Has the U.S.A. literally become the battleground of a "cold" civil war?...In the U.S.A., regardless of where you stand, do you see your political, ideological, or even religious opposition as an actual enemy whereas in years gone by you might not have?
J.W. Howler
2012/04/04 17:30:02
|
|
|||||
|
89 votes
|
|
65% | |||
|
47 votes
|
|
35% | |||
Within the U.S.A., regardless of whether you lean left or lean right, have you come to the point where you liken your opposing, ideo-political side to an actual enemy rather than fellow Americans with a mere differing political POV?
Top Opinion
-
Wolfman 2012/04/04 17:49:17YES - I have come to liken my ideo-political, and/or religious opposition as ...
+18Yes, big authoritarian government in Washington vs. smaller central government/local control. The War was hot from 1861-1865. It has been cold since then. It is likely to get hot again very soon.
I asked - "Conservative people and conservative viewpoints make you sad?"
You answered - "No the disrespect they show others is what I find sad. I don't judge people by there beliefs only there actions."
So, you agree with their beliefs, but their actions make you sad, which implies that their beliefs and their actions are in conflict with each other?
Therefore, I am again asking -
So, you agree with their beliefs, but their actions make you sad, which implies that their beliefs and their actions are in conflict with each other?
Or, are their beliefs and disrespectful actions one and the same?
And, can you give me an example or two?
Your beef is that you profess to be a non-bullying, morally-upright, self-righteous atheistic person while the people to whose behavior you refer to as saddening to you, claim to be Christians.
How do you KNOW that person who dropped the money was beyond a shadow of a doubt, a Christian?...Did she ever acknowledge that to you, just as you acknowledged to her that you were an atheist?
And, "self-righteous" essentially means believing one's SELF to be "righteous" - "righteous" meaning -- good, virtuous, upright, upstanding, decent; ethical, principled, moral, high-minded, law-abiding, honest, honorable, blameless, irreproachable, noble; saintly, angelic, pure.
And from your example, it looks as though you were putting YOUR beliefs over what you assume to be HER beliefs just as much as you thought she was doing that to you.
It all has to do with self-pride in one's belief that one has the "right" stance.
And you DO believe that do you not?
So much so that it was VERY important for YOU to make it known that YOU were a professing atheist, just as you thought that SHE thought it was important for HER to mention that such an act was reminiscent of a Christian.
Maybe you did not put your beliefs OVER hers.
But, if YOU did not, then neither did SHE.
According to you telling it -
1) you did not like it when you thought she might have mistaken you for a Christian..
2) she did not like it when you told her that you were an atheist...
3) she thought negatively of you after you correcting her
4) you thought negatively of her after her negative reaction
As a result, who do you think to be the better person from this encounter -- yourself and your beliefs -- right?
And, most likely she thinks herself and her beliefs to be better - right?
Therefore, either both of you put yourselves and your beliefs OVER the other, or NEITHER of you did IMO.
Uh, if I remember correctly you were using that to illustrate an example of why "conservative" actions "sadden" you.
Being saddened is not a negative reaction?
RE: "I was trying to show her to open hers eyes to seeing atheist are good people as well."
"As well"...So, you think Christians ARE good people?
RE: "Why does that bother you?"
Why do YOU think something is "bothering me"?
Thus, I go back to my earlier comment-
"4) you thought negatively of her after her negative reaction
As a result, who do you think to be the better person from this encounter -- yourself and your beliefs -- right?
And, most likely she thinks herself and her beliefs to be better - right?
Therefore, either both of you put yourselves and your beliefs OVER the other, or NEITHER of you did IMO."
Me stating - "you thought negatively of her after her negative reaction" --
Is NOT an example of me "going to the ACTIONS"?
I have made that statement at least three times now, and I cannot find where that statement mentions her BELIEF.
___________________
You state - "Not me and my atheism are better then her and her Christianity. "
I mean, if you believe there could be the omission of something in the world that would make it "blissful" - (i.e., ecstatic, happy, euphoric, joyful, elated, rapturous, delighted, thrilled, overjoyed, joyous, on cloud nine, in seventh heaven, over the moon, on top of the world) -
And that omitted "something" is religion, and Christianity certainly falls into the category of "religion", at least for many people (and I think for YOU as well), would you not agree that whatever it is that you think would make the world "blissful" would be "better"?
How could "blissful" not be "better"?
And you make that pretty clear in the following comment in answer to another poll question -- (links provided)
POLL question - "Atheists: If you could make up your own religion, would you?"
http://www.sodahead.com/livin...
YOUR comment (typos included) - "No religion is thw cause of...
Me stating - "you thought negatively of her after her negative reaction" --
Is NOT an example of me "going to the ACTIONS"?
I have made that statement at least three times now, and I cannot find where that statement mentions her BELIEF.
___________________
You state - "Not me and my atheism are better then her and her Christianity. "
I mean, if you believe there could be the omission of something in the world that would make it "blissful" - (i.e., ecstatic, happy, euphoric, joyful, elated, rapturous, delighted, thrilled, overjoyed, joyous, on cloud nine, in seventh heaven, over the moon, on top of the world) -
And that omitted "something" is religion, and Christianity certainly falls into the category of "religion", at least for many people (and I think for YOU as well), would you not agree that whatever it is that you think would make the world "blissful" would be "better"?
How could "blissful" not be "better"?
And you make that pretty clear in the following comment in answer to another poll question -- (links provided)
POLL question - "Atheists: If you could make up your own religion, would you?"
http://www.sodahead.com/livin...
YOUR comment (typos included) - "No religion is thw cause of most problems if I where in a world without it it whould b blissful l."
http://www.sodahead.com/livin...
No need to explain, even if you want to.
Whatever you believe is what you believe.
To each his own, even if you are in denial that it is true that you believe atheism to be "better" than Christianity.
That is unless you believe your atheistic world "bliss" to be a bad thing.
But, I do not believe that YOU believe that to be the case.
Your self-righteousness is very obvious.
Bless you.
To answer your questions..
RE: Do you not find respecting others is the right thing to do?...
Yes, I find respecting others is the right thing to do...But, I do not believe that to be any credit to me...And, I am pretty sure your idea of "respect" and my idea of "respect" are not synonymous.
RE: Do you think her reaction to me is an acceptable way to understand people and to try move past our prejudice of others?
No, but neither is your comment - " "No religion is thw cause of most problems if I where in a world without it it whould b blissful l."
Regardless, I respect your right to an opinion...But, I do not respect THE opinion.
Our individual, respective worldviews are antithetical to each other, and therefore our discourse is going to clash no matter what is stated.
And, just an FYI..I thought it was just a typo when you did it once, but after a few times I have figured I would let you know that the word you are using "agin", is actually spelled "again".
And, yes we may clash "again"...But, I doubt it.
Once I have satisfied my curiosity about someone regarding their online commentary on this site, I tend to look in a different direction.
Now, you state otherwise.
One brand of freedom?
Yet, you make the statement - "Do you think the other side is really for everyone's freedom our just your brand of freedom?"
That statement of yours infers you do not agree that there is one brand of freedom.
"What I ment by the statement was that its easy to SAY you believe in Freedom that is until someone has a different idea of what that means."
"A different idea of what freedom means"?...If there is only one brand of freedom, as you have stated, then if someone else has a different idea from you as to what freedom means, and you don't like it, what is the difference between you and them as far as one being "pushy" with one's view of freedom?
Maybe specific examples of what you mean would help.
By the way, have you heard of the new SOPA?: http://www.sodahead.com/unite...
Neither side is 100 percent correct, neither side is 100 percent wrong. Also, some issues have no "right" or "wrong" and call for some compromise out of necessity.
It kills me when I point out some hypocrisy, and each side says, "well, the other does it, so it's OK for us to do likewise to them. Two wrongs don't make a right, and we're in big trouble if we don't learn to get along.