The Great Ideology Divide

1. 87

   Sharlee01posted 2 years ago

   
   
   No flowery OP here, just some pretty forward straight questions. In hopes of getting some straight off-the-top-of-your-head answers. Looking for straight truth, not politically correct fluff - fluff. Hopefully, you will dive in, and share.
   
   Let's explore our system of ideas and ideals, especially one which forms the basis of economic or political theory and policy. 
   
   Why are we so divided?   Take a moment and contemplate, as Americans, do we really have much in common at this point when it comes down to personal ideologies. 
   
   Has it become politically necessary at this juncture to momentarily oppose the other tribe to save our Nation?
   
   Have ideologies finally become so different, so divided that we can't find any middle ground at this juncture? 
   
   Are you willing to succumb to the other's vastly different ideologies, at all costs?
   
   It's clear the divide is great, and most here pretty well know my opinion on this subject. How about sharing yours?

   replyreport
   1. 83

      gmwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Sharlee, this is an excellent post.  However, I am very under the weather today so I am unable to respond right now.

      replyreport
      1. 87

         Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

         Grace --- I was wondering, where is Grace?    Sorry to hear you're not feeling well. A lot of flu bugs going around. So many of my family and friends have been down with the stomach flu. you feel better --- prayer coming your way.

         replyreport
         1. 83

            gmwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Thank you for putting me in your prayers.  It is so sad that America has become so extreme at both ends.   It is sad how the Democrats are destroying our cities through their inane or rather insanely illogical liberal crime policies.   In New York, people are being attacked by "groups" left & right, even in broad daylight.   Adams is a mistake.   During the Columbus Day Parade, people rightfully booed him.  Adams is a joke.  Sliwa would have made a MUCH BETTER mayor.

            replyreport
            1. 87

               Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

               Nothing can be said to make representatives realize citizens want to be safe in their communities. They don't really care about the people they represent, and in reality, they don't watch, they don't come in contact with the ordinary citizens. They seek power to dictate what Americans will have and have not. They see no need for law and order, it costs money, and they just have other agendas to spend our cash. Social agendas are expensive.
               
               Glad to see you back

               replyreport
   2. 82

      peterstreepposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      If I may join in...
      I think it's pretty simple.
      The US has a two-party system. Sooner or later this will make a polarisation as it is ingrained in the system.
      You can either choose for Pepsi or for Coca Cola.  There is no Orange juice or Coffee.
      And the two flavours of Coke do their best to keep it that way. New flavours are a threat to the political system and the powers that be. So in the end the political system is not there to serve the country but to serve itself.
      (this is not only happening in the US though, in many countries around the world politics is not for the people but a power structure to favour the rich and mighty.)
      So as long as you can only drink two flavours of coke there will be a great divide.

      replyreport
      1. 96

         Readmikenowposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         I don't have a comment, but I would like to applaud your excellent analogy. 
         
         We could get into the battles between coffee drinkers and tea drinkers, but that is another subject for another time.

         replyreport
2. 69

   abwilliamsposted 2 years ago

   Yes it has become necessary to oppose the other tribe, they are dangerous!
   They don't know what they are for, they only know what they oppose; conservatism, an America first agenda, US having a place in this world.
   They want a transformation of this Country which has been so good to all of us.
   Transformed into what exactly? I am not sure, they certainly don't know and that's what makes them dangerous!
   We can't trust what this tribe would put in the peace pipe.

   replyreport
   1. 87

      Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I agree it is so important to at this point oppose the other side, They clearly have denatured the very core of America. Politically speaking I feel this administration and those that support it are quickly trying to transform America into something that is unrecognizable. A country that most certainly has been so good to all of us. Instead of moving forward with freedom, and democracy, they seem bent on a  tweaked form of socialism. Democracy plus socialism is their end product. A product that
      will destroy America and all that our current democracy offers.
      
      I must agree we need to restore the Nation, and I have a good faith will in Nov. I still hold onto trusting Americans are seeing what is happening.

      replyreport
3. 79

   Credence2posted 2 years ago

   The only thing we have in common or should is the concept of Democracy, rule by law, and a common defense, self preservation as a nation.
   
   Both sides may have taken extremes which has been to the other side's distaste. That disparity in political difference has increased in the last 50 years or more. Was it the counter culture of the sixties revolt, women's liberation of the 70s? No more Rockefeller Republicans or Proxmire Democrats...
   
   The Republicans involvement in the social cultural issues may have been a catalyst. They have always been the rich man's party, promoting the concepts and policies that kept them on top.
   
   Even if we all agree to play by the same rules, the differences are so much more stark today, that they may well be no healing.
   
   I would have to succumb to the ideology of the antagonistic side if such is the desire of the majority of voters. I won't operate outside of the democratic process, or I am no better than what I often accuse my adversaries of being. I will just have to hold on to my hat for what has to be a "rough ride", hoping that the storm will pass.

   replyreport
   1. 87

      Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I knew I could depend on you to join in, and as always give a very sensible, and common-sense view.  You do come across the line with words that make me think...  I think you have the ability to look at our current divide realistically, no fluff to be had.

      replyreport
      1. 79

         Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

         Nice topic, couldn't resist....

         replyreport
4. 75

   Valeantposted 2 years ago

   I think an earlier post sums it up so nicely.  One side has been convinced that the other is the enemy.  Now, both sides are jumping on that bandwagon, due to the violence we have seen born of that brainwashing.
   
   But what that post gets wrong is that there is middle ground.  We see it quite often in these forums.  We can all agree that we want a secure border and our immigration laws need revising.  But we just don't agree on the specifics to those commonalities.
   
   We all have common ground on term limits, balanced budgets, and a strong military.
   
   And the claim that the left doesn't know what they are for is another right-wing misunderstanding.  The left is for equality, for diversity, for evolution, for the Constitution, for humanity, for environmentalism, for regulated capitalism, for freedoms with the limits that they do not endanger society.

   replyreport
   1. 89

      wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      But we can't all agree that we want a secure border.  Far too many people would welcome any and all that were not a proven violence risk.  Similarly, those with a powerful legislator that "brings home the bacon" will (and do) continue to vote them in - they would fight tooth and toenail to maintain the powerful in Congress.  Likewise balanced budgets; our spending is far too great for anyone to propose a balanced budget as it would mean there personal favorite line item would be hit.  Same for a strong military; many would do away with the military altogether and far more would cut it back to a shadow of what it is.  I'm sure you have spoken with people like ALL of those, just as I have.
      
      If the left is for equality we would have seen equal consideration given to all in considerations for a new SCOTUS member.  We would not see universities fighting over affirmative action in accepting students.  We would not see Harris saying that black neighborhoods would be the first to see FEMA. 
      
      If the left is for the Constitution we wouldn't see liberal SCOTUS members voting their conscience or personal morality, but we do.  We wouldn't see the masses of people illegally crossing our border (the President swore to protect our border, not open it to all), and we certainly wouldn't be welcoming them with open arms and pocketbooks.
      
      So no, outside of giving money to anyone not rich and providing for all the poor of the world, I don't think the left does know what it wants.

      replyreport
      1. 75

         Valeantposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         So much to unpack.  I guess I should have said many instead of all since you wish to give the fringes representation.  No surprise there.
         
         And that you list things you believe go against the beliefs I listed only shows an extremist thought process.  That a president using his privilege to give a voice to an underrepresented and previously discriminated against segment of the population does not help with equality on a court that already has six white people, is a belief in the continuation of systemic racism.  That university example only strengthens that viewpoint, let alone not being able to acknowledge the mischaracterization of what Harris said by Fox News.
         
         I'm not at all surprised when someone extreme misunderstands the left, especially in these forums.  It's become all too common.

         replyreport
   2. 69

      abwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      V, your "tribe" devalues life, going against our Declaration of Independence...which is very CLEAR about LIFE. You all have made it a number one priority, to be able to unconditionally take away life, as IF you all are somehow "endowed"!? The saddest part of that statement, are the millions of lives which have been and still are, taken away! The topic isn't pertaining to hardened, dangerous, murderous, unrepentant criminals, but rather...innocent, defenseless, voiceless, babies!!!
      
      Your tribe constantly and annoyingly, infringes upon the only amendment with, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED, in it!!
      
      How can you acknowledge our sovereignty, when your tribe has spent a fortune on stopping all construction of the border wall, making sure that our southern border IS NOT secure? Another fortune on {not legal, struggling citizens} but on adding to, building up, sanctuary cities and states so that ILLEGAL migrants {criminals} can be financially supported, taken care of, protected...from U.S. laws!?!
      
      You threw "the Constitution" into the mix, as a secondary thought, I believe it was done for my benefit. You also put conditions on anything that may be seen as agreeing with me...or middle ground.
      
      No, we are worlds apart, you may not be my sworn enemy, but I have no desire to meet you; I don't even think you could give me direction as to where the halfway point/middle ground, might be!
      
      That's how far apart we are!

      replyreport
      1. 59

         Fayetteville Fayeposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         Governing a democracy without compromise is impossible.  The end result is maintaining a constant state of status quo.  But adopting a hate filled attitude toward a neighbor with the different political ideology than your own just seems counterproductive. Political parties today are united more by their hatred of the other side of the aisle than by their affinity to their own. If there’s this gap in how much you like your side and dislike the other side, and it’s all motivated by emotions,  I feel you’re less likely to hold presidents accountable for things and more likely to vote for your side no matter what they do, even when it’s corrupt. It’s just driven by hatred.  Hatred is dominating our politics. So much for this country's supposed "Christian values"

         replyreport
         1. 69

            abwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Who mentioned hate?
            
            You have no argument against any of my points and so your immediate response is to make me out to be a hater and question my "Christian values"!
            
            The H word was never mentioned nor considered!
            
            You are worse at this than V is.

            replyreport
            1. 87

               Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

               I read your comment and saw nothing of hate. I saw you sharing your honest view, and being very polite while doing so.
               
               It is very clear if you don't agree with some here, they feel they have the right to read in their own context into a comment and make it worse by offering their attitude of superiority. 
               
               I don't think some got the memo, we all have the right to share views, and have the right to say  ---  "No, we are worlds apart, you may not be my sworn enemy, but I have no desire to meet you; I don't even think you could give me direction as to where the halfway point/middle ground, might be!"
               
               I find it easier at this point to ignore pedestal preaching.  Little good to come from debating when it is clear ideologies are so far apart.

               replyreport
               1. 69

                  abwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  I think we were doing fairly well at staying on topic/on point. Well, for us! lol

                  replyreport
               2. 79

                  Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  I don't think some got the memo, we all have the right to share views, and have the right to say  ---  "No, we are worlds apart, you may not be my sworn enemy, but I have no desire to meet you; I don't even think you could give me direction as to where the halfway point/middle ground, might be!"
                  -------
                  As unfortunate as that may sound, that is currently where we are in our society right now. It has nothing to do emotions, just completely different world views for which it is very difficult if not impossible to find a common bridge.

                  replyreport
                  1. 69

                     abwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                     On that we can agree Cred and I take no pleasure in saying that.

                     replyreport
                     1. 79

                        Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                        I know it is not pleasant to agree with me, but acknowledging the truth is sometimes like that.

                        replyreport
                        1. 69

                           abwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                           On an even sadder note, did you fare well through Ian and beyond?

                           replyreport
                           1. 79

                              Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                              Well, AB, oddly enough we just had 35 mile an hour winds at the worst. I think the heavier part of the storm hit Ft. Myers and Southwest Florida, going up that coast for a while, veered east into the state hitting Orlando and points north of our Brevard County location. We got away, this time.
                              
                              It was a good thing too, because it is such a hassle having to take those shielding metal plates up and down.
                              
                              Outside of that we were hardly scratched, thanks.

                              replyreport
                              1. 69

                                 abwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                 Good to know.

                                 replyreport
                              2. 89

                                 wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                 "Shudder"  You need to come live in Idaho.  Our only concern is when Yellowstone will blow it's top, and when it does we won't have a care in the world, for it won't matter how many plates we put up.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 79

                                    Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                    Are you talking about the geiser, old faithful?
                                    
                                    I did not know that it presented such a threat. Mountain West issues usually involved heavy snowfall or, sometimes, fires.
                                    
                                    With rare exception virtually every part of the country has some climate or topographic issue that give residents cause for concern. I had the earthquakes and brush fires in Southern California, the 2-3 feet snow pack in Colorado and Montana, the volcanic eruptions with its lava and noxious vapors in Hawaii, and now the hurricanes here, can I ever cut a break?
                                    
                                    But again, there is tornado alley in the American Midwest which I have been able to avoid.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 89

                                       wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                       "Are you talking about the geiser, old faithful?"
                                       
                                       No.  You didn't know?  The entire Yellowstone park is one giant caldera of an ancient volcano, and one day it will blow it's stack again.  It has done so in the past and will again, and when it does most of Wyoming and Idaho will disappear (or turn to ash) along with much of Oregon, Utah, Washington and Montana.

                                       report
                  2. 89

                     wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                     The term for that bridge is "compromise" - something we have forgotten how to do.  Instead we fight for as much as we can get, accept a vote somewhere in the middle, and then begin the fight all over to get more.

                     replyreport
                     1. 79

                        Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                        ... well, Yes!

                        replyreport
                  3. 87

                     Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                     Yes, it is clear some just won't accept others having the right to share their views.  It is clear that at times one gets a huge lecture on what is more of an acceptable view. Some seek to project their view over all other views. Which is their right, but it does become very unpleasant trying to converse.
                     
                     Much of the time we are at opposite views, but we give room and courtesy to listen to eaches opinion.  I don't think we preach at one another as a rule that is.
                     
                     Is this not a much more sensible way to converse?  I mean everyone is unique in how they carry on a conversation, but my radar goes up when one is talking at me instead of to me.

                     replyreport
                     1. 69

                        abwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                        I know what you mean Sharlee, when you say, "talking at you"! Comparable to when a conversation is never given the chance to develop or play out, before someone begins to critique every word and dismantle the conversation.

                        replyreport
            2. 59

               Fayetteville Fayeposted 2 years agoin reply to this

               Come on. The rhetoric, the political discourse these days is pure hate. Politicians stoke hate and fear of the "other"
               You see it on every forum, even this one. The name calling, the condescension. Painting the other "side" as some sort of inhuman abomination.  No interest in real conversation with anyone different than themselves. Take a look back at your own posts and how you've characterized "libs'

               replyreport
               1. 69

                  abwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  You come on! This is us, HP folks, having a conversation and hate wasn't mentioned nor considered until you and you alone, brought it in. You didn't stop there, now you've brought "inhumane abomination" into it. ??? Unless you have had a change of heart and are referring to what abortion is, not sure what this means or where it's coming from?!?
                  Where is this coming from Faye? Perhaps you are the one who needs to "take a look".

                  replyreport
            3. 89

               wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

               Of course there is an argument against your primary point.
               
               We take lives every day (in the millions), from plants to insects to elephants.  Your argument is not about taking lives, it is about taking human lives, with the term defined by you.  Those with a different definition, one more reasonable and factual, are wrong and hateful, right?

               replyreport
               1. 69

                  abwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  I really don't know what is in the heart (or at the heart) of those who mercilessly defend abortion, Wilderness. I can't say they're hateful, but I do believe they are wrong. I can say that when it comes to hate, I hate what abortion is and what it involves, just as I hate what murder is and what it involves.

                  replyreport
                  1. 79

                     Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                     Abortion is a matter of the mother's rights over her own life and body over the future child's rights over his or her own life and body.
                     Pro-Deathers fight for the will of the mother.
                     Pro-Lifers fight for the newly ignited will of a future baby.

                     replyreport
                  2. 89

                     wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                     I understand that.  Where I have trouble is that you DEMAND that all other people share your view on what is a human life.  While it may be completely obvious to you, based on opinion and nothing else, it is not so to others.  At the same time you appear to refuse to acknowledge that your opinion is indeed an opinion, not established fact, and therefore demand that everyone else share it or be wrong.  And when they don't share your opinion they are murderers and worse.
                     
                     It is this "great divide" that no one will discuss or acknowledge that has caused the rift, not whether it is about a woman's right to control her body or the murder of children.  IMO, of course.

                     replyreport
                     1. 79

                        Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                        "Where I have trouble is that you DEMAND that all other people share your view on what is a human life.  While it may be completely obvious to you, based on opinion and nothing else, it is not so to others.  At the same time you appear to refuse to acknowledge that your opinion is indeed an opinion, not established fact, and therefore demand that everyone else share it or be wrong.  And when they don't share your opinion they are murderers and worse."
                        
                        ~ are you advocating "each to their own?"

                        replyreport
                     2. 69

                        abwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                        Didn't realize I was so DEMANDING and here I thought I was just defending those who do not have the capacity to defend themselves {not talking bugs, but rather, tiny human beings)

                        replyreport
      2. 75

         Valeantposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         Do your values of life come from politics, religion or science?  It's important to ask.
         
         If it's politics, many laws do not recognize a child's rights until birth.  Mothers do not get alimony until the baby is born.  You cannot claim a fetus on your taxes.
         
         If it's religion, then maybe you're a life begins at conception person.  If it's science, maybe it's when the baby is developed enough to feel, or live independently outside of the womb.
         
         My point is, you clearly have your views, but they are far from settled depending on the philosophy you're considering.
         
         My own belief is in the life of the mother.  After looking through historical recounts of a time before access to abortion, and seeing how those women were butchered and harmed, there is a concern for the value of life there.  I do not see any humanity in forcing a mother to birth a non-viable fetus that endangers her life, force a woman to birth her rapist's baby, or in forcing a 12-year old to have to carry her rapists baby to term.
         
         And as an agnostic, I wouldn't want anyone's religious views impacting my own body autonomy.  Is there another medical procedure that is forced onto a human being?  Even in death, a person has rights to body autonomy.  For a party that value's freedom, passing laws that allow the state to force a medical procedure onto a person seems counter to their own beliefs.
         
         And I don't see spending billions on a border wall as a secure option when it is being defeated by common tools from Home Depot.  As for sanctuary cities, those municipalities have weighed the pros and cons to that decision in crime prevention.  You either believe in state's rights or you don't.
         
         I agree that we are very far apart in terms of political views.  We both agree that the other is dangerous though, that much is for sure.

         replyreport
         1. 69

            abwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            "Butchered and harmed", I can't help but think of the house of horrors of modern-day abortionist Kermit Gosnell or of the many others we have learned about since we first heard his name. I can't help but think of Planned Parenthood profiting off of human body parts....
            Would you agree that if there are human body parts to sell, they were once attached to a human body?

            replyreport
            1. 75

               Valeantposted 2 years agoin reply to this

               Not even a reasonable answer to the most important question in that post - do your values of life come from politics, religion or science?
               
               Then you go off on some messed up tangent spewing conspiracy theories about Planned Parenthood.
               
               https://www.npr.org/2016/01/28/46459482 … ssue-sales

               replyreport
               1. 69

                  abwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  No, it is all true, so you don't agree, is your answer?
                  What is odd to me is that those of you on the left or pro-abortionists in general, can talk about these lives being destroyed and it stays political for you, as if you are talking about dimpled and hanging chads on ballots and not about a human being.

                  replyreport
                  1. 75

                     Valeantposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                     It is far from true, as I just posted the results of investigations into the claim. 
                     
                     And what you seem to miss is that many have differing opinions about when life begins.  Even in the Dobbs decision, that choice is now left up to states to have a differing opinion on it.  You won't even define when life begins, despite me having asked now three different times.  This is almost as bad as asking Katanji Brown to define the word woman.  You seem to not be able to define when you believe life to begin.
                     
                     Let alone you not answering a simple question about whether a state should have the right to force a person to undergo a medical procedure.  That's another not-so-veiled insult where you label us pro-abortionists instead of pro-choicers.

                     replyreport
                     1. 69

                        abwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                        I have no problem with women that have been raped or have gotten caught up without protection and absolutely don't want a baby, from taking the morning after pill. But, literally, the morning after because
                        everything that grows is living...so it is imperative to take this under consideration. I am a bigger fan of birth control when it comes to the latter scenario. I am also a big fan of sonograms and of having pregnant women listen to their baby's heartbeat. So many girls/women have been fed so much garbage, I want them to understand for themselves, that there really is a life there! If they do not want their baby, there are many loving Parents that do.

                        replyreport
               2. 69

                  abwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  You triggered me with the "butchered" word, do I get a pass if I am triggered?
                  I would say that my values come from studying the principles of reasoning, including deductive reasoning, I believe myself to be a logical thinker. Yes, my faith would definitely enter in, but not religion! My Parents had a role, otherwise I wouldn't be such a fan of making one's on way, having such a strong work ethic, going after my American dream and wanting the same for every individual! My "politics" come out of a combination of all of that.

                  replyreport
                  1. 75

                     Valeantposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                     Yeah, I'll give you a pass.  I think it's an important topic.
                     
                     That was a nice explanation of where your belief structure emits from.  Not entirely sure it answered either of my questions, but helps to gain some understanding.
                     
                     For me, I think there can be a case made to define life after a zygote becomes a fetus.  We have standards for death that are fairly universal, not sure why we cannot define when life begins the same way.  But I am not a life begins at conception person.

                     replyreport
                     1. 69

                        abwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                        Do you believe that everything that grows is alive or living?

                        replyreport
                        1. 75

                           Valeantposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                           Not necessarily.  If it cannot sustain itself, then I see it as a part of something else.

                           replyreport
                           1. 79

                              Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                              ~ it's destiny is to be an individual and become independent. It takes a very long time for a human to form. Development and growth continues until age 22. (The frontal lobe is still developing after age 18.)
                              
                              Life begins when the egg and the sperm unite and a flash of light/soul enters the union. This soul has a blueprint (of light) which will then unfold according to its astral body.
                              
                              A baby manifests it's physical form when born. Next, the psyche forms during the next six years. Shall we kill the child as early as just-born and onward, until for or five, (if it is too hard to raise or a job is lost, etc.) since the psyche is just beginning to form?
                              
                              If I were you, I would take this miracle of creating the most amazing thing that exists on earth, a human being, very seriously ... which is an understatement.
                              
                              Have sex, if you plan to procreate. If you do not want a baby, don't have sex. It's just for the sake of your Ego, otherwise,
                              Face it.
                              
                              EGO

                              replyreport
                              1. 81

                                 Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                 Don't you think we have a strong connection with this symbol "~"

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 79

                                    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                    ~ I love to use it at just the right time.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 79

                                       Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                       ~~ ~  ~    ~        ~                    ~

                                       report
                                    2. 81

                                       Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                       Do you remember someone else who also loved to use it?
                                       I also love using this symbol, and yes, just at the right time

                                       report
                                       1. 79

                                          Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                          

                                          report
                                 2. 79

                                    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                    But, I know you do not agree about the moment when the soul enters the body.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 81

                                       Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                       Tell me if it is possible. Possibly it will help me ease the pain I am suffering through

                                       report
                                       1. 81

                                          Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                          Just promise me you'll let me know if you notice any signs. I'll step back, but I'll be at ease!

                                          report
                                       2. 79

                                          Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                          ... what is your pain?
                                          " if you notice any signs. I'll step back, but I'll be at ease!"
                                          
                                          Okay

                                          report
                                          1. 81

                                             Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                             No one can ever understand that but God!

                                             report
                                             1. 79

                                                Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                                Oh, I mentioned "soul" and "astral" and other and words pertaining to the metaphysical world.

                                                report
                                                1. 81

                                                   Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                                   I'm unsure where you used the word "astral" in this conversation.
                                                   If you recall, we once had a detailed discussion on this topic, so I am pretty sure about your thoughts on the subject.
                                                   No worries! Take care!
                                                   God bless you!

                                                   report
                                                2. 81

                                                   Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                                   My response to you, "No one can ever understand but God," was in answer to your question: "...what is your pain?"
                                                   
                                                   I think you edited your response later.

                                                   report
                                                   1. 79

                                                      Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                                      I think it our job to know what God knows. We need to understand God.
                                                      A piece of God is within us, so it can't be that difficult to know.
                                                      We need to be quiet and go within. Yes, we need to meditate on God's love for us and our love for God.
                                                      Simple as that.
                                                      We try to find happiness in the outer world, but until we realize that going within will bring happiness, we will be kicked around by the players of greed and power.
                                                      
                                                      The priority is life: Human life and its source.
                                                      Sorry to get so metaphysical, Misbah.
                                                      Oh well.
                                                      
                                                      Shine On Brightly.
                                                      
                                                      Procol Harum - 01 - Shine On Brightly (1971)
                                                      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_XEB16-Oec

                                                      report
                                                      1. 81

                                                         Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                                         I agree happiness comes from within. Thank you so much for sharing.
                                                         Sending you Love and Blessings!

                                                         report
                                                         1. 79

                                                            Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                                            Thank You. Sending you the same!

                                                            report
                              2. 79

                                 Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                 "Have sex, if you plan to procreate. If you do not want a baby, don't have sex. It's just for the sake of your Ego, otherwise," Face it"
                                 
                                 Positively brilliant, I just as well say to you, don't go to the bathroom no more.......

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 75

                                    Valeantposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                    In the conservative world, sex is only for procreation.  And only in the missionary position.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 79

                                       Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                       In the liberal world, we are animals in a barn yard.

                                       report
                              3. 82

                                 peterstreepposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                 Have sex, if you plan to procreate. If you do not want a baby, don't have sex. It's just for the sake of your Ego, otherwise,
                                 Face it.
                                 
                                 EGO
                                 
                                 
                                 - This is not true. Sex is also to create a bond with your partner. It is part of a healthy relationship. Sex is also part of having a healthy relationship with your own body and mind.
                                 How much frustration is there not on celibacy? How much child abuse in monasteries and closed one-gender-only institutions?
                                 Sex helps you with tension and stress, withholding sex does the opposite.
                                 To say that sex is only for procreation and not to enjoy and make it taboo is asking for frustration,  rape and violence.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 79

                                    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                    My goodness. I am trying to offer a way to prevent unwanted pregnancies and you are trying to justify and excuse human weakness. It is irresponsible to satisfy sexual impulses in a way which results in conception.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 82

                                       peterstreepposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                       you can use a condom. No so difficult. Or the Pill and there are more options.

                                       report
                                       1. 79

                                          Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                          Yet, there are still oopsies. Personally, I think if religious institutions taught the precept and guidelines, when advising How to Live, of no sex before marriage, we'd all benefit.

                                          report
                                          1. 82

                                             peterstreepposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                             Life is full of oopsies.

                                             report
                                    2. 79

                                       Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                       PS Every marriage and relationship is a mistake. When mistakes make mistakes it just adds up to double the mistakes.
                                       Stop already! There are enough people walking around, stomping all over this beautiful earth. It's fine if the people produced are respectful of the earth, but mostly they are raised to be just as selfish as their parents who continue to perpetrate the colossal ignorance of the Creator of the Earth and Heavens.

                                       report
                           2. 69

                              abwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                              "A part of something else"? Please elaborate.
                              It sounds as if you aren't sure how to answer the question.

                              replyreport
                              1. 79

                                 Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                 (it's mother.)

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 69

                                    abwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                    Isn't it p.c. or woke to say birthing person, Kathryn? Although these same p.c./woke people pretend that there's nothing really there to give birth to...until there is a birth in process!
                                    When they can no longer explain "it" away, voila`... a new life, a little person, where did that come from, it's a miracle! Yikes, "miracle", now I've really gone and done it.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 79

                                       Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                       Now, here it is: If a birthing person is a woman, but she has become a man, well, yes "he" can get pregnant. But the reality is, despite the hormone blockers, breast removal and beard growing chemicals, the womb was left intact. Can one say the womb-man is not a womb-man?

                                       report
                              2. 75

                                 Valeantposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                 I believe I answered it precisely.  In some respects, I see a fetus as part of the woman until it is viable outside of the womb without her support.  Without the woman, the fetus dies prior to viability. 
                                 
                                 Although, as I noted earlier, I think a case could be made that declaration of life begin when a zygote becomes a fetus.

                                 replyreport
            2. 59

               Fayetteville Fayeposted 2 years agoin reply to this

               How and when did planned Parenthood profit off of human body parts???

               replyreport
5. 69

   abwilliamsposted 2 years ago

   https://youtu.be/Z_s-Qk07KxA

   replyreport
6. 79

   Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

   There is a huge misunderstanding on the part of the Democrats in regard to the wisdom of conservative thinking. The problem is Democrats are very closed minded and think the Republicans are the enemy.
   
   Maybe Democrats can explain why this is so.
   
   They seems to have chips on their shoulders and expect much from the government. They do not value independence and the power of each individual to work hard and solve their own problems and create their own destinies. Furthermore, they abhor failure and learning from one's own decisions and mistakes. Instead, Democrats expect the government to bail citizens out when they find themselves in too much school debt or unwillingly pregnant.
   
   Republicans do not.
   
   It seems to be about the rich and the poor. The middle class have qualities of both but will lean right or left depending on whether they see their glass half full or half empty.
   A poor person will never vote Republican.
   A rich person would never vote Democrat.
   
   However, today's Democrats in office are quite wealthy and really have capitalism on their minds. They are making tons of money in every and any way they CAN!
   
   
   Including (and especially,) Nancy, Barak and Sandy.

   replyreport
   1. 79

      Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Funny, we Democrats say the same thing about Republicans and rightwing types in regards to liberal/progressive thinking. So where does that put us all now? Your idea of "wisdom" is relative and just makes you a legend in your own mind. We all do not subscribe to it.
      
      Don't speak of the sty in my eye while ignoring the rafter in your own.
      
      The government managed to bail out corporations to the tune of billions, what do we have to say about that?

      replyreport
      1. 79

         Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         ~ was this decision voted upon?
         No.
         You might have gotten a different outcome, because the Republican wisdom said, "NO BAILING OUT."

         replyreport
         1. 79

            Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Do you remember 2008? Bush and later Obama authorized a corporate bailout from the treasury in response to the economic meltdown of that year.  Remember "to big to fail"? You have to remember that as we both know that you were not born yesterday.
            
            So yes, it was voted upon as the executive branch did not have the authority to make such a massive sum available without congressional approval.

            replyreport
            1. 79

               Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

               ~ well, it shouldn't have been and wasn't advised by Republican thinkers of the day, which of course I remember.

               replyreport
               1. 79

                  Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  But who listens to or values Republican thought?

                  replyreport
                  1. 69

                     abwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                     If more did "listen/value", we'd definitely be in a stronger, more durable and reliable boat right about now.

                     replyreport
                  2. 79

                     Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                     You had your Trump and Republican Congress from 2017-19 in charge, would that not indicate those Republican thoughts were in control for a time?

                     replyreport
                     1. 79

                        Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                        what Republican thinkers do you know, value or read?
                        
                        Oh wait, you don't.
                        Typical for anybody, Republican or Democrat.
                        
                        However, Trump was surrounded by good Republican thinkers. And He did listen to them.
                        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSJxyVJjAfk

                        replyreport
                        1. 79

                           Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                           I know how Republicans think and I don't put it on some sort of pedestal.

                           replyreport
               2. 79

                  Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  What Republican thinkers? Bush, a Republican was in charge as president, can't think of a more prominent Republican thinker than that.
                  
                  And I remember, too.

                  replyreport
                  1. 79

                     Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                     Ha very funny.
                     You know better.

                     replyreport
                     1. 79

                        Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                        Do I?

                        replyreport
                        1. 79

                           Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                           - talking about Bush.
                           https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/12/02/ho … -democrat/

                           replyreport
                           1. 79

                              Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                              Was he not a Republican?
                              
                              Oh, is it that some Republicans are more Republican than other Republicans?

                              replyreport
                              1. 79

                                 Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                 duh.

                                 replyreport
                  2. 89

                     wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                     Are there any thinkers at all anywhere on the Hill?  Not IMO - only cunning creatures looking out for themselves.

                     replyreport
      2. 89

         wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         How many accepting welfare have paid it all back?

         replyreport
         1. 79

            Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

            What about the basic Republican premise that of self reliance and personal responsibility and all of that stuff?
            
            Do we put on the shelf when corporate entities are concerned?
            
            Who knew in 2008 that these titans of industry would or could pay back the loan?

            replyreport
            1. 79

               Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

               There are laws against monopolies.
               https://www.investopedia.com/articles/03/071603.asp
               https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/com … trust-laws

               replyreport
               1. 79

                  Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  We know about the laws against monopolies but that did not stop corporate giants from accumulating great financial and economic power. We seem to have enforced those laws only when we wanted to.
                  
                  Republicans and their laissez faire attitude toward business encouraged monopolies more than discourage them.

                  replyreport
   2. 59

      Fayetteville Fayeposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      That's a whole lot of sweeping generalizations there. It's quite dangerous when we view people or groups  in such absolute terms. What happened to individuality?

      replyreport
7. 79

   Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

   If one chooses to murder and murder is against the law, there are consequences.
   
   Yes, each to their own, with appropriate penalties.

   replyreport
8. 79

   Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

   Maybe, it is each to their own as far as who is to murder in life.

   replyreport
9. 96

   Readmikenowposted 2 years ago

   My question for everyone on this forum is..."Has there ever been a time in the history of this country or any country where there weren't great political divides?"
   
   I don't think things will change because tribalism is part of the human condition.
   
   The only thing that can happen is for people to work together based on their personal interests.  That's it.  The country is attacked, we come together. Our way of life is endangered, we come together, etc.
   
   I've lived in other countries and various states.  It is always the same and never changes no matter where you go.
   
   Am I wrong?

   replyreport
   1. 79

      Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      No, you are right, because ultimately that is what it will come down to.

      replyreport
   2. 59

      Fayetteville Fayeposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      You're not wrong Mike but I don't think we've ever experienced a time where the political divide has turned into such hatred for the other. Now we have folks describing the supporters of the opposite party as evil, degenerate, dangerous and so much more.  I don't think I've ever seen such vitriol.

      replyreport
10. 87

    Sharlee01posted 2 years ago

    Yes, many times dismantling or diverting into another subject. There is no room for debate on one's personal views.  I have found at times one's view is misread or taken out of context, and mistaken as to mean a fact.  And then labeled misinformation.

    replyreport
11. 59

    Fayetteville Fayeposted 2 years ago

    Speaking of ideology...
    
    https://twitter.com/MomsAGAbbott/status … rLpUj8lniQ

    replyreport
    1. 79

       Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

       stupid.

       replyreport
       1. 59

          Fayetteville Fayeposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          The actual reality though

          replyreport
          1. 79

             Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

             still stupid

             replyreport
             1. 79

                Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                ? who would get such a young one pregnant?
                ? where were her parents?
                ? why do we not call out the child abuse that obviously occurred?

                replyreport
12. 79

    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    PS If religious institutions, (churches of any faith) do not teach abstinence, then it is too late after a girl gets pregnant. 
    
    Failures, all.
    
    No, it is nothing but rude and heartless to go to an abortion clinic and express your holy views and pray your holy prayers! Stay away! It is way too late for YOUR input.
    
    And thanks for nothing.

    replyreport
13. 79

    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    Abstinence before marriage is doable and recommended.  However such an expectation cannot be forced, but rather inspired and encouraged. Let the youth see the wisdom in such a proposal:
    
    *keeping your freedom
    *establishing your career path
    *waiting for the right love
    *creating an appropriate and secure nest
    
    At the same time, let them know the dangers of unwanted pregnancy:
    
    *the expense
    *the heartache
    *the inconvenience
    *the difficulty of raising a child without adequate means of finanical and psychological support
    
    However, if the world/social environment, (Hollywood, social media, internet sources, etc.) is full of permissive sexual messages and erotic images, what are religious organizations and even parents supposed to do???
    
    Its a wicked world. What makes it so?
    Selfishness and Egotism.
    
    Sex, after all, is pleasing oneself and oneself only.
    So, do it alone and don't risk your sperm escaping gleefully into some random egg.

    replyreport