get metaphorical answers. Bill Craig was debating John Crossan one time, and he pressed him on the issue of God's existence. Crossan kept avoiding the question. Finally, Craig asked, ';During the Jurassic period, did God exist?'; Crossan said, ';Meaningless question,'; but he eventually admitted that he didn't think God existed in any objective sense. God was just a theological construct that Crossan superimposed on the universe. ';God'; for Crossan is just a way of looking at the universe, but apart from anybody looking at the universe that way, God doesn't exist.
Because I fought tooth and nail to become a Catholic, I just say ';I am a Catholic, a real, believing Catholic'; And if they have a problem, they have it with the Church and not with me. I know what is essential and what isn't.
In things essential, unity; in doubtful, liberty; in all things, charity. ST AUGUSTINE
Oh, who knows. There are states of being. Dead is one of them. Alive here in the flesh is another. The spirit does not die, so there is also Heaven with spirits and Hell with spirits. The spirits of the dead are sleeping. They know nothing of what is going on. I'd like to skip that and go right to Heaven.
OK, I am a liberal Christian. I do think much of the Bible is metaphorical and allegory. God is the creator of all things. Jesus is God in human flesh. God became flesh and dwelt amongst us. What happens after we die is
We go to be with God.
Absent from the body is to be present with the Lord.
We are refined and purified For He is like a refiner's fire and like fullers' soap.
Not if you don't mind replies full of Bible quotes or the Bible says or you gotta have faith and other crap like that
I agree kool Aid. Excellent post. God bless !
I need to get a life size cross that I can carry around on Halloween because I am going to be Jesus on Good Friday...where can I get on?
we will stop breathing and get buried first.....then await judgment or quickening...
Is the liberal media always THIS judgmental toward pregnant teenage girls?
Or is it only when the teenage girl is the daughter of a prominent conservative?
.Is the liberal media always THIS judgmental toward pregnant teenage girls?
No, if she were the daughter of a prominent Liberal she would be celebrated for having an abortion.Is the liberal media always THIS judgmental toward pregnant teenage girls?
I think the reason this is getting so much attention is because Sarah Palin has the possibility of being the next VP. As we all know, candidates are always scrutinized to the highest leve...as they should be, since they will lead our country, whether Dem or Rep.
It just looks bad for her since she is such a champion of abstinence etc etc. All opinions aside, she also doesn't have too much experience. I guess we will see in Nov!
Liberals run from one BS headline to another like a bunch of hungry dogs after the weenie mobile. They have no clue what is going on anywhere in the world because all they read is the headlines and not the story and the headlines are written to sucker in the stupid and liberals fall for it everytime.
Only when they are not judging certain conservatives for not doling out more money to help the teenage girls they just got done judging :-)
If that makes sense...
and it shouldnt!
You've asked these kinds of questions alot. Why keep stirring it up? You repubs have asked us to quit so what are you doing? Trolling?
Exactly
Unmarried ones, yes, So is God.
I will take door number 2 for 5 million Jenny.sexy myspace
.Is the liberal media always THIS judgmental toward pregnant teenage girls?
No, if she were the daughter of a prominent Liberal she would be celebrated for having an abortion.Is the liberal media always THIS judgmental toward pregnant teenage girls?
I think the reason this is getting so much attention is because Sarah Palin has the possibility of being the next VP. As we all know, candidates are always scrutinized to the highest leve...as they should be, since they will lead our country, whether Dem or Rep.
It just looks bad for her since she is such a champion of abstinence etc etc. All opinions aside, she also doesn't have too much experience. I guess we will see in Nov!
Liberals run from one BS headline to another like a bunch of hungry dogs after the weenie mobile. They have no clue what is going on anywhere in the world because all they read is the headlines and not the story and the headlines are written to sucker in the stupid and liberals fall for it everytime.
Only when they are not judging certain conservatives for not doling out more money to help the teenage girls they just got done judging :-)
If that makes sense...
and it shouldnt!
You've asked these kinds of questions alot. Why keep stirring it up? You repubs have asked us to quit so what are you doing? Trolling?
Exactly
Unmarried ones, yes, So is God.
I will take door number 2 for 5 million Jenny.
How do characterize a self-proclaimed liberal who is not actually liberal?
Some people say they are liberal and others will argue their beliefs are not actually liberal. What does this mean? What's a fake liberal?How do characterize a self-proclaimed liberal who is not actually liberal?
I would say he is confused. Or the person saying said liberal isn't a a liberal is confused. I would not characterize the person as a fake liberal unless he indeed knew what a liberal was and was intentionally trying to make others think he believed in the libereal cause when indeed he absolutely did not and tried to hide the fact that he did not.How do characterize a self-proclaimed liberal who is not actually liberal?
';Liberal'; is used by many different people to mean many different things -- and frequently used by people who are not liberal to mean ';anything I don't like';.
Liberal -- by the dictionary -- means one who favours a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties, and who favours an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets.
Very few people seem to actually use the word the way the dictionary defines it -- so your mileage may vary,
It means we have become way, way, way too hung up on labels.
Hillary Clinton
A Neo-Conservative !
LINO, DINO, CINO AND RINO.
liberal, democrat, conservative, or republican
IN NAME ONLY
But you also have to face the possibility that they are liberal.. it's your views of them that are off... but who am I to judge.
A swing voter?
I would say he is confused. Or the person saying said liberal isn't a a liberal is confused. I would not characterize the person as a fake liberal unless he indeed knew what a liberal was and was intentionally trying to make others think he believed in the libereal cause when indeed he absolutely did not and tried to hide the fact that he did not.How do characterize a self-proclaimed liberal who is not actually liberal?
';Liberal'; is used by many different people to mean many different things -- and frequently used by people who are not liberal to mean ';anything I don't like';.
Liberal -- by the dictionary -- means one who favours a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties, and who favours an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets.
Very few people seem to actually use the word the way the dictionary defines it -- so your mileage may vary,
It means we have become way, way, way too hung up on labels.
Hillary Clinton
A Neo-Conservative !
LINO, DINO, CINO AND RINO.
liberal, democrat, conservative, or republican
IN NAME ONLY
But you also have to face the possibility that they are liberal.. it's your views of them that are off... but who am I to judge.
A swing voter?
How do I set up a debate stating that the media does not have a liberal bias?
How do I set this debate up? I don't know where to start? I am supposed to debate that the media does not have a liberal bias. What points should I make?How do I set up a debate stating that the media does not have a liberal bias?
You may be able to frame the debate by stating far right headlines and substantiation of the reports (corroboration from other unrelated sources).
Then contrast the so-called ';liberal'; point of view and the corroborating evidence or support of the facts.
The far right creates a distrust of the mainstream media by positioning themselves as truth, but the facts to support their positions are vague and unsubstantiated (he said, she said), supposition and implied conclusions derived from faulty perspectives.
The unwitting mainstream plays into this trap by skewing their news more to the right, instead of digging in and showing their history of unbiased reporting.
This will be a difficult assignment, as many people have a bias that may bolster or support their skewed perspective of the world, primarily using fear and isolationism, ignorance and misplaced patriotism.
Good luckHow do I set up a debate stating that the media does not have a liberal bias?
***** **** ****** boobs **** whore ******* dick, get me banned idc. you're all ******* *****. ight?
It's hard to prove a negative. The burden of proof should be on the other side to prove that the media DOES have a liberal bias. However, I would start by admitting that SOME media does in fact have a liberal bias -- for instance National Public Radio -- but they represent small minority, and are balanced by media like Fox News which has a conservative bias. Then talk about the majority in the middle -- your job is to show that they try to be accurate and simply describe things as they see them. Why would they distort things? What's in it for them? And can anyone really be objective?
Spring Leaf, you are in deep trouble. Does you teacher hate you, or just want to make a fool of you?
If you can pull this off, you have one hell of a career waiting for you in Washington.
But only if you can stomach being a hypocrite, sorry.
(Baby, in all good conscience I can not bring myself to help in this project, it just hits too close to home, truly sorry)
You may be able to frame the debate by stating far right headlines and substantiation of the reports (corroboration from other unrelated sources).
Then contrast the so-called ';liberal'; point of view and the corroborating evidence or support of the facts.
The far right creates a distrust of the mainstream media by positioning themselves as truth, but the facts to support their positions are vague and unsubstantiated (he said, she said), supposition and implied conclusions derived from faulty perspectives.
The unwitting mainstream plays into this trap by skewing their news more to the right, instead of digging in and showing their history of unbiased reporting.
This will be a difficult assignment, as many people have a bias that may bolster or support their skewed perspective of the world, primarily using fear and isolationism, ignorance and misplaced patriotism.
Good luckHow do I set up a debate stating that the media does not have a liberal bias?
***** **** ****** boobs **** whore ******* dick, get me banned idc. you're all ******* *****. ight?
Report Abuse
It's hard to prove a negative. The burden of proof should be on the other side to prove that the media DOES have a liberal bias. However, I would start by admitting that SOME media does in fact have a liberal bias -- for instance National Public Radio -- but they represent small minority, and are balanced by media like Fox News which has a conservative bias. Then talk about the majority in the middle -- your job is to show that they try to be accurate and simply describe things as they see them. Why would they distort things? What's in it for them? And can anyone really be objective?
Spring Leaf, you are in deep trouble. Does you teacher hate you, or just want to make a fool of you?
If you can pull this off, you have one hell of a career waiting for you in Washington.
But only if you can stomach being a hypocrite, sorry.
(Baby, in all good conscience I can not bring myself to help in this project, it just hits too close to home, truly sorry)
Can some liberal explain to me how a public option health care plan is deficit neutral?
We will just give it away or do you plan on jacking up the taxes on the people who already pay taxes anyways. Nobody, I repeat nobody that would choose (probably the wrong word since it will be FORCED) a public option pays ANY (yes I said ANY) taxes. They might get taxes withheld, but it is all refunded.Can some liberal explain to me how a public option health care plan is deficit neutral?
nothing the government has ever done is deficit neutral, anyone who buys that hype is not studying government management techniquesCan some liberal explain to me how a public option health care plan is deficit neutral?
It is deficit neutral because it costs the same.
Of course, it will cost more if everybody receives health care ... right now, there are several million people in the wealthiest country in the world who can't afford health care. A lot of them pay taxes.
The cost of untreated health care problems is a much greater cost than the cost of treatment.
Unfortunately, the cost of curing the ignorance displayed in your question is exorbitant.
Wow seriously? I'd LOVE to get all my taxes back!! I'm sure my husband would too!
if you've been paying attention.. the plan is for the public option to have to go through the same negotiation process for their prices.. their prices are expected to be lower, but not by a lot.
You must not pay taxes then. Because even when I started out working, I never got back everything I paid in, not even 1/3. So either I'm being rubbed by the IRS, or what you said is a lie.
For some uber, are you aware of how many hospital bills go unpaid by uninsured citizens - which gaps are filled with your high tax payments now??
Insuring everyone could only save you $. Dol*.
It is deficit neutral if it is payed for by whatever means.
Deficit neutral means we won't borrow to do it.
That seems obvious.
The public option is funded like health insurance companies are, we all pay, its not a government freebie.
What are you kidding me? I'd take it, the government can't do worse then the actual insurance companies.
I pay about $30,000 a year in taxes after refunds and I would choose a public option. So, you are wrong.
no i cannot, it will be ok though
taxpayer money and budget cuts
nothing the government has ever done is deficit neutral, anyone who buys that hype is not studying government management techniquesCan some liberal explain to me how a public option health care plan is deficit neutral?
It is deficit neutral because it costs the same.
Of course, it will cost more if everybody receives health care ... right now, there are several million people in the wealthiest country in the world who can't afford health care. A lot of them pay taxes.
The cost of untreated health care problems is a much greater cost than the cost of treatment.
Unfortunately, the cost of curing the ignorance displayed in your question is exorbitant.
Wow seriously? I'd LOVE to get all my taxes back!! I'm sure my husband would too!
if you've been paying attention.. the plan is for the public option to have to go through the same negotiation process for their prices.. their prices are expected to be lower, but not by a lot.
You must not pay taxes then. Because even when I started out working, I never got back everything I paid in, not even 1/3. So either I'm being rubbed by the IRS, or what you said is a lie.
For some uber, are you aware of how many hospital bills go unpaid by uninsured citizens - which gaps are filled with your high tax payments now??
Insuring everyone could only save you $. Dol*.
It is deficit neutral if it is payed for by whatever means.
Deficit neutral means we won't borrow to do it.
That seems obvious.
The public option is funded like health insurance companies are, we all pay, its not a government freebie.
What are you kidding me? I'd take it, the government can't do worse then the actual insurance companies.
I pay about $30,000 a year in taxes after refunds and I would choose a public option. So, you are wrong.
no i cannot, it will be ok though
taxpayer money and budget cuts
What is the basic ideas behind conservative and liberal?
When it comes to certain organizations, what are the qualities and ideas behind being conservative versus liberal. How can I tell the difference between the two?What is the basic ideas behind conservative and liberal?
Very good question that more people should ask before they just accept these terms at face value.
Though as one previous answer said, the ';Conservative'; platform is supposed to favor keeping government out of public affairs and private business. In actuality, it seems that they often do just the opposite. ';Conservative'; is, I suppose, meant to refer to allegiance to traditional values, and ';free enterprise';. But realistically it is not an accurate term. Much of the ';Conservative'; agenda is actually quite radical, and enacts laws (such as the Patriot Act) which allow the government to interfere very directly in the lives of American citizens -- reading their mail, listening to their telephone conversations, and so on. It also supports the activity of corporations that do little to serve the public, and spend vast public money to gain profit. Those same corporations enjoy public tax support (Oil Depletion Allowance), and are even bailed out by the government, via your tax dollars, if they fail (Citibank).
I doubt the Founding Fathers would have much agreed with such things, whatever the pretext. So, although I do believe that all people have the right to advocate whatever they wish in a free society, including limiting freedom for the ';public good';, the word ';Conservative'; is in itself a misnomer, as it has little to do with the principles on which this country was founded.
As for ';Liberal'; -- I guess one might say that the term is more accurate. Liberals tend to vote for things that they see as upholding personal freedoms over the dictats of a majority. Abortion, for instance. Taxation for a comprehensive public health system (which most outside the United States have). Free tax-paid college education for those who qualify (ditto). The American Civil Liberties Union is a ';Liberal'; organization often attacked in the ';Conservative'; media. But it is worth noting that organization fights just as hard to allow neo-Nazis to meet and march as they do causes that they might themselves believe in.
Today, though, to be frank -- the lines are drawn. But it is a well-known aspect of Political Science that the extremes of ';Leftist'; and ';Rightist'; governments are in practice very difficult to distinguish, so much they resemble one another.
Stalin was extreme left, for instance -- Hitler extreme right. This may be the fear that drives those who wish to keep everything in the ';Private Sector';. Just as often, though, political paybacks and private interest produce exactly the opposite result: government involved in every phase of life, but making its decisions behind closed doors, rather than publicly. Who is to say which is preferable? In the end, it's this difference that distinguishes ';Republican'; from ';Democrat'; in terms of their basic idea of government. One thinks that power should be given by the public to elected officials to decide what is best, the other thinks it should be up to each person to decide on every issue. That's the true meaning of those two terms, ';Republican';, and :';Democrat'; respectively -- (which is in itself somewhat surprising and contrary to common belief of what each party represents). So once again, your question is a good one to ask.
Whichever side one subscribes to, it is a sure sign of a decadent culture when the two sides lose effective understanding and dialogue. This is sadly the case in the United States today. Whether the polarization is political or economic -- the fact that such extreme differences exist and have no regard for the opinions of the opposite side: it speaks badly of us all.What is the basic ideas behind conservative and liberal?
they are names people call each other to avoid actually debating issues.
Liberals will spend your hard-earned dollar to f*** the rich and help the poor. Conservatives will spend your hard-earned dollar to keep the poor from f*ck*ng. Independents say f*ck the liberals and the conservatives.
Liberals believe in the herd and conservatives believe in the individual.
How the herd would be controled would be by a group of people refered to as the liberal elite. The rest of the herd would have to obey orders.
The weakness for the individual is that it leaves the poor, weak and incompetents stranded to their own fate.
Liberals are idealists and think in terms of how things should be. They live in a fantasy world. They are elitist and consider themselves to be much more enlightened than the common person. Therefore they should be allowed to make the rules for the rest of us but they should not be held accountable for following the rules themselves, after all they're better than the rest of us. They're all about fairness and equality, particularly in the realm of thoughts and feelings, as long as everyone else is forced to agree with their thoughts and feelings. They want to protect the environment as long as it is the common person sacrificing, because they're elite and shouldn't have to give up their own energy consuming ways (i.e....driving SUV's, flying in private jets, etc...).
Conservatives, on the other hand, see the world as it is and they live in reality. They're all about people being responsible for themselves. Well that pretty much sums it up.
Liberals. Conservatives. Parties comprised of Politicians. Politicians are those engaged in Politics.
Politics.
Poli - a variant of Poly, meaning Many.
Tics - a variant of Ticks, meaning Blood-sucking parasites.
Politics therefore, means Many Blood-Sucking Parasites.
There really isn't much difference. Both are capable of causing endless financial headaches for the rest of us, and they don't particularly care.
I know this didn't help, but it was fun, wasn't it?
Conservatism is a minimalist government involved in your life, and lower taxes.
Liberalism means the government is responsible for all of the bad decisions people make and will pay for those mistakes with your tax dollars.
Somewhere in the past we lost our ideals, parties were formed and changed our thinking. As I grew up I voted for people who thought for the good of the nation, not for the good of the party. We begin to lose our way in the 70s, down hill all the way. Look at what each believes and you will not see that much difference. What do we have vote for; one makes us feel good, one seem to know alittle but she is a woman and one who has had a lifetime to gain knowledge.
We have had men in office with IQs over 130 yet what did they accomplish.
A conservative will say one thing and do the opposite and a liberal will lie.
Conservatives are mostly Republicans. Republicans tend to favor big business. They are against things like stem cell research and gay marriage, partly because conservatives are thought to be more religiously conservative as well. Ironically though, they support capital punishment. They're thought of as being quick to use military force and are stronger on issues of security. They're against illegal immigration. They favor tax cuts to stimulate the economy using little government assistance. Yet they also favor more government control over other aspects of life, such as security. (Patriot Act).
Examples are George Bush, McCain, and Pat Robertson.
Liberals are often democrats, and support universal health care, are more concerned with environmental issues, and thus, believe in greater regulation of big businesses. They like lower defense spending. They're also typically in favor of free trade, although, there's a large number of liberals who don't. Liberals like labor unions, support stem cell research, but are against capital punishment, favor gun control, and like higher taxes.
Examples are the Clintons, Al Gore, and Michael Moore.
This might help (about Liberalism):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bJFbWyVA鈥?/a>
Conservatives believe they can comport their own lives and spend their own money more wisely and more logically than the government can. Liberals believe everything must be regulated because people can't be trusted with their own decisions for their own lives, and that the government can spend their money more wisely and logically than they can.
A good example of money/spending would be health care. A liberal thinks the government should be handling people's health insurance for them while a conservative can see that if there were less tax money withheld from the common paycheck, the payee could afford their own health insurance.
A good example of comportment regulation would be unions. A conservative knows in his/her head that if they were left alone to run a business, they would be more than willing to pay attention to safety regulations, but a liberal believes there should be a watchdog group like a union to FORCE the safety rules that are already being adhered to.
Conservatives like getting stuff done, Liberals like complaining until others fix their problems.
Very good question that more people should ask before they just accept these terms at face value.
Though as one previous answer said, the ';Conservative'; platform is supposed to favor keeping government out of public affairs and private business. In actuality, it seems that they often do just the opposite. ';Conservative'; is, I suppose, meant to refer to allegiance to traditional values, and ';free enterprise';. But realistically it is not an accurate term. Much of the ';Conservative'; agenda is actually quite radical, and enacts laws (such as the Patriot Act) which allow the government to interfere very directly in the lives of American citizens -- reading their mail, listening to their telephone conversations, and so on. It also supports the activity of corporations that do little to serve the public, and spend vast public money to gain profit. Those same corporations enjoy public tax support (Oil Depletion Allowance), and are even bailed out by the government, via your tax dollars, if they fail (Citibank).
I doubt the Founding Fathers would have much agreed with such things, whatever the pretext. So, although I do believe that all people have the right to advocate whatever they wish in a free society, including limiting freedom for the ';public good';, the word ';Conservative'; is in itself a misnomer, as it has little to do with the principles on which this country was founded.
As for ';Liberal'; -- I guess one might say that the term is more accurate. Liberals tend to vote for things that they see as upholding personal freedoms over the dictats of a majority. Abortion, for instance. Taxation for a comprehensive public health system (which most outside the United States have). Free tax-paid college education for those who qualify (ditto). The American Civil Liberties Union is a ';Liberal'; organization often attacked in the ';Conservative'; media. But it is worth noting that organization fights just as hard to allow neo-Nazis to meet and march as they do causes that they might themselves believe in.
Today, though, to be frank -- the lines are drawn. But it is a well-known aspect of Political Science that the extremes of ';Leftist'; and ';Rightist'; governments are in practice very difficult to distinguish, so much they resemble one another.
Stalin was extreme left, for instance -- Hitler extreme right. This may be the fear that drives those who wish to keep everything in the ';Private Sector';. Just as often, though, political paybacks and private interest produce exactly the opposite result: government involved in every phase of life, but making its decisions behind closed doors, rather than publicly. Who is to say which is preferable? In the end, it's this difference that distinguishes ';Republican'; from ';Democrat'; in terms of their basic idea of government. One thinks that power should be given by the public to elected officials to decide what is best, the other thinks it should be up to each person to decide on every issue. That's the true meaning of those two terms, ';Republican';, and :';Democrat'; respectively -- (which is in itself somewhat surprising and contrary to common belief of what each party represents). So once again, your question is a good one to ask.
Whichever side one subscribes to, it is a sure sign of a decadent culture when the two sides lose effective understanding and dialogue. This is sadly the case in the United States today. Whether the polarization is political or economic -- the fact that such extreme differences exist and have no regard for the opinions of the opposite side: it speaks badly of us all.What is the basic ideas behind conservative and liberal?
they are names people call each other to avoid actually debating issues.
Liberals will spend your hard-earned dollar to f*** the rich and help the poor. Conservatives will spend your hard-earned dollar to keep the poor from f*ck*ng. Independents say f*ck the liberals and the conservatives.
Liberals believe in the herd and conservatives believe in the individual.
How the herd would be controled would be by a group of people refered to as the liberal elite. The rest of the herd would have to obey orders.
The weakness for the individual is that it leaves the poor, weak and incompetents stranded to their own fate.
Liberals are idealists and think in terms of how things should be. They live in a fantasy world. They are elitist and consider themselves to be much more enlightened than the common person. Therefore they should be allowed to make the rules for the rest of us but they should not be held accountable for following the rules themselves, after all they're better than the rest of us. They're all about fairness and equality, particularly in the realm of thoughts and feelings, as long as everyone else is forced to agree with their thoughts and feelings. They want to protect the environment as long as it is the common person sacrificing, because they're elite and shouldn't have to give up their own energy consuming ways (i.e....driving SUV's, flying in private jets, etc...).
Conservatives, on the other hand, see the world as it is and they live in reality. They're all about people being responsible for themselves. Well that pretty much sums it up.
Liberals. Conservatives. Parties comprised of Politicians. Politicians are those engaged in Politics.
Politics.
Poli - a variant of Poly, meaning Many.
Tics - a variant of Ticks, meaning Blood-sucking parasites.
Politics therefore, means Many Blood-Sucking Parasites.
There really isn't much difference. Both are capable of causing endless financial headaches for the rest of us, and they don't particularly care.
I know this didn't help, but it was fun, wasn't it?
Conservatism is a minimalist government involved in your life, and lower taxes.
Liberalism means the government is responsible for all of the bad decisions people make and will pay for those mistakes with your tax dollars.
Somewhere in the past we lost our ideals, parties were formed and changed our thinking. As I grew up I voted for people who thought for the good of the nation, not for the good of the party. We begin to lose our way in the 70s, down hill all the way. Look at what each believes and you will not see that much difference. What do we have vote for; one makes us feel good, one seem to know alittle but she is a woman and one who has had a lifetime to gain knowledge.
We have had men in office with IQs over 130 yet what did they accomplish.
A conservative will say one thing and do the opposite and a liberal will lie.
Conservatives are mostly Republicans. Republicans tend to favor big business. They are against things like stem cell research and gay marriage, partly because conservatives are thought to be more religiously conservative as well. Ironically though, they support capital punishment. They're thought of as being quick to use military force and are stronger on issues of security. They're against illegal immigration. They favor tax cuts to stimulate the economy using little government assistance. Yet they also favor more government control over other aspects of life, such as security. (Patriot Act).
Examples are George Bush, McCain, and Pat Robertson.
Liberals are often democrats, and support universal health care, are more concerned with environmental issues, and thus, believe in greater regulation of big businesses. They like lower defense spending. They're also typically in favor of free trade, although, there's a large number of liberals who don't. Liberals like labor unions, support stem cell research, but are against capital punishment, favor gun control, and like higher taxes.
Examples are the Clintons, Al Gore, and Michael Moore.
This might help (about Liberalism):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bJFbWyVA鈥?/a>
Conservatives believe they can comport their own lives and spend their own money more wisely and more logically than the government can. Liberals believe everything must be regulated because people can't be trusted with their own decisions for their own lives, and that the government can spend their money more wisely and logically than they can.
A good example of money/spending would be health care. A liberal thinks the government should be handling people's health insurance for them while a conservative can see that if there were less tax money withheld from the common paycheck, the payee could afford their own health insurance.
A good example of comportment regulation would be unions. A conservative knows in his/her head that if they were left alone to run a business, they would be more than willing to pay attention to safety regulations, but a liberal believes there should be a watchdog group like a union to FORCE the safety rules that are already being adhered to.
Conservatives like getting stuff done, Liberals like complaining until others fix their problems.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)