Who cares about Guns, Gays, Abortion, or Immigrants??

[Wardawg1001]

Interesting political compasses. I always found it difficult to classify myself as either left-wing or right-wing, I simply disagree with too many ideals on both sides. I got similar results from both, about half way down the spectrum on Libertarian and just slightly to the left.

I'm not really sure I answered the questions right though. I was struggling on some of the questions, the implications of answering one way could mean many things. Such as this question:

"An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth."

This phrase has multiple interpretations, and I'm not sure the context in which they are asking it.

 

[klinc]

Interesting. Mine are

My first thought is that all such tests are at least partially advocacy, although at least for me it's also the difficulty of taking a position based on such general statements, especially so with the second test. I see myself as a fairly far right libertarian on average and neither test agrees.

I was too slow for left or right wing. I was a lock they who is always behind a hooker

 

[werepossum]

Interesting. Thanks for answering the questions publicly.



We agree here except for the draft and the national ID card. Most people would probably be surprised, based on our posting histories, to find me in favor of both and you opposed to both.



Now I see why you got the "liberal" rating. These answers are pretty typically liberal, except for the corporate welfare one. I think you and I disagreed on every question here except I think I also had "Maybe" under privatizing social security.

Appears you're more of a commie than you thought.

Well, I used to be a real radical treehugger; now I've morphed into more of a libertarian right wing treehugger. I guess some of the leftiness hung around. I'm definitely pro-trade union, pro-protectionist. I don't mind government giving money to industries such as solar, provided they have a viable business model, nor protecting industries from foreign predation. And my libertarianism is mostly centered around individual liberty; libertarianism in tests seems to be mostly centered around removing government regulation from businesses, and as a still fairly rabid environmentalist that's something I can't get behind. Possibly given that I should be calling myself a classical liberal rather than a libertarian, but the connotations of liberal are so closely tied to progressive and I'm as anti-progressive movement as I can be.

As to the National ID card, you did catch that the statement said "There should be no National ID card", right? I'm in favor of a National ID card for its effects on fighting voter and benefits fraud and illegal immigration. If welfare in its many forms was replaced by private charity I agree it probably wouldn't make sense, but then I don't think private charity can support individuals who cannot work in a modern economy. Too many people would simply say "she's healthy, she can work". Then you have kids growing up malnourished and therefore of sub-average intelligence, becoming a permanent underclass. (Not that we don't have a permanent underclass today, but it's largely self-selecting, and kids growing up within that permanent underclass have sufficient opportunity, nutrition, and stimulation to grow up intelligent and to break out of that underclass if they have the will. Much harder to do that if your IQ is 80 due to insufficient childhood nutrition.) I can definitely agree that government shouldn't know any more about me than it has to know, but considering that more than half of all households receive a government check I think a National ID card is a movement whose time has come.

 

[werepossum]

I was too slow for left or right wing. I was a lock they who is always behind a hooker

That would be funnier if I understood rugby.

In American football, hookers only play AFTER the game.

 

[werepossum]

Interesting political compasses. I always found it difficult to classify myself as either left-wing or right-wing, I simply disagree with too many ideals on both sides. I got similar results from both, about half way down the spectrum on Libertarian and just slightly to the left.

I'm not really sure I answered the questions right though. I was struggling on some of the questions, the implications of answering one way could mean many things. Such as this question:

"An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth."

This phrase has multiple interpretations, and I'm not sure the context in which they are asking it.

Exactly. Neither side is correct on every issue, or completely correct on any issue. I struggled with the questions as well, simply because there are very few things in a modern society that can be adequately reasoned with one simple statement. Very few things are black and white. Hell, even black and white people aren't actually black and white.

 

[zsdersw]

Neither side is correct on every issue, or completely correct on any issue.

Blasphemy! Here in P&N everyone's "side" is right 100% of the time and the opposition is wrong 100% of the time.

 

[klinc]

That would be funnier if I understood rugby.

In American football, hookers only play AFTER the game.

:biggrin:
Its like American football but the same guys tackle and run and you can beat people up who don't wear any pad or helmets. Those thousands of college kids not making it to the NFL should really go try it especially since its becoming a Olympic sport.

 

[Darwin333]

Only if everything was that simple. Not everyone should own a gun. Some people feel that life begins at conception and feel they are protecting an innocent child. Immigration... Simply letting in the rest of the world won't work plus there are so many dynamics to be considered.

These issues are important and they are related to the corrupt politics. There is a valid reason why they are called wedge issues.

Yes there is. It is what the elites in both parties use to drive a wedge between the American people so that they continue to argue about the shit that is either irrelevant or doesn't stand a chance in hell of changing instead of the actual important issues that can and should be changed.

In a nutshell, most of you are sheeple who are falling right into the hands of your controllers.

 

[gevorg]

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Yes there is. It is what the elites in both parties use to drive a wedge between the American people so that they continue to argue about the shit that is either irrelevant or doesn't stand a chance in hell of changing instead of the actual important issues that can and should be changed.

In a nutshell, most of you are sheeple who are falling right into the hands of your controllers.

Everyone thinks they've taken the red pill.

 

[Gunslinger08]

Guns - Agreed.

Gays - Agreed.

Abortion - The cause of strife is that a large number of people view abortion as homicide, which I tend to agree with. We don't view homicide as a personal moral choice, so the issue at hand is just the decision of whether or not you think a fetus deserves the protections afforded to those who are born. We would never support pulling the plug on someone in a vegetative state if we knew for certain that they would come out of it within 40 weeks. I find it highly ironic that criminals can be charged with a 2nd murder when killing a pregnant woman, which indicates that the fetus is (or has a very good chance of being) a valid human being, but that people argue that a fetus is just a clump of cells when women don't want to be burdened by pregnancy.

Immigration - Agreed, if they're doing it through the established process. You can't just open your borders and allow in everybody without any type of documentation.

 

[sm625]

You aint taken the red pill until you realize that someone else is actually in control of the 85% of your brain that you're not using. And that in your daily interactions with people, there is actually 5 to 50 times more communication that occurs on levels we are not conscious of, and have no control over. Contained within the sum of all the unused portions of our brains is a collective intelligence, sentient in its own right. Its intelligence is infact so vast that it has almost entirely eluded us throughout the evolution of our civilizations. But we get glimpses of it thru the traits of certain idiot savants, like Stephen Wiltshire, that guy who can draw an entire city skyline in full 360 degree panoramic detail with stunning accuracy from just a glance. There are many many others who have tapped into this "occult power". And there are of course others who tap into that power and use it for nefarious purposes. For more information look up the works of Lloyd Pye. (Not the starchild skull stuff, but before that. Starchild is interesting, but not as interesting as this highly esoteric subject.)