Raising social involvement, self awareness and self improvement topics, because our communities are the sum of our personal beliefs, behaviors, action or inaction. Only "we" can improve our family, work place, school, city, country, etc.
Wednesday, July 31, 2019
Your Political Compass
Now this is a little embarrassing...
I scored Left of Center on this tool...
Who would have thunk... :-)
libertarian 1 : an advocate of the doctrine of free will 2a : a person who upholds the principles of individual liberty especially of thought and action b capitalized : a member of a political party advocating libertarian principles
libertine 1 disparaging : a freethinker especially in religious matters 2 : a person who is unrestrained by convention or morality specifically : one leading a dissolute life libertines indulging a variety of amorous impulses
Libertarian/ Authoritarian is not a "?" I rate a zero. I am a perfect social moderate, by your test.
The reason I suggest a different interpretation of the axis is because libertarians seek to live their moral code without government interference, while modern liberals seem opposed to "authority" in any form, including any moral code or convention. Somewhere between those two are the anarchists.
I think "authority" is good, it just depends on who wields it, to what end, and whether it is accepted voluntarily or forced upon you.
Hey, it's your test. If I'm a perfect social moderate by that standard, then you are wrong about my positions on "birth control/abortion, LGBT rights, drugs and pornography." At least insofar as you consider them "extreme."
My guess is that your "do not regulate business or hold them accountable stances" balanced your desire to use government mandate to force people to live the way you wish they would.
And I don't think there is a "perfect in a test like this.
Finally, it is not my test. A FB friend posted a link to and I just tried it out.
And I prefer not to pigeonhole people. Of course if you don't, it makes it harder to tell others what they think. But if you do, then you don't have to listen to them when they tell you; you can simply deny that is what they think.
There's another way to look at this: "Our Constitution is suited to a moral people, and to no other." I prefer to see government stay out of most behavior mandates, but to have people self-govern under the authority of some fixed moral code.
Be they LGBT, pregnant and struggling with what to do, adults using recreational drugs, adults enjoying adult pornography, adults having consensual sex, Liberals, etc.
Thankfully the US Constitution prevents folks like you from controlling all of the other citizens in the country. :-)
I am most certain that everyone is working off of a moral code, unfortunately or fortunately it is not yours. :-)
I pigeonhole people based on their beliefs as expressed in behavior. I don't assign them arbitrarily like you do. Do all LGBT people think alike, even about LGBT issues, and act them out? Do all women think exactly alike about abortion? Do adults having consensual sex realize that they are "sinning" but do it anyway? Or maybe they ARE married? Liberals have this expressed belief that everyone has their own moral code, which means they get to make it up as they go along rather than ascribing to some general, time-tested morality that holds society together. By your fruits ye shall know them. If you want to know what somebody thinks, ask the question and then listen to the answer.
"Our Constitution is suited to a moral people, and to no other."
You have no idea how correct that quote is. And it's the very reason this immoral administration and its immoral enablers are threatening the stability of our Republic.
The quote does not say immoral PERSON, it says immoral PEOPLE. Tolerating random killings and tolerating (or making) constant insults on traditional morality does not make us a moral people.
Thankfully, you are right. The majority of the voters in this country are moral people, but by a quirk of our electoral process, the immoral choice was elected.
PLEASE add "IMHO". half the country believes they ARE moral people and still voted for Trump. The other half believes they are moral people and voted against him, or they voted for Satan's handmaiden, take your pick.
"I pigeonhole people based on their beliefs as expressed in behavior. I don't assign them arbitrarily like you do."
I am not sure I have done much "arbitrarily" in my whole life. Over analyzing is one of my personal demons.
And any thoughts I have regarding you and your beliefs come from many years of exchanging comments with you.
Please remember that this twist came from my questioning your social flexibility score.
"My guess is that your "do not regulate business or hold them accountable stances" balanced your desire to use government mandate to force people to live the way you wish they would."
I think I will paste in the questions one day and we can see if I was correct? Then again you may be okay with personal freedoms like people being LGBT and marrying who they wish, having abortions, having sex out of marriage, smoking pot, etc. :-)
I think you may fail to see the distinction when you say, "Then again you may be okay with personal freedoms like people being LGBT and marrying who they wish, having abortions, having sex out of marriage, smoking pot, etc. :-)"
--I am OK with people being LGBT, but when they ask for official government sanction and benefits, it ceases being a personal freedom and becomes a government issue. I am OK with their freedom to be LGBT, so long as they are OK with my freedom to object, privately at least.
--I am OK with people having abortions of necessity, but I believe they government should restrict abortions that take the life of a viable human being. I believe a strong moral conscience should prevent most other abortions AND the need for them.
I was quite pleased with my zero score, because I strongly subscribe to the notion of higher authority in most social matters, balanced between government edict and a shared traditional morality.
I quote: "Moral people do not: - vilify asylum seekers - tolerate children to be torn from their parent - tolerate their leader to spread lies and hate"
You are correct. Why would you imply that anyone DID?
My objection IS irrelevant to the Constitution, that is correct. It is based on something else that is NOT a government purview. Everybody's "freedom" in that regard is not governed by the Constitution or by law, so why do you want the law to curb my freedom?
The government cannot curtail the rights of LGBTQ+ individuals. You wish for the government to be able to do so. I don't give a flying fig about your stupid feelings on the matter.
I didn't say "treat" (or mistreat) anybody. I said they were entitled to their opinion and should not be penalized for holding it.
Moose, government is not supposed to curtail the natural rights of ANYBODY. But when government starts creating "rights" and issuing "privileges" it becomes a matter where individuals and the society are entitled to weigh in, or at least to hold an opinion-- that, too, is a natural right. Do you believe government should tell a baker whom he may create a cake for?
The government is not creating a right in this case. It is protecting rights. Arguments against homosexuality are religious in nature, so such ideas cannot, because of the first amendment, be enshrined in American law. Nobody's rights are being taken away by allowing LGBTQ+ people to live freely. You're free to believe whatever you want and exercise that freedom up until it infringes on someone else's rights.
au contraire. Criminal law is about behavior. LGBT as a "status" is not about behavior, so it cannot be criminalized. But LGBT behavior can be, but isn't. That does not mean it cannot be morally opposed, whether that is a matter of religion or something else. You do not force your version of religion on me.
What studies? If there were genetics involved, it would never get passed on to subsequent generations, the "survival of the fittest" would eliminate those who do not reproduce. Sorry if that offends, and I won't go further.
I'm at (+3,0)
ReplyDeleteAssuming such "tests" have any validity whatsoever, which I doubt.
ReplyDelete3.0 Fiscal and ?.? Social
ReplyDeleteEconomic -6.0
ReplyDeleteLibertarian/Authoritarian -7.54
Moose
Economic Left/Right: -4.13
ReplyDeleteSocial Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.41
I took it again...
ReplyDeleteEconomic Left/Right: -0.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.05
That seems more like me... :-)
Though I am still scoring Left leaning...
They will have to take away my Conservative Card...
So, I really am the "radical conservative" here? Economically and socially? Wow.
ReplyDeleteSo explain something to me: "Authoritarian" I understand. But why is the other end of the axis "Libertarian" and not "Libertine"?
libertarian
ReplyDelete1 : an advocate of the doctrine of free will
2a : a person who upholds the principles of individual liberty especially of thought and action
b capitalized : a member of a political party advocating libertarian principles
libertine
1 disparaging : a freethinker especially in religious matters
2 : a person who is unrestrained by convention or morality
specifically : one leading a dissolute life
libertines indulging a variety of amorous impulses
I think Libertarian or Anarchist would be the correct opposite of Authoritarian.
ReplyDeleteOnly an Authoritarian would use the word Libertine to judge people who believe and act differently than themselves.
So how badly do you want government to enforce your beliefs on the free peoples of the USA?
Economic Left/Right: +3.0
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: +?.?
Libertarian/ Authoritarian is not a "?" I rate a zero. I am a perfect social moderate, by your test.
ReplyDeleteThe reason I suggest a different interpretation of the axis is because libertarians seek to live their moral code without government interference, while modern liberals seem opposed to "authority" in any form, including any moral code or convention. Somewhere between those two are the anarchists.
I think "authority" is good, it just depends on who wields it, to what end, and whether it is accepted voluntarily or forced upon you.
“...while modern liberals seem opposed to "authority" in any form, including any moral code or convention.”
ReplyDeleteI don’t think you know any liberals.
Moose
Somehow I find it hard to believe you scored:
ReplyDeleteEconomic Left/Right: +3.0
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: +0.0
I mean with your desires to:
- control birth control / abortion
- control LGBT rights
- I don't know how you feel about drugs / pornography?
But that is interesting.
I am not sure I agree with this graphic, but it is interesting.
ReplyDeleteThe reality is that fiscal Liberals can be anywhere on the Left.
And Anarchists are an extreme, not in the middle of anything.
And Liberals definitely believe in Authority, that is why they pass so many regulations.
Personally I prefer the Nolan Diagram version
ReplyDeleteHey, it's your test. If I'm a perfect social moderate by that standard, then you are wrong about my positions on "birth control/abortion, LGBT rights, drugs and pornography." At least insofar as you consider them "extreme."
ReplyDeleteMy guess is that your "do not regulate business or hold them accountable stances" balanced your desire to use government mandate to force people to live the way you wish they would.
ReplyDeleteAnd I don't think there is a "perfect in a test like this.
Finally, it is not my test. A FB friend posted a link to and I just tried it out.
As noted above, I prefer the Nolan Diagrams
And I prefer not to pigeonhole people. Of course if you don't, it makes it harder to tell others what they think. But if you do, then you don't have to listen to them when they tell you; you can simply deny that is what they think.
ReplyDeleteThere's another way to look at this: "Our Constitution is suited to a moral people, and to no other." I prefer to see government stay out of most behavior mandates, but to have people self-govern under the authority of some fixed moral code.
ReplyDeleteOf course you love pigeon hole people...
ReplyDeleteBe they LGBT, pregnant and struggling with what to do, adults using recreational drugs, adults enjoying adult pornography, adults having consensual sex, Liberals, etc.
Thankfully the US Constitution prevents folks like you from controlling all of the other citizens in the country. :-)
I am most certain that everyone is working off of a moral code, unfortunately or fortunately it is not yours. :-)
I pigeonhole people based on their beliefs as expressed in behavior. I don't assign them arbitrarily like you do. Do all LGBT people think alike, even about LGBT issues, and act them out? Do all women think exactly alike about abortion? Do adults having consensual sex realize that they are "sinning" but do it anyway? Or maybe they ARE married? Liberals have this expressed belief that everyone has their own moral code, which means they get to make it up as they go along rather than ascribing to some general, time-tested morality that holds society together. By your fruits ye shall know them. If you want to know what somebody thinks, ask the question and then listen to the answer.
ReplyDelete"Our Constitution is suited to a moral people, and to no other."
ReplyDeleteYou have no idea how correct that quote is. And it's the very reason this immoral administration and its immoral enablers are threatening the stability of our Republic.
Moose
The quote does not say immoral PERSON, it says immoral PEOPLE. Tolerating random killings and tolerating (or making) constant insults on traditional morality does not make us a moral people.
ReplyDeleteThankfully, you are right. The majority of the voters in this country are moral people, but by a quirk of our electoral process, the immoral choice was elected.
ReplyDeleteMoose
PLEASE add "IMHO". half the country believes they ARE moral people and still voted for Trump. The other half believes they are moral people and voted against him, or they voted for Satan's handmaiden, take your pick.
ReplyDeleteJerry,
ReplyDeleteI am more fascinated by:
"I pigeonhole people based on their beliefs as expressed in behavior. I don't assign them arbitrarily like you do."
I am not sure I have done much "arbitrarily" in my whole life. Over analyzing is one of my personal demons.
And any thoughts I have regarding you and your beliefs come from many years of exchanging comments with you.
Please remember that this twist came from my questioning your social flexibility score.
"My guess is that your "do not regulate business or hold them accountable stances" balanced your desire to use government mandate to force people to live the way you wish they would."
I think I will paste in the questions one day and we can see if I was correct? Then again you may be okay with personal freedoms like people being LGBT and marrying who they wish, having abortions, having sex out of marriage, smoking pot, etc. :-)
I am starting to disagree with this.
ReplyDelete"ARE moral people and still voted for Trump"
Moral people do not:
- vilify asylum seekers
- tolerate children to be torn from their parent
- tolerate their leader to spread lies and hate
I think Trump supporters just are people who want their way no matter who it hurts...
- many of them seem to put money ahead of the needs of other humans
- and have totally missed the meaning of the Good Samaritan
One insulting misconception at a time...
ReplyDeleteI think you may fail to see the distinction when you say, "Then again you may be okay with personal freedoms like people being LGBT and marrying who they wish, having abortions, having sex out of marriage, smoking pot, etc. :-)"
--I am OK with people being LGBT, but when they ask for official government sanction and benefits, it ceases being a personal freedom and becomes a government issue. I am OK with their freedom to be LGBT, so long as they are OK with my freedom to object, privately at least.
--I am OK with people having abortions of necessity, but I believe they government should restrict abortions that take the life of a viable human being. I believe a strong moral conscience should prevent most other abortions AND the need for them.
I was quite pleased with my zero score, because I strongly subscribe to the notion of higher authority in most social matters, balanced between government edict and a shared traditional morality.
I quote: "Moral people do not:
ReplyDelete- vilify asylum seekers
- tolerate children to be torn from their parent
- tolerate their leader to spread lies and hate"
You are correct. Why would you imply that anyone DID?
You are correct that sometimes God works through our government.
ReplyDeleteDo you even watch the news or listen to our President speak?
Trump Fact Check 1
Trump Fact Check 2
Trump Fact Check 3
"I am OK with their freedom to be LGBT, so long as they are OK with my freedom to object, privately at least."
ReplyDeleteYour objection is irrelevant to the Constitutional freedoms of LGBTQ+ people. But you Republicans have never much cared for the Constitution.
Moose
My objection IS irrelevant to the Constitution, that is correct. It is based on something else that is NOT a government purview. Everybody's "freedom" in that regard is not governed by the Constitution or by law, so why do you want the law to curb my freedom?
ReplyDeleteThe government cannot curtail the rights of LGBTQ+ individuals. You wish for the government to be able to do so. I don't give a flying fig about your stupid feelings on the matter.
ReplyDeleteMoose
Jerry,
ReplyDeleteAre you saying that the white supremacists should still be free to judge and treat minorities than white folk?
I didn't say "treat" (or mistreat) anybody. I said they were entitled to their opinion and should not be penalized for holding it.
ReplyDeleteMoose, government is not supposed to curtail the natural rights of ANYBODY. But when government starts creating "rights" and issuing "privileges" it becomes a matter where individuals and the society are entitled to weigh in, or at least to hold an opinion-- that, too, is a natural right. Do you believe government should tell a baker whom he may create a cake for?
Jerry,
ReplyDeleteShould a baker be able to say no to creating a cake for a Black couple?
The government is not creating a right in this case. It is protecting rights. Arguments against homosexuality are religious in nature, so such ideas cannot, because of the first amendment, be enshrined in American law. Nobody's rights are being taken away by allowing LGBTQ+ people to live freely. You're free to believe whatever you want and exercise that freedom up until it infringes on someone else's rights.
ReplyDeleteMoose
Assuming my normal role as Devil's Advocate...
ReplyDeleteWe know being Black is genetic, not behavioral...
Science is still working on LGBT+...
LGBT+ is not a nationally protected class yet.
We do not protect the rights of fur trappers to have cakes made by PETA bakers...
ReplyDeleteStudies have shown a genetic component to homosexuality.
ReplyDeleteMoose
It’s also irrelevant. If Religious belief can be protected, so can other chosen behaviors.
ReplyDeleteMoose
au contraire. Criminal law is about behavior. LGBT as a "status" is not about behavior, so it cannot be criminalized. But LGBT behavior can be, but isn't. That does not mean it cannot be morally opposed, whether that is a matter of religion or something else. You do not force your version of religion on me.
ReplyDeleteWhat studies? If there were genetics involved, it would never get passed on to subsequent generations, the "survival of the fittest" would eliminate those who do not reproduce. Sorry if that offends, and I won't go further.
"If there were genetics involved, it would never get passed on to subsequent generations..."
ReplyDeleteOh, the idiocy. It hurts.
"You do not force your version of religion on me."
But you keep trying to do that to others.
Moose
Moose,
ReplyDeleteAs I have clarified many times. Freedom of Religion was a founding tenant of the country. It is the only belief class that is protected.
The science is still in its infancy and mostly applies to gay men unless something has changed.
Jerry,
God works in mysterious ways.
There are a great many anomalies in nature. It is very complex.
And please prove to Moose that God exists and you deserve as a Christian desrve special protections.
Back to the topic, Jerry believes in using government to legislate morality to his liking.
ReplyDeleteThat is why he is likely more authoritarian than the test showed.
Both DEMs and GOPers like Big Government as long as it enforces their will. :-)
"Jerry believes in using government to legislate morality to his liking." So did the test lie, or did you?
ReplyDeleteMore on that later...
ReplyDelete