Subject:
|
Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 18 Jan 2000 18:48:01 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2388 times
|
| |
|
|
You know Scott, I really don't get you sometimes. My post was mildly
derogatory to a faceless group - not to you - and you completely took it
as an attack.
"Scott E. Sanburn" wrote:
>
> Christopher Weeks wrote:
>
> > Exactly! So you chose the opposite party.
>
> What my parents did have nothing to do what I believed in, thank you
> very much.
You're welcome to believe what you want. That's fine. I don't happen
to believe the same thing. I believe that it is essentially impossible
for the opinions of your parents to have played no role in your
political beliefs. I'm sorry if that offends or scares you or
something, but I think that's just how we all work.
> > Sure. I'm not saying that those things have nothing to do with it. You
> > obviously give these issues some thought, but I still say that people
> > have more hidden baggage behind these kinds of decisions than they
> > typically know.
>
> Well, since you know so much about me, tell me why I chose what I did,
> since I obviously don't know anything!
How do you derive from my general statements about the psychology of
belief that I claim to know a great deal about you. I know fairly
little about you. (I think) I know (in no particular order):
1. You work two jobs (I think you bag groceries and work a CAD package)
2. You live in Michigan
3. You are very conservative politically
4. You are strongly Christian
5. You allow more errors in writing to slip through than most people here
6. You seem to freak out about stuff from time to time
7. You like LEGO
8. You are currently annoyed with me
9. You have a sister, a father and a mother
10. ...(I can't think of anything else right off hand)
> > they're certainly not conservative Republicans. That rank is designated
> > for whacked out religious fascists.
>
> Talk about name calling!
I guess I meant that as an expression of a generally accepted viewpoint.
I suppose that was foolish. I generally affiliate most of my peers
with conservatism and they seem to believe that the far right is
populated by those who we feel comfortable labeling as 'whacked out
religious fascists.' YMMV.
> I think libertarian views are very close to
> true conservative politics,
I think that depends on what you consider conservative politics? (e.g.
prayer in school, abortion rights, foreign policy, family values,
renegging on UN debt, Reaganomics, etc.) But I still disagree. I think
it's about as much like conservative politics (by which I'm assuming you
mean Republican politics) as it is liberal politics (by which I mean Democratic).
> I did
> score a libertarian on that political poll that someone posted earlier
Everyone (well most people) score as libertarians on that. Therein lies
it's value to the LP.
> in this thread, BTW, even though I am a "whacked out religious fascist",
I want it to be clear that I never said that. You are the only one who
has even so much as implied that you fit that title. I'm not saying by
this that I think you're not, either. I just don't know.
> What do you consider yourself, so I can line up the proper name calling on you?
Human. What do you mean? In what sense? I am sympathetic to the
libertarian political movement, but I am more extreme. I am non
religious. I suppose my views are sufficiently divergent from the norm
that whacked-out would mildly fit.
> > That rank is designated
> > for whacked out religious fascists.
>
> You know, this statement really keys me in to what most people think,
> which is so not true its pitiful, but I don't feel like going into it at
> this point.
Really, it shoudl only key you into what I think. I'm not most people.
Please tell me what is pitiful about what you believe I think based on
the label I used. I mean this quite seriously.
> > > I have seen too many examples of socialism failing, and the Democratic
> > > party seems to be the place for leftists, socialists, etc. That is why.
> > > I could care less what my parents do, in terms of their voting record.
> >
> > I believe that you could care less.
>
> Care less about what? My parents? Could you clarify, or just call me
> fascist again?
Fascist!
Psych! No really, I was making a subtle (which at least one person
noticed) comment on the commonly misused phrase "I could care less"
which should be "I couldn't care less." The former is a vernacular
resulting from lazy ignorance over the years. It is used to mean the
opposite of what it quite obviously does mean. It seemed particularly
fitting in this case because you were using it to exclaim that you don't
care what the opinions of your parents are, when in fact you literally
suggested that you do care - and maybe even implied that you care more
than just a little.
I hope it was OK for me to do both - call you a fascist again and clarify.
Sincerely,
Christopher Weeks
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
| (...) What my parents did have nothing to do what I believed in, thank you very much. I chose for what I think is best. My mom never cared too much for politics, and I have not seen my dad in many years. (...) Well, since you know so much about me, (...) (25 years ago, 17-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
473 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
