Why are technical message boards overwhelmingly liberal?

[Deeko]

I don't really think there's that many more liberals here. Or maybe there are, I just don't notice because with a few notable exceptions, they don't annoy me. I've found that many conservatives are basically assholes about their views, they 'know' they are right, and you are clearly stupid and a lesser person than them for not agreeing with them. Not to say there aren't liberals like that too, but it seems a higher percentage of conservatives are.

I typically assume that most technical people are deep thinking, logical persons

You did a good job of masking your flamebait, op.

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: JS80
It's funny how liberals see being against a law that favors gays is somehow bigoted.

Please cite one law that gives gays more rights than straights?

We're starting on the wrong foot. There's no right to marriage. There's no right to equality either.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: JS80
It's funny how liberals see being against a law that favors gays is somehow bigoted.

Please cite one law that gives gays more rights than straights?

We're starting on the wrong foot. There's no right to marriage.

Who said anything about marriage? There's a ton of areas gays are fighting for equality in. JS80 said liberals consider those people against laws that "favor" gays to be bigotted. My contention is there are no such laws being advocated that "favor" gays, just laws that seek to grant gays equal rights/protection from discrimination. If you are against a law that grants a gay person the right to visit their lifelong partner in the hospital, sorry, but you be a bigot. If you don't want gay couples adopting a child because you don't approve of their "lifestyle" and would rather have the kid live in a group home/orphanage, you be a bigot.

 

[brandonb]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

That reply made no sense. The two sides in that argument are not two ends of the spectrum. One is reasonable conjecture based on the available evidence, the other is "god did it". Those two points of view are not equally valid.

The only purpose to posting in that thread is to educate Duwelon and a few other people on the basic terminology and fundamental premise of the big bang theory. They can continue to plug their ears and disbelieve it all they want, but if they are going to argue against it they should at least have the facts right.

Reasonable conjecture? Thats what the big bang is. I've watched many shows from Nova and other TV programs about the big bang. All of it is speculation, and is just as phony as any "God figure". There was some huge holes in the logic in the shows I've watched. There was no critical thinking. Liberals believe everything thats on "their side" for their cause and accept it as truth without applying any critical thinking. The one I just watched on National Geographic channel 2 weeks ago called "Big Bang" I could pick apart from the start of the show to the end.

But to point that out is someone who "just continuing to plug their ears" Why would I waste my time picking it apart, you and every other liberal will dismiss anything I will say anyhow. Why? Because liberals are just as "religious" about certain topics as religious people are with God.

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: JS80
It's funny how liberals see being against a law that favors gays is somehow bigoted.

Please cite one law that gives gays more rights than straights?

We're starting on the wrong foot. There's no right to marriage.

Who said anything about marriage? There's a ton of areas gays are fighting for equality in. JS80 said liberals consider those people against laws that "favor" gays to be bigotted. My contention is there are no such laws being advocated that "favor" gays, just laws that seek to grant gays equal rights/protection from discrimination. If you are against a law that grants a gay person the right to visit their lifelong partner in the hospital, sorry, but you be a bigot.

All that's fine with me. I'm only saying that there isn't a right to marriage, or to equality.

What we're really getting at is that the state should not recognize a marriage as any type of legal union, because to do so discriminates against people who cannot get married, and hence are not subject to the benefits such a union grants.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: brandonb

Originally posted by: eskimospy

That reply made no sense. The two sides in that argument are not two ends of the spectrum. One is reasonable conjecture based on the available evidence, the other is "god did it". Those two points of view are not equally valid.

The only purpose to posting in that thread is to educate Duwelon and a few other people on the basic terminology and fundamental premise of the big bang theory. They can continue to plug their ears and disbelieve it all they want, but if they are going to argue against it they should at least have the facts right.

Reasonable conjecture? Thats what the big bang is. I've watched many shows from Nova and other TV programs about the big bang. All of it is speculation, and is just as phony as any "God figure". There was some huge holes in the logic in the shows I've watched. There was no critical thinking. Liberals believe everything thats on "their side" for their cause and accept it as truth without applying any critical thinking. The one I just watched on National Geographic channel 2 weeks ago called "Big Bang" I could pick apart from the start of the show to the end.

But to point that out is someone who "just continuing to plug their ears" Why would I waste my time picking it apart, you and every other liberal will dismiss anything I will say anyhow. Why? Because liberals are just as "religious" about certain topics as religious people are with God.

And the fundamental misunderstanding continues.....

Reasonable conjecture BASED ON OBSERVABLE EVIDENCE vs guessing games and whole-cloth fabrication about god, religion and creation. you don't see the difference? Eh, just go re-read the big bang thread.

And that's some hubris on your part to think that you are able to pick apart over 80 years of scientific work on a theory.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: JS80
It's funny how liberals see being against a law that favors gays is somehow bigoted.

Please cite one law that gives gays more rights than straights?

We're starting on the wrong foot. There's no right to marriage.

Who said anything about marriage? There's a ton of areas gays are fighting for equality in. JS80 said liberals consider those people against laws that "favor" gays to be bigotted. My contention is there are no such laws being advocated that "favor" gays, just laws that seek to grant gays equal rights/protection from discrimination. If you are against a law that grants a gay person the right to visit their lifelong partner in the hospital, sorry, but you be a bigot.

All that's fine with me. I'm only saying that there isn't a right to marriage, or to equality.

What we're really getting at is that the state should not recognize a marriage as any type of legal union, because to do so discriminates against people who cannot get married, and hence are not subject to the benefits such a union grants.

There's no right to equality? And who are these people who cannot get married that are being discriminated against besides gays?

I agree the gov't should get out of the 'marriage' business and solely recognize some form of union, but it's so embedded in our laws that the separation is not practical at this point.

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: JS80
It's funny how liberals see being against a law that favors gays is somehow bigoted.

Please cite one law that gives gays more rights than straights?

We're starting on the wrong foot. There's no right to marriage.

Who said anything about marriage? There's a ton of areas gays are fighting for equality in. JS80 said liberals consider those people against laws that "favor" gays to be bigotted. My contention is there are no such laws being advocated that "favor" gays, just laws that seek to grant gays equal rights/protection from discrimination. If you are against a law that grants a gay person the right to visit their lifelong partner in the hospital, sorry, but you be a bigot.

All that's fine with me. I'm only saying that there isn't a right to marriage, or to equality.

What we're really getting at is that the state should not recognize a marriage as any type of legal union, because to do so discriminates against people who cannot get married, and hence are not subject to the benefits such a union grants.

There's no right to equality? And who are these people who cannot get married that are being discriminated against besides gays?

I agree the gov't should get out of the 'marriage' business and solely recognize some form of union, but it's so embedded in our laws that the separation is not practical at this point.

The bill of rights contains no right to equality.

If it's all the same to you, I'm going to stop threadjacking.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Atreus21
The bill of rights contains no right to equality.

Why stop at the bill of rights? If you read just 4 more amendments down the list you'd get to the 14th which contains the EQUAL PROTECTION clause. You can argue semantics that this promises equal protection and not equality, but semantics is all that is.

 

[brandonb]

Originally posted by: jonks

Who said anything about marriage? There's a ton of areas gays are fighting for equality in. JS80 said liberals consider those people against laws that "favor" gays to be bigotted. My contention is there are no such laws being advocated that "favor" gays, just laws that seek to grant gays equal rights/protection from discrimination. If you are against a law that grants a gay person the right to visit their lifelong partner in the hospital, sorry, but you be a bigot. If you don't want gay couples adopting a child because you don't approve of their "lifestyle" and would rather have the kid live in a group home/orphanage, you be a bigot.

Do Lions mingle with Hyenas? Or do Lions kill Hyenas? Do Cheetas hunt with Lions and share the food willingly in effort for cooperation? Or do they fight over the food? Do Birds of a feather flock together? Do Jews applaud other Jews which marry Jews? (Which I seen a few Jews on this forum participate in a few months ago?)

According to the animal kingdom, people don't get along very well with others who are different. People feel more comfortable with those of the same mind or physical characteristics. That is fact. Scientific fact. For liberals who believe in evolution and science. This should be accepted. So why is it wrong for those who point out and treat other peoples lifestyle negatively a bad thing or "bigoted?" Liberalism should embrace such fact. They don't. Why? I personally will disagree with laws which make such lifestyles "normal" because I don't believe it is normal. Two males wanting to have children is not right. Its against the animal kingdom, and it goes against nature. That is scientific fact. But for me to say such things means I'm the bigot and many other words.

Where is the critical thinking on this topic? There is none.

 

[brandonb]

Originally posted by: jonks


And the fundamental misunderstanding continues.....

Reasonable conjecture BASED ON OBSERVABLE EVIDENCE vs guessing games and whole-cloth fabrication about god, religion and creation. you don't see the difference? Eh, just go re-read the big bang thread.

And that's some hubris on your part to think that you are able to pick apart over 80 years of scientific work on a theory.

AGAIN, liberal critical thinking at its finest. Of course I see a difference but you just put words into my mouth.

And yes I can pick apart 80 years of scientific work on a theory. You wanna know how? Its against the laws of physics and nature to be able to create matter, space, energy, and everything else which can be read on scientific meters because its impossible for such things to be created out of nothingness. Even if the galaxies came from a single point in space, it makes no difference. There had to be a "beginning" where this stuff came into existence. It's against our scientific laws for it to create itself out of nothing. Everything else is just speculation or guessing. 80 years of guessing doesn't get you past that simple fundamental problem. No matter how much anti matter, dark matter, theory xyz's, alternate universes you throw at a problem. Its still all bullshit.

Maybe you believe in bullshit? I don't. I believe in the flying spaghetti monster. Bullshit or flying spaghetti monster. Which difference is there? Why is bullshit taught in schools and not the flying spahetti monster. Thats the point the big bang thread was all about.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Butterbean

In this forum there is a cadre of people with same lib politics who will answer posts 24/7. The same people quickly chime in at 2 in the morning or 2 in the afternoon. This pretty much testifies to the quality of life they are living. Such patterns are more characteristic of a liberal mindset where daydreaming comes easier than working - or even having normal sleep patterns. These internet heros think they are doing something "important" by espousing their views and take tremendous offense if people disagree with them. Hence they quickly degenerate into put-down artists and retreat into the psychotic denial of their conditioned thinking. Its just snotty nonsense really and the perps arent that bad of people or they would be off doing bad things instead of locked to their puter. Hardforum is better place for original thinkers and balance.

WTF? Do you seriously monitor when the 'libs' post? Talk about not having a life...

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

The bill of rights contains no right to equality.

If it's all the same to you, I'm going to stop threadjacking.

Technically true, as the bill of rights is only the first 10 amendments and equal protection under the law doesn't come till #14.

 

[cliftonite]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: PokerGuy
Techno-savy people tend to be younger as they've grown up with the technology. Younger people tend to be more idealistic as well as liberal, thus the more left-leaning crowds on technology oriented boards.

Ding Ding!

Originally posted by: JS80
It's funny how liberals see being against a law that favors gays is somehow bigoted.

Please cite one law that gives gays more rights than straights?

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
You know how to turn a liberal into a conservative?
Make them earn & save $100K.
Worked for me

Didn't work for me. I've come right on some issues and left on others through discussion but my wallet doesn't dictate my moral compass.

Didnt work for me, or most of my family.

 

[BassBomb]

because republicans cant use the internets

 

[cliftonite]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Young college grads = core liberal group

Come back in 20 years and see how many of them have changed sides.

Or if Obama wins and tries to turn the country to the left watch them change faster.
Most of them are to young to remember how liberals actually run the country. The last time this happen was 1993-94. Other wise liberals have been out of power since 1980.

Ummm, have we forgotten the 1990s?

 

[MikeyLSU]

many people use the word conservatives interchangable with Republicans, that couldn't be further from the truth.

Conservatives believe in less government mainly. Republicans of today have not gone down that path and have become much much more liberal.

I mean, McCain is no conservative, but is running as a rep.

 

[Martin]

First of all, while moreso than the general population, AT isn't THAT technical of a place.

I've spent a fair amount of time working at pretty successful tech companies (used to work for the maker of the BlackBerry, now I work for these guys) and conservatives are a very rare item. This is true both on the small scale (ie, people in companies) and on the larger scale (high tech places like San Francisco/Valley, Seattle, etc).

And why wouldn't they be liberal? Tech people tend to be very well educated, live in diverse urban areas, are well-off financially, and other hallmarks of liberals.

There's so the fact that there are a lot of links to academia and tech companies, with a ton of new technology/ideas coming out of there (for example, the CEO and head of engineering at my currency company are both profs at UofT).

And finally, let's be honest here, the type of thinking that conservatism is based on isn't very conductive to innovation. The same mindset that makes people discard traditions and try new things (ie, forgetting about the traditional definition of marriage and supporting gay marriage) is the same mindset that let's them toss aside old ideas and technology and try new things.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: brandonb

Originally posted by: jonks


And the fundamental misunderstanding continues.....

Reasonable conjecture BASED ON OBSERVABLE EVIDENCE vs guessing games and whole-cloth fabrication about god, religion and creation. you don't see the difference? Eh, just go re-read the big bang thread.

And that's some hubris on your part to think that you are able to pick apart over 80 years of scientific work on a theory.

AGAIN, liberal critical thinking at its finest. Of course I see a difference but you just put words into my mouth.

And yes I can pick apart 80 years of scientific work on a theory. You wanna know how? Its against the laws of physics and nature to be able to create matter, space, energy, and everything else which can be read on scientific meters because its impossible for such things to be created out of nothingness. Even if the galaxies came from a single point in space, it makes no difference. There had to be a "beginning" where this stuff came into existence. It's against our scientific laws for it to create itself out of nothing. Everything else is just speculation or guessing. 80 years of guessing doesn't get you past that simple fundamental problem. No matter how much anti matter, dark matter, theory xyz's, alternate universes you throw at a problem. Its still all bullshit.

Maybe you believe in bullshit? I don't. I believe in the flying spaghetti monster.

See? This is what we're talking about. You simply don't understand the big bang theory. The big bang makes NO CLAIM WHATSOEVER as to where matter came from. The theory makes no attempt to explain such. So how does the fact that it is impossible to create matter out of nothing in any way invalidate it?

This is why your arguments are dismissed. They are based upon a fundamental ignorance of the subject matter.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Let me see if I've got this straight...

Liberals are younger, smarter, more logical, less afraid of thinking, more educated, progressive, reinvent themselves and see failure as an opportunity, idealists, nobel, etc.

Conservatives are older, stupid, less logical, afraid of thinking, less educated, content with the way things are, too busy listening to AM radio, tend to have a persecution complex, think everyone else is stupid and greedy and won't shut up about it, whiners, rarely bother to formulate arguments or counter-arguments, post a lot of really stupid things, lack a fundamental willingness for critical thinking, basically assholes about their views, 'know' they are right, accuse others of being clearly stupid and a lesser person than them for not agreeing with them, bigots, etc.

I think this collage of comments from the various posts above clearly answer the OP's question.

 

[Fox5]

Fiscal irresponsibility and rampant corruption on both sides.
I'll pick the one with the track record of being less corrupt (or that I haven't tried in a while) until I get some real choice.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: Martin
First of all, while moreso than the general population, AT isn't THAT technical of a place.

I've spent a fair amount of time working at pretty successful tech companies (used to work for the maker of the BlackBerry, now I work for these guys) and conservatives are a very rare item. This is true both on the small scale (ie, people in companies) and on the larger scale (high tech places like San Francisco/Valley, Seattle, etc).

And why wouldn't they be liberal? Tech people tend to be very well educated, live in diverse urban areas, are well-off financially, and other hallmarks of liberals.

There's so the fact that there are a lot of links to academia and tech companies, with a ton of new technology/ideas coming out of there (for example, the CEO and head of engineering at my currency company are both profs at UofT).

And finally, let's be honest here, the type of thinking that conservatism is based on isn't very conductive to innovation. The same mindset that makes people discard traditions and try new things (ie, forgetting about the traditional definition of marriage and supporting gay marriage) is the same mindset that let's them toss aside old ideas and technology and try new things.

I've had the same personal experince as well, the more I move up in my life profressionally - the more progressives/liberals I seem to bump into.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
Let me see if I've got this straight...

Liberals are younger, smarter, more logical, less afraid of thinking, more educated, progressive, reinvent themselves and see failure as an opportunity, idealists, nobel, etc.

Conservatives are older, stupid, less logical, afraid of thinking, less educated, content with the way things are, too busy listening to AM radio, tend to have a persecution complex, think everyone else is stupid and greedy and won't shut up about it, whiners, rarely bother to formulate arguments or counter-arguments, post a lot of really stupid things, lack a fundamental willingness for critical thinking, basically assholes about their views, 'know' they are right, accuse others of being clearly stupid and a lesser person than them for not agreeing with them, bigots, etc.

I think this collage of comments from the various posts above clearly answer the OP's question.

That people who are more educated are more likely to be liberal is simply a fact. You can debate why this is, but it is true. Conservatism by definition attempts to maintain the status quo in a general sense. This is simply a fact. Liberalism attempts to change the status quo. This is simply a fact. Young people tend to be more liberal then old people. This is simply a fact. (although people also tend to liberalize with age, but usually they started off far more conservative so they don't actually overlap.) I'm not sure what you're trying to argue as a good chunk of the things you mentioned are just part of generally accepted reality.

Also, if you take your same approach to this thread then liberals are illogical, use their reasoning skills poorly, have big mouths, piss and moan all the time, call people names instead of putting forth a logical argument, would rather daydream then work, live worthless lives, etc... etc. See how dumb that idea is?

 

[MikeyLSU]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
Let me see if I've got this straight...

Liberals are younger, smarter, more logical, less afraid of thinking, more educated, progressive, reinvent themselves and see failure as an opportunity, idealists, nobel, etc.

Conservatives are older, stupid, less logical, afraid of thinking, less educated, content with the way things are, too busy listening to AM radio, tend to have a persecution complex, think everyone else is stupid and greedy and won't shut up about it, whiners, rarely bother to formulate arguments or counter-arguments, post a lot of really stupid things, lack a fundamental willingness for critical thinking, basically assholes about their views, 'know' they are right, accuse others of being clearly stupid and a lesser person than them for not agreeing with them, bigots, etc.

I think this collage of comments from the various posts above clearly answer the OP's question.

That people who are more educated are more likely to be liberal is simply a fact. You can debate why this is, but it is true. Conservatism by definition attempts to maintain the status quo in a general sense. This is simply a fact. Liberalism attempts to change the status quo. This is simply a fact. Young people tend to be more liberal then old people. This is simply a fact. (although people also tend to liberalize with age, but usually they started off far more conservative so they don't actually overlap.) I'm not sure what you're trying to argue as a good chunk of the things you mentioned are just part of generally accepted reality.

Also, if you take your same approach to this thread then liberals are illogical, use their reasoning skills poorly, have big mouths, piss and moan all the time, call people names instead of putting forth a logical argument, would rather daydream then work, live worthless lives, etc... etc. See how dumb that idea is?

lol, what you say is so far from fact it is ridiculous. Liberal and Conservatism is driven much more by region than education. Like someone above said, the higher up the professional ladder they go, the more liberals they run into. I am the exact opposite. The higher I am getting I am running into many more conservatives. Why? Because I live in a much more conservative part of the country.

If I lived in California, I'm sure it would be different. But don't go saying your opinion and stating it is just fact.

 

[Vic]

Why are conservatives always playing the victim card on representation? :roll:

There are plenty of conservative types here. However, to answer the OP's question, the reason is because technology is all about adapting to changing conditions and dealing with what works. This is something which conservatives, with their inherent 'stay the course' mentality, are incapable of doing (while remaining conservative).