What arguments may help progressives moderate or change their views?
While it is difficult to dislodge a faulty opinion once held, it is not impossible - especially if presented with an incongruent fact that produces cognitive dissonance. One example is that progressives think that Conservatives don't care about the poor while the fact is they donate more to charity than liberals. Can you think of other examples? Bonus points for including a follow up to their inevitable response to the dissonance. While this question is focusing on ways to reach progressives, feel free to point out blind spots that Conservative have as well.
2
Be part of the movement!
Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.Create your free account
39 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.For me it’s taking the liberal progressive ideas to their “logical” end-point. Also, side their own standards on them. If they say they hate hate, they still hate and, therefore, they are only acting to promote what they say they want to destroy. Building on that, for all their talk and promise to alleviate prejudice, discrimination etc, they’ve only created new forms of it. For instance, it’s okay to discriminate against white people or men, therefore, humans cannot get around these things. No matter what a human system will always be intolerant of others. The allure of liberalism is that they seek to eliminate this, but, it’s impossible.
One last one is demonstrating that their ultra tolerance for things like sex always lead to pedophilia. Always. And we’re seeing this now. This is related to the gay agenda. Because homosexuality and pedophilia are closely linked. Just look at the recent legislation out of SFO. Mention to them that sex or love is not free and that there is a very competitive dynamic and inequitable distribution of sex among the population. Therefore there are people left out of the sex bonanza and this entire institution only favors a small minority of people. Moreover that people are being discriminated out of sex due to immutable characteristics.
Towgunner77
Level 5
Sep 10, 2020
0
@Towgunner77, no, "ultra tolerance" in regards to sex does not "lead to pedophilia". We are not seeing this now, homosexuality and pedophilia are not linked in any way. There are vast differences between sexual orientation and gender identity when it comes to any number of consenting adults who are free to live their lives and act as they please, and sexual corruption of a minor (or even animal) who has no ability to consent. There are groups within the far-right who are trying to masquerade as LGBTQ supporters advocating for pedophilia in order to disparage legitimate supporters. Using the never-ending slippery slope approach is never helpful, and people need to stop bringing up pedophilia or bestiality or "marrying your toaster" when it comes to gay / trans / whatever rights.
What if we turn this around to popular Conservative viewpoints, one of which I quite often hear is with absolute religious freedom - in support of discrimination for religious convictions. We can say that allowing this will always lead to Christians committing rampant pedophilia and excusing it as their religious right, much as the Catholic Church has done. We can say this will always lead to children dying because parents decided to pray-away deadly illnesses rather than get medical help. We can say Conservative values will always lead to a return to segregation, where "sundown" towns are re-established allowing Conservatives to run minorities out of their towns with threats of violence.
Now, I don't believe that at all. But that is using your logic with Progressive values.
I have to point out in the strongest terms that there is no link between homosexuality and paedophilia.
The peer-reviewed literature shows that the majority of paedophiles are heterosexual males, usually members of the victim’s family.
The two biggest pedo cases currently in the news — Jeffrey Epstein and the UK Muslim grooming gangs — support the vast body of established research. Both are 100% heterosexual.
@JacksonNought You don't think cancel culture, identity politics, etc, etc is not "running people out of towns" etc... do you know what a real Conservative is?
CONSERVATISM is: a political philosophy advocating the preservation of the best of the established order in society and opposing radical change, or simply change for its own sake.
There are bigots and extremists on both sides of politics...
@Lightman there is a difference between Cancel Culture, which I disagree with, and Accountability Culture, which I do agree with. I never said that each side didn't have their demons. You seem to be interpreting my posts as only attacking Conservatives.
But since you put it out there, do you know what a real Progressive is?
Progressivism is: generally any political movement that wants to change government for the better, favoring or advocating progress, change, improvement, or reform, as opposed to wishing to maintain things as they are, especially in political matters.
Progressivism is what brought on religious freedom, civil rights, same sex marriage, etc.
@JacksonNought Yes and no... I do know what Progressivism is and what it was. Unfortunately it now has almost no link to Progress... only change.
Many currently identify it as regressive.
No one in their right mind would seek change for the worse, unless they were an enemy.
Progressivism did not create most of those changes you mentioned. That is lie.
BTW SSM in the view of a great many is not Progressive in any way, just change, where the majority have caved into a very vocal minority and the useful idiots of the Progressive Left.
I'm not interpreting your posts as anything they are not. You choose the language, not me.
@Lightman how did Progressivism not bring about religious freedom, civil rights, or same sex marriage? By definition, Conservativism would want to keep the status quo "established order" and oppose "radical change". For a long time Christianity was the only accepted religion, and Conservatism would have been okay with that. Progressivism sees people being prevented from equality and tries to amend that.
America is founded on protecting the minority from the "tyranny of the majority". So a vocal minority of black slaves wanted freedom and the majority caved, which was change for change sake and not progress, is that your take? It's the same with SSM - a group of people were treated differently under the law and progress was made to grant equality. You may have not liked it, or think it was regressive. People thought that giving women the right to vote was regressive, or outlawing anti-miscegenation.
You are 100% interpreting my posts to fit your narrative. My language was very clear at the beginning, criticizing both Progressives and Conservatives for being too quick to dismiss the other side, demonize them, and build up strawmen of what they think without actually asking or listening. You saw that and responded with basically "how dare you insult Conservatives!"
@JacksonNought Oh dear.... I had much more respect for you before you asked.
- Progress and Progressivism are 2 different things.
- The Progressive Era started in the late 1800s and ended around 1920. Which excludes it from your claims.
- Today's Progressives are nothing like those in the Progressive Era.
Do you need more information?
I suggest you look up...
The Enlightenment. It is not Progressivism in fact in many ways they are opposites.
Humanists and The Renaissance. Also not Progressives..
The Reformation and Martin Luther. Also not related to what we know as Progressivism.
The Industrial Revolution. Brought about many changes in society.
Postmodernism is what today's Progressives base their beliefs on. Change is change for good or bad, the Earth is dynamic not static planet. All true Conservatives understand this. Conservatives are not anti-progress in fact many embrace and initiate it. Progressives that say otherwise are liars. those tht believe them re fools, useful idiots to be used in their hunger for political and social power.
It is a Progressive lie that Conservatives seek to live in the past and seek to block all change.
You can "insult" (your word) Conservatives all you like... just be factul when you do.
BTW I already proved your biased languge use ok. I'm not going to reproduce all of it for you there is no need to. Look to yourself, not me.
"Conservatives are not anti-progress in fact many embrace and initiate it. Progressives that say otherwise are liars."
Yet here you are telling me, a progressive, what I think.
My language is clear. You can lie all you want and tell me I'm saying something I'm not, doesn't make it true.
@JacksonNought Nope. Just posting a fact
As for you lying.... You just can't face the truth of your bias... get over it. I am.
People can read you know.
@JacksonNought except that leftists were the segregationists and the slave holders and the members of the KKK in the vast majority.
@curvycom not true. If that was the case, then why are all the "leftists" trying to remove Confederate monuments and ban the Confederate flag, and the "rightists" trying to stop them and clinging to their "heritage"?
It is well known that there was a party realignment. First, if we are using terms like "leftists" and using the current-day definitions, then no they were not the majority slave holders and KKK members. If you said Democrats, then yes, but not "leftists". Back in the late 1800s and early 1900s, the "leftists" were the Republicans, with Democrats opposing desegregation and civil rights. Once the Democratic Party started endorsing more civil rights and discussing black issues, there was a massive shift where southern Democrat racists left the party and joined the Republicans. Today's Democrats where the Republicans of Lincoln.
@JacksonNought They are basically the same, I feel. The people, that hate without reason. Modern day leftists are essentially the same. They simply have a new thing to hate, but they are the same then and now as the subset of the population that are easily led to hate.
@JacksonNought honestly though, dude, it was a snarky comment on my part, not an argument. Just a joke, dude. Still... like most humor -- maybe a grain of truth there whether you like it or not.
I keep saying, "You can't fix STUPID"!!!
OUR education system had at least 12 years to create this problem!!!
IMHO, it would take at least that long, no double that, six hours a day, five days a week just to put a dent in THEIR thinking!!!!!
Serg97
Level 8
Sep 10, 2020
1
@Serg97 Theodore Dalrymple (Spoilt Rotten) writes about how progressives stated their assault on the UK education system way back in the early 20th century with the Spens Report in 1931.
The impact is now deeply embedded, as Dalrymple says: “...the possession of an opinion on a subject, which is active, is deemed more important than having any information on that subject, which is passive; and that the vehemence (feeling) with which an opinion is held is more important than the facts (knowledge) upon which it is based.”
Progressives have been brainwashing kids for almost a century.
@Admin Try earlier yet with the Prussian education system. It was designed to stratify society to allow for loyalty to an idea or country blindly and layered control and labor groups. This has been used both by Marxist and by Mercantile groups since then as both hate an educated population. This is why the false narrative on education is still pushed in the US and Europe. They teach enough to keep folks ignorant and arrogant. It is how the SNP is pushing an extreme left wing agenda in Scotland and getting away with it.
If you want to change someone's ideas, I'd advise the following:
- Act in good faith
- Assume good faith on their part
- Learn more about their ideas
- Make an argument based on #3
WilyRickWiles
Level 8
Sep 10, 2020
6
Change? Is that for the better or worse?
@Josf-Kelley Either/or!
@dd54 I'm just not making a value judgment. The process is the same regardless of whether you're trying to persuade for good or for bad.
@dd54 I never claimed to follow that advice with everyone 
. The fact is, not everyone is acting in good faith, and there's not enough time to persuade everyone online. I try to judge who's not acting in good faith and then focus on persuading the ones who are. But still, if you really want to persuade someone, you have to follow it.
@dd54 You can be biased and in good faith at the same time.
@dd54 None of us are completely objective--as much as we might like to think we are. Why persuade at all if you don't have preferred--or biased--ideas? Good faith to me just means 1. You're honest about why you believe in your ideas (e.g. you're not publicly making a moral appeal but privately aware that you're spreading propaganda to pad your company's bottom line), and 2. You're not claiming good faith in offering an argument but refusing to listen, study, and concede when you know you've been proven wrong.
Seriously though...
- Stop feeding them.
- Teach them the safe way to use and maintain a firearm
- Return Civics and Debating to the classroom
and this one is my personal favorite....
4. Teach them Logic, Reasoning, Philosophy and research skills. The most impactful university course, I ever took was a fourth year elective in civil engineering which taught us the logical fallacies and required us to write one "short" paper each weak that identified fallacies in current newspaper articles. I still do it today. I wrote 10 page papers on 500 word articles.
cRaZyTMG
Level 7
Sep 10, 2020
3
The last thing I want to do is teach a progressive to shoot accurately! . Yes logic would help but we’ve two months to stop the civil war. Need to shock people to use common sense first I’m thinking.
@Admin Admin I have to agree with CrazyTMG, shocking them will only drive them further into the mindset that any who don't agree are the enemy. That is not a good place to go. beleive it or not taking them on a exposure shooting and maintenance day at the range will show them people who like shooting and help get rid of a good bit of the us versus them mindset they have been fed. From there it is just slowly but surely showing were community based on the value of the individual is more supportive then community constructed by government and group think (technocracy to be honest).
@M_MarinoDC, @cRaZyTMG Good points... I was referring to something like seeing BLM/looters which shock some progressive suburbanites into seeing that BLM isn't as noble of a cause as they thought.
@Admin >we’ve two months to stop the civil war
Stop? 
As a few others have said, when speaking with Progressives or Conservatives, the best approach is to act in good faith and try to actually understand their position. Crying out "socialism" or "racism" isn't helpful for speaking with either side. Too often people like to use always-expanding strawmen or demonization to try and tell you what the other side believes and wants to do, while not actually listening to people from the other side, or just calling them liars. It's no wonder there is such a divide right now.
JacksonNought
Level 8
Sep 10, 2020
3
Both sides? you mentioned "Socialism" and "Racism" do you really think only one side has racists and its the Conservative side?
Postmodernism creates what "normal" people would call liars, deniers of reality etc, etc, etc...
@Lightman you must have misunderstood my point. Progressives constantly cry out "racism" over any small thing, and Conversations constantly cry out "socialism / marxism" over any small thing. It's the go-to accusation / criticism for each side, and only helps to further the divide.
Agreed. We hold positions based on our opinions, don't act like the other person is evil or stupid. My opinion might be wrong but it's based on the best information I have now, usually assume the other person is in the same position.
Agree that being non threatening and clearly show an openness to change your own mind.
@JacksonNought Nope Progressives cry racism to stop debate and censor free speech... Conservatives can actually be socialists so that is a moot point you've made. Only LW Progressives get correctly nailed for being socialists and that is by anyone, even themselves. I did post what Conservatism is.
As for me misinterpreting your bias... "over any small thing" proves it exists.
Don't confuse true Conservatives, who are BTW conservative by nature for those radicals or bigots that inhabit the extremes... Conservatives are not extremists... extremists are.
@Lightman you clearly have an agenda and are stuck in tribal thinking. You are taking my criticisms of both progressives and conservatives, and only finding issue with conservative criticism. This is exactly the point I was making, and you are part of the problem.
@JacksonNought Clearly you are yet again wrong. I'm a swinging voter I vote policy not people or tribe.
You need to look further back at what you actually write... the bias is clear and its not mine I'm just pointing yours out.
Great question. Wish I had the answer.
With the post-modernists who drive most of the woke-progressive unrest, discussion is impossible because they pride themselves in rejecting the concepts of truth, reason and rationality. If you accept their view that my “feelings” construct my world, then facts and reasoning have no value. Therefore, if somebody “feels” like a woman, he is a woman, in spite of the fact that he has a penis.
The other obstacle is that post-modernists have effectively convinced the public — both left and right — to be skeptical to the extreme. So if I present verifiable figures showing Barack Obama deported almost twice as many southern border crossers in his first two years than Donald Trump deported, they simply reject the figures outright.
Similarly, Steven Pinker gives meticulously footnoted research in The Better Angels of Our Nature and The Case For Enlightenment Now, but factions of both the left and the right simply reject the data as “false”.
Ironically, as both sides readily reject peer-reviewed facts, they often enthusiastically embrace wild conspiracy theories.
We can no longer communicate because an open mind is seen as a weakness, and conceding point to the opposition is seen as a betrayal.
People only moderate their positions when they are motivated to educate themselves. And that is becoming more and more a rarity.
GeeMac
Level 8
Sep 10, 2020
3
I have managed to get them to see the light individually... but eventually they all, without exception, fall back to the collective groupthink.
So as much as we try, I think we will all fail with these people.
Progressives cannot tolerate dissent.
Lightman
Level 8
Sep 10, 2020
2
@dd54 How many decades do you want me to go back? 1, 2, 3 4 5?
Here is 1 example...I've defended Pauline Hanson and her party when it started up... did it for years still do it when they say something sensible. Convinced and converted quite a few people, most reverted back to stupidity and bigotry though.
Stop wasting my time.
Agreed that it’s hard to reach a progressive who’s friends require them to follow along or leave them.
No arguments exist that will overcome fears once established. Fears generate prejudice, which is internally recognized, then defended fiercely against the guilt response.
TimTuolomne
Level 9
Sep 10, 2020
0
Guilt is powerful... what do you think they’re afraid of? “Racist” Trump supporters?
@Admin The guilt comes from knowing within themselves that they are wrong, can’t admit it, and so double down on their position. I’m not defending it; just saying what I see.
@Admin, @dd54, Alexis deToqueville predicted the eventual conversion of any Democracy (which for this point includes our representative republic) to socialism, because the unintelligent masses, unaware of the founding principles and how their rights are protected by them, happily abandon their liberty because they believe they can vote themselves the goodies - as if the government is actually the source of money, not productivity and raw materials.
So some believe that all democracies will fall, and seldom peacefully.
Which flavor of progressive are we talking about? Is it the confirmed, hard-core ideologue for whom the cause is a religious crusade? Or is it those who Lenin referred to as the “useful idiots?”
For the former variety, logic and reason have no place in their world view, a faith-based perspective no less fervent than a devout Christian’s facing arguments that the virgin birth and the resurrection couldn’t have happened. The beautiful thing about faith is that logical assaults make it stronger. Belief in things for which there is no evidence is a badge of honor.
The second group offers more potential, but only inasmuch as they think their support for progressive programs is a logical choice. They’re the ones who are genuinely moved by “equality” and “fairness” and who think BLM is really about saving black lives. They’ll show up to the protests and carry signs, and they’ll cast their vote for the candidate that makes them feel good about themselves, but if you try to get them to examine their assumptions, it gets stressful. In the event you are successful in that effort, any potential conversion will be no more substantive than their previous position. They’ll do whatever makes them feel good.
The ideologue is a true believer and will view any attempt to induce a modified world view as proof of your heresy. The dilettante is much more amenable, but their lack of substance makes any discussion kind of pointless.
Yeah, I’m a cynic. It’s a more fruitful use of my time examining my own assumptions.
Edgework
Level 8
Sep 10, 2020
3
Yes, I made a mistake of saying progressives... I should have said moderates as progressives are too dogmatic 
@Admin
What’s to moderate with a self styled moderate? By definition their most telling characteristic is a big crease in their ass from sitting on the fence. They stand for nothing with any passion. Change and progress come from commitment and belief. “Maybe this, maybe that” is what made Jimmy Carter a one-term president. As Rush Limbaugh so aptly put it, “There are no books called ‘Great Moderates In History.’ “
Definition of a NYC conservative: a liberal who’s been mugged. That’s an argument that creates itself.
I agree with progressives on secularism, gay rights, and healthcare , and Israel
I disagree with em on immigration and huge government
I am a Tribal Socialist Nationalist
FrozenSoul
Level 7
Sep 10, 2020
2
So you are not a tribal Nationlist Socialist? Why not? What is the difference?
@Lightman
U cannot say National Socialist
Shhhhh. It’s a bad word
@SocialDarwin Apparently Nazi is a bad word.... I see it as a historical one.
At jacksonnaught. You said it’s well documented that there is no connection between gays and pedo.
Guess what. I don’t believe any of it. Yep. I don’t. Want to know why? Because you lie. That’s right. The entire institution of gay is a lie. You say it’s born in. Lie. I grant it’s compelling. But a compulsion is not the same as innate. And by saying it is innate is a lie. Not to mention the left are all liars.
So what about all this “documentation”. It’s bogus. Of course it’s going to say there’s no connection. If such a document said there is a connection it would be lambasted by your side. The authors would get harassed and force to apologize.
And then they’d never work again. And your side will have made an example of them. Good old authoritarianism.
You can’t write or say anything remotely disparaging about the gays. They’re a protected class. You know “some animals are more equal than others”.
There is no truth here. There is no false here per se, there is only what the gays allow.
Nice free open society you got there.
Something else occurred to me. I think I understand a little more why you’re reacting with such gusto. pedophilia is in the news. You got Epstein’s madam locked up. So long as she’s not killed by the same kind of “suicide” she’s destined to reveal. cuties is amping this up. A b list actress just spoke out against pedophilia on an awards show. Kevin spacey being gay with underage boys (hello). And there are groups and activists/protesting in hollywood on this.
No wonder you’re scared. No wonder your reaction. It’s coming to the surface.
Personally I don’t think you’ll get pedophilia through. I think it’s inevitable for your side to push it but any red blooded member of the human race will not only denounce, they’ll take to the streets and they are.
There is a probability here. People are going to demand how we ever got so degenerate that we even remotely entertained the idea of normal pedophiles. And then they start tracing back to analyze how it all came to be.
As I said, no wonder you’re reaction.
Towgunner77
Level 5
Sep 11, 2020
0
@Towgunner77 I rarely agree with @JacksonNought but he is correct - there is no significant link between homosexuality and paedophilia.
Admittedly, the gay community fed the myth by welcoming paedophile groups into Pride Parades up until the late 70’s or early 80’s. The criminal molesters were trying to piggyback on the gay rights movement to gain acceptance. Gay activists, to their credit, finally rejected them.
There’s plenty of peer reviewed data (and I get that you don’t accept it).
The most widely cited study is by Jenny, Roesler & Poyer (1994), American Academy of Pediatrics:
82% of victims were molested by the heterosexual partner of a close relative of the child
I know I said I was out, and I was just going to ignore any further comments from you, but I had to pop back in just to laugh at you. Thank you, you gave me quite the chuckle. So you can be presented with mountains of evidence and you just won't believe it. You say the left all lie, that gay people all lie, etc. Despite evidence of the contrary, you feel in your heart of hearts that you are right. So much for facts don't care about your feelings, eh?
You might be the biggest fool I think I've come across on this site, and I've dealt with rabid anti-semites. No wonder you can't figure how to do a simple reply.
Here, ladies and gentlemen, is the poster boy for this topic. You want to understand how to speak to a progressive and try to make them understand your side, this is exhibit A of what not to do. A lot of people commenting here want to claim progressives think based on feelings while conservatives think based on logic... well here we have a conservative flat out say they are basing their worldview on their feelings and spitting in the face of factual evidence.
Once more Tow, I am sitting here laughing my ass off at what a fool you've made out of yourself.
I don't have a comment on your argument with jackstein. Could you please use the reply button indicated in the attached photo? You're really jacking up the flow of the thread. Thank you
I had dinner with a LIB/Moderate last night!!!
He said, " He would not vote for TRUMP because of the way he talks"!!
I asked him if he liked what TRUMP had DONE!!! No response!!!
I then asked him to name what JOE had done in his 40 plus years in government, again no response!!!
Any questions????
Serg97
Level 8
Sep 20, 2020
0
What has Trump done that you like?
@BlurtReynolds Before or after the "KUNG-FLU"!!!
playing games right???
You are where I am from!!!
Why bother? Their current reasoned approach in many cases deserves a answer that they'll receive very quickly. In feet per second
DAN_STL
Level 7
Sep 10, 2020
1
Things feel very dangerous now even at brick throwing speed.
@Admin I like eating soup. These rioters are ruining perfectly good soup cans and it makes me sad.
I've been moderating (discussing possible truths with those who want to know better from worse) with progressives since at least 1980 or so...
That is 40 years of experience.
"One example is that progressives think that Conservatives don't care about the poor while the fact is they donate more to charity than liberals. Can you think of other examples?"
Progressives include individuals who belong in the following categories:
-
False propagandists (who intend to deceive so as to harm: frauds)
a. Paid false propagandists
b. Pro-bono false propagandists -
Brainwashed (Indoctrinated purposefully in Public Schools by Group 1a)
a. They are taught to spread false propaganda and they are taught not to question false propaganda and they are strictly obedient (see: Gulag Archipelago by Alexander I. Solzhenitsyn)
b. They still question their brainwashing, they are not strictly obedient -
Curious people having connected to false propaganda and are as yet not connected to alternative narratives that are not intentionally false
a. They are eager to spread false propaganda because that is all they know so far
b. They already question the false propaganda naturally, internally, as too much of it is self-evidently self-contradictory.
All of the above applies equally to "Conservatives," so an example worthy pointing out to those whose minds are not turned off internally by brainwashing is the process known by many words such as The Hegelian Dialectic, or Divide and Conquer. When people see that there are many other people other than the 2 sides of the 2 Party Politics Con Game, they are then sometimes willing to investigate why people are not party to the 2 Party Political Con Game.
Josf-Kelley
Level 8
Sep 10, 2020
5
Politics is not simply 2 sided.
The word Politics can be defined many ways by many people doing the things that are political. Organized crime hidden behind a patriotic flag has ONE side, the worst criminals run that side because they are the worst criminals. If there are divisions in a Cartel (groups of organized criminals forming an alliance to share the booty stolen from the victim SIDE) the Cartel is still run by the dominant criminal dominating the dominant criminal gang for as long as that dominant criminal dominates: destroys the competition, by incorporation, threat, fraud, or murder.
Political competitors competing to offer the best political services under the actual law can number as many as there are people competing to supply the demand for the highest quality and lowest cost political services.
That is under the law, as many competitors as there are people inspired to compete. The number of political sides are unlimited by criminal powers that work to either entice, extort, to incorporate competitors, or suicide them, or enslave them, and make them work to pay for the cost of enslaving them.
Under organized crime hidden behind a false patriot front, there is only ONE party, that is the party taking the loot and spending the loot taken on making sure that the victims remain obedient.
"The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned."
XIV - Citizen rights not to be abridged
Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868
I think the difficulty lies in the fact that progressivism is comforting and reality is harsh and sometimes difficult and deadly. It is so much easier and safer feeling for them to believe that the government can and surely will make human beings and human life perfect and eventually bring us to that utopia that they've been promised by all their college professors and political leaders if only we can achieve real equality. Transcendent goals are what build and drive civilizations; goals that may not be achievable in the lifetime of the aspirant but are deemed worthy of the trying and thereby give meaning and purpose. Utopian progressivism may just be the one transcendent goal that is sure to destroy civilization.
Geofrank
Level 7
Sep 10, 2020
0
Being polite also softens the blow of reality but also shocks people when reality bites.
The best thing to repeat to progressives is that they are in fact a small minority held in contempt by intelligent people. Once they understand this, groupthink cannot hold. Another thing is that they think that loyalty to some Democratic fool with grandiose pretentions is progressive. In fact Republican candidate Kim Klacik has more progressive arguments than her Democratic opponents.
Corjova
Level 6
Sep 10, 2020
2
Kim has a powerful ad. I’m afraid that the Democrats hide their plans from the public. “Joe’sa nice guy” a weak policy plan.
None of us is correct all the time. But when one acquires good habits, one can generally be much less wrong. There is a reason I'm beginning with an aside: namely there are ways in which we can know the rightness of things, but rather than get all pedantic about it, I'll share an anecdote I recently heard:
It kind of starts with caring about a specific person. Here's what I mean: The founder of the #walkaway movement was a (gay) progressive that pretty much accepted all the stories he was spoon fed. A very good friend of his very patiently got him to agree to watch one video on the fact that Donald Trump did NOT make fun of a handicapped reporter. The movement founder had some respect for his good friend, so he agreed to watch the video. He fully expected not to be convinced, but the video actually showed decades worth of footage of Trump using the exact hand gestures he made with the disabled reporter when he meant to convey he thought the question or statement was ridiculous.
So ultimately there was no arguing with decades of archival footage or the implication that the media had to be deliberately lying.
But ultimately, what this fellow asserts is that he never would have had his eyes opened to the truth if his friend hadn't cared about him enough to gently present this evidence.
Now this friend might have been wrong and her evidence could have been weak, but it wasn't, and ultimately, it was convincing.
Later on though, he tried presenting the same evidence to other friends of his, and was soundly rejected. I believe, and so does he, that it was because for him, newly red pilled, the issue came first. But in his case, the care came first, and the issue came second. And ultimately , this is how he comes across now, as a caring person that also is in possession of some facts, rather than the other way around.
This has been my experience also. Assuming you happen to be right, you start with love and care and understanding, then you have a chance of getting your point to register. It's always hard to do, always takes a lot of care and effort, and is usually worth the effort. That's what I've personally found.
curvycom
Level 7
Sep 12, 2020
1
This is the best take in the thread. Good man, Curvy.
At jacksonnaught. And yet I keep repeating over and over to you. There are drag queen story hours where overly sexualized men get access to kids. Once again, an 11 yr old boy dressed as a whore did a sex dance in front of adult homosexual men. ??? It’s like...duh.
This is all fact. All you have are nuanced comments. And you keep insisting to bring religion into this. Why? Okay there was an issue in the Catholic Church, but, to conflate, as you are, that by saying gays are pedos is the same as Catholics are pedos is baseless because what you keep missing is there is an agenda to “normailize” pedophilia. And the Catholic Church is not the source of this agenda. Sure people err or sin from all walks of life. What’s that prove?
You can be tin foil hat all you want but for the 1000th time...an 11 yr old child did a sex dance at 2 AM in front of adult gay men. And this was celebrated by liberals. Period. This happened. The Catholic Church is NOT celebrating or facilitating underage boys doing strip teases for grown gay men. Or is this something you actually believe? So where is this coming from, eh?
Our “conversation” represents the deep and irreconcilable differences in this society right now. You keep saying I’m “off the reservation”. No, I’m off of your reservation. Or put another way you are off of my reservation.
You’re consumed by your ideology. And it’s sad. Because it obscures your ability to see how things are. And so, abuse will continue.
Towgunner77
Level 5
Sep 11, 2020
0
Looks like you and John have the typical homophobic QAnon talking points down pat.
You keep bringing up this 11 year old boy dancing. I have never heard of this, where is your source? Where is the non-anecdotal evidence of liberals celebrating? Something tells me your prudish attitude reads into things that aren't there, but I will hold my judgement until you provide the evidence. And if it happens to be the case, then sure that seems inappropriate and is something that should be stopped immediately. This is not indicative of all the drag time story hours though. All I've ever seen is comedic performances and enthusiastic story reading which keeps kids engaged and entertained, no sexual undertones whatsoever. It's no different than having a clown or animal mascot entertain kids, you seem to be adding subtext which isn't there.
My analogy is not baseless, it is perfectly apt. Saying all gay people are pedos is exactly the same as saying all Catholics are pedos. Gay people aren't trying to normalize pedophilia. The only ones I see trying to normalize pedophilia are actual pedophiles trying to hijack civil rights movements to excuse their behavior, far-right trolls trying to make it seem like LGBTQ people are supporting pedophilia in attempts to strip away basic rights, and yeah these ultra-religious groups who try to keep child marriages legal. Anyone remember Roy Moore, who got the President's glowing endorsement? Or how about the President admitting to intentionally walking in on teen pageant contestants in their changing rooms? And you say liberals and gay people are trying to normalize it?
You are the one consumed by ideology. You refuse to accept the mountains of documented evidence that homosexuality and pedophilia have no correlation, that gay people are not victims of mental illness, or that Democrats and liberals aren't trying to normalize pedophilia. Keep bringing up your ONE example of an 11 year old dancing, I'll cite the thousands of cases of Catholic priests raping children and covering it up... let's see who really is trying to facilitate pedophilia.
It's people like you, so consumed by your pearl-clutching chaste prudish outlook, that are further dividing this country and allowing the abuse to continue. As you constantly devote your free time towards crying about gay people supposedly paving the way to pedophilia, you let child brides persist with 13 states having no age minimum, you let family members continue to abuse children (remember Josh Duggar), and you let people's basic civil rights get trampled on.
@JacksonNought it was kind of a big news story late in 2019. Definitely some time before the coof. Not weighing in on your discussion, just, you can probably find out pretty easily about the kerfuffle regarding the 11 year old drag queen twerking for adults. At this point I do not now remember the original source, but at that time it was all over the place. So much so that I'm surprised you haven't heard about it somewhere.
Once upon a time I spent A LOT of time trying to reason, logic and offer proofs to “Liberals”. ( “Progressive” is simply another name these people have taken and distorted ... just like ‘Liberal” )
After all, I spent most of my adult life in Manhattan, Brooklyn and Queens ... where EVERYBODY “with a Brain” identified as “Liberal”.
It was a Total Waste of Time ...
Regardless of ANY manner of debate, there was NO getting through to them.
I could get them to where they couldn’t present a rebuttal ... where they would be “forced” to agree for hours ... and the next day, it was like the entire conversation NEVER Happened.
It destroyed LOTS of potential relationships as I was considered to be “Unreasonable and Heartless” ...
NOT “Stupid” because I was simply too smart for that but ...
Their determination was typically that I wouldn’t “Play Well With Others”.
Bay0Wulf
Level 8
Sep 10, 2020
2
I spent thirty-plus years in Manhattan and Brooklyn myself. Mostly I remained undercover, occasionally trying to engage in a dialogue. One acquaintance was a real Communist, card and all. I asked, “Why do you have to keep killing people, and might that be a systemic flaw in your agenda?” Things degenerated after that.
It’s like you say—the logical part of their brain can be made to acknowledge the paradoxes of their beliefs, but to reach those beliefs they’ve already left logic and reason in the dust.
I’m responding to the comments on my comment about homosexuals and pedophilia. For some reason I can’t reply to the individual posts. At any rate, I’ve read “strongly disagree” that homosexual and pedophile is related. And that epstein and Harvey Weinstein we’re both heterosexual therefore this is a heterosexual problem only.
2 incidents...nice sample size.
Meanwhile...
The ever pure lgtismajrjehfwfafajdjeh and q ( and P) who, apparently, are the polar opposite of pedophiles is actively doing “drag queen” story hours. Where grown men in “dresses” and in highly sexualized clothes to include lingerie are seeking access to little children. I watched a grown man get on all fours doing a highly sexual dance in front of a three year old girl. Oh and some of these pure as snow “drag queens” turned out to be...convicted pedophiles. But accordingly they are not pedophils because gays are not at all like that. Then there was an 11 year old boy dressed in “drag”, that is as a street whore, doing sex dances in a gay night club in front of adult homosexual men at 2 am. Nothing to see here right? Wasn’t there a movie a couple of years ago that, I believe won an oscar, about a grown man having sex with an underage boy? I guess that was “love” and not pedophilia.
Good old harvey milk didn’t have his own underage boy. There weren’t young children at stonewall either. And all of the founding members of the “gay movement” were not outed pedophiles. Right?
Oh and what just happened in SFO? Did they not just submit legislation that might have already passed where a judge can not put a gay man on a sex offending registry if he had sex with an under age child? Why would this be necessary if there is no connection between gays and pedophilia?
First off, to the posters that posted all the gay is not pedophile stuff, whether your right or your wrong, pedophilia in general is being promoted. Two incidents of late support this claim on top of several others over the years - aforementioned SFO legislation and “cuties” on netflix.
The relationship is both direct and indirect. Yes, gays are pedo’s. And we have the broader losing of sexual morals, i.e., the sexual revolution, to thank for this. Surely the sex revolution included heterosexual, but what people fail to understand is that it’s all part of a spectrum of degeneracy. Read about the sex revolution and youll find the rise of homosexuality was central to it.
What I’m pointing out is that first it was gays and now it’s pedophiles. And why not? If a pedophile is just another sexual “orientation” than how can this person really be at fault? Sound familiar?
Someone said “ultra tolerance” does not lead to pedophilia. My question back is - are you living in a cave? Tolerance means tolerance for every person. You all cheer...yippie. Yes, and that means “all” to include pedophiles. The human appetite for sex is no different than any other appetite. It’s insatiable and seeks ever more “kicks”. Go to a gay “community” and observe the obsessive displays of sex. This is the locus forcing society to succumb more and more to this appetite.
We’re told gay is “born in”? No proof has ever verified this. Meanwhile ask a typical gay about their life and you’ll discover they were sexually abused as kids. It’s like clockwork. Over and over and over again. Pro-gay people and certainly gays themselves, vehemently deny such a connection. Why? Because it’s terrible optics for them. The organized PR campaign over the last 20-30 years has been making gays look like innocent mockingbirds. To out the pedo-gay connection will impact their popularity. And at the end of the day being liked is more important to the gays than dealing with their abuse issues. And that is substance of the “gay community”.
Take your head out of the sand or you’ll have child harems led by a abusive drag queen soon.
Towgunner77
Level 5
Sep 11, 2020
0
You are so far off the reservation it isn't even funny.
First, no one said that LGBTQ people can't be pedophiles. They simply said that it is just as likely for pedophiles to be heterosexual. Being gay or trans has no correlation with being a pedophile. There is rampant pedophilia in the Catholic Church, does that mean being Catholic causes pedophilia?
What drag queens are convicted pedophiles? Which ones who have done story hour? I would like examples please. I didn't hear this much outrage when Bugs Bunny dressed as a woman to trick Elmer Fudd. I don't hear this much outrage over Powder Puff Football. I always remember men dressing as women and women dressing as men being played off as funny for kids and adults alike, why is there all of this outrage and accusations of trying to endorse pedophilia now?
The notion that all LGBTQ people were abused or molested as children is an outright lie. The notion that LGBTQ people are all pedophiles is an outright lie.
You are also so far from the truth when it comes to the California bill you are trying to use as a rallying cry. As I explained on a separate post, when it comes to California Bill SB 145 people just see the click-bait headlines and media talking points and form opinions and outrage without ever looking deeper into it. There is already a law which automatically labels oral or anal as rape and requires sex offender registry, but lets vaginal sex be excused away by a judge. The law was already in existence to let a judge excuse away a statutory rape of a minor and someone 10 years older when vaginal sex was involved, the new bill does nothing to change that criteria, it just endorses equal application of the law for LGBTQ people, allowing discretion for sexual acts that aren't strictly heterosexual.
[usatoday.com]
Before SB-145, an 18-year-old male convicted of having oral or anal sex with a 17-year-old male would be required to register as a sex offender, while a 24-year-old male convicted of having penile-vaginal sex with a 15-year-old female would not be automatically required to register – it would be left up to the judge.
Garrett-Pate said SB-145 creates parity regardless of sexual orientation.
"The current law says that for penile-vaginal sex, it's up to the judge to determine whether or not that person should be placed on the registry," he said. "Under current law, however, the judge has no discretion if it's oral or anal sex. That means that LGBTQ young people end up being treated differently than their non-LGBTQ peers."
...Notably, SB-145 does not apply to intercourse of any kind with minors who are younger than 14. In those cases, mandatory sex offender registration is required by law.
You are basically using this bill to try and call gay people pedophiles, while not using the current law to call heterosexual people pedophiles. Why not be outraged at the fact that there was already an uncontested law for years that let 24 year-olds rape 14 year-olds and get away with it?
What about child brides? Did you know that 13 states in the USA have no age limit for marriage, meaning a family can marry off their 8 year old daughter to a 40 year old man? And typically, especially in religious scenarios, rape / pedophilia is ignored when it is between married couples. Before Tennessee set an age limit of 17 in 2018, girls as young as 10 were married in 2001. Just last year there was a bill in Idaho to end child marriage and make the minimum age 16 - the bill died, with a Republican lawmaker saying it "went too far" and another saying they were concerned about "sanctity of family".
[independent.co.uk]
Three 10-year-old girls and an 11-year-old boy were among the youngest to wed, under legal loopholes which allow minors to marry in certain circumstances.
The minimum age for marriage across most of the US is 18, but every state has exemptions – such as parental consent or pregnancy – which allow younger children to tie the knot.
In May, the high-profile Republican governor for New Jersey declined to sign into law a measure that would have made his state the first to ban child marriage without exception. Chris Christie claimed it would "conflict with religious customs."
Where is your outrage with devoutly religious people and pedophilia? Why are you so focused on LGBTQ people? Where is your outrage with the Catholic Church? You think "ultra tolerance" of LGBTQ rights will lead to pedophilia. Why aren't you concerned that "ultra tolerance" of religion can lead to pedophilia? If we allow religious organizations to circumvent the law due to their religious convictions, such as with the birth control mandate of the ACA, then we will eventually allow Catholics to engage in pedophilia with no consequence because it is part of their religious freedom. Doesn't that sound ridiculous? That is where this kind slippery slope can get you.
You just seem like an ultra prude who thinks anything other than missionary sex purely for procreation within a man-woman only marriage is off the rails in depravity and an end to civilized society. Perhaps you should actually educate yourself and not cling to debunked stone-age bigoted talking points.
At jacksonnought. No, I’m not saying all gays are pedos. I’m saying many of them are, because, they are. I’m saying there is a real connection here.
Yes there were outed pedophile drag queens. Also, I want to know why drag queens in general want to be around little kids? Because they do want this and they do dress and behave in very sexual ways when with kids.
Why this desire to be around kids?
Again you have grown men on all fours doing stripper like dance moves to an audience of impressionable kids one was a little innocent 3 yr old girl on a chair that he was doing some kind of solo dance for. At a certain point the man turned around and had is posterior pointed at the child...on all fours.
You’re like...nothing to see here. And, well that’s the sort of thing they do, apparently, at Catholic Churches, so...
This is documented you can’t argue against this. This is what I mean when I state the truth that gay and pedo are connected. Or are you going to make the argument that not all of these drag queens are gay? Yeah ole miss Q over there in fishnet stilettos is straight as an arrow.
Here’s the thing about the Catholic Church and Christianity. What happened was done by people who were not at all consistent with the teachings of the church. They were corrupted. You make it sound as though the church actually teaches pedophia is good and therefore promotes this. You’re just being straight-up ignorant.
Worse still is that there is a force promoting pedophila and it’s liberals who include gays. It was hollywood that fawns over the issues with the church yet they a huge hotbed for sexual abuse of all kinds. Corey Feldman has made this clear. Once again, second mention, you have “cuties” being released. Clearly pedophilic.
And again, what corner of society is pushing for drag queen story hours? What corner of society has open aire sex festivals that do include children as participants?
Oh yeah, that’s the Catholic Church, right?
Look, I feel like your a good communist in Stalin’s Russia that got locked up in the gulag and still refuses to accept the truth.
Gnash your teeth all you want. This is the truth and your side, liberal, is revealing this truth. Because you are trying to “normalize” this and in doing so you inadvertently reveal the machinations of child sex abuse. It’s only a matter of time until this comes to the surface. It’s systemic it’s in go poetry and art etc.
Towgunner77
Level 5
Sep 11, 2020
1
Once again, way off base. Totally wrong. Yes, a lot of drag queens are gay, but some aren't. You don't have to be gay to be a drag queen or king. It's called acting / performance. Drag, or even cross-dressing, is a different identity than homosexuality or trans identity.
Yes, some gay people are pedophiles. Also some straight people. Also some seriously devout Christians using the Bible to justify it. Not all though. To try and link homosexuality with pedophilia is what is straight-up ignorant.
So you don't like characters reading stories to children? Well let's get rid of Barney or other animal mascots reading to kids, that just promotes bestiality right? Let's stop with the mall Santa photos. Let's stop teaching the Bible, which is full of violence and sexuality, to children. There is a trend of children's sports coaches engaging in pedophilia - let's ban children's sports.
I agree, let's not overly sexualize children or subject them to strippers. But don't try to equate a man dressed as a comical female character as a stripper trying to corrupt children's minds.
Yeah, there is a pedophile problem in Hollywood. There is also a pedophile problem in religion. Don't act like one is bad and a product of the environment while the other is fine or only perpetrated by corrupted individuals who don't subscribe to the teachings.
No one is trying to normalize pedophilia. Take off your tin-foil hat.
As for "Cuties" since you seem to be clinging to that, that was an unfortunate case of America and its love of sexualizing / fetishizing women's bodies. The French film, Mignonnes, is a coming of age story about a young Senegalese girl, which actually is highly critical of a culture which steers impressionable young girls toward the hypersexualization of their bodies - no different than you see in popular teen pageants (hosted by our so-pious president), or ridiculous school dress codes that send girls home for the thickness of their tank top straps or arbitrary rules on the length of skirts and shorts. As with everything in the USA, the marketing was changed to focus on sexualization, which is where the controversy came from - and rightly so. So perhaps America just has a problem with sexualizing female bodies, even of children. This is where rape culture comes from, telling women they must be to blame for men being unable to control themselves. And those uniform rules, and female victim blaming, typically come from conservative religious ideology, the type that accused women of being witches for knowing math.
At jacksonnaught. You’re responses to the fact there is a gay and pedo connection are predictable. It’s very very very important for the gays to keep this under the rug. Such a disclosure will hurt their PR and you can’t have that. Because it will shatter the idea that gays are innocent. It reveals a level of abuse that is systematic and, therefore, a fundamental component to this “community”. Indeed the movie that I believe got an Oscar maybe even best picture about an older gay man having sex with a younger boy is not art. It’s the reality. It’s part of the “coming of age” process within the gay community. You dismiss this. Flippantly. And say “well that’s just how it is in this community, how else are they supposed too...” and just like that you inadvertently find yourself siding with pedophilia.
As I said, you’ll do everything you can to deny this.
Truth, jacksonnaught, is a peculiar thing...it can be obscured even buried and believed dead, but as a constant, it always comes to the surface.
Towgunner77
Level 5
Sep 11, 2020
0
You are just flat out lying now. It's sad how indoctrinated you really are. There is no need to "deny" anything, I am just speaking factual truth with mountains of evidence to support. You are the one making up falsehoods. Who the hell is saying "well that's just how it is in this community, how else are they supposed too..."? I sure didn't.
For the last time, it isn't a PR move, it isn't to protect community, it isn't being swept under the rug - THERE IS NO LINK BETWEEN HOMOSEXUALITY AND PEDOPHILIA. Maybe you need to get out of your bubble and stop listening to "alternative facts". Interesting how you keep blaming gay people but seem to think religion is innocent? It is well documented that homosexuality, trans identity, etc do no lead to, nor do they endorse, pedophilia. It is also well documented how the Catholic Church abused thousands of children, covered it up, and refused to allow investigations.
I guess you are saying being abused by a priest is all part of the Catholic community, how else are people supposed to... No? Well then stop being so obtuse when it comes to gay people.
I have no need to continually waste my time with your homophobic rants and misinformation. I'm out.
Of course you never provided evidence of your "11 year old boy" story.
I seriously doubt anyone, left or right, adopts, maintains, or switches their political position based on arguments. I’ve never witnessed it at any rate... unless they were very young and still forming their views. I’m betting it has more to do with their personal psychology, life experiences, religious beliefs, economic status, and identity commitments.
BlurtReynolds
Level 7
Sep 11, 2020
1
I hated Trump until people showed me 'The rest of the story' with many of the news stories about him.
Recent Visitors 134
Photos 127 More
Posted by Admin Does teaching "white guilt" also cultivate a "white pride" backlash?
Posted by Admin Is it time to take a knee on the Superbowl?
Posted by Admin Why not equality right now?
Posted by Admin How's Biden doing?
Posted by Admin How many good friends do you have from other political tribes?
Posted by Admin What did Trump do, if anything, to incite violence?
Posted by Admin Is free speech dead?
Posted by Admin Is free speech dead?
Posted by Admin Is free speech dead?
Posted by Admin Under what time and circumstance is the use of violence warranted?
Posted by Admin Now what?
Posted by Admin What do you expect to be achieved by this week's pro-Trump DC rally?
Posted by Admin What did you learn in 2020?
Posted by Admin Should pedophiles be allowed to have "child" sex robots?
Posted by Admin Do you have a "line in the sand" regarding political or social change?
Posted by Admin Should big tech firms hire more Blacks and Hispanics?