Those who think politics works that way are tyrants, not because of a specific organisation or authority, but because they believe society functions by their authority alone. Plato's political analysis is naive, based on the posturing and ego of leaders, rather than on looking at governance itself. — TheWillowOfDarkness

Inactive beliefs are less important than active practice. It's one thing to live in a progressive or conservative community; it's another thing to be engaged in that community. One can never darken the door of a church, but have great concern that the worship be conducted in a particular manner.

Engagement in a religious community will affect life-outcomes (like divorce) much more than sitting at home and nattering on about religion and the #)(%#*(@!)#(%& government, Obamacare, feminism, et al. — Bitter Crank

◔_◔ Yeah, that must be it... — Emptyheady

Being conservative, per se, isn't the critical factor in reduced rates of divorce. — Bitter Crank

Jewish couples 97% less likely

That's pure bullshit. Though, I will say it is consistent with you aversion to recognising loss. I'll use an example you might understand: abortion. Just because a growing child has yet developed and be born, it doesn't mean they aren't lost if the pregnancy is terminated. Loss doesn't require existence to occur. Something can be last merely by the world not being allowed to exist in some way in the first place. — TheWillowOfDarkness

No government or political system functions or is born from one person's authority. That's a illusion, a posturing to assert status, rather than an understanding of how the political system works. — TheWillowOfDarkness

Absurd posturing. You have no less to lose in political conflict than a progressive or a liberal. If you lose, you are stuck with a society with values and culture you cannot stand. Even if a liberal or progressive society is a continuation of a status quo, it still means the value and culture you want have been lost. — TheWillowOfDarkness

If you had nothing to lose in this conflict, you would not be fighting. You wouldn't even care about politics. — TheWillowOfDarkness

The world and society are far more complex than worshipping tyrants who masquerade as philosopher kings. — TheWillowOfDarkness

But notice your non sequitur from "why should I care what Agustino thinks" to "why should I care what anyone thinks" — Banno

I've seen that you are a scared fascist and hypocritical christian. I have not seen that there is something interesting to be had from further conversation. — Banno

Why should I care what you think? — Banno

So you try to engage in a discussion by doing exactly what was pointed out as uninviting. — Banno

Your motivation is fear, your politics is nasty. — Banno

Do you want to discuss philosophy or score points? — Banno

If you want to talk about the open society, start a conversation instead of a confrontation. — Banno

Your views have been shown to be incoherent, yet you persist. And persist. And persist. — Banno

The Open Society — Banno

↪Agustino How does he keep such a straight face? — Banno

We must build a big firewall! — jorndoe

Success doctrine windbag. — Heister Eggcart

Medicine, yes. Not much else. — Heister Eggcart

To argue there is no such freedom amount to arguing for predetermination-- that are actions can somehow be defined without actions themselves-- which is utter nonsense. — TheWillowOfDarkness

When exactly do people not have skin in the game? With respect to ethical interests is that is unavoidable; one is seeking to achieve a particular way of life or perform an action they understand they need to. — TheWillowOfDarkness

What I think you mean is, however, is people need to be threatened by the powerful if they are to behave ethically. — TheWillowOfDarkness

He's opinionated but not smart. — Heister Eggcart

For sure. That's a possibility. Due to the freedom of our world (since no state logically necessitated), anyone can be a little snitch. In concreto, there is nothing we can do to remove the possibility of someone behaving unethically (or in a way someone else doesn't like). — TheWillowOfDarkness

Not an "abstraction" with no meaning, but a truth of being free actors. No amount of pretence of "nature" or "authority" undoes this. Respect is only given by a person freedom. One cannot force other such that ethical behaviour (or the behaviour you want) is necessary. — TheWillowOfDarkness

Not just marriage, but also status more generally — TheWillowOfDarkness

Your concept of social conservatism is from the 1950's. PM me if you want to talk about it further.. if not, vaya con dios. — Mongrel

Abortion[edit]
Social conservatives argue that they are "pro-life", opposed to abortion on moral grounds often based on arguments of fetal personhood.[4] Personhood arguments focus on giving a fetus the status of a person which then entitles them to the right to life.[5] Social conservatives often support the repeal of Roe v. Wade.

Same-sex marriage[edit]
Social conservatives are against the legalization of same-sex marriage, supporting instead laws such as the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman. They oppose same-sex marriage over concerns on parenting, religious concerns, concerns of continued changes to the definition of marriage, and concerns about tradition.[6] Conservatives are often opposed to homosexuality, and therefore are concerned with "normalizing" homosexuality through the institution of marriage.

Sex Education[edit]
Sexual conservatives are social conservatives concerned with the moral education and possibly age-inappropriate information their children get from sex education classes in public schools. Sexual conservatives prefer Abstinence-Only sex education, as opposed to Comprehensive Sex Education. This political view stems from strong beliefs in parental authority and strict moral values.

[...]

2000s

Social conservatives again became powerful in American politics in 2001 with the election of socially conservative President George W. Bush. It has been argued that many of Bush's policy decisions were strongly influenced by his religious beliefs.[17] During his time in office Bush would pass influential conservative social policies such as the Defense of Marriage Act and support an increase in funding of Abstinence-Only Education.[18] While President Bush did not strongly promote pro-life policies, he supported the movement through an emphasis on parental rights and focus on strict regulation of taxpayer funding. — Wikipedia

Sorry, Ag. I live in the so-called Bible Belt. It's my family, so I think I know them. You don't understand the US culture at all. You've been identifying with the wrong country all this time. :( — Mongrel

I have no idea how you got that impression, dude. But it's wrong. — Mongrel

It can be being pieces of shit to each other, yes — TheWillowOfDarkness

It does mean, however, that such moral questions are thought of as a question of an independent acting being, rather than just a passive thing that's just going to fill a role. — TheWillowOfDarkness

I'm just going to assume you're being serious here, dude. I gather you wouldn't be able to tolerate the way of life that is now common in my world. Nobody's asking you to. You live your way, we'll live our's, OK? — Mongrel

Under feminism, women become more important than marriage, more important than the status and desires of men. Authority of their lives passes to them. They are understood to independent agents of their own volition. In the context of marriage, relationships and social positions, it involves working with their decisions rather than being passive actors who just fill a desired social outcome. — TheWillowOfDarkness

Certainly, it is not defined in a few specific terms, but that's because it refers to a system and authority where women lack power, where an authority governs their lives without respect for the women themsleves. Any society will such a system qualifies as Patriarchy. — TheWillowOfDarkness

Patriarchy is (in part) the identification of when women lack authority over their lives and status. — TheWillowOfDarkness

The feminist will never say the only relevant question is whether a woman is respecting marriage's authority. — TheWillowOfDarkness

Arrived at PF first as "willowz", got banned and came back as Q~uestion. Now I'm here as 'Question'...

Kinda funny... — Question

Are you coming on to me? ( >:O ) — Sapientia

I wish. That'd make me 21, which is actually how old I was when I joined PF. But people often assume that I'm about that age anyway, and are surprised when I tell them my age. — Sapientia