I think that I'm becoming more liberal the older I get.

[KingJeremy]

1. I find myself further convinced that the death penalty is wrong after many years of thinking that it was right. My reason for this though is that I now think that a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole is a much harsher punishment.

2. I support gay marriage rights. Although I think that if you are going to let gays marry then you should allow bigamy and the marriage of relatives as long as it is among consenting adults.

[Mayfuck]

That's good to know. Liberalism is a sign of intelligence.

[Andrew_Pakula]

Originally posted by KingJeremy
1. I find myself further convinced that the death penalty is wrong after many years of thinking that it was right. My reason for this though is that I now think that a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole is a much harsher punishment.

I feel the same way, life in solitary confinement would be way worse a punishment. Death is the easy way out.

I have no problem with the death penalty though, however it needs to be harsher. None of this lethal injection crap, that's being far too kind for some of these criminals. They need to be tortured and killed in the most painful ways possible.

[Ghetto_Squirrel]

Originally posted by Mayfuck
That's good to know. Liberalism is a sign of intelligence.

Oh, shit. jczeroman's going to kill Julio!

[BeautifulLoser]

Originally posted by KingJeremy
you should allow bigamy and the marriage of relatives as long as it is among consenting adults.

Originally posted by Mayfuck
That's good to know. Liberalism is a sign of intelligence.

Yes, it's incredibly intelligent to want to allow consenting adult relatives to marry, so they can populate the world with mentally retarded and/or physically deformed children.

Brilliant!!

[pale blue eyes]

Not that I'm advocating it, but the risk of deformation or retardation from inbreeding is not significantly higher than the mean risk in normal breeding in humans.

[The Omega Concern]

1. I find myself further convinced that the death penalty is wrong after many years of thinking that it was right. My reason for this though is that I now think that a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole is a much harsher punishment.

your thinking the wrong way. it aint about the convict, its about sending a message to society that certain behavior will not be tolerated and you will die if convicted of certain crimes.

death row inmates have it much much tougher than regular inmates. take that away and the fringe element of society will become more bold because they know less than their life is at stake and 'death row' in prison no longer exists.

[Ghetto_Squirrel]

Originally posted by The Omega Concern
your thinking the wrong way. it aint about the convict, its about sending a message to society that certain behavior will not be tolerated and you will die if convicted of certain crimes.

In application, though, that's not the case. States that use the death penalty have consistently had murder rates higher than those that don't.

The only thing that the death penalty has really been effective in doing is villianising the poor and minorities. Before ex-governor Ryan's commutation of capital sentences in Illinois, minorities made up 89% of those on death row, and 80% of them were represented by the public defender, meaning that when their life was on the line, they couldn't even afford to hire legal representation.

[Debaser]

Originally posted by The Omega Concern

your thinking the wrong way. it aint about the convict, its about sending a message to society that certain behavior will not be tolerated and you will die if convicted of certain crimes.

I seriously cannot imagine how the death penalty is a deterrent. Does a mass murderer ever stop himself right before it's too late saying "oops, i better not murder in this state cuz of the death penalty!" or vice versa (i'm moving to another state without a death penalty before i start my killing spree). Does a gangbanger ever consciencely put away the gun and instead beat the shit out of somebody because he's afraid of the death penalty? None of those situations seem likely to me.

[Debaser]

As for me, I was raised in a very conservative family and had natural conservative leanings. Living in Sacramento I heard first hand the meteoric rise of Rush Limbaugh everyday on the radio.

But growing older and more successful, I feel I've become more compassionate, empathic and selfless. I think those core values have really led me into progressive and liberal ideas. Looking back at my former conservative views I can't help but feel they were rooted in core values of egotism and greed.

[BeautifulLoser]

Originally posted by pale blue eyes
Not that I'm advocating it, but the risk of deformation or retardation from inbreeding is not significantly higher than the mean risk in normal breeding in humans.

Hmm... where'd you hear that? (I'm curious, not saying you're wrong..)

Oh, also...

If it's a first generation inbreeding, then I'd agree with you, but once it gets several generations of inbreeding down the line... I'd venture to say things start getting more and more fucked up. And that is entirely a possibility in the scenario mentioned. (I mean, hell, look at the generations of direct (brother/sister) inbreeding in royal families... you started having some pretty insane rulers in ancient egypt.)

[wally]

as long as one wrongly accused person is ever put to death, the death penalty is wrong.

[pale blue eyes]

Originally posted by BeautifulLoser


Hmm... where'd you hear that? (I'm curious, not saying you're wrong..)

Oh, also...

If it's a first generation inbreeding, then I'd agree with you, but once it gets several generations of inbreeding down the line... I'd venture to say things start getting more and more fucked up. And that is entirely a possibility in the scenario mentioned. (I mean, hell, look at the generations of direct (brother/sister) inbreeding in royal families... you started having some pretty insane rulers in ancient egypt.)

I took a developmental Psych course over Winter Session, which covered both the physical and psychological aspects of growing up. I'm not sure where it was from but there was a study done on inbreeding (as a result of sexual abuse, etc.) and there were no more incidences seen there than in the general population. I'm sure a few generations of inbreeding, especially if genetic defects run in the family, would not be good but it's probably hard to find a good example of that. She actually showed us a clip of an X-Files episode in class for that, the one with the mother kept under the bed and the three brothers who were all deformed. Interesting class.

[gurr8]

Originally posted by Debaser
As for me, I was raised in a very conservative family and had natural conservative leanings....Looking back at my former conservative views I can't help but feel they were rooted in core values of egotism and greed.

Ditto.

[Nimrod's Son]

Originally posted by Debaser
As for me, I was raised in a very conservative family and had natural conservative leanings. Living in Sacramento I heard first hand the meteoric rise of Rush Limbaugh everyday on the radio.

But growing older and more successful, I feel I've become more compassionate, empathic and selfless. I think those core values have really led me into progressive and liberal ideas. Looking back at my former conservative views I can't help but feel they were rooted in core values of egotism and greed.

You have to love liberal conceit

They always think they're smarter than conservatives and better human beings

[Mayfuck]

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son
You have to love liberal conceit

They always think they're smarter than conservatives and better human beings

It's fact college graduates are more likely to be Democrat than Republican. The halls of American academia tend to sway liberal.

[Mariner]

Originally posted by Mayfuck


It's fact college graduates are more likely to be Democrat than Republican. The halls of American academia tend to sway liberal.

of course, but the question is, what does that mean?

(and i'd say it's a safe bet to say only the halls in certain departments sway liberal.)

[Future Boy]

Originally posted by Mayfuck

The halls of American academia tend to sway liberal.

So do Newsrooms!

[Mayfuck]

Originally posted by Future Boy


So do Newsrooms!

Well naturally the media MUST be liberal. The media's job is to inform the public and to do that they have to question the establishment continually. I think that concept gets lost when people accuse the media of a liberal bias.

[Mayfuck]

Originally posted by Mariner


of course, but the question is, what does that mean?

I'm not sure exactly but it may be the same reason why major cities sway liberal while rural areas sway conservative: you are exposed to more varying ideas and different cultures. With that experience under your belt you gain a bigger threshold for empathy which strays you away from the egoism of conservatism.

[Mayfuck]

Originally posted by Mayfuck
That's good to know. Liberalism is a sign of intelligence.

Of course this was just a jocular jab to the conservatives on this board but is it coincidence that the most educated region in the U.S. (New England) tend to have a higher standard of living and Democratic voting tendancies than the least educated region (the deep south) which is a Republican stronghold?

[Nimrod's Son]

Originally posted by Mayfuck


Of course this was just a jocular jab to the conservatives on this board but is it coincidence that the most educated region in the U.S. (New England) tend to have a higher standard of living and Democratic voting tendancies than the least educated region (the deep south) which is a Republican stronghold?

yes

[Mariner]

Originally posted by Mayfuck


...you are exposed to more varying ideas and different cultures. With that experience under your belt you gain a bigger threshold for empathy...

very true. on the other hand, people living in cities are in general much more disconnected from and therefore ignorant of the dynamics and nature of the foundational functions of both their own society and the realities of basic/nonspecialized human survival. this, i think, goes part of the way to explaining the isolated, highly irrational, unrealistic ivory tower syndrome that unwittingly permeates academia (and to an extent, the political 'left').

[gurr8]

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son
yes

he said, head firmly entrenched up his own ass.

[Nimrod's Son]

Originally posted by gurr8


he said, head firmly entrenched up his own ass.

no, i'm just not conceited enough to believe that my way of thinking makes me better than anyone else

unlike, obviously, yourself

[Corganist]

Man, the self-congratulatory, liberal feel-good factor is high in this thread. There seems to be a lot of "I'm a liberal because liberals are good, and conservatives are dumb." sort of talk. That kind of sentiment really rings hollow to me, and not just because it denigrates my own ideological leaning. I'm uncomfortable with the notion that personality traits such as empathy or intelligence have any effect on something as external as the political ideology you take on. Afterall, politics are just words and ideas. They can be right or wrong, sure, but they don't in themselves dictate the moral rightness or wrongness of the people who adhere to them.

It doesn't take a political leaning to be a good person. (In fact, being as apolitical as possible is probably the best way to be a good person). Having empathy is good. Being intelligent is good. But that doesn't mean that if you also think being liberal is good that all those things are related. There are egotistic, greedy, liberals; and empathetic, intelligent, conservatives. And vice versa.

As for me, I'd say I've slowly grown more liberal on some fronts over the past few years. No major changes, but I'm not near as rigid on a lot of things as I may have been in the past. But any change has never been because I feel like I should feel differently out of some moral obligation to others. I'm not a better person because I don't take a hard line on something like abortion. I've just come to a different view analyticly. I don't pat myself on the back about it and say "Man, how dumb was I!" I think when you start casting the shifting of your views in terms of your personality development instead of your analysis of the issues, you do yourself a disservice, because it invites the question: Did you become more liberal/conservative because you believed in it...or because you thought you should?

[Jonny5]

props to corganist for keeping it real.

i'd just like to put this quote out there:
"A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing."

unfortunately, I can't remember the writer that said it.

[wally]

Originally posted by Corganist


As for me, I'd say I've slowly grown more liberal on some fronts over the past few years. No major changes, but I'm not near as rigid on a lot of things as I may have been in the past. But any change has never been because I feel like I should feel differently out of some moral obligation to others.

you said a lot in that statement, i don't think you know it.

[Mariner]

Originally posted by Jonny5

unfortunately, I can't remember the writer that said it.

then you're probably a conservative

[Debaser]

Christ people, I only said that I'm a better person compared to my younger self. If conservatives choose to identify themselves with my description of my young egotistical and greedy self, then it's on them.