Let's talk Moore


JoCa
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

The LDS church is the number one promoter of left wing values in the country.

Erm, I really haven't noticed birds in church.  Further, when people bring wings to potluck dinners, I'm pretty sure the right wings are in there with the left wings.  No.  Leftyism may be A-OK, but I'm pretty sure the Church doesn't favor left wings over right wings.  (And now I want to go to  Kentucky Fried Chicken.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, JoCa said:

And that is how the leftist always describe it. 

"We need amnesty b/c of . . .well think of the children!!!"

The funny thing is that most LDS members (especially in Utah) live in a very heavily single majority demographic; if they actually had to deal with the problems that most of the rest of the country is reeling from they would very quickly start singing a different tune.  It's all well and good to "think of the children" when where you live is 80+% culturally homogeneous.  Start living in an area that over a span of 10 years goes from 80% culturally homogenous to 40% and then see the drugs, the crime, etc. come into your area and then tell me what you think of "preserving families".  

Tell me what you think of "preserving families" when driving down the interstate you see Mexican flags waving on the backs of trucks . . .

Yeah I do want to preserve families . . .my own.

I have spent the last 20 years living near Seattle. Before that, central Pennsylvania.

But I suppose now you'll change tactics and simply dismiss me because I'm obviously brainwashed by the Seattle contingent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Vort said:

I have spent the last 20 years living near Seattle. Before that, central Pennsylvania.

But I suppose now you'll change tactics and simply dismiss me because I'm obviously brainwashed by the Seattle contingent.

Nope . . . just look at the demographics dude.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Seattle

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_metropolitan_area#Demographics

You're about 30 years behind DC; big, big difference.  You haven't had to face communities getting totally decimated by changing demographics. . . just wait Vort, just wait . . .but by the time you start screaming about it-it will be too late and all one can say is "told ya so".

If you are a conservative, all the statistics show that in the next 30 years, you are completely toast due to demographics.  The only thing saving conservatives right now is that by and large minorities don't vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Godless
4 hours ago, JoCa said:

And that is how the leftist always describe it. 

"We need amnesty b/c of . . .well think of the children!!!"

I can assure you that Vort is probably one of the least leftist people on this board. And last I checked, preserving immigrant families and showing compassion to those less fortunate than us was 100% in line with the teachings of Christ and the LDS Church. Something about "love your neighbor" and "unto the least of these my brethren" I think. I dunno, I'm just a dumb atheist. 

That doesn't mean open borders. It simply means having an immigration policy that has respect for human dignity and the integrity of families.

4 hours ago, JoCa said:

The funny thing is that most LDS members (especially in Utah) live in a very heavily single majority demographic; if they actually had to deal with the problems that most of the rest of the country is reeling from they would very quickly start singing a different tune.  It's all well and good to "think of the children" when where you live is 80+% culturally homogeneous.  Start living in an area that over a span of 10 years goes from 80% culturally homogenous to 40% and then see the drugs, the crime, etc. come into your area and then tell me what you think of "preserving families".  

I've been a part of the "white minority" my whole life and I think you're being overly dramatic. Multiculturalism is only dangerous to those who are irrationally afraid of it. The rest of us get along just fine, thank you. 

4 hours ago, JoCa said:

Tell me what you think of "preserving families" when driving down the interstate you see Mexican flags waving on the backs of trucks . . .

What does that have to do with anything? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Godless said:

I've been a part of the "white minority" my whole life and I think you're being overly dramatic. Multiculturalism is only dangerous to those who are irrationally afraid of it. The rest of us get along just fine, thank you. 

What does that have to do with anything? 

You are liberal, that's fine multi-multiculturalism isn't a danger to you b/c you are liberal.  So of course it isn't a danger to you.

Politics and nations are all about power.  Power comes in the form of rules and laws.

Mexicans flying a mexican flag in the US is a big deal b/c it signifies that they hold more allegiance to their home country vs. their immigrant country. This will then correspond that they will vote for individuals who hold more allegiance to their home country.

You being from Texas of all people should understand how this works.  You should study up on the history of how and why Texas became it's own nation.  A nation is built upon a shared cultural, historical, and ethical background.

At some point when the differences between culture and background becomes too large, nations split.  It has happened 1000s of times in history and we are absolutely foolish to believe that we are so much more enlightened than our ancestors that it won't happen to us.

Multiculturalism is a huge danger to conservatives simply because of statistics; statistics don't lie.  90% of blacks vote Democratic. something like over 70% of Hispanics vote Democratic (excepting Cubans funny enough b/c  they know the dangers of socialism).  The vast, vast, vast majority of minorities vote Democratic.  And it doesn't have anything to do with the Republican message.  This is why multiculturalism is pushed by MSM . . . they are liberal, they know the vast majority of minorities vote liberal so they push it to obtain more and more power.

Except I'm of the belief I don't think when minorities are the majority in this country they will be so "accepting" of the "new minority".

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/11/30/texas-student-newspaper-blasted-over-anti-white-your-dna-is-abomination-column.html?intcmp=ob_article_sidebar_video&intcmp=obnetwork

Recently (can't find the link) a HS girl wrote on the girls bathroom mirror "It's okay to be white N*******".  School went up in arms, held a big after-school meeting with parents to combat "racism" . . .yeah well eventually it comes out that a black girl had written it on the mirror.  I'm glad she had the guts to come forward; kudos to her for at least owning up to her mistake (the same thing happened at a college campus last year).

If you don't recognize what's going on . . .you aren't paying attention. 

I clarify to note that I wish that all members of every race, nationality were members of the Church; it is only under the Gospel of Jesus Christ that unites every one that a true multicultural united nation could ever be built.  In that case we could all live together harmoniously without regard to nation or race.  That will happen when Christ returns. 

But seeing as we are only ~1% of the population currently, good luck on that . . .until He reigns again anything else will lead to heartache.

I have absolutely 0 problem with anyone from any race coming to the US as long as when you immigrate you take on the historical cultural linguistic values of this country.  I don't believe that is an unreasonable request and it is not multiculturalism.

Edited by JoCa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Godless
9 hours ago, JoCa said:

You are liberal, that's fine multi-multiculturalism isn't a danger to you b/c you are liberal.  So of course it isn't a danger to you.

I think you could find plenty of conservatives who feel the same way I do. In fact, based on past discussions in this very forum, I can guarantee it. 

Unrelated: do you know a guy named @yjacket

Quote

Mexicans flying a mexican flag in the US is a big deal b/c it signifies that they hold more allegiance to their home country vs. their immigrant country. This will then correspond that they will vote for individuals who hold more allegiance to their home country.

I'm curious what your thoughts are on the confederate flag. 

Quote

You being from Texas of all people should understand how this works.  You should study up on the history of how and why Texas became it's own nation.  A nation is built upon a shared cultural, historical, and ethical background.

At some point when the differences between culture and background becomes too large, nations split.  It has happened 1000s of times in history and we are absolutely foolish to believe that we are so much more enlightened than our ancestors that it won't happen to us.

I'm not from Texas, I just live here. And down here you'll hear very different takes on the Texas war for independence depending on who you ask. All that aside, it's worth noting that historical context is vital when comparing cultural trends throughout the centuries. We're no longer living in a time of imperialism and colonialism. The world has gotten smaller and more connected in the last 150 years. 

Quote

Multiculturalism is a huge danger to conservatives simply because of statistics; statistics don't lie.  90% of blacks vote Democratic. something like over 70% of Hispanics vote Democratic (excepting Cubans funny enough b/c  they know the dangers of socialism).  The vast, vast, vast majority of minorities vote Democratic.  And it doesn't have anything to do with the Republican message.  This is why multiculturalism is pushed by MSM . . . they are liberal, they know the vast majority of minorities vote liberal so they push it to obtain more and more power.

Really? You don't think messages like "All lives matter" and "Build the wall" might be pushing minorities to the left? 

 

Edited by Godless
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
43 minutes ago, Godless said:

I think you could find plenty of conservatives who feel the same way I do. In fact, based on past discussions in this very forum, I can guarantee it. 

The left is all in favor of diversity and multiculturalism, as long as minorities vote the way they tell them to.The moment you (generic!) see a minority vote for a republican or speak out against gay marriage, than diversity is just an annoying buzzword. 

That said, sometimes people are afraid of a more diverse society simply because they are indeed, bigoted in someway. 

 

Edited by MormonGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, MormonGator said:

That said, sometimes people are afraid of a more diverse society simply because they are indeed, bigoted in someway. 

All fine and dandy to say that until the laws start changing.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/11/30/kate-steinle-s-accused-killer-found-not-guilty-murder.html

Ben Shapiro had a pretty good take:

https://twitter.com/benshapiro

I don't particularly care to question a Jury as it's the bedrock of this nation . . .but it seems pretty dang obvious that involuntary manslaughter would at least fit the definition.  These same things happened 50+ years ago in the South.  White man gets accused of murder and the jury lets them off.  It is ludicrous to think that it can't happen in reverse.  It was wrong then and wrong now.

No it's not bigoted . . .it's just an inherent recognition that at it's core human beings are tribal and whether or not you individually are tribal is irrelevant it's the recognition that other people are tribal.  No, it's not bigoted, it's just a recognition that human beings have an extremely hard time living in a group of people that do not conform to the tribe.

History is full of examples.  I get the black's complaints about being in jail . . .it's b/c the drug laws are targeted towards minorities.  Making marijuana illegal was purely based on a racial thing (discourage Mexicans in the US).  I'm totally for removing drug laws . . . but I'm not so stupid to think that if I were in the minority that laws would not be created to oppress that minority.  It happens all over the world, it's happened for 1000s of years.  It happens on group level, on a local level, state level and a national level.

Take for example this forum; there is little doubt that I bring an enormous amount of diverse ideas into the "LDS.net" tribe, I do not conform to most of the tribe . . .for that I have gotten a lot of grief.  That is fine and generally speaking I do not personally attack unless attacked, if I have done otherwise, I certainly do apologize. 

We are tribal when it comes to the LDS Church, generally for staunch members, the least bit of criticism raises the hackles and defenses.

The only way to remove that tribal instinct (which I am totally for) is to have some mechanism whereby something much larger binds everyone together; this is how and why nations are formed.  So praytell when you have 15% of the US population that is foreign born what binds them together? What binds them together with the other 85% of the population. 

Binding occurs when people have things in common; this is why you can instantly met someone you've never met from your Alma Mater and you're high-fiving each other and talking about the latest football game . . .it's why you can met a LDS member you've never seen before half-way across the world that you can't even speak the same language, you are giving each other hugs and singing songs together, laughing etc . . . b/c something bigger than you binds you together that you have in common. 

Prior to 1964, most immigrants where European and Protestant; so it was much easier for them to get bound into the tribe of The United States.  Yeah there were derogatory names used for them, but at the end you could go to Church with them, there was a shared background.

What binds those foreigners coming into the US today?  What binds a Muslim refugee from some God forsaken world into the US?  And unfortunately, just being a fellow human being on this earth that wants to live in the US isn't enough to bind people together.

It's what most "enlightened" people can't seem to figure out about Trump and why he won; it's why Trump won, b/c it's never been about race, it's about protecting the Tribe of the United States; if you want to become part of the tribe of the United States and share it's cultural, historical values great come on in-regardless of your race. 

Multiculturalism by its very definition it antithetical to historical US culture.  And what will happen is that over time when the dominant historical US culture becomes weak enough another culture will rise to take its place with a different set of laws and rules.  Plenty of people out there truly believe "Hate speech is not free speech". When a significant enough portion of the population believes that, laws will follow and the courts and Bill of Rights be danged.  The history of the US shows this, it will happen again. 

When Christ comes, then we can talk about multiculturalism . . .

Edited by JoCa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/29/2017 at 3:41 PM, Godless said:

I can assure you that Vort is probably one of the least leftist people on this board. And last I checked, preserving immigrant families and showing compassion to those less fortunate than us was 100% in line with the teachings of Christ and the LDS Church. Something about "love your neighbor" and "unto the least of these my brethren" I think. I dunno, I'm just a dumb atheist. 

That doesn't mean open borders. It simply means having an immigration policy that has respect for human dignity and the integrity of families.

I think @JoCa is part right here:  the Church’s emphasis, in the immigration debate, on preserving families; is superficially highly selective at best.  I’ve been in the business of separating families for the better part of a decade—in divorce court, then in criminal court, and now in DCFS cases—and no one from the Church had ever said “boo” to me about it. Because most people, even the Church leadership, understands that sometimes families just have to be separated—there are some things in our society that are more important than family contiguity.  And of course, deportation does not necessitate the dissolution of a family—the family is free to travel to the homeland of the deported member and continue their lives there.  

So no, from the Church’s standpoint, this isn’t about keeping families together at all costs—and therein lies the rub.  Read the tea leaves a bit, and it becomes apparent that the Church is basically saying that continued family life is more important than the sort of cultural homogeniety that America is generally considered to have enjoyed up through the late 20th century.  

From a civil/historical/secular standpoint @JoCa is right to be scared, because population replacements rarely work out well for those on the receiving end—whether Native Americans, ancient Romans, ancient Jews, Rwandans, Czechoslovakians, Bosnians, South Africans, et cetera.  Progressive westerners may have bought in to the idea of cultural relativism (or even, in many cases, Western inferiority)—but middle- and far-easterners, Latin Americans, and American minorities generally are all still very ready to believe in the superiority of their own races/cultures/histories and their own ethnic birthrights to regional/global hegemony.  As a matter of historical trends, this isn’t likely to end in a a pretty way.  The Book of Mormon seems to partially confirms this with its prophecies about the seed of the Lamanites (Hispanics or Native Americans?) being as a young lion in the midst of the Gentiles in America (European-descended folk?) in the last days.  If you take that reading—yes, there WILL be race wars in America, and there’s no stopping it; so all you can do is batten down the hatches, stay out of the conflict as best you can, and prepare to rebuild.

What the Church is implicitly asking us to do, is to come to grips with the decay/collapse of America as we knew it and accept on faith that the Church is ready to step into the resulting cultural, economic, and maybe even political void to establish something better.  We are being asked to believe that this time won’t be like all those other times.  Many LDS conservatives—and I think @JoCa falls squarely into this category; and I tend to flirt with it myself—aren’t ready to take that leap of faith, and still think that there might be a way to cram the genie back into the bottle to (coining a phrase) make America great again; thus, the Church’s actions smack of betrayal. 

As a conservative, I’ve spent a lifetime watching progressive Mormons try to reconcile the Church’s direction with their own conflicting world views, values, and sociopolitical allegiances.  I guess it’s now my turn to feel that same sort of tension.  Conservatism tells me I am under siege and must defend myself.  The Church is quietly telling us—you can’t win this one, stay out of it, echoing  Isaiah of old who said:

Quote

Associate yourselves, O ye people, and ye shall be broken in pieces; and give ear, all ye of far countries: gird yourselves [for war], and ye shall be broken in pieces; GIRD YOURSELVES AND YE SHALL BE BROKEN IN PIECES.  (Isaiah 8:9, emphasis added)

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Godless
2 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I think @JoCa is part right here:  the Church’s emphasis, in the immigration debate, on preserving families; is superficially highly selective at best.  I’ve been in the business of separating families for the better part of a decade—in divorce court, then in criminal court, and now in DCFS cases—and no one from the Church had ever said “boo” to me about it. Because most people, even the Church leadership, understands that sometimes families just have to be separated—there are some things in our society that are more important than family contiguity.  And of course, deportation does not necessitate the dissolution of a family—the family is free to travel to the homeland of the deported member and continue their lives there.  

So no, from the Church’s standpoint, this isn’t about keeping families together at all costs—and therein lies the rub.  Read the tea leaves a bit, and it becomes apparent that the Church is basically saying that continued family life is more important than the sort of cultural homogeniety that America is generally considered to have enjoyed up through the late 20th century.  

From a civil/historical/secular standpoint @JoCa is right to be scared, because population replacements rarely work out well for those on the receiving end—whether Native Americans, ancient Romans, ancient Jews, Rwandans, Czechoslovakians, Bosnians, South Africans, et cetera.  Progressive westerners may have bought in to the idea of cultural relativism (or even, in many cases, Western inferiority)—but middle- and far-easterners, Latin Americans, and American minorities generally are all still very ready to believe in the superiority of their own races/cultures/histories and their own ethnic birthrights to regional/global hegemony.  As a matter of historical trends, this isn’t likely to end in a a pretty way.  The Book of Mormon seems to partially confirms this with its prophecies about the seed of the Lamanites (Hispanics or Native Americans?) being as a young lion in the midst of the Gentiles in America (European-descended folk?) in the last days.  If you take that reading—yes, there WILL be race wars in America, and there’s no stopping it; so all you can do is batten down the hatches, stay out of the conflict as best you can, and prepare to rebuild.

What the Church is implicitly asking us to do, is to come to grips with the decay/collapse of America as we knew it and accept on faith that the Church is ready to step into the resulting cultural, economic, and maybe even political void to establish something better.  We are being asked to believe that this time won’t be like all those other times.  Many LDS conservatives—and I think @JoCa falls squarely into this category; and I tend to flirt with it myself—aren’t ready to take that leap of faith, and still think that there might be a way to cram the genie back into the bottle to (coining a phrase) make America great again; thus, the Church’s actions smack of betrayal. 

As a conservative, I’ve spent a lifetime watching progressive Mormons try to reconcile the Church’s direction with their own conflicting world views, values, and sociopolitical allegiances.  I guess it’s now my turn to feel that same sort of tension.  Conservatism tells me I am under siege and must defend myself.  The Church is quietly telling us—you can’t win this one, stay out of it, echoing  Isaiah of old who said:

I've always had an immense amount of respect for the Church's policy of political neutrality. And while the Church, from an organizational standpoint, is generally going to align with conservative values, there's no line in the sand that keeps the narrative strictly in line with the GOP. Rather than left and right, the Church deals in right and wrong. This will rock the liberal boat quite a bit of the time, but it will also rock the conservative boat on occasion. I can see how it would be a huge test of faith regardless of which way you lean. Sometimes I feel like people are more passionate about their political views than their religous ones, so it can't be easy to see your church contradict your politics. But then again, being faithful isn't supposed to be easy, is it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
5 minutes ago, Godless said:

I've always had an immense amount of respect for the Church's policy of political neutrality. And while the Church, from an organizational standpoint, is generally going to align with conservative values, there's no line in the sand that keeps the narrative strictly in line with the GOP. Rather than left and right, the Church deals in right and wrong. This will rock the liberal boat quite a bit of the time, but it will also rock the conservative boat on occasion. I can see how it would be a huge test of faith regardless of which way you lean. Sometimes I feel like people are more passionate about their political views than their religous ones, so it can't be easy to see your church contradict your politics. But then again, being faithful isn't supposed to be easy, is it?

You can also separate your political views from your religious ones. I don't want the LDS church making rules for people who aren't LDS anymore than I want  an atheist telling me what to do. Libertarianism baby. You leave me alone, I leave you alone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Godless
16 hours ago, JoCa said:

All fine and dandy to say that until the laws start changing.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/11/30/kate-steinle-s-accused-killer-found-not-guilty-murder.html

Ben Shapiro had a pretty good take:

https://twitter.com/benshapiro

 

I have no clue what take that is because you just posted a link to his account and the dude tweets about 50,000 times per day. I did notice, however, that he retweeted this Red State article that suggests that the sensationalism of this story on the right is probably unwarranted. It includes this little nugget:

"One quick but important note: Garcia Zarate is not going free. The jury did convict him of a lesser charge of being a felon in possession of a gun, and he now awaits sentencing, which will be 16 months, two years, or three years in state prison. He has already served two years and will get credit for that time, but even if he is not given the maximum sentence, there is an outstanding U.S. Marshals Service warrant against him, and despite the sanctuary cities policy, San Francisco apparently does turn over undocumented immigrants to the feds when they have a warrant. So he is either getting deported, or spending more time in prison first, and then getting deported."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Godless said:

I have no clue what take that is because you just posted a link to his account and the dude tweets about 50,000 times per day. I did notice, however, that he retweeted this Red State article that suggests that the sensationalism of this story on the right is probably unwarranted. It includes this little nugget:

"One quick but important note: Garcia Zarate is not going free. The jury did convict him of a lesser charge of being a felon in possession of a gun, and he now awaits sentencing, which will be 16 months, two years, or three years in state prison. He has already served two years and will get credit for that time, but even if he is not given the maximum sentence, there is an outstanding U.S. Marshals Service warrant against him, and despite the sanctuary cities policy, San Francisco apparently does turn over undocumented immigrants to the feds when they have a warrant. So he is either getting deported, or spending more time in prison first, and then getting deported."

Yeah; it’s one thing for San Francisco to ignore an ICE hold; quite another to ignore a federal court warrant.

By the way, stay tuned for a wrongful death lawsuit against the city.  It’s gonna be yuuuuge, believe me . . . and discovery will be a ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Senator Al Franken to resign amid sexual misconduct claims

I am reluctantly forced to admit that he makes a point in the video which resonates with me a bit.  

There is an image forming in my mind.  I don't believe this image reflects reality, and yet it is forming in my mind.  It is an image of the left being the new guardians of female purity and virtue, and the right being a bunch of lecherous wagon-circling power-keepers.

I am not happy with this image, or with the current state of affairs which moves our culture a smidgen closer to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
26 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

There is an image forming in my mind.  I don't believe this image reflects reality, and yet it is forming in my mind.  It is an image of the left being the new guardians of female purity and virtue, and the right being a bunch of lecherous wagon-circling power-keepers.

Yup. That doesn't mean I agree with the left on this or that issue, I don't. But it is increasingly clear that the right is now becoming what they apparently hated the left for being in the 1990's. Willing to make excuses for all sorts of perverted behavior as long as said pervert votes the correct way on issues. 

Edited by MormonGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Yup. That doesn't mean I agree with the left on this or that issue, I don't. But it is increasingly clear that the right is now becoming what they apparently hated the left for being in the 1990's. Willing to make excuses for all sorts of perverted behavior as long as said pervert votes the correct way on issues. 

@Just_A_Guy predicted the decay of the Right with the election of Trump..  It is sad to see him proven correct

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When power is held by the slimmest of margins short-term thinking reigns triumphant. Conservatives know that they may lose control of one or both houses in the 2018 elections. They want to place conservative judges and pass as much legislation as possible in the short time that may be remaining. So...they hold their noses and let Moore in. Democrats, being out of power by the slimmest of margins, are hoping that this play for the moral high ground will be enough to push them back into power next year. Their track record is no better than the GOP overall, but for right now, the look is that the Democrats are the more righteous players.

Personally, I wish we could do a political "CONTROL...ALT...DELETE" and bring in a brand new bunch of citizen legislatures. Short of that, I look at the GOP with new-found wariness, but trust the Democrats no more than before. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share