What political beliefs do you not share with your political affiliation?

[Persian Vol]

With the political climate as polarized as it is, it seems that if you don't believe in global warming, you are certain to also be pro gun/religious/pro life. Also, if you do believe in global warming, you are most likely to be pro BLM/ pro choice/pro immigrant. Many stances are lumped into the category of either the right or the left, but I created this thread to acknowledge that we are all not mindless political drones that support any cause that our preferred political affiliation advocates.

So my question is this. What political stances do you not agree with in respect to your own party?

I'll go first. I lean left so I will talk about some liberal stances that I do not agree with.

While I certainly am not an advocate for all lives matter, I do criticize the BLM and feminist movements of this day and age. I feel that their movements are well intended, but poorly executed. Regardless of who's fault it is, race relations has only gotten worse in recent years. As for feminist, yelling at men isn't going to solve inequality.

I remember when Justin Timberlake was criticized for cultural appropriation of black people. I found that completely ludicrous. There is too much apologizing for things that they don't need to apologize for.

Leftist are not immune to ignorance when it comes to science. There are plenty of conservatives who are anti global warming and anti evolution. But liberals as a whole aren't immune to anti science beliefs. There are many liberals who believe in alternative medicine, and are anti pills. Now not all liberals believe in alternative medicine, but there are certainly a few coocoo spiritual types who have no idea how the body works physiologically.

 

[hog88]

I'm considered fairly conservative by most who know me and in most instances I vote republican however:

1. Even though I am 100% against abortion I don't think it should be outlawed completely.
2. I'm against the death penalty with the justice system we have today.
3. I'm for legalizing all drugs and regulating them like alcohol.

 

[n_huffhines]

Libertarians are obsessed with the gold standard, all I care about is having a money supply the federal government has trouble manipulating.

In general, libertarians are not very pragmatic (and I used to be more this way). Often they'll forfeit a better result than the status quo because it's not a perfect result.

A lot of libertarians act like rule of law is an end rather than means to an end. They worship the constitution. It's all important to me, but if we get more freedom by breaking the law/not exactly following the constitution, then good.

 

[golfballs]

With the political climate as polarized as it is, it seems that if you don't believe in global warming, you are certain to also be pro gun/religious/pro life. Also, if you do believe in global warming, you are most likely to be pro BLM/ pro choice/pro immigrant. Many stances are lumped into the category of either the right or the left, but I created this thread to acknowledge that we are all not mindless political drones that support any cause that our preferred political affiliation advocates.

So my question is this. What political stances do you not agree with in respect to your own party?

I'll go first. I lean left so I will talk about some liberal stances that I do not agree with.

While I certainly am not an advocates for all lives matter, I do criticize the BLM and feminist movements of this day and age. I feel that their movements are well intended, but poorly executed. Regardless of who's fault it is, race relations has only gotten worse in recent years. As for feminist, yelling at men isn't going to solve inequality.

I remember when Justin Timberlake was criticized for cultural appropriation of black people. I found that completely ludicrous. There is too much apologizing for things that they don't need to apologize for.

Leftist are not immune to ignorance when it comes to science. There are plenty of conservatives who are anti global warming and anti evolution. But liberals as a whole aren't immune to anti science beliefs. There are many liberals who believe in alternative medicine, and are anti pills. Now not all liberals believe in alternative medicine, but there are certainly a few coocoo spiritual types who have no idea how the body works physiologically.

You don't think all lives matter? :blink:

 

[n_huffhines]

You don't think all lives matter? :blink:

Obviously, that's not what he's saying.

 

[golfballs]

Obviously, that's not what he's saying.

I know, it just sounds ridiculous - like the entire identity politics charade

 

[joevol33]

I'm a Christian independent conservative (mostly), and have zero problems with medical marijuana. I can honestly see the argument for recreational use. Though I don't do it, nor would I, I'd rather deal with someone smoking pot than drunk.

 

[Madscientistvol]

I lean so far right that I'm more a middle leaning conservative than a right leaning moderate, so I guess I'm nominally republican.

That said I disagree on same sex marriage, I'm for instituting the legal responsibilities and benefits to their unions also.
Actually, to think of it most of my ways I part ways with republicans is over LGBT issues. I don't get up in arms about it but I mostly disagree with their stances and am for sound policies to address their issues in functioning in society in a normal manner.

Also I'm for more pro environmental protection policies than most republicans.

Also I'm for decriminalization of marijuana.

 

[TheDeeble]

I'm not sure what I would fall under. For the longest time I would have considered myself a conservative republican, but having been responsible for myself for the past couple administrations, I've seen more of how things work, what's affected, and I've become more moderate in a couple areas. A couple stand out.

Gay marriage- I don't really care. If two people want to live together it should be their right. If two people want their money/retirement/insurance/ect to go to the other it should be their right. The problem is when "marriage" and the govt are involved together. Govt can't discriminate based on race/sex/religion/ect. I have a potential solution. If someone wants the govt tax/spousal benefits of marriage, then it can't be based around religious terminology. I'd be in favor of saying marriage is between you, God, and whoever is willing to perform the ceremony and there's no recognition/benefits from the govt. If you and your partner want to be recognized by the govt and receive tax benefits/spousal benefits, then you have to complete a civil union form(or whatever we call it) which has no bearing on whether or not you're actually married. Cut the term marriage out of the govt and replace it with something else. Let marriage be the religious ceremony that's sacred to those involved, and let the govt have their own thing for people that want the benefits whether their straight/gay.

Drugs- End the war on drugs. Not certain how far I'd go without more consideration, but legalize weed for starters and probably others. Regulate them like alcohol as mentioned above(although businesses can still have no usage policies for employees if they want). Banning alcohol didn't work. If enough people want it, it will be available no matter what the govt does.

Environmental- I don't have a problem with environmental regulations as long as their based on sound reasoning and aren't draconian. I don't have a problem with trying to cut emissions and move towards renewable energy. Whether or not humans are changing the environment, emissions/waste aren't good for any of us. And while oil isn't going away in my lifetime, it's a finite resource. We owe it to the children today to hand them renewable energy or plans to continue research/development. That's not even coming from an environmental concern perspective, it's just smart to look for renewable energy. Use oil only what oil can do. If it's possible for wind/water/solar/nuclear to do it, let them.

 

[SergeantVol]

I find myself more aligned with the little l libertarians. The party is too far out there.

I don't care about the Gold Standard and I completely disagree with their views on foreign policy. I am more closely a centrist on foreign policy. I advocate diplomacy for the sake of stability but will not rule out using the "big stick" if justified.

 

[Through_The_T]

I'm pretty socially liberal and fiscally conservative, so I align mostly with Libertarians. But here are some differences I have from the overall Libertarian position:

1.) I believe that industrialization and the burning of fossil fuels is causing environmental and climate change and abnormal weather patterns. (Was not convinced of this at first, but deep research into the topic has changed my stance)

Some Libertarians argue that cracking down on this area affects jobs in the coal/energy sector. While that may be true in the short term, the side affects of burning coal and fossil fuels infringe on other's rights to clean air, water and livable environments, and also affect the tourism/natural attraction industry (see coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef as an example), so I actually think the Libertarian position should defend people's rights to those basic human necessities.

Do I believe it's a national security issue (Obama's line) or the biggest global threat? No,I think that title still belongs to regimes/terrorist groups who want to get their hands on WMDs or dirty bombs. But it is a very big issue, nonetheless.

2.) I believe that space/human advancement programs should have federal funding and should have the largest, albeit realistic, budgets possible (NASA). This is not just to benefit the United States, but it is to ensure the future of mankind and our long-term survival.

Can't really think of any others of the top of my head. Very interesting thread, OP.

 

[LouderVol]

I wouldn't identify as conservative or Republican, but that is probably what I have been labeled so I will go off that.

pro gay marriage.

pro environmental responsibility. not the EPA but we need to take care of this planet.

even though I am pro closed/controlled border I don't think we should ever identify a people to keep out. as long as they do it right they are welcome here, imo.

pro balanced budget. they might give lip service to it but they aren't.

I am fine with marijuana and a few other drugs.

I am not 100% anti regulation. I believe there is plenty of areas where we need the government.

I am for a strong military but not for using it as much. GTFO of the ME.

I dont have the same fascination with Israel as most do.

I wish we had zero welfare outside of the VA and those who actually needs it. which includes corporate welfare. while I am for creating a country good for business but not for directly giving them money.

 

[05_never_again]

I would consider myself a libertarian; small L. Most libertarians are pro-choice; I am not. A lot of libertarians put an undue emphasis on drug legalization, particularly marijuana. I agree with legalizing pot, but the emphasis on it leads a lot of non-libertarians to believe that is all libertarians care about.

I agree with libertarian orthodoxy on pretty much everything else.

 

[joevol320]

With the political climate as polarized as it is, it seems that if you don't believe in global warming, you are certain to also be pro gun/religious/pro life. Also, if you do believe in global warming, you are most likely to be pro BLM/ pro abortion/pro illegal immigration. Many stances are lumped into the category of either the right or the left, but I created this thread to acknowledge that we are all not mindless political drones that support any cause that our preferred political affiliation advocates.

So my question is this. What political stances do you not agree with in respect to your own party?

I'll go first. I lean left so I will talk about some liberal stances that I do not agree with.

While I certainly am not an advocate for all lives matter, I do criticize the BLM and feminist movements of this day and age. I feel that their movements are well intended, but poorly executed. Regardless of who's fault it is, race relations has only gotten worse in recent years. As for feminist, yelling at men isn't going to solve inequality.

I remember when Justin Timberlake was criticized for cultural appropriation of black people. I found that completely ludicrous. There is too much apologizing for things that they don't need to apologize for.

Leftist are not immune to ignorance when it comes to science. There are plenty of conservatives who are anti global warming and anti evolution. But liberals as a whole aren't immune to anti science beliefs. There are many liberals who believe in alternative medicine, and are anti pills. Now not all liberals believe in alternative medicine, but there are certainly a few coocoo spiritual types who have no idea how the body works physiologically.

fix your post.

to say that Christians are anti-science because they don't believe in evolution is just stupid.

 

[luthervol]

I'm a pretty far left leaning liberal.

My biggest issue is the left's tendency to occasionally go so far in trying to protect the rights of an individual or group, that they loose sight of the impact to the common good.

The ADA and Endangered Species Act are two examples of great intent that went to far in certain applications. Intent is critically important as a starting point, but sometimes the left fails to adequately consider the probable result.

 

[joevol320]

I'm pretty socially liberal and fiscally conservative, so I align mostly with Libertarians. But here are some differences I have from the overall Libertarian position:

1.) I believe that industrialization and the burning of fossil fuels is causing environmental and climate change and abnormal weather patterns. (Was not convinced of this at first, but deep research into the topic has changed my stance)

Some Libertarians argue that cracking down on this area affects jobs in the coal/energy sector. While that may be true in the short term, the side affects of burning coal and fossil fuels infringe on other's rights to clean air, water and livable environments, and also affect the tourism/natural attraction industry (see coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef as an example), so I actually think the Libertarian position should defend people's rights to those basic human necessities.

Do I believe it's a national security issue (Obama's line) or the biggest global threat? No,I think that title still belongs to regimes/terrorist groups who want to get their hands on WMDs or dirty bombs. But it is a very big issue, nonetheless.

2.) I believe that space/human advancement programs should have federal funding and should have the largest, albeit realistic, budgets possible (NASA). This is not just to benefit the United States, but it is to ensure the future of mankind and our long-term survival.

Can't really think of any others of the top of my head. Very interesting thread, OP.

you can't be socially liberal and fiscally conservative.

 

[DinkinFlicka]

you can't be socially liberal and fiscally conservative.

Gtfo joe.

 

[joevol320]

Gtfo joe.

you can't. if you're going to allow people to live a very liberal life of doing what feels good the unintended consequences of addiction, abortion, STD's, etc... will cost. so you'll not pay for these services and be seen a mean, racist, anti-woman, etc... or you'll cave to the pressure fund programs to pay for these services.

 

[05_never_again]

Leftist are not immune to ignorance when it comes to science. There are plenty of conservatives who are anti global warming and anti evolution. But liberals as a whole aren't immune to anti science beliefs. There are many liberals who believe in alternative medicine, and are anti pills. Now not all liberals believe in alternative medicine, but there are certainly a few coocoo spiritual types who have no idea how the body works physiologically.

There is some good work done by a guy named Jonathan Haidt (a liberal guy himself) on the psychological differences between conservatives and liberals. One of the things he highlights is that liberals can be just as anti-science as conservatives, but they pick different issues. He says GMOs and nuclear power in particular as issues liberals are anti-science on.

 

[MT LeConte]

I support the NRA's position on possession and ownership of guns. This includes military style semiautomatic weapons. I would like to see the left change their stance on gun control.

Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

 

[05_never_again]

you can't. if you're going to allow people to live a very liberal life of doing what feels good the unintended consequences of addiction, abortion, STD's, etc... will cost. so you'll not pay for these services and be seen a mean, racist, anti-woman, etc... or you'll cave to the pressure fund programs to pay for these services.

Who says you'll have to cave to it?

 

[joevol320]

Who says you'll have to cave to it?

i agree, but more than not people will cave. whether you cave or not, people have a liberal type lifestyle, drugs, sex with many partners, financial irresponsiblity, still suffer.

 

[hog88]

I'm a pretty far left leaning liberal.

My biggest issue is the left's tendency to occasionally go so far in trying to protect the rights of an individual or group, that they loose sight of the impact to the common good.

The ADA and Endangered Species Act are two examples of great intent that went to far in certain applications. Intent is critically important as a starting point, but sometimes the left fails to adequately consider the probable result.

I would have never guessed, you hide it well.

 

[JC61]

you can't. if you're going to allow people to live a very liberal life of doing what feels good the unintended consequences of addiction, abortion, STD's, etc... will cost. so you'll not pay for these services and be seen a mean, racist, anti-woman, etc... or you'll cave to the pressure fund programs to pay for these services.

I think you can if you don't sit on the fringe. I don't know what I am anymore...:crazy:

I'm a moderate for the most part (I think); when it comes to social issues I probably lean left, but lean right on economy.

I lean further right regarding defense; however, like Louder, I think we need to be more selective where, when and how long we engage our armed forces. But , when necessary, we need to be quick and decisive...you can't do that w/ a weak military.

 

[JC61]

i agree, but more than not people will cave. whether you cave or not, people have a liberal type lifestyle, drugs, sex with many partners, financial irresponsiblity, still suffer.

dogs and cats living together...mass hysteria!