25 replies to this topic

[Oldschooler81]

I was thinking about this, and I'm pretty sure that's why so many issues get a bad rap from the other side, or from even more moderate believers of the same thing. Because it makes it seem like "ah they're all crazy".

I'm basically independent (probably like 50-65% left or so) but I'm of the "can't we all just get along" idea. I think both sides usually have good points, even if I don't always agree with their method of delivering it, I can see where they're coming from or why they would feel a certain way. However when you get extremists with fiercely loyal followers who won't back down, that makes it almost impossible for any middle ground to be reached. That's unfortunate too because I think most people are probably on the moderate side of one party or the other - like they believe in a milder version of the stereotypical Dems or Repubs.

Does anyone have any ideas why certain issues seem impossible to resolve - i.e. healthcare, homosexuality/gay marriage, and the one that can't be mentioned.

[curiousity]

I was thinking about this, and I'm pretty sure that's why so many issues get a bad rap from the other side, or from even more moderate believers of the same thing. Because it makes it seem like "ah they're all crazy".

I'm basically independent (probably like 50-65% left or so) but I'm of the "can't we all just get along" idea. I think both sides usually have good points, even if I don't always agree with their method of delivering it, I can see where they're coming from or why they would feel a certain way. However when you get extremists with fiercely loyal followers who won't back down, that makes it almost impossible for any middle ground to be reached. That's unfortunate too because I think most people are probably on the moderate side of one party or the other - like they believe in a milder version of the stereotypical Dems or Repubs.

Does anyone have any ideas why certain issues seem impossible to resolve - i.e. healthcare, homosexuality/gay marriage, and the one that can't be mentioned.

Easy answer.

300,000,000 people will never agree on everything

Heck, I'm sure that 300 million people can't even agree that the earth is round,

Flat Earth Society

let alone agree on things as emotionally charged as the A-topic, gays, etc.

So I'm curious, why do you think we should even be able to "just all get along"?

In a school of a couple of thousand, do you think you could get everyone to agree on anything (not counting letting school out early)? Then why be so naive into thinking millions of people can get along. Did you see the Dude's video of that raving lunatic african-american attacking that car? How do you think he's gonna want to get along with anyone that is semi-normal? Sorry to break it to ya, but the world will never be a 100% friendly place to live. Get used to it.

[Oldschooler81]

Easy answer.

300,000,000 people will never agree on everything

Heck, I'm sure that 300 million people can't even agree that the earth is round,

Flat Earth Society

let alone agree on things as emotionally charged as the A-topic, gays, etc.

So I'm curious, why do you think we should even be able to "just all get along"?

In a school of a couple of thousand, do you think you could get everyone to agree on anything (not counting letting school out early)? Then why be so naive into thinking millions of people can get along. Did you see the Dude's video of that raving lunatic african-american attacking that car? How do you think he's gonna want to get along with anyone that is semi-normal? Sorry to break it to ya, but the world will never be a 100% friendly place to live. Get used to it.

(bolded) Good point lol.

Yeah l know it's logically unlikely that's ever gonna happen, esp if many issues have been debated since the beginning of time... I can dream though.

It's just been my experience that usually when you hear about some politician or minister or protestor trying to push an issue, it's an extreme case which somewhat rightly turns off the other side. Sarah Palin is a perfect example imo. I disagree with her politically on many things, but what gets me the most is she comes across as kinda radicial and stubborn about it.

I actually hate it even more when it's something I SUPPORT/agree with and it's someone saying it in a really jerky or forceful way. Makes me think "Man this is never gonna pass, they're making it really look bad."

For example if I was trying to make a case against the death penalty, I wouldn't start railing against "ah the only people who believe in that Texas justice are you gun toting Bible thumping rednecks"....I would just argue that violence doesn't solve anything, and that killing a scummy person won't bring back anyone they murdered or the damage they did.

Or with the A topic - killing the doctors (or sticking up for those who do) is an even better example.

I think if people reasonably debated things and the examples were more moderate variations of it, there'd at least be some chance of resolution.

[mando]

Unfortunately, we are in an era where the ability to make compromises is portrayed as a weakness rather than a strength. This is fueled by hyperbolic and frequently bogus arguments by commentators who feed on controversy and conflict.

As you point out, the vast majority who coexist peacefully day-to-day are drowned out by the extreme voices out there.

[Dave Burrell]

Unfortunately, we are in an era where the ability to make compromises is portrayed as a weakness rather than a strength. This is fueled by hyperbolic and frequently bogus arguments by commentators who feed on controversy and conflict.

As you point out, the vast majority who coexist peacefully day-to-day are drowned out by the extreme voices out there.

well said!

[mando]

Current article on this very topic...

The major example happens to point to one party, but it criticizes all fronts...

...distortion and dishonesty cause Americans to be increasingly skeptical of — even cynical about — their political institutions and leaders. Once people lose faith in the political system, they're less likely to vote, less willing to pay taxes to support government-run programs, less motivated to run for office themselves and — sociologists say — they're even less likely to get involved in their own communities.

[Oldschooler81]

Unfortunately, we are in an era where the ability to make compromises is portrayed as a weakness rather than a strength. This is fueled by hyperbolic and frequently bogus arguments by commentators who feed on controversy and conflict.

As you point out, the vast majority who coexist peacefully day-to-day are drowned out by the extreme voices out there.

Thanks mando and davburr. I'll have to read the article later, but I agree. I wonder if news outlets only tend to report on the more hardcore believers, as opposed to the more moderate ones. I love for instance, how newspeople and talk show hosts (well in most of the 90s before they became as trashy as they are today - even Springer used to be respectable) always ask questions of both sides and try to be devil's advocate.

I firmly admit I'm wishy washy on some things, never firmly taking a side and sticking with it. I guess that's just cause I can see both sides of the issue. My personal opinion might be more one way, but I like hearing what everybody's got to say - hey either I'll learn something/possibly change my mind...and if I don't, at least it'll strengthen my argument for what I believe.

My ex gf (who'se a Christian and more of a right leaning moderate) and I used to have really great discussions on things like this, and I learned alot. We disagreed on stuff at first, but I found myself coming around to her side a bit more. We're both moderates, just each of us a teeny bit to one side of it.

[FolsomVW]

Thanks mando and davburr. I'll have to read the article later, but I agree. I wonder if news outlets only tend to report on the more hardcore believers, as opposed to the more moderate ones. I love for instance, how newspeople and talk show hosts (well in most of the 90s before they became as trashy as they are today - even Springer used to be respectable) always ask questions of both sides and try to be devil's advocate.

I firmly admit I'm wishy washy on some things, never firmly taking a side and sticking with it. I guess that's just cause I can see both sides of the issue. My personal opinion might be more one way, but I like hearing what everybody's got to say - hey either I'll learn something/possibly change my mind...and if I don't, at least it'll strengthen my argument for what I believe.

My ex gf (who'se a Christian and more of a right leaning moderate) and I used to have really great discussions on things like this, and I learned alot. We disagreed on stuff at first, but I found myself coming around to her side a bit more. We're both moderates, just each of us a teeny bit to one side of it.

Great topic, thanks for raising it. This is at the heart of the hyperpartisnship that has plagued the nation at an increasing degree since the early 1990s. The media, only in rare moments seems to perform its much needed role as the fifth estate to put a check on our government and elected representatives. When they provide facts to viewers, readers and listeners they tend to avoid putting it in the context of the popular political arguments. The rest of the time they will quote the best competing soundbites, and then call it a "great discussion", which it never really is. The "best" soundbites will tend to be short and sweet (8 seconds) and as outlandish as possible. Politicians know such words will get covered whenever they feel like sending a particular message to just the "audience" being targetted. Lately, as Mando's great article illustrates, the truth doesn't matter when much of the media will repeat Romney's truthless remarks aimed at tapping the anti-government, anti-Obama feelings of the tea party crowd.

[uberman]

There are no compromises with some things...like murder, adultery or fraud. There's just right and wrong....period.

How about: National Defense, Freedom of Speech, Right to bear arms, Suffrage... I understand you more than likely implied those things, but to accompany murder with something as trivial and meaningless as adultery? This isn't 1st or 21st century Palestine, adultery isn't that big of a deal...

[EDF]

How about: National Defense, Freedom of Speech, Right to bear arms, Suffrage... I understand you more than likely implied those things, but to accompany murder with something as trivial and meaningless as adultery? This isn't 1st or 21st century Palestine, adultery isn't that big of a deal...

Adultery meaningless... and trivial... ?

Oh well... all take a swipe at this one...

If a man or woman who takes a marriage vow and then commits adultery... don't you think there is a certain amount of "respect" that is lost... a certain amount of "trust" is lost...

So when you get a guy who will commit adultery, what makes you so sure he will keep his vow(oath) to defend and protect the constitution of the United States...

At some point in our society when we have these kinds of moral failings... then we lose our society and our country... and therefore our way of life...

We are slouching towards Sodom and Gomorah now...

And when you have politicians who will bail out their cronies.. and politicians who will lie and cheat to get power... they will hire "beaurocrats" that will promote their agenda... The end result is "the people" won't believe a stinking word they say anymore...

My case in point...? When "el presidente" Barry "O", aka "the Bamster" says the unemployment rate is only 10% when we all know it's much higher...? or...when you have discredited global warming studies such as we've seen and/or for example, the State C.A.R.B. emissions issue that they want to shut down all diesel engines because of a "phony increase in mortality"...? What happens then...? You get the people who hold up the "guv-ment" with scorn and derision because there is a lack of "trust" and "respect"...

Now...

Tell me again why Adultery is not a big deal....?

[The Average Joe]

"adultery isn't that big of a deal... "

It is to the people involved. And if kids are involved, the destruction of the family unit hurts us all far more than can be quantified.

[uberman]

Tell me again why Adultery is not a big deal....?

Adultery laws vary from state to state, although there are a few cases seen at the federal level (specifically spouses who had extramarital affairs and contracted HIV/AIDS and passed it on to their spouses,) the point is: in Michigan, you can get a life sentence for committing adultery, in Maryland, you get a $10.00 fine, in California, I'm not entirely sure if any consequences exist to punish adultery.

The point I'm making is this: adultery is something we have and continue to compromise on, Maxine said it's something we SHOULD NOT compromise on, which is hokum, since such an issue is dealt with at the state level, for the most part, and most states have varying degrees of tolerance for such an act.)

My real gripe was that murder, adultery and fraud were the three things Maxine said we shouldn't compromise, murder being the only one I agree with.

Adultery used to be punished through severe means, stoning, dismemberment, exile... We compromised, evolved...

Progressed

[Oldschooler81]

Are you serious?

There are no compromises with some things...like murder, adultery or fraud. There's just right and wrong....period.

I think we are where we are today because in the past, we tried to compromise and ended up with a bloated government that approves every entitlement program that came before them. PLUS, our government didn't pull in the reins when they should have to avoid things becoming as bad as they have become now. (I'd say that's pretty extreme.)

If you have a decrease in your income, don't you start to make some cut backs before you come to the point of losing your car or house? Don't you save for the day you may have that sort of situation?

Or are you just like our extreme government, and go full force ahead like there's no tomorrow?

These are extreme times with some people losing everything they have worked all their lives to accomplish. Maybe you are one of the lucky ones, as I am, that haven't. But we aren't out of the woods yet and unless the present administration starts addressing the real issues, like JOBS...we could join the ranks of those poor individuals who have nothing left.

Too many families are homeless and living on the streets....THAT is extreme!

Apologies if I offended with my initial post.

Oh I definitely agree some things are inexcusable. Like I think any first degree murder should never ever get out of jail, no matter how "reformed" or well behaved they are. If you take someone's life intentionally, you shouldn't get to enjoy yours again. Less severe crimes might deserve a second chance depending on the situation, but are still wrong no question.

I think we all would agree on the basic core of the issues (that they're wrong and shouldn't happen), it's the solution or the remedy that people argue about, because everyone has their own idea...all of which probably has a shred of truth or logic to it.

[The Average Joe]

"Adultery used to be punished through severe means, stoning, dismemberment, exile... We compromised, evolved...

Progressed"

To cross link from another thread's discussion... Fundamentalist Muslims didn't...they still stone, and kill for adultery (among other things).