different perspectives as possible while conservatives, evangelicals, neocons...etc are not? Are we obliged to tolerate everything including intolerance? Can we be all inclusive without appearing weak, self-contradictory ununified and indecisive?
2007-06-15 05:00:30 · 15 answers · asked by socrates 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
i think instead of trying to fit every possible answer into two categories maybe we need to add some more parties. i hate labeling a person liberal or republican or democrat or conservative. it doesnt matter. because when it comes down to its only your alive or your dead
2007-06-15 05:04:21 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
It's funny, my Dad was a Goldwater Republican of the first stripe, and he was the one who taught me to consider all sides and get as much information as possible before I made a decision. I once was able to convince him that voting for an incumbent Democrat in the House made more sense from the stand point of the power aquired with senority.
That was back when people had firmly held opinions but were able to respect the right of the individual to have a differing one. While the Right certainly has honed polarization to a fine art, the grand father of demonizing your opponent was Joe McCarthy.
By the way, my Mom was a Roosevelt Democrat and they managed to agree to disagree most of the time.
2007-06-15 05:18:44 · answer #2 · answered by Caffiend 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Tolerance is a strong virtue, and thank God it's liberals who own that. We're more interested in dazzling people with intelligence, truthfulness and character, instead of baffling them with bullshit...and you know who owns all that...conservatives, evangelicals, neocons etc...I don't feel frustrated at all. It's quite liberating.
2007-06-15 05:26:00 · answer #3 · answered by Fern O 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. I try to promote everyone to be tolerant as inclusive in as many ways as possible. With that being said, I'm sure you will get a lot of people answering this who are not tolerant or inclusive. And I ignore them.
2007-06-15 05:05:27 · answer #4 · answered by Take it from Toby 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
You pretty much highlighted the number one weakness of the Democrats. They have no concrete platform because they are spread too thin, and are therefore quite "liberal" when it comes to policy.
There is some diversity in conservatives; not all of them hate and discriminate against gays, not all are religious, and the racist aspect no longer needs to be addressed due to significant progress. In general though they follow their stereotype better than Democrats do.
2007-06-15 05:07:04 · answer #5 · answered by Pfo 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
The general problem with democrats, they are willing to entertain various lines of thought and ideas. Republicans on the other hand only consider what is good for the republican party and could care less about other Americans. They seem to not understand what a middle ground is, absolutes are all they know, unless of course their republican President is spending the country into massive debt, this they can overlook under the guise of patriotism. Waving Chinese made American flags and yellow magnets saying you support the troops is not patriotism.
2007-06-15 05:08:32 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
It seems that libs really don't stand for anything, which means they fall for everything. You cleared up a question that I've had about that for a while. Nowhere is it written that you have to like and tolerate every person, place or thing. Not doing that is being an individual. Try thinking for yourself for once.
2007-06-15 05:18:01 · answer #7 · answered by Princess of the Realm 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Thats why people think liberals have no direction. It's simple divide and conquer within their own group. It's very easy to distract a liberal, because they stand for everything, but have no direction. Not bad or good, just different.
2007-06-15 05:02:52 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Yes very frustrated. Even being liberal, the line has to be drawn somewhere. Especially since the right has successfully used propaganda and slander to redefine what it means to be liberal. Its far past time that we take a stand.
2007-06-15 05:07:51 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Nobody is obligated to respect anybody.
Liberal has about what, 40 or 50 definitions?
2007-06-15 05:03:49 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋