fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2669 ]

[ SECRET POST #2669 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2669 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 017 secrets from Secret Submission Post #381.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I hate that I can't ever have political discussions on the internet, because there is no such thing as good-faith disagreement anywhere. I want to discuss the flaws in Republican ideas, not rant about how they're simultaneously evil and brainless. They're people just like you and me and they are allowed to be wrong without it meaning they want to ruin everyone's lives. There was a thread on here the other day about how they must all have mental disorders, ffs.

*stews in own little corner of sanity*

I will discuss with you. I'm an Independent (for lack of a better party) and see serious flaws in each of the major party's arguments.

I agree.

I hate how people are never just people who disagree with you. If they're more extreme about social issues than you are then they're an SJW. If they less extreme then they're a bigoted asshole. Why does this one thing that you disagree on have to define the other person?

Also, Democrats aren't perfect either.

Oh my gods, man, I completely get you.

I want to have a calm, respectful conversation with someone who disagrees with me. And I want to have a calm, respectful conversation about divergent ideologies.

There are some things on which I take a very firm stance, but even then, when someone disagrees with me, I'm not ready to write them off. I'm ready to argue with them from a place of compassion and see if I can turn them around.

I agree, it would be nice (as there are flaws on both sides of the political spectrum). The problem is the vocal part of the party these days are the ones that spewing a whole lot of evil, racist and bigoted crap, and that gets people's emotions on both sides, thus ensuring that no rational debate can take place. Internet or RL.

Exactly. They make all rational viewpoints look bad.

There's also different extremes too. I know people who are pretty stereotypically Republican in some ways - hate Obama, love guns, etc. But this doesn't mean they're racist (they don't like Obama for fiscal reasons - yes, that's a thing), homophobic (some of them are pro gay marriage) or whatever else. One hardcore view /=/ all-around hardcore views.

I agree a whole bunch and it's a damn shame. It's just this tendency to reduce everything to an absolute good-or-evil argument and to turn issues into black-and-white. IMO the worst culprit for this is abortion - where, on both sides, everyone who disagrees with you is CLEARLY an evil bigot who just doesn't understand morality. It is immensely frustrating. And it's great when you can have real conversations - which does happen on here occasionally thankfully.

Oh God, abortion. I'm pro-choice and feminist, but I really do think there are pro-life advocates who honestly just think it's taking a life. They're not trying to inhibit women, because it's not so much about women as it is the unborn babies - because that's how they see it. By the same token, just because I'm pro-choice does not mean I believe in abortion as the only choice a woman should make; it doesn't even mean I'd have one myself. It simply means I believe a woman should have the right to do what she wants.

You know, I think the main difference between most pro-life and most pro-choice people is that pro-choice people recognize necessity. They don't always like that necessity, but they recognize it. And the reason they recognize it is because they know that the alternative is much, much worse.

I find that I can reach an understanding with a person who is pro-life but who is also pro-education and pro-contraception. However, I cannot reach an understanding with a person who is pro-life but also anti-education and anti-contraception, because it is clear to me that dogma is more important to that person than an actual solution.

Edited 2014-04-25 01:21 (UTC)

This is me, basically. I hate abortions, I'd have to be in horribly dire straits before I'd have one and I wish nobody would ever need one again. But the only way to get closer to that goal is by reducing the number of unplanned amd unwanted conceptions, and history has pretty much proven that just telling people not to have sex doesn't work.

As for dealing with the ethical dilemma of life vs. choice in the meantime: I was finally able to come to a mental truce with myself by filing abortion under the same "necessary evil" category as personal bankruptcy.

It's definitely hard to find many who can actually have a discussion about of abortion within a logical context. I've sharpened my debating teeth with a few pro-lifers who made defensible points and I'm grateful for the experience helping me shore up my own defenses, but it's been years since I had a challenge.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #2669 ]

Re: Non-Fandom rants

Re: Non-Fandom rants

Re: Non-Fandom rants

Re: Non-Fandom rants

Re: Non-Fandom rants

Re: Non-Fandom rants

Re: Non-Fandom rants

Re: Non-Fandom rants

Re: Non-Fandom rants

Re: Non-Fandom rants

Re: Non-Fandom rants

NAYRT

Re: Non-Fandom rants