Submit a question to our community and get an answer from real people.
Submit

Why do people hate liberals ?

Report as

Because they're not really "liberals" in the classic sense anymore, these days they're just socialists. Hate is a pretty strong word though, I'd say there's more *severe dislike* coming FROM them than being directed AT them.

Helpful (10) Fun (2) Thanks for voting Comments (17)
Report as
Amen to this ^
Report as
I will say this: I am a liberal; and while I think democracy is good, I think that communism (the original version of communism as Karl Marx wrote about in the book The Communist Manifesto, not Stalinistic communism that China and Cuba have.) would be much better.
Report as
would you mind explaining the comparison?
Report as
@numberthirteen-I saw in your other comments, that most of your family is liberal, and that seems like it's the only reason you are, because you arguments are very flawed and you have nothing to back up your false claims. It's mere parroting.
Report as
No, I truly believe that conservatism is slowly destroying this country.
Report as
how so?
Report as
have ny of you read The Jungle. It was about the dangers that immigrants and low wage minority workers faced in the meat packing idustry in the early 1900's. If we had no regulations, imagine everything being so unregulated that even living was deadly. Now compare the to 1984, where everything even thoughts are so tighlty controlled that everybody lives in complete and total oppression and lack of freedom. They are both horrible, and they both happen in certain aspects of reality. So we need a middle ground between opressive tyranny and utter chaos
Report as
Because it's holding us back legolas.
Report as
the fact that you have no substantial evidential support tells me that you are just parroting whatever it is your parents told you.
Report as
you can't even explain your claim.
Report as
Because I'd rather not have to. It takes to long and I have ADHD, so I have a hard time focusing without my medicine, which has worn off.
Report as
And I do have evidence, it's called congress.
Report as
Ok, then that makes your arguments irrelavant, and you cannot honestly expect anyone to listen. Your answer itself was 100% false. Conservatives do very much care about the working class.
Report as
Doesn't seem like it.
Report as
If they truly cared about the working class they wouldn't try to destroy unions.
Report as
again, a false claim without evidence.
Report as
Without evidence?!?!? Just look at Wisconsin!
Report as
Add a comment...

Because liberalism only results in tyranny, as history has proven time and again.

Helpful (8) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (64)
Report as
No it hasn't.
Report as
Wow, home schooling obviously doesn't teach critical thinking.
Report as
Ikr?
Report as
Yes it has, look at the French Revolution, a self admittedly liberal society. Look at the city of Athens in Ancient Greece, which eventually fell to tyrants, look at Communist Russia, which resulted from a host of Liberal ideas being implemented. There are quite a few examples throughout history of what i stated above, the fact is, Liberalism is a breeding ground for tyranny.
Report as
Maccuje - Critical thinking involves watching your dignity in public. This is public and it looks like you lost track of your dignity.
Report as
First off, Russia's version of communism failed because they weren't actually practicing communism. Karl Marx, the author of the communist manifesto, never intended it to be the way it turned out in Russia. Communism didn't work for Russia because the leaders were greedy. In a communist society, no one is to have a better life than anyone else. Everyone is supposed to get a fair share. In Russia the dictator and his advisors lived in luxury while the people suffered.
Report as
Who would you intrust to give everybody this fair shake you speak of 13 ?
Report as
I would trust myself spider. That may sound like bull, but I could never bring myself to betray people for my own personal gain.
Report as
Here's hoping you become prez and have some other men of honor to help lead this country then. I don't know you tho , and probably wouldn't trust you if ya said ya wanted to make everything fair. Doesn't seem possible , I would also like to see no more war but I doubt that as well.
Report as
Okay numberthirteen, but if you have a dictator, it results in tyranny, and someone has to control that inflow of power and it's spread out. History shows that dictatorships result in tyranny, Communism and socialism work great on paper, don't get me wrong, but when implemented in reality, they result in tyranny.
Report as
I would try not to get us into any wars that we didn't have to be in, but I couldn't guarantee anything. But 8 years isn't long enough for me to ensure that the people are provided for; I mean the next guy could come in and ruin it all.
Report as
Not if the dictator truly cares about his people, preppyboy. If I were a dictator I would never abuse my power. My conscience would never allow it.
Report as
Understandable, i get that, you seem like a man of honor, but also remember that Power Corrupts.
Report as
I guess what I was trying to get at 13 is everybody getting a fair shake sounds great but it will never be that way (history has taught is that). The best system we have is in place now in the good ole USA and would benefit from backing away from socialist medicine & government handouts.
Report as
Universal healthcare seems to be working for Canada spider. And the most I would do with my power preppyboy, as far as corruption goes, is I would build a Gundam, just cause I love giant robots. But other than that I wouldn't do anything bad with my power. And it's pretty hard to bribe and corrupt me since I don't care much for expensive stuff.
Report as
Check out the population of Canada ,about 10% of our population, & some are still crossing the border to see a doctor of their choosing , Eh
Report as
Well I believe that it can work if done right. Which they do, except for the choose your own doctor part.
Report as
You can say that, because you haven't been exposed to that influence yet.
Report as
But again preppyboy, it's hard to corrupt one who has all he wants and needs. All I need is a girl that loves me, food, water, clothing, and shelter; all I want is my iPod, my truck, and a way to keep these things. I have no need for a fancy house or a fancy car.
Report as
Human desires and "needs" change like the seasons, it is the way of our nature. No man is safe from corruption.
Report as
I do not need anything more than what I just posted. No man does. What they want is what changes.
Report as
I have everything I need to be happy. I just want for everyone else to have what they need, too.
Report as
And if my needs change, I will fulfill that need at my own expense, not someone else's.
Report as
Numberthirteen, do you expect to retire on that? When we suck all the money away from the rich, where will we get work? Our bosses will be broke and unable to maintain their business because their money was taxed away from them. Then there will be no more money to spread and everyone will be broke. Additionally what about big families? and those with single-income? A communist tax system is terrible on all that. I don't want to get my 10-year neuroscience degree and then give my earnings to someone else and I'm sure you wouldn't either.
Report as
I'm saying that everyone would pay their fair share. The rich would still have money, but they'd be paying what they don't need.
Report as
And so charities were made. Why should the government tell people what they need and don't need?
Report as
true communism can never exist in a diverse populace. There will always be greeedy people. in a situation such as communism provides there is a huge power vacuum which greedy people have ample opportunity to seize with ease. The power goes to the keeps of the peace, who are corrupted. Also to representatives and anyone who has more say. It can work for a little while, but eventually power currupts and people run out of money to spend because you can never provide for everyone
Report as
Legolas - Completely agreed, and well put on your part. :) I don't understand all the talk about greedy rich people in capitalist societies when there are always greedy rich people in power in any type of society.
Report as
Indeed. And thank you
Report as
We have plenty of resources and money to provide for everyone on the planet, the problem is no one cares about others anymore, that's why people suffer, and quite frankly I'm tired of it. One day people will realize that we are here to help one another, not fight one another over our resources.
Report as
Numberthirteen - How we can help people is to give them opportunity. Not free stuff.
Report as
Numberthirteen, to believe such a thing is delusional, there will never be a world peace facilitated by humans alone, because human nature is inherently drawn toward conflict.
Report as
PreppyBoy - Also true.
Report as
Also, to simply provide for all gives life no meaning, what is a victory worth if there is no challenge in getting there? If you equalize the outcome of everyone's financial and living situation, the human race would cease to have the will to improve.
Report as
I don't think so. And I'm not saying that they shouldn't work for the resources, nor am I saying that there won't be conflict. But to say that we can't provide for everyone who does their fair share is utterly false.
Report as
and what would you call a fair share, in objective truth, a fair share is where everyone pays the same into the system, no matter how much money they have. But what Obama calls a fair share, is to just bankrupt everyone.
Report as
Not true. A fair share is where they put in what they don't use. The rich have absurd amounts of money that they don't use that could be used by those les fortunate. And Obama does not want to bankrupt everyone.
Report as
Actually, he does, his economic policies show it, it's the reality, just deal with it, and this is absolute, a fair share is where EVERYBODY PAYS THE SAME THING, that is called equal sum, and it's completel fair. The "Rich" people, have "Absurd" amounts of money, because they earned that money, if you don't have alot of money, then do something to earn some, and then invest wisely, that is how the majority of people get "Rich". Contrary to popular belief, most of the wealthy people in america are actually not liars and cheaters. Also, many of those people with alot of money, donate a large amount to a large array of charities. However, if you are a freaking idiot, like all the occupy wall street people, you're going to sit down in a field, continuing to be a bum making no money, and continue to not be rich, this is the reality of the matter, just deal with it.
Report as
No the rich nowadays have absurd amounts of money because their parents and grandparents earned that money. There are very few rich people in America that didn't inherit their fortunes.
Report as
And they only give to charities to get rid of their guilt for being so greedy. Also Obama's economic policies have kept us from going bankrupt.
Report as
No they haven't, they have actually put us trillions of dollars into the toilet, he is pushing us into an economic collapse so that he can implement a facist economic system, and eventually, a socialistic one. Also, even if the rich inheretid their fortunes, that is their money, they can do what they want with it, it was willed to them by their benefactors, who obviously wanted them to have it. Also, the reasoning for giving to charity doesnt matter, they still give to charity. Get over it and focus on an actual issue, like creating more jobs so that the less fortunate have an opportunity to make some money and store it away.
Report as
We'd have jobs here if greedy douchebag CEOs would stop sending them to china for cheaper labor. That's the reason our economy isn't getting better any faster than it has been.
Report as
Guess why they get sent to china, BECAUSE OBAMA MANDATES IT WITH FEDERAL REGULATIONS AND TAXES. for instance, Obama single-handedly took out the keystone pipeline, which would have created billions of american jobs in the oil and gas industry, so now instead, the gas and oil CEO's are forced to ship their buisness to China, in order to keep their buisness going.
Report as
Prebby boy is 100% right liberals are bad and it can lead to communism
Report as
I have a great desire to say something but I don't want to hang up on Numberthirteen.
Report as
I mean gang up.
Report as
Honorable thing to do, i think i have this one handled at the moment anyway, don't worry too much about it, on the other hand, you can just say what you want to say and leave it at that as well if you want.
Report as
I will if he feels comfortable with it. If not I understand.
Report as
Preppy I wish you were always in hand to swiftly and effectively take down opponents on all the debates I partake in. It's be nice to have that kind of card up my sleeve
Report as
*it'd
Report as
Haha, if you say so, but i'm not certain i'm that much of a help. In any case, if you need help, just comment on one of my answers with a link to the question you are debating on and i'll see if i can lend a hand.
Report as
Thanks. I did not mean it literally but just saying you handle these situations admirably
Report as
First off preppy boy, the tax regulations you speak of we're put in place long before Obama was in office. Second, the keystone pipeline would have only created a couple hundred thousand permanent jobs, and the gas that was to be transported through this pipeline wasn't even going to be sent to the US, it was going to go to the Gulf of Mexico to be shipped elsewhere, plus the pipeline was going to go through the water sources of a few cities and towns, which could turn disastrous if the pipe leaked there. The potential costs of building that pipeline outweighed the benefits of it.
Report as
Even if it's a few hundred thousand that's still a few hundred thousand families that would have had their own income
Report as
True, but the pipeline still had to many risks with it.
Report as
*too
Report as
No balls no blue chips numberthirteen, any good buisnessmen knows that sometimes you have to take risks in order to profit long term.
Report as
But to risk the safety of others is not a risk one should take.
Report as
Yes it is
Report as
No it's not haxis. That is only ok when they are willing to let you risk their lives, and that is hardly ever the case.
Report as
Sometimes the risk is worth it, and freedom is worth any price.
Report as
I agree that freedom is worth that risk, but a pipeline that sends oil and gas to other countries is not worth the safety of our country's citizens.
Report as
but it's worth the risk of other countries citizens? the people in china who drill oil are at just as much risk as the people here that would drill oil, if you want to claim pure communism, you have to have that same respect for all human beings, and since you are unwilling to take such a risk, your nation would be bankrupt in a decade.
Report as
What I'm saying is, those people that would be directly affected if the pipe were to leak are not willing to risk it, if we truly needed the pipe, we'd find a way to make it safely without unnecessary risks. If they were willing to take that risk then I'd be fine with it, but they aren't, so I'm not.
Report as
Add a comment...

conservatives hate liberals because they can be more idealistic than rational. Liberals hate conservatives because they tend to be more blunt and realistic.

Helpful (7) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (2)
Report as
I don't mean to flatter myself but you put this too perfectly... Sorry, liberals. o_o
Report as
Hate is a strong word, but putting that aside , you have stated the issue in a concise and proper context.
Report as
Add a comment...

idk!!!! :) sorry i really don't know

Helpful Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

Depends who U like! I should know! :D

Helpful Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

liberals are making laws to change human nature,you can't change human nature

Helpful (6) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (18)
Report as
YES YOU CAN! You just wait and see! Men and women are EXACTLY the SAME! Haha
Report as
lol Tony
Report as
Except on TV where the woman is always right!
Report as
Yes "you" can.
Report as
MadMarcus, I have to let my husband believe that he is right on most things just so he will close his mouth. ;)
Report as
actually they do science research of various kinds to study human nature more indepth and then they may change laws to reflect new discoveries
Report as
Everybodyhurts - I hope that's a joke? It sounds like his personality type, not his being a man.
.
MajesticUnicorn - "New"? Both conservatives and liberals go by old ways.
Report as
What are you talking about Marcus?
Report as
NumberThirteen - Where at?
Report as
Your last comment.
Report as
On this answer.
Report as
Sorry, I'm still confused. I had two paragraphs in that comment.
Report as
The whole comment.
Report as
To EverybodyHurts I mean not all men need repeated correction. To MajesticUnicorn I meant liberals aren't a new rise.
Report as
To better put my comment to EverybodyHurts: it's not a hallmark of men to need correction. (I don't mean to overkill my reply to her.)
Report as
Lol
Report as
I'm still misunderstanding?
Report as
Never mind.
Report as
Add a comment...

Because conservatives hate people who care about the working class.

Helpful Fun (1) Thanks for voting Comments (96)
Report as
Too much stereotyping here.
Report as
I'm just being honest. Conservatives only care about corporate big shots. They don't give a crap about anyone else.
Report as
You can't say that with such a matter-of-fact voice. If conservatives were to come out and say "I only care about corporate big shots" than you could use that manner but that's only a liberal accusation.
Report as
Well I'm talking about the ones in congress to be honest.
Report as
13, give it a rest. Stop repeating that garbage.
Report as
No, I won't, because it's not garbage.
Report as
Numberthirteen - That doesn't disprove my point.
Report as
Actions speak louder than words.
Report as
They may say they care about the people, but there actions say otherwise.
Report as
We Conservatives who's money is being taken ARE the working class. How old are you? 13?
Report as
I'm 17. My dad is liberal, my mom is liberal, and my grandfather is liberal. And the reason your money is taken away is so everyone's lives can be a bit better. Roads, bridges, parks, they're provided by the government. They don't pay for themselves.
Report as
But those conservatives that aren't don't pay their fair share.
Report as
*arent working class.
Report as
The people "not paying their fair share" are the bottom 47% of workers who pay no taxes and the people who contribute nothing, yet take what they consider "entitlements."
Report as
Those people are the ones currently serving in the military or are retired.
Report as
If you would use factcheck.com you would know that.
Report as
Or if you would watch msnbc
Report as
WRONG! Why am I arguing with a child? Get a job, pay some taxes and we'll continue this conversation at a later date.
Report as
Now I won't deny that there are those that do abuse the system, but most people are honest.
Report as
Do you watch Fox News? If you do then stop. Fact checking websites have disproved so much if what that channel says it's ridiculous.
Report as
I'm not going to read all these comments I missed except Numberthirteen's "actions speak louder than words" one.
.
Numberthirteen, actions do speak louder than words. And I'd rather watch the conservatives' actions than listen to your words.
.
Medic - Please don't use the child argument. I'm 17 and I get it a lot; it doesn't feel good.
Report as
(P.S. I will be leaving at any time so when I stop commenting, please don't assume I ran out of things to say. :P)
Report as
Ok mad.
Report as
Let it be known that I didn't abandon my argument; I consummated it.
Report as
Huh?
Report as
in response to the post, if you really believe that you are a troubled sould. I believe that they just shouldnt get special treatment or be rewarded for being poor
Report as
* soul
Report as
I don't think they should either. I think that they should be given jobs working for the government building roads and bridges or something in exchange for welfare money.
Report as
But that takes money from those who earn their own living. Via taxes. People who can barely make it as it is. Socialism/communism only works until you run out of other people's money to spend
Report as
Lol. I agree, Legolas. Nicely put.
Report as
Thank you
Report as
Lol, you used MSNBC as a source? That is only the most liberal, biased media source out there. Secondly, if conservatives actions speak to say that they don't care about the people, then what do liberals actions say? Seriously, every single admittedly or non-admittedly liberal society has turned into a totalitarian regime that oppresses everyone there. Case in point, Reign of Terror in France, Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, all Liberal societies with a just peachy liberal agenda. Also, Lego is absolutely right here, Socialism collapses right about the time when you run out of the money you stole from the people. Hence why in Soviet Russia, things got so bad that you could only get a certain amount of water, or a certain amount of bread every day, no matter how big your family was. Either that, or those liberal countries end up in massive wars, such as the time immediately after Napoleon took over in France, he ended the reign of terror, but they had to get money somehow, so he went and conquered a few countries, killing people to further advance a liberal agenda. So, whose actions are speaking louder? The Capitalist conservative CEO's who work to make their money, give large amounts to charity, and create more jobs and opportunity for everyone, or the liberals who have an entitlement mentality, and kill millions, oppress entire countries, and take out any opposition to their ideas by any means neccesary. Seriously, i think the answer to this is really obvious.
Report as
13 you are communist liberal I bet you are those type of people that allow women to walk around all exposed an hater of islam is America had the Islamic liberation party of America we could end this all now through strength and unity and peace through Islam!
Report as
@preppy while I totally agree, I do not think most of these foot soldiers loud far enough ahead or intend any of those outcomes to be the result of the actions of the party. I don't think the party does either, but it is the inevitable conclusion
Report as
I tend to agree with you on this one legoslav, history shows that only the people at the top really know what's going on, the foot soldiers and people who aren't at the top are just pawns used by the liberal state, and then they are tossed aside when they have fulfilled their purpose, it's another reason i'm not a fan of liberalism, it keeps many people ignorant, and it treats all but the top few like trash.
Report as
I disagree that there is a secret plot, I just think that it ends up that way. I dont think there is a lop level plotting a takeover, however
Report as
Haxis, I don't feel any hatred towards Islam, that's conservatives that hate Islam, and I don't care what women wear, it's their body, let them show as much of it as they want, as long as it's not innapropriate.
Report as
Legolas, if the money remains in circulation then you won't run out of money for taxes.
Report as
Preppyboy, nazi germany was led by a conservative, not a liberal. He simply claimed to be a liberal and promised liberal policies, but in reality he was conservative.
Report as
Also preppy boy, I don't believe that it's okay to keep people from speaking their mind.
Report as
Also haxis, America doesn't have, nor will it ever have, an official religion, this country is based on the freedom to practice whatever religion you want. So the chances of everyone converting to Islam is nonexistent.
Report as
He implemented liberal policies as well.

Also, if the government spends trillions more than they could ever make and those who still have money run out of it to be taxed then that's a problem. The government runs out of money the same way a business does: bad msnagement
Report as
That's why you don't spend more than you take in. Or you could always invade another country, lol jk. But that being said the rich in this country have plenty of money to provide for the rest.
Report as
But it is their right to reap what they sow.
They have a lot of money because they spend wisely and much of that money is interest from savings in bank accounts. If their work force dropped due to increased people on unemployment or welfare or the CEO position was no longer necessary due to how a communist society runs things, then they lose their income. You may argue that they have enough saved to last them and their grand kids through happy lives, but if they have to provide for the rest of the nation that means extreme expenses with no income. AKA: a time bomb.

When they run out, not only does that mean that /they/ are screwed, but everyone else who relies on them is. So say in this communist state bill gates is in this position. One day he will run out of money. When that happens not only is he now on welfare but the huge amount of money he payed to everyone else falls on the shoulders of Donald Trump. Now he goes under. And so on and so on
Report as
First off. Donald trump inherited his money. Second, they wouldn't lose their jobs in a true communist society.
Report as
Numberthirteen, I know I said I would back out but when it's personal, it's different. My dad brings home a LOT of money but my family lives like the average Joe because of how many people live in my house; more people, more money spent. How would we ever make it if MORE of my dad's money were taxed?
Report as
We would only tax what you guys don't use.
Report as
The Soviet Union said exactly that numberthirteen, but it didn't happen that way, what you call a true communist society cannot exist in a human world, because a true communist society is meant to be perfect, human beings are not perfect, and cannot create anything that is. Communism and Socialism only work on paper and in theory, in reality, they turn bloody and horrible within a very short amount of time, history shows this, it's really not arguable.
Report as
Numberthirteen - So we couldn't save up retirement or savings?
Report as
Marcus, you wouldn't need to, everything you need would be provided for you. And preppyboy, I know that that is true, but when one learns the mistakes of the past and decides not to make those same mistakes, history ceases to repeat itself. The mistake the soviets made was being greedy and unwilling to allow the people to criticize their behavior so that it could be corrected if necessary. I would not make that mistake. No matter how much you think that I could be corrupted by power and greed, I promise you I care more about others than I do about myself. I think things through to ensure that I'm not hurting someone down the line for my own personal gain. I believe that my honor is more important than money or pleasure. I refuse to let corruption stain me.
Report as
Numberthirteen - If my government has the power to give me everything, they have the power to take it all away.
Report as
Numberthirteen, you have never been exposed to that influence, you cannot know what it would do to you, your resolve is wonderful, but if you have really learned from the mistakes of the past, then you wouldn't support liberalism.
Report as
Preppyboy, the definition of conservatism is to cling to the old ways, that's the exact opposite of learning from the past, liberals look to the past only to learn from the mistakes of the past and use the knowledge we have to make the world better. And Marcus, the only reason that they'd take it away is if you committed a crime or didn't do what is required of you.
Report as
And I know I wouldn't become corrupt because the people would be able to criticize my actions preppyboy, unlike in most dictatorships.
Report as
NumberThirteen - Firstly, I don't want everything provided for me in the first place; I want to work for it. Secondly, giving someone that much power over me is way too much a risk.
Report as
Marcus, you would be working for it. You'd provide us with labor and we'd provide you with what you want and need.
Report as
I would rather receive money from my boss and spend it on my own initiative.
Report as
every communist society worked /at first/. It worked because of the good-natured idealists such as yourself that started them. Unfortunately, that fair old king will one day pass away, and that gives rise to the power vacuim. To either be occupied by: an elected successor, offspring, or the military. Each of theses will cause the counrty to fail and corrupt in time. The congress could be corrupted or have "enforcers". nobody can ensure their heir is as good-willed as you are, and the military of course is never a good decision to rule a country with.

dealing with providing for eveyone
-with around a billion citizens, there is no way that you can possible gauge what i will need for the rest of my life
-such a society is a deathtrap for progress as there is absolutely no incentive for creativity. If I were to design the next big thing, here, I could become a millionaire and live a prosperous life. In a communist society, not only would my monetary status not change whatsoever, but there is no opporunity for me to do anything other than the job that has been assigned me. So why would I even try to design a more energy effivient light bulb or renewable power source? Nothing would ever change
-The definition of conservatism, if you really think that, would be closer to conserving what works and fixing what doesnt.


Why does it matter if Donald Trump inherited it? Hius ancestors worked hard enough to get it, and he was smart enough to spend wisely

I agree, humans are not perfect, therefore a perfect society would eventually corrupt. A capitalist society allows for noncorrupt people to gain just as much power and does not allow the corrupt ones the power over everyone else's lifeline
Report as
Geez, Legolas, nice one. You need to write that down and save it somewhere.
Report as
Thank you
Report as
First off legolas, I don't plan on dying. Not until I find the right person to replace me. And the problem with Donald Trump is that his wealth has made him greedy.
Report as
Numberthirteen, i sincerely doubt most people plan on dying, i think it comes to them as a rather shocking instance.
Report as
But I have a legitimate plan to become immortal.
Report as
alright... please allow me to point out that Qin Shi Huang Di, the first emperor of China, spent his entire life tring to become immortal. As did many other leaders of nations. They have all failed. While you search for the holy grail or drink mercury us here in reality have plans
Report as
Where their methods failed, robotics and bioengineering shall succeed. And I know better than to drink mercury. Plus the holy grail has probably disintegrated by now.
Report as
But again, in a communist society, there is no incentive for anyone to want to try and create such life-sustaining technology
Report as
Robotics and bioengineering, have failed to produce the power necessary to run a human body, much less work all the synapsys within the brain.
Report as
true as well
Report as
Legolas, if I'm in charge and I tell them to do it, they'll have no choice.
Report as
Preppyboy, I wouldn't need a new brain, just a new body, which is completely possible. We've already made a working heart from scratch, granted it was not a human heart, but soon we'll be able to make a human heart.
Report as
If you force them to, they'll probably make ones that would kill you instead of save you. They'll have no motivation, so by the time they finish it you'll have died already. Additionally, you cannot force creativity. You'll also have a massive strike on your hands
Report as
1st off, I'm not stupid enough to let people I don't trust operate on me. Second what do you mean by I can't force creativity? What does that have to do with this? And third, the only people who would strike are the conservatives, and they would eventually get desperate enough to do what is required of them.
Report as
You all are fantastic debaters. You just need to know when to stop... (that's right now.) :P This thread will probably be deleted if this keeps going.
Report as
So?
Report as
Creativity=inventions. It's pretty plain it'll take some creative minds to make a cyborg out of you

Striking and unions have been historically liberal
Report as
Numberthirteen, all of those hearts we have "created" have been clone cells, which go into cascading failure at a certain point. Secondly, that bioengineered body would have to generate the power to run all your brain synapsys effectively, and still run everything throughout the body. You would be asking an impossible thing. Immortality does not exist, even if you could get multiple heart transplants, your brain will start to decompose within your skull after a certain point from oxidizing, and the scar tissue created by surgery will quickly prevent another heart transplant after about two or three of them.
Report as
you would prolong your life by about fifty years at most, as those hearts can go into cascading failure at any point.
Report as
indeed. as well as mental deterioration
Report as
Yes, that as well, mental deterioration is one of the early results of that oxidization occuring in the brain, and it is seen in people at ages as early as 70 in some cases if i recall correctly.
Report as
The heart problem can be solved by using a robotic heart. Not sure about the brain problem. But scientists would have as much funding as they need to achieve this. And creativity is not something that one can hinder, those who have it will use it regardless of the world around them.
Report as
If they have nothing to gain they have nothing to work towards or achieve
Report as
If they want their idea to be achieved they will. Not everyone invents things for money.
Report as
That us true, but I'm just seeing that those who don't jumping on the strike bandwagon with the ones who do
Report as
Huh?
Report as
Numberthirteen, i watched a movie last night, i reccomend you watch it, it is called Atlas Shrugged, it is a movie based on a novel written in the 50s, about a world almost exactly like the one you would like to create, and it is very realistic about the consequences.
Report as
Is the dictator cruel to his people? Because if he is, then it's nothing like the world I wish to create.
Report as
Oh there is no dictator yet in the movie, it shows the slow decline into totalitarianism that your wishes would create, and it shows the results of it. Simply watch the movie and you shall understand.
Report as
I too will have to watch said movie
Report as
It is very good, the movie has been split into three parts, i have now watched part 1 & 2 and am eagerly awaiting part 3.
Report as
Does it have Tom hanks in it, or am I thinking of another movie that came out recently?
Report as
No, Tom Hanks does not make an appearance in Part 1 or part 2.
Report as
But he's in one of them?
Report as
part III has not come out yet, so i'm not certain as to whether he is in that, but i don't think he will be in part three, as he did not appear in the first or second movie.
Report as
There was some movie out with him in it that took place in different time periods, but it had atlas in the title too, that's why I'm asking.
Report as
i see, well, rest assured this is not that movie.
Report as
Oh. I must be thinking of cloud atlas. I think that was what the other one was called.
Report as
Add a comment...

I'm conservative and though I don't agree with their view, I don't mind liberals.

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

Why do people hate conservatives? I'm guessing the reasons are similar.

Helpful (5) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

I remember when Liberal was supposed to = acceptance, tolerance and individual freedom.

Not self righteousness and outright intolerance for others with a "backward" set of values. (Pro life, pro gun, pro religion... Etc)

Helpful (3) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (73)
Report as
I'm a liberal, and while I try to accept others opinions, I can't stand people who would deny others happiness for their own monetary gain.
Report as
But I am pro gun.
Report as
Numberthirteen, if you don't mind my commenting, how do conservatives deny others' happiness? I think people deserve good jobs after going to college and getting 10-year degrees. I wouldn't feed off of someone's effort and nor would I want anyone feeding off of mine.
Report as
By that I meant they deny gay people the right to marry, and they try to destroy unions, one of the few things that keep companies from running there workers over.
Report as
Sorry but I don't catch part of your point because I don't understand the phrase "running workers over".
.
"They" (we) deny homosexual marriage for different reasons. My reason is because firstly I believe homosexuality is a sin, and secondly I believe it's only psychological.
.
I'm conservative and onions are my favorite food. Just joking, I'll be here all next weekend! Seriously, how do they try to destroy unions?
Report as
(I'll be back tomorrow. 'Night!)
Report as
1. By running their workers over I meant they take advantage of the loopholes so they don't have to pay their employees what they deserve.
2. Homosexuality is no worse a sin than lying.
3. What do you mean by psychological?
4. They try to make it hard for unions to negotiate with companies. Thus defeating the purpose of those unions.
Report as
I would have to study this union thing to know anything about it.
.
2. Although a homosexual person is not any worse a sinner than anyone else, homosexuality is, I think, the 2nd worst sin.
3. By "psychological" I mean the only scientific evidence of homosexuality is the behavior. There's no such thing as physiological homosexuality so homosexuality must be fake.
Report as
There should be conservative party called Islamic party USA or Islamic liberation or Islamic people's front or Islamic liberation of America
Report as
Haxis - What are you saying?
Report as
I'm Christian.
Report as
Marcus, the bible says that all sins are equal. And being homosexual is most certainly not fake. It is a very real thing.
Report as
And haxis, the reason there is no Islamic party in America is because conservative Christians tend to hate Muslims.
Report as
Numberthirteen - You're right, all sins are equal. I shouldn't say otherwise. But by supporting homosexual marriage I would be supporting sin and I won't do that.
.
How do you know homosexuality is real if there's been no physiological evidence?
Report as
Because they wouldn't subject themselves to being ridiculed for being homosexual of their own will.
Report as
Everyone is subjected to ridicule.
Report as
True, but people are really bad about ridiculing homosexuals.
Report as
People are really bad about ridiculing everyone, and homosexuals are ridiculed specifically for homosexuality. Along with that, other people (and just as many) are extremely defensive for them. All this adds up to attention, good and bad. I personally believe homosexuality is often a path to attention.
Report as
Well it's not, most of the time anyway.
Report as
I believe most of the time it's for attention, and the rest of the time it's a delusion. That's usually what makes something considered a delusion: when the behavior is conveyed but the physiology isn't found.
Report as
What evidence have you found to support your claim that homosexuality is a delusion?
Report as
Numberthirteen - I just told you: the behavior of homosexuality is found, but not the physiology.
Report as
Preppyboy, what surveys are you talking about, because there is no way they are accurate. Where did you even hear about them? Fox News?
Report as
But that doesn't mean it's a delusion, Marcus.
Report as
That's like saying that god doesn't exist. There is no evidence to suggest he does, but at the same time there is no evidence to suggest he doesn't.
Report as
Numberthirteen, they absolutely are accurate, and for your information, i picked up multiple different internet articles, from sites including NBC, which is your stated source, why don't you try doing a search instead of just saying something is wrong, second, there is alot of evidence to support that God exists, again, this is just a matter of you choosing not to see it.
Report as
Numberthirteen - You're right.
Report as
For the record I do believe in God.
Report as
I never said I don't believe in god. I was simply stating that it's like saying he doesn't exist. And what evidence is there really? A book written by humans that claim to be prophets? I can see why some people don't believe in god. But I believe, not in the bible itself, but in Jesus, who if you think about it, was a liberal.
Report as
And it was merely a survey. It only looked at a handful of people. It doesn't actually show the whole picture preppyboy.
Report as
NumberThirteen, I didn't say you don't believe in God.
Report as
Preppyboy seemed to be implying that I didn't.
Report as
no, i simply stated that you have chosen to ignore the evidence for his existence in saying that there isnt any.
Report as
I was saying that other people do not feel that it is enough evidence to support his existence. I see plenty of evidence.
Report as
@ preppyboy down syndrome is caused when a child has a third copy of the 21st chromosone. So it is a genetic defect, not a mental disorder, so even if you are right about homosexuality (which I don't thin you are) you are wrong about what down syndrome is,
Report as
Down Syndrome manifests itself in the mind, making it classified as a mental disorder, it is simply a mental disorder caused by that genetic defect which is the third copy of that chromosome, not the resulting disorder.
Report as
So, to clarify, Down Syndrome is caused by a genetic defect, it is not a genetic defect in itself though
Report as
yes it is a genetic defect, which happens to have neurological impact.
Report as
I haven't studied down syndrome but I do study many fields of neuroscience (and psychology) and although I agree down syndrome manifests itself mentally, I can't imagine it's not associated with some sort of brain defect. It's hard to imagine it a psychological defect, as those are usually caused by the person's experiences. Indeed people with down syndrome are born with the condition and that indicates it has neural base. I'm not implying anyone is right or wrong; just giving my opinion.
Report as
No Marcus, that actually proves that preppyboy has no idea what he's talking about.
Report as
NumberThirteen - I did say I haven't studied Down's Syndrome.
Report as
Let me point out I still think homosexuality is psychological.
Report as
But still, you also agreed that Down syndrome is caused by defects.
Report as
And homosexuality is only psychological in some cases. Most are just born that way.
Report as
Numberthirteen - My agreement isn't as strong as it would be if I were to have studied Down's Syndrome.
.
I disagree that homosexuality is ever physiological and I disagree that people are born with it. But I'm not going to argue anymore because we already did.
Report as
It has been proven by medical research that homosexuality is caused by the presence or absence of certain genes in the genetic makeup of an organism
Report as
Numberthirteen, if born that way, that would make it a brain or genetic defect, since it is contrary to naturality. Meaning you still must admit it is a disorder.
Report as
but just because somebody has a genetic issue doesn't make them less human
besides, if having genes that are different from the norm means you Ar disordered. Isn't anybody expressing any recessive traits, a genetically defective person, and what about if the genotype on a trait they have is heterozygous dominant, meaning they carry the recessive but express the dominant?
Report as
I think it is not a defect, just a difference. Of anyone wanted to know, the test done altered the genes of fruit flies. WHen certain genes were tweaked, the resulting flies were homosexual
Report as
See? They're born with it.
Report as
but, for some it is a lifestyle choice
Report as
To be clear, i have no problem with homosexuals, unchosen attraction is not something i have an issue with. I do however, have a problem with gays, they choose to be ruled by their s3xuality, and choose to have no self control, that is my main issue. Homosexuality may be a condition, but gay is a life choice, and it is a life choice promoting a lack of self control.
Report as
but sexual desires are natural and it is better to have sex than become Villon due to celibacy
Report as
What is the difference between homosexual and gay?
Report as
gay can also mean happy
Report as
But again, what's the difference between gay and homosexual?
Report as
Other than gay's original definition.
Report as
there isn't one in that case
Report as
Exactly! That's why preppyboy's comment makes no sense.
Report as
even if it is a choice, why does that matter?
Report as
I don't think it matters. If they aren't harming others and it makes them happy then there's nothing wrong with it.
Report as
Gay: A chosen lifestyle that includes being ruled by your attractions

Homosexual: An unchosen s3exual attraction triggered by some unknown cause.
Report as
Where did you get that definition for gay? It sounds like a ton of bull.
Report as
That is a definition based on observation my friend, to be Gay is to choose the Gay lifestyle, to choose the Gay lifestyle is to be ruled by one's urges. It is basic deductive reasoning, and once you reason, you put a name to the function. The function is a lifestyle that results in someone being ruled by their attractions, the name of that function is "Gay". "It would only sound like a ton of bull", to a liberal who is far too interested in being PC to get anything done.
Report as
but don't straight people have to make the choice whether or not to have straight sex?
Report as
First, I don't give a crap about being politically correct; second, the true definition of gay is happy or joyful, not what you said, it somehow got turned into a word that meant homosexual. A gay lifestyle is when you decide not to have a care in the world, not a lifestyle where one is taken over by one's urges.
Report as
To "not have a care in the world" would be to become ruled by your urges my friend, since you would only be able to act upon impulse at that point, one way or another, my definition for Gay is accurate. Majestic Unicorn, yes a straight person can choose to have gay sex, a wonderful example of this is within the prison system, there are massive amounts of news stories talking about men who have been s3xually abused by other inmates. Certainly not all of those inmates abusing these men are homosexual. In the end, who you choose to give your body to is a choice.
Report as
I meant straight people choosing whether or not to resist urges toward straight sex
Report as
No preppyboy, it's not, the true definition of gay has nothing to do with being homosexual.
Report as
Numberthirteen, we all understand that, but we are using modern english, and that is the general understanding of the word in today's society, you will have to get over it. Majestic unicorn, yes, straight people also choose whether or not to be ruled by their s3xual urges. I abhor promiscuity in any case, and the promiscuous straight people are just as bad as those who embrace that gay lifestyle.
Report as
Still, not every homosexual is ruled by their sexual urges, they may have gay sex, but that's not a bad thing. It makes them happy and it doesn't harm others, so why try to stop it? Personally, if another man made me happy and he wanted to be with me, I'd do it. I'd rather be with a woman, but if we make each other happy I don't care what gender the person is.
Report as