Your forum makes me sick

[STLantny]

When a political movement declares their doctrines to be Divinely Revealed Truth, then considering counterarguments becomes a political form of heresy. Cults work this way every day, and so can political parties and political movements if they metasticize. At the moment, the right wing has absolutely gone off the deep end in this direction, and you see it in virtually every post by party apologists here. "The Leader can do no wrong". "The Party can do no wrong". "There is only one True Party". "The Party represents the Will of God". "Opposition to the Party is the work of the Devil". Etc, etc, etc. Read the forum with that in mind and it makes a lot more sense.

q/q

[/ QUOTE ]



So you are saying that the WHOLE republican party is a bunch of over-zealous, apologist, that believe they are divinly inspired as the chosen party? In all honesty, I havent seen much talk about Religion on this forum, so you must be getting this rhetoric from someone.

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I dont understand??? How does the you people comment make me a hypocrite?

[/ QUOTE ]

fair enough....let me explain (without malice or bad intention) how I interpret what you're saying, and you tell me what I missed.

[ QUOTE ]
Im not liberal or conservative I dont think. I have leanings of both. But you chastise the republicans for blindly following someone, yet you seem to do the same thing, using snide remarks against anyone who seems to disagree with you (which I dont necassarily). Its just that both sides posture and look down on the other, almost leading me to believe that you people are the very thing you hate the most. And if it is one thing I hate its hypocrites.

[/ QUOTE ]

I took the 'you people' appelation in the above quote to be doing exactly what you say that you hate in the same quote, i.e. posturing and looking down on the other.

If I've misunderstood, my apology.

Would you explain your view further?


<font color="orange"> </font>

[/ QUOTE ]


I dont think I really look down on anyone, or at least enough that I dont take the time to at least, listen to what they are saying. IE. there ARE groups that I will dismiss moreso than others (Nazi's, hate groups), but I at least TRY to process what they are saying. Most people that I see on TV/Forums only process things enough, to make fun of/discredit them.

The term "you people" is just quicker than typing, people who are on this forum that talk about politics etc. Semantics and time-saving, not malice was my intention.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand the sentiment, and agree with most of it, but I try to be careful about making sweeping generalizations that can be easily misinterpreted, such as your above 'Most people.....' sentence.

I saw no malice in your statement, just did not understand what I perceived to be an ambiguity, hence my request for clarification.

Thank you for the clarification.........

[QuadsOverQuads]

[ QUOTE ]
I havent seen much talk about Religion on this forum, so you must be getting this rhetoric from someone.

[/ QUOTE ]

This makes no sense at all.

Either I'm parroting what I read here or I'm parroting what I hear somewhere else?

Those are the only two options?


q/q

[STLantny]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I havent seen much talk about Religion on this forum, so you must be getting this rhetoric from someone.

[/ QUOTE ]

This makes no sense at all.

Either I'm parroting what I read here or I'm parroting what I hear somewhere else?

Those are the only two options?


q/q

[/ QUOTE ]

You may not blindly follow a person, but you blindly follow something. I didnt mention anything about rightwingers/religion/leftwingers or for that matter politics. I did however comment on the fact that no one really listens to the other side. And you didnt really take the time to read what I wrote, but chose to take the time to bash whovever is on the other side of your beliefs, something of which I really didnt ask for. My point is, this isnt about politics, as much as it is communication. In my opinion, its peoples political pre-conceived notions that are blinding.

[SheetWise]

[ QUOTE ]
Another part is that this is an online forum so people have all the time in the world to make up a response, research things online (as we all know most online sources suck).

[/ QUOTE ]
We don't have all the time in the world, and credible replies should not include "suck" sources. We should be sophisticated enough to tell the difference.

I would simply look at it as an adult. When my children fought, I wanted to know who started it -- because I didn't fault the other for responding in kind (I tried to teach them better, but I didn't fault them).

In this particular crisis, there has been one side which keeps throwing accusations that have no foundation. When they are disproved, they throw another volley. They will continue to do this until they believe they have finally stumbled across some truth. In the process they will gloss over any unfavorable facts. This is the difference between childhood and adulthood.

[QuadsOverQuads]

[ QUOTE ]
You may not blindly follow a person, but you blindly follow something.

[/ QUOTE ]

Two key words here: "follow" and "blindly".

You have established neither.

And I won't even get into the whole "someone"/"something" word-game that you're trying to play (queue ominous theme music, of course).

[ QUOTE ]
I didnt mention anything about rightwingers/religion/leftwingers or for that matter politics.

[/ QUOTE ]

You posted this to a politics forum. I presume that you chose this forum for a reason. Is that incorrect?

[ QUOTE ]
I did however comment on the fact that no one really listens to the other side. And you didnt really take the time to read what I wrote, but chose to take the time to bash whovever is on the other side of your beliefs, something of which I really didnt ask for.

[/ QUOTE ]

With all due respect, I'm not really worried about what you did or didn't "ask for". You get the replies you get. As for me, I simply read your post, found that I agreed with your general point, and I then offered what I considered to be a fairly important elaboration which was very relevent to this particular forum.

If you'd take a moment to re-read my original reply, you'll notice that what I'm talking about is an attitude -- the reduction of politics to articles of faith and heresy. (note : I'm sorry if it offends you that I don't see the right and the left as equally guilty on this front, but the fact is that I don't. And I don't because they aren't.)

[ QUOTE ]
My point is, this isnt about politics, as much as it is communication. In my opinion, its peoples political pre-conceived notions that are blinding.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is precisely the point of my replies so far.


q/q