Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

What have you changed on?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> What have you changed on? Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
What have you changed on? - 12/12/2016 11:29:39 AM   
ManOeuvre


Posts: 277
Joined: 3/2/2013
Status: offline
What political issue have you done an about face on?

We've all seen the slightly rightward shuffle that happens when people first start earning some decent coin, and heard the adage that a right-minded youth has no heart while a left-minded professional has no brain.

What positions though, have you moved on? Has it affected relationships? I read the P&R forum every week, and I read into the posts a tremendous degree of confidence in the assertions of various positions, opinions, etc, but surely none of them were implanted through mother's milk.

Was it a moment? An epiphany? An incident that affected you? A long considered journey through the thoughtful re-axamining of some principle that used to hold much more value than it now does?
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: What have you changed on? - 12/12/2016 11:33:18 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
I was opposed to Mitt Romney, especially when he took Paul Ryan as his running mate.

But now, if the Electoral College opens the door to it, I hope they elect him President.

If they don't step in and do something, then I will also reverse my long standing understanding of why we have the EC and advocate its abolition as now useless.

I am more conservative -- in the traditional sense, not the mockery the conservative movement has become -- on financial matters, especially pro-global trade, though I'm also for tighter banking and market regulation. I am more progressive on social issues. I'm very pro-union -- they've done a lot of good, and we'll all regret their demise in the end.

Reagan convinced me to move from Independent to Democrat (concern over his dance with the far right religious nuts like Falwell). But Hilary and the DNC have left me unable to support Democrats either.

I think the Green Party is more activist than practical, though for now, they're probably closest to my views. I'm looking at the Working Families Party too, though they aren't as active nationally, especially in Presidential elections. I hope a new Progressive Party emerges, and I hope a new moderate republican party emerges from all this mess.

I used to be pro gun-control, but definitely a gun-owner defender. Now, I'm not sure people can be trusted with guns anymore.

I used to support the Supreme Court as an ideal, but it's become a partisan joke.

That we now pass laws and embrace policies that openly defy science just boggles my mind.

We've become a nation of morons. And it's getting worse.

Our educational system isn't going to help.

And I believe our Democratic experiment is coming to an end. I'm sad to say that. I will certainly fight to try to stave it off. But we may well become a historical footnote, and far sooner than we think.


< Message edited by Musicmystery -- 12/12/2016 11:52:51 AM >

(in reply to ManOeuvre)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: What have you changed on? - 12/12/2016 11:42:33 AM   
ThatDizzyChick


Posts: 5490
Status: offline
It was a long process of study and reflection starting around age 13, and yes I did change quite substantially, I went from effectively a Liberal (Canadian parlance), to a libertarian of sorts (going back and forth between left-libertarian and Georgist), to a communist heavily influenced by Christian communist thought (though stripped of it's religious foundation) with some flirtation with anarchist communism.
There were a number of short periods of dabbling in other ideas along the way, but those are my main stopping points

_____________________________

Not your average bimbo.

(in reply to ManOeuvre)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: What have you changed on? - 12/12/2016 11:50:22 AM   
ThatDizzyChick


Posts: 5490
Status: offline
quote:

If they don't step in and do something, then I will also reverse my long standing understanding of why we have the EC and advocate it's abolition as now useless.

That is not an unreasonable position, given that preventing precisely what is happening is one of the stated purposes of the Electoral College.

_____________________________

Not your average bimbo.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: What have you changed on? - 12/12/2016 12:07:25 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
good luck with that

Recount Michigan: Judge Halts It, But Don't Count Out An Appeal
The same judge who ordered the recount to begin Monday reversed course Wednesday, but an appeal is likely.

what do you want them to do vote against the constituency? On what grounds?

Green Party nominee Jill Stein spent $3.5 million on the Wisconsin recount. On December 9, the Commission said Clinton’s gain was a net 49 votes as of day 9.

Wisconsin’s presidential recount has been completed and the state Elections Commission planned to vote Monday on certifying the results.

Republican Donald Trump’s margin of victory had decreased by just 25 votes with nearly all the ballots recounted. The final tally will be revealed once the recount is certified.


Why the Electoral college

Under the system of the Electoral College each state had the same number of electoral votes as they have representative in Congress, thus no state could have less then 3. The result of this system is that in this election the state of Wyoming cast about 210,000 votes, and thus each elector represented 70,000 votes, while in California approximately 9,700,000 votes were cast for 54 votes, thus representing 179,000 votes per electorate. Obviously this creates an unfair advantage to voters in the small states whose votes actually count more then those people living in medium and large states.

One aspect of the electoral system that is not mandated in the constitution is the fact that the winner takes all the votes in the state. Therefore it makes no difference if you win a state by 50.1% or by 80% of the vote you receive the same number of electoral votes. This can be a recipe for one individual to win some states by large pluralities and lose others by small number of votes, and thus this is an easy scenario for one candidate winning the popular vote while another winning the electoral vote. This winner take all methods used in picking electors has been decided by the states themselves. This trend took place over the course of the 19th century.

While there are clear problems with the Electoral College and there are some advantages to it, changing it is very unlikely. It would take a constituitional amendment ratified by 3/4 of states to change the system. It is hard to imagine the smaller states agreeing. One way of modifying the system s to eliminate the winner take all part of it. The method that the states vote for the electoral college is not mandated by the consitution but is decided by the states. Two states do not use the winner take all system, Maine and Nebraska. It would be difficult but not impossible to get other states to change their systems, unfortunately the party that has the advantage in the state is unlikely to agree to a unilateral change.



_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: What have you changed on? - 12/12/2016 12:09:07 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
what happened? Crime Inc lost?

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to ThatDizzyChick)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: What have you changed on? - 12/12/2016 12:14:03 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
AND the thread is derailed on the fifth post.

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: What have you changed on? - 12/12/2016 12:18:40 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
you derailed it in post 2

quote:

But now, if the Electoral College opens the door to it, I hope they elect him President.

If they don't step in and do something, then I will also reverse my long standing understanding of why we have the EC and advocate its abolition as now useless.


It appeared you did not understand the purpose of the EC so I took a moment to explain it for you.





< Message edited by Real0ne -- 12/12/2016 12:21:39 PM >


_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: What have you changed on? - 12/12/2016 12:22:13 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
Uh-huh. Sure.

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: What have you changed on? - 12/12/2016 12:49:34 PM   
tamaka


Posts: 5079
Status: offline
Honestly i think this is one of the main reasons Trump hasn't been having daily intelligence briefings... just in case something happens people won't say that he knows too much now.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: What have you changed on? - 12/12/2016 12:59:31 PM   
ThatDizzyChick


Posts: 5490
Status: offline
Good point T

_____________________________

Not your average bimbo.

(in reply to tamaka)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: What have you changed on? - 12/12/2016 1:25:17 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
sure but on what grounds?

REUTERS
The recount effort by Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein in three crucial U.S. states neared an end on Monday, after weeks of legal wrangling yielded only one electoral review in Wisconsin.

A U.S. judge in Pennsylvania rejected Stein's request for a recount and an examination of that state's voting machines for evidence of hacking in the Nov. 8 election won by Republican Donald Trump.

Meanwhile, Wisconsin election officials said on Monday they had completed their recount.

so are people expecting the EC to run contrary to their duty to abide by state/fed laws?

Its done, the election is over crime inc lost to a german.









< Message edited by Real0ne -- 12/12/2016 1:26:21 PM >


_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to tamaka)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: What have you changed on? - 12/12/2016 1:27:21 PM   
ThatDizzyChick


Posts: 5490
Status: offline
Oh shut up. Can you try to stay on topic even just once?

_____________________________

Not your average bimbo.

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: What have you changed on? - 12/12/2016 1:31:01 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
Thats the thanks I get for trying to be helpful going out of my way to get an explanation how the electoral college works to equalize the states votes so chicago LA and NY cant decide who the prezzy will will screw the rest of the country. Besides everyone know trump is a democrat anyway.


Better talk with MM who turned this into a whinefest about the EC, because crime inc didnt get the job done.





< Message edited by Real0ne -- 12/12/2016 1:33:00 PM >


_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to ThatDizzyChick)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: What have you changed on? - 12/12/2016 1:36:36 PM   
LadyPact


Posts: 32566
Status: offline
Believe it or not, had you asked me ten years ago, I'd have said 'domestic partnerships,' rather than "marriage," was good enough. I was seriously more concerned with the rights that people didn't have, than the specific word. Things like being considered next of kin for medical decisions, treatment options, end of life situations, etc. I suppose my position was, get what's obtainable. I looked at it as go for what's really important (bad way of phrasing it) when it comes to your life partner when the sh^t hits the fan. I never thought I'd see gay marriage as an equality right, happen in my lifetime. Very glad I was wrong.

Firearms. (I do not call this 'gun control'.) I've always been a proponent of hunting. That part won't change. If you are shooting game to put food on the table for your family, I'll support you all of the way. I've changed over the years about firearms for personal protection. I still have problems with the idea of going on the offensive. The defensive, on the other hand, shoot. If the attacker enters your home, kill the f^cker.

The death penalty. My views on this have expanded. A death sentence isn't only appropriate for those who (criminally) end another person's life (or several lives). There are people who commit such heinous crimes that are just an inch short of the severity of death that I'm not big on the perpetrator to be permitted to keep breathing. I'm still working on how I see the "we don't kill sick people" theory and my ideas about how to deal with the criminally insane. Maybe I'll know in ten more years.

For the kink community especially... (I know it's not what you asked, but it's my pet cause.) It is my personal belief that it is crucial that we expand our definition regarding consent violations. We need to stop 'prettying it up' when a person rapes another person by calling it a 'violation'. If it would be a rape (non consent type) out there in the vanilla world, we might want to look at it as the same thing as criminal rape in the kink world, too.

While I'm at it, consent violations aren't just about 'play' or what happens in public play spaces. To believe in the theory of consent means we must hold a stronger line about what a person does with intentional, malicious, variations of violations of consent. We can not and should not fail to address the issues that face out kink communities.


_____________________________

The crowned Diva of Destruction. ~ ExT

Beach Ball Sized Lady Nuts. ~ TWD

Happily dating a new submissive. It's official. I've named him engie.

Please do not send me email here. Unless I know you, I will delete the email unread

(in reply to ManOeuvre)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: What have you changed on? - 12/12/2016 1:38:54 PM   
WickedsDesire


Posts: 9362
Joined: 11/4/2015
Status: offline
Shag all cunt...look you asked :)

(in reply to LadyPact)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: What have you changed on? - 12/13/2016 12:06:15 PM   
ManOeuvre


Posts: 277
Joined: 3/2/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact


For the kink community especially... (I know it's not what you asked, but it's my pet cause.) It is my personal belief that it is crucial that we expand our definition regarding consent violations. We need to stop 'prettying it up' when a person rapes another person by calling it a 'violation'. If it would be a rape (non consent type) out there in the vanilla world, we might want to look at it as the same thing as criminal rape in the kink world, too.

While I'm at it, consent violations aren't just about 'play' or what happens in public play spaces. To believe in the theory of consent means we must hold a stronger line about what a person does with intentional, malicious, variations of violations of consent. We can not and should not fail to address the issues that face out kink communities.



You know, LP, in my mother tongue, the word for rape sounds rather more like violate, and rapaciousness was something for either the birds or fencing. Imagine my confusion, struggling through English newspapers in the late 80s: on one page, story about an arrested rapist, on the next, a story about a rapper selling out a concert. Man I thought the world was a screwed up place.

(in reply to LadyPact)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: What have you changed on? - 12/13/2016 12:15:34 PM   
ManOeuvre


Posts: 277
Joined: 3/2/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact
For the kink community especially... (I know it's not what you asked, but it's my pet cause.) It is my personal belief that it is crucial that we expand our definition regarding consent violations.…

LP, does this represent a departure for you from a previously held notion?

(in reply to LadyPact)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: What have you changed on? - 12/13/2016 12:27:33 PM   
WickedsDesire


Posts: 9362
Joined: 11/4/2015
Status: offline
there is i and no-ele so i will feast
correct I all above me

(in reply to ManOeuvre)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: What have you changed on? - 12/13/2016 6:57:39 PM   
Greta75


Posts: 9968
Joined: 2/6/2011
Status: offline
FR
When I was a kid, I naturally wanted total freedom of speech, full freedom of press, and I don't think those things should suffer consequences. I thought our government, my own government in my own country, was way too crazy and restricting.

But as I grew up, I think the changing point was when initially, I wanted to pursue a career in journalism, and took a year's course on it.

There was a class that shows about how irresponsible journalism could influence the masses in a negative way. And have resulted in death of innocent people, and people getting physically hurt, as it riled up people to violence.

It completely change my entire view on what I wanted for full freedom of speech.

What I learnt is, in Utopia. Everybody is a mature adult who can exchange and have differences of view, differing beliefs, without ever going into physical conflict.

But in the real world. There are alot of non-mature adults operating in it, who are the black sheeps that can really cause some serious damage over words that are said.

So I completely understood our government point of view after that. They want a perfect orderly, law abiding society, where everything goes smoothly everyday, with no hiccups or major crime or protests or riots to disrupt people's day to day life.

This is also important as we have no natural resources AT ALL. Our economy is 100% reliant on companies wanting to be based here as a first choice due to the stability and security and predictability of an environment that we can offer.

It makes me really appreciate my government alot more and I really see their style of governance. It is based on pure pragmatism. And not against human rights. They simply want to do what is best for this country to continue to be successful. What works for us may not work for a country filled with natural resources for example.

As for which American party I support. I grew up thinking dems are the better party who represents more freedom, more kindness.

But after their support of an extremely terrible religion that does not represent what dems are suppose to represent.

I just started feeling more kindred spirits with republicans who seem to be the party who is not under estimating the goals of Islam as a religion and what they are trying to achieve in this world.

Dems keeps laughing it off as xenophobia, racism or paranoia, whatever. They are no longer sane or doing what is best for maintaining as much freedom for their people as possible. To support the very religion which is the anti-thesis of freedom.

I also grew up viewing Islam as a peaceful cultist religion, because of all their religious dress code, rules, fasting, all that stuffs. And also because I spent a good part of my life in a Muslim's family home. As my parents got an agreement with them to pick me up for school, and pick me back from school and hang out at their place until my parents can pick me home. But looking back as an adult on how they treated their daughter, my best friend then. And just little things came back to me.

One thing is, my own parents were physically abusive too, so even though my best friend was also being physically punished, but ALL her punishments were about breaking Islamic rules. My punishment has nothing to do with religion. But simply having a mother who hates my existence and lives to torment me.

So at that point of time, I didn't associate her abuse with Islam teachings. But looking back, I see it really clearly now that it was all Islam motivated. I felt her parents loved her. She was an only child. But they were just also, simply following their religion and trying to keep their daughter from straying from the religious regiments, as with religious people.

The hardest thing my friend had was being forced to wear the horrible hijab all the time. She never understood why she has to hide her body. She always leave in a hijab and then change into short skirts and normal clothes in my home, and we go out. And then change back into hijab to go home. Or she'll be punished for not wearing it outside.

Things like these. I felt was horrible. She also got punished for drinking from my cup. Sharing utensils or crockery that has touched swine is against Islam. I am chinese, I eat pork as my stable, we use pork lard for everything! Even our sweet traditional desserts, we put pork lard in it! So everything that I touch is polluted. And even if washed with detergent before allowing her to use it is not good enough. It needs special holy sand and water to rinse it of the "unholiness of swine" in it apparently.

So in the end, I had disposable cups just for her. She can't eat food in our home that's for sure. As our kitchen has pork in it.

My point is, I think at core, I still believe in total freedom. For my government, they have a good excuse not to practice it. It's about greater good.

But what is Islam's excuse? And what is dems excuse for supporting a religion that is against freedom.

I remembered some articles were even saying Trump aggressive stances towards Muslims, will hurt the relationship with the middle east. And US wants their oil and their "help" to fight ISIS. We all know the very people funding ISIS are the middle eastern government. Well...., there lies the problem. Basically, bending over to the world's most evil country, like Saudi Arabia, over oil. And playing surface games. They pretending to be horrified over ISIS, while they are the ones empowering ISIS.



< Message edited by Greta75 -- 12/13/2016 7:28:57 PM >

(in reply to WickedsDesire)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> What have you changed on? Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.281