Author Topic: Are social conservatives always wrong?  (Read 18716 times)

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 185
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #250 on: July 05, 2019, 08:16:12 AM »
The topic of conversation was social conservatism.  The inverse of social conservatism is social liberalism.  I didn't follow that you were talking about a third tangential topic (progressivism).  Based on previous conversations in this thread I've actually been mentally conflating 'liberal' with 'progressive' as they've been used interchangeably.  My apologies.
No need to apologize!  I'm still a bit confused though.  Progressive ideas tend to align with liberals(not to be conflated with libertarians) but not always.  So I think it follows that social conservatives are not always wrong.

I was thinking about this today.... what are your thoughts on deplatforming?  Conservative/liberal/progressive?  Definitely not libertarian, anyway.

How about the integration of Islam into secular western society?  That one's really interesting, because #coexist is usually promoted by progressives, yet the embodiment of Islam can be very...traditional and conservative, what with the covered women and the segregated mosques and women only recently being able to drive in Saudi Arabia.  (Kind of ironic that some hardline Christians don't like Muslims)

Here are some socially conservative ideas that seem to stand the test of time:
Having a military
Having federal borders
Having pride in your country
Improving your lot in life through work and sacrifice
...Those were just off the top of my head.

Also it's very likely I'm misinterpreting you.  But I do find this subject fascinating.

I'm liberal by Canadian standards and all of those are also liberal values.

Yeah, Iím American and fairly left-leaning, and fail to see how those are ďconservativeĒ ideas.

Maybe the military one. Can't say it's a liberal position, but I do know at least a subset of liberals that come pretty close if not all the way to wanting to eliminate all military or at least it seems like it from their comments.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13627
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #251 on: July 05, 2019, 08:29:31 AM »
The topic of conversation was social conservatism.  The inverse of social conservatism is social liberalism.  I didn't follow that you were talking about a third tangential topic (progressivism).  Based on previous conversations in this thread I've actually been mentally conflating 'liberal' with 'progressive' as they've been used interchangeably.  My apologies.
No need to apologize!  I'm still a bit confused though.  Progressive ideas tend to align with liberals(not to be conflated with libertarians) but not always.  So I think it follows that social conservatives are not always wrong.

I was thinking about this today.... what are your thoughts on deplatforming?  Conservative/liberal/progressive?  Definitely not libertarian, anyway.

How about the integration of Islam into secular western society?  That one's really interesting, because #coexist is usually promoted by progressives, yet the embodiment of Islam can be very...traditional and conservative, what with the covered women and the segregated mosques and women only recently being able to drive in Saudi Arabia.  (Kind of ironic that some hardline Christians don't like Muslims)

Here are some socially conservative ideas that seem to stand the test of time:
Having a military
Having federal borders
Having pride in your country
Improving your lot in life through work and sacrifice
...Those were just off the top of my head.

Also it's very likely I'm misinterpreting you.  But I do find this subject fascinating.

I'm liberal by Canadian standards and all of those are also liberal values.

Yeah, I was going to say . . . I know that in America conservatives have tried hard to co-opt those issues but having a military, federal borders, pride in country, improving your life through work . . . none of those are socially conservative in nature.

My thoughts on 'deplatforming'?  My thoughts are that speech should generally be free - but not free from consequences.  If you hold an incredibly unpopular position (this issue only seems to come up with positions associated with hate and intolerance), nobody should silence you.  At the same time, nobody should be forced to provide a platform for your comments - the host or owner of the platform you're expressing your message on has every right to decide that your message is unsuitable and kick you off.

Re: integration of Islam into western society

There are millions of Muslims in Canada who are well integrated into our society.  I believe that the same is true of the United States.  Islam is already integrated into western society.  What people tend to mean when they talk about 'integration of Islam' is that they don't like extreme conservative interpretations of the religion.  And that's perfectly fair.  I'm not a fan of extreme conservative interpretation of any religion.  It tends to make people do foolish and antisocial things.  This is true of muslims, christians, jews, whatever.  (I've yet to run across any extreme conservative buddhists, but I'm sure they're out there too.)  To argue that islam is somehow different than any other religion comes off as a little absurd though.

Personally, I think that most religious doctrine is stupid.  (Note, this isn't to say that religion itself is without value . . . discussing philosophy and grappling with issues of morality is perfectly fine.  The doctrine though . . .)  I don't really draw any significant difference between wearing a yarmulke, a turban, a cross, or a burka.  Is a Sihk man who chooses to wear his five articles of faith (turban, knife, bracelet, comb, and special underwear) being oppressed by his religion?  Why would you believe that a woman who voluntarily chooses to wear a niqab is oppressed then?   Even though I think they're a little goofy, I'd fight for people's rights to wear whatever symbols they please.  They are symbols of faith - faith I don't share.  Who am I to judge a practice that I don't believe in from a community that I don't belong to?

Where I draw the line is when faith starts to cause an impact on human rights.  If a Christian believes that it's OK to attack a homosexual man for his sexual orientation, that's over the line.  If a Muslim believes that he should be able to attack a man for drawing a picture of the prophet Muhammed, that is over the line.  Most religions rely on scripts and texts from thousands of years ago, which are products of the time they were written.  They need to be read and interpreted with that understanding.  If they're not, then the people who are following the religion invariably come off as idiots.  They should be free to be as idiotic as they want though, until they start to encroach on other's rights though.
« Last Edit: July 05, 2019, 08:31:26 AM by GuitarStv »

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13627
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #252 on: July 05, 2019, 08:38:18 AM »
The topic of conversation was social conservatism.  The inverse of social conservatism is social liberalism.  I didn't follow that you were talking about a third tangential topic (progressivism).  Based on previous conversations in this thread I've actually been mentally conflating 'liberal' with 'progressive' as they've been used interchangeably.  My apologies.
No need to apologize!  I'm still a bit confused though.  Progressive ideas tend to align with liberals(not to be conflated with libertarians) but not always.  So I think it follows that social conservatives are not always wrong.

I was thinking about this today.... what are your thoughts on deplatforming?  Conservative/liberal/progressive?  Definitely not libertarian, anyway.

How about the integration of Islam into secular western society?  That one's really interesting, because #coexist is usually promoted by progressives, yet the embodiment of Islam can be very...traditional and conservative, what with the covered women and the segregated mosques and women only recently being able to drive in Saudi Arabia.  (Kind of ironic that some hardline Christians don't like Muslims)

Here are some socially conservative ideas that seem to stand the test of time:
Having a military
Having federal borders
Having pride in your country
Improving your lot in life through work and sacrifice
...Those were just off the top of my head.

Also it's very likely I'm misinterpreting you.  But I do find this subject fascinating.

I'm liberal by Canadian standards and all of those are also liberal values.

Yeah, Iím American and fairly left-leaning, and fail to see how those are ďconservativeĒ ideas.

Maybe the military one. Can't say it's a liberal position, but I do know at least a subset of liberals that come pretty close if not all the way to wanting to eliminate all military or at least it seems like it from their comments.

I feel like you may be misunderstanding their source of concern.

It's true that there's less support for the military when it's used to conquer and destabilize other countries, execute civilians by drone, kidnap civilians from other countries and hold them without any hope of a fair trial, support and entrench the power of known pedophiles in foreign countries, or run illegal torture facilities.  Currently, the US military is an organization that should rightfully be steeped in dishonor and shame.  Not because every member of it is a horrible person (or because a military is inherently bad), but because of how American has chosen to use it's force.

Many (if not most) social liberals are fans of using the military for humanitarian aid and peacekeeping missions though.  The problem is usually not the military, but the goals the military is used to achieve.

JGS1980

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 115
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #253 on: July 05, 2019, 10:47:52 AM »
I apologize if this was covered upthread... but I'm curious about the response around this concern


How about the issue of teenage pregnancy?

I'd argue that neither social conservatives nor liberals desire teenage pregnancy.

The difference, as I see it, is the approach to solving the problem.

Conservatives favor: marginal sex education, less access to family planning, having the baby, adoption or not, marrying, and getting on with life.

Liberals favor:          comprehensive sex education, more access to family planning, having the baby, adoption or not, marrying, and getting on with life [if that's what you want]

Liberals also favor:    having the choice not to have the baby, having the choice not to marry too young to someone you don't want to marry, and then getting on with life

iris lily

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3229
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #254 on: July 05, 2019, 11:07:47 AM »
I apologize if this was covered upthread... but I'm curious about the response around this concern


How about the issue of teenage pregnancy?

I'd argue that neither social conservatives nor liberals desire teenage pregnancy.

The difference, as I see it, is the approach to solving the problem.

Conservatives favor: marginal sex education, less access to family planning, having the baby, adoption or not, marrying, and getting on with life.

Liberals favor:          comprehensive sex education, more access to family planning, having the baby, adoption or not, marrying, and getting on with life [if that's what you want]

Liberals also favor:    having the choice not to have the baby, having the choice not to marry too young to someone you don't want to marry, and then getting on with life
Your characterization of what conservatives want is probably off by quite a bit.

I am not much of a social conservative when it comes to this topic, on the other hand,  I side with with those conservatives who think that government sex education isnít very effective and if parents donít take on this job and make it a family value they are contributing to the problem.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4184
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #255 on: July 05, 2019, 11:38:07 AM »
I apologize if this was covered upthread... but I'm curious about the response around this concern


How about the issue of teenage pregnancy?

I'd argue that neither social conservatives nor liberals desire teenage pregnancy.

The difference, as I see it, is the approach to solving the problem.

Conservatives favor: marginal sex education, less access to family planning, having the baby, adoption or not, marrying, and getting on with life.

Liberals favor:          comprehensive sex education, more access to family planning, having the baby, adoption or not, marrying, and getting on with life [if that's what you want]

Liberals also favor:    having the choice not to have the baby, having the choice not to marry too young to someone you don't want to marry, and then getting on with life
Your characterization of what conservatives want is probably off by quite a bit.

I am not much of a social conservative when it comes to this topic, on the other hand,  I side with with those conservatives who think that government sex education isnít very effective and if parents donít take on this job and make it a family value they are contributing to the problem.

I'd say "government sex education" is kind of a scare-tactic term.

That said, research suggests that comprehensive sex education actually is effective. So I'm not sure why conservatives would think this.

Telecaster

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1824
  • Location: Seattle, WA
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #256 on: July 05, 2019, 11:49:19 AM »

Your characterization of what conservatives want is probably off by quite a bit.

I am not much of a social conservative when it comes to this topic, on the other hand,  I side with with those conservatives who think that government sex education isnít very effective and if parents donít take on this job and make it a family value they are contributing to the problem.

Objectively, comprehensive sex education in schools reduces teen pregnancy and teens who receive comprehensive sex education delay having sex compared to those who don't. 

So, I'd say that social conservatives who oppose comprehensive sex education are the problem. 


iris lily

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3229
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #257 on: July 05, 2019, 11:53:27 AM »
I apologize if this was covered upthread... but I'm curious about the response around this concern


How about the issue of teenage pregnancy?

I'd argue that neither social conservatives nor liberals desire teenage pregnancy.

The difference, as I see it, is the approach to solving the problem.

Conservatives favor: marginal sex education, less access to family planning, having the baby, adoption or not, marrying, and getting on with life.

Liberals favor:          comprehensive sex education, more access to family planning, having the baby, adoption or not, marrying, and getting on with life [if that's what you want]

Liberals also favor:    having the choice not to have the baby, having the choice not to marry too young to someone you don't want to marry, and then getting on with life
Your characterization of what conservatives want is probably off by quite a bit.

I am not much of a social conservative when it comes to this topic, on the other hand,  I side with with those conservatives who think that government sex education isnít very effective and if parents donít take on this job and make it a family value they are contributing to the problem.

I'd say "government sex education" is kind of a scare-tactic term.

That said, research suggests that comprehensive sex education actually is effective. So I'm not sure why conservatives would think this.

I donít know what the study/ studies looked at in determining  ďcomprehensive sex educationĒ but  if truly comprehensive, it would very much include teachings in the home of children.

  Biological facts taught in school i.e. the government are fine but they donít go far enough to provide effective life lessons, and there are nuances to just the biological facts that might be in violation of some values.

My position that is if parents arenít doing the job then they doing their children a disservice.
Counting on the government to do this job is shirking  their parental duty.


GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13627
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #258 on: July 05, 2019, 11:58:08 AM »
I apologize if this was covered upthread... but I'm curious about the response around this concern


How about the issue of teenage pregnancy?

I'd argue that neither social conservatives nor liberals desire teenage pregnancy.

The difference, as I see it, is the approach to solving the problem.

Conservatives favor: marginal sex education, less access to family planning, having the baby, adoption or not, marrying, and getting on with life.

Liberals favor:          comprehensive sex education, more access to family planning, having the baby, adoption or not, marrying, and getting on with life [if that's what you want]

Liberals also favor:    having the choice not to have the baby, having the choice not to marry too young to someone you don't want to marry, and then getting on with life
Your characterization of what conservatives want is probably off by quite a bit.

I am not much of a social conservative when it comes to this topic, on the other hand,  I side with with those conservatives who think that government sex education isnít very effective and if parents donít take on this job and make it a family value they are contributing to the problem.

I'd say "government sex education" is kind of a scare-tactic term.

That said, research suggests that comprehensive sex education actually is effective. So I'm not sure why conservatives would think this.

I donít know what the study/ studies looked at in determining  ďcomprehensive sex educationĒ but  if truly comprehensive, it would very much include teachings in the home of children.

  Biological facts taught in school i.e. the government are fine but they donít go far enough to provide effective life lessons, and there are nuances to just the biological facts that might be in violation of some values.

My position that is if parents arenít doing the job then they doing their children a disservice.
Counting on the government to do this job is shirking  their parental duty.



I agree with you that any parent should discuss sex and sex education with his or her children.  It should not be left up to the school system.  However, in the real world it is often left up to the school system.  That's why a comprehensive sex ed program in schools has proven so effective.


"After accounting for other factors, the national data show that the incidence of teenage pregnancies and births remain positively correlated with the degree of abstinence education across states: The more strongly abstinence is emphasized in state laws and policies, the higher the average teenage pregnancy and birth rate. States that taught comprehensive sex and/or HIV education and covered abstinence along with contraception and condom use (level 1 sex education; also referred to as ďabstinence-plusĒ [26], tended to have the lowest teen pregnancy rates, while states with abstinence-only sex education laws that stress abstinence until marriage (level 3) were significantly less successful in preventing teen pregnancies. Level 0 states present an interesting sample with a wide range of education policies and variable teen pregnancy and birth data [17]Ė[19]. For example, several of the level 0 states (as of 2007) did not mandate sex education, but required HIV education only (e.g. CT, WV) [19]. Only three of the level 0 states (IA, NH and NV) mandated both sex education and HIV education, but one of them (NV) did not require that teens learn about condoms and contraception. This state (NV) has the highest teen pregnancy and birth rates in that group (Figure 1). Nevada is also one of only five states (with MD in level 0, CO in level 2, and AZ and UT in level 3) that required parental consent for sex education in public schools instead of an opt-out requirement that is present in all the other states [16], [19].

The effectiveness of Level 1 (comprehensive) sex education in our nation-wide analysis is supported by Kirby's meta-analysis of individual sex education programs [8], Underwood et al. 's analysis of HIV prevention programs [27], and a recent review by the CDC taskforce on community preventive services [28]. All these studies suggest that comprehensive sex or HIV education that includes the discussion of abstinence as a recommended behavior, and also discusses contraception and protection methods, works best in reducing teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3194801/


The facts clearly show that an opposition to a comprehensive sex ed program results in greater teen pregnancy and spread of sexual disease.  I'd challenge you, or anyone who disagrees to find any study that shows keeping information from children about sex leads to good outcomes.
« Last Edit: July 05, 2019, 12:02:46 PM by GuitarStv »

Dabnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1737
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #259 on: July 05, 2019, 12:01:00 PM »
I apologize if this was covered upthread... but I'm curious about the response around this concern


How about the issue of teenage pregnancy?

I'd argue that neither social conservatives nor liberals desire teenage pregnancy.

The difference, as I see it, is the approach to solving the problem.

Conservatives favor: marginal sex education, less access to family planning, having the baby, adoption or not, marrying, and getting on with life.

Liberals favor:          comprehensive sex education, more access to family planning, having the baby, adoption or not, marrying, and getting on with life [if that's what you want]

Liberals also favor:    having the choice not to have the baby, having the choice not to marry too young to someone you don't want to marry, and then getting on with life
Your characterization of what conservatives want is probably off by quite a bit.

I am not much of a social conservative when it comes to this topic, on the other hand, I side with those conservatives who think that government sex education isnít very effective and if parents donít take on this job and make it a family value they are contributing to the problem.

You're right. parents who don't teach their kids about life are contributing to the problem. So what are we going to do about it? Do you have any suggestions as to how we can make parents raise their kids properly? Saying they ought to and walking away doesn't solve anything.

And as others have said, sex ed in schools is verifiably effective and it's probably better for kids to get a consistent education rather than be taught solely by their parents, some of whom were never taught properly themselves. Parents having "the talk" with their kids should be more about the emotional aspect* of relationships while education in school covers anatomy, statistics, and other factual information.

*ETA: not suggesting that parents should only teach the emotional aspect, just that I don't expect parents to be pulling out textbooks and diagrams for their presentations.

« Last Edit: July 05, 2019, 12:09:48 PM by Dabnasty »

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 185
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #260 on: July 05, 2019, 12:39:30 PM »
The topic of conversation was social conservatism.  The inverse of social conservatism is social liberalism.  I didn't follow that you were talking about a third tangential topic (progressivism).  Based on previous conversations in this thread I've actually been mentally conflating 'liberal' with 'progressive' as they've been used interchangeably.  My apologies.
No need to apologize!  I'm still a bit confused though.  Progressive ideas tend to align with liberals(not to be conflated with libertarians) but not always.  So I think it follows that social conservatives are not always wrong.

I was thinking about this today.... what are your thoughts on deplatforming?  Conservative/liberal/progressive?  Definitely not libertarian, anyway.

How about the integration of Islam into secular western society?  That one's really interesting, because #coexist is usually promoted by progressives, yet the embodiment of Islam can be very...traditional and conservative, what with the covered women and the segregated mosques and women only recently being able to drive in Saudi Arabia.  (Kind of ironic that some hardline Christians don't like Muslims)

Here are some socially conservative ideas that seem to stand the test of time:
Having a military
Having federal borders
Having pride in your country
Improving your lot in life through work and sacrifice
...Those were just off the top of my head.

Also it's very likely I'm misinterpreting you.  But I do find this subject fascinating.

I'm liberal by Canadian standards and all of those are also liberal values.

Yeah, Iím American and fairly left-leaning, and fail to see how those are ďconservativeĒ ideas.

Maybe the military one. Can't say it's a liberal position, but I do know at least a subset of liberals that come pretty close if not all the way to wanting to eliminate all military or at least it seems like it from their comments.

I feel like you may be misunderstanding their source of concern.

It's true that there's less support for the military when it's used to conquer and destabilize other countries, execute civilians by drone, kidnap civilians from other countries and hold them without any hope of a fair trial, support and entrench the power of known pedophiles in foreign countries, or run illegal torture facilities.  Currently, the US military is an organization that should rightfully be steeped in dishonor and shame.  Not because every member of it is a horrible person (or because a military is inherently bad), but because of how American has chosen to use it's force.

Many (if not most) social liberals are fans of using the military for humanitarian aid and peacekeeping missions though.  The problem is usually not the military, but the goals the military is used to achieve.

I perhaps wasn't specific enough. Many liberals want to cut military, disagree with the use of military given recent Iraq war, etc. As I understand/have seen, humanitarian aid would be a go, peacekeeping missions - well, I think by adding that term, there's a decent amount of liberals who probably wouldn't be down with that and would reference other peacekeeping missions they didn't like. I'm specifically talking about a smaller subset of liberals I know that are pretty much straight up anti-having military whatsoever. They would be OK with a group of government sponsored people with no weapons who consisted of like engineers for infrastructure help in a foreign country for humanitarian aid but again without weapons. They're pretty close to pacifists. I don't know that there's a huge amount of them, but they aren't conservatives. Two different opinions but both of the liberal persuasion I would say. I am speaking anecdotally in this last instance, so maybe it's just a few acquaintances and almost no one else thinks this way.

KBecks

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1690
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #261 on: July 05, 2019, 12:46:07 PM »
I was going to post about forced adoption in the 1960s, when young moms would be told their babies died, but they didn't, and they were given to other families in closed adoptions.

Then, I read this story -- from 2012, where a woman's three children were taken by social workers and adopted to a homosexual couple.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/familys-anguish-as-they-face-third-forced-1676705

I'm going to suppose this is the work of liberals.

Another article about forced adoption:
https://rewire.news/article/2012/05/15/violations-continue-despite-forced-adoption-victories/

I'm also thinking of Rosemary Kennedy, and how she was lobotomized.  There are many, many terrible parts of our past.
« Last Edit: July 05, 2019, 12:59:48 PM by KBecks »

Dabnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1737
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #262 on: July 05, 2019, 12:52:08 PM »

...snip

Maybe the military one. Can't say it's a liberal position, but I do know at least a subset of liberals that come pretty close if not all the way to wanting to eliminate all military or at least it seems like it from their comments.

I feel like you may be misunderstanding their source of concern.

It's true that there's less support for the military when it's used to conquer and destabilize other countries, execute civilians by drone, kidnap civilians from other countries and hold them without any hope of a fair trial, support and entrench the power of known pedophiles in foreign countries, or run illegal torture facilities.  Currently, the US military is an organization that should rightfully be steeped in dishonor and shame.  Not because every member of it is a horrible person (or because a military is inherently bad), but because of how American has chosen to use it's force.

Many (if not most) social liberals are fans of using the military for humanitarian aid and peacekeeping missions though.  The problem is usually not the military, but the goals the military is used to achieve.

I perhaps wasn't specific enough. Many liberals want to cut military, disagree with the use of military given recent Iraq war, etc. As I understand/have seen, humanitarian aid would be a go, peacekeeping missions - well, I think by adding that term, there's a decent amount of liberals who probably wouldn't be down with that and would reference other peacekeeping missions they didn't like. I'm specifically talking about a smaller subset of liberals I know that are pretty much straight up anti-having military whatsoever. They would be OK with a group of government sponsored people with no weapons who consisted of like engineers for infrastructure help in a foreign country for humanitarian aid but again without weapons. They're pretty close to pacifists. I don't know that there's a huge amount of them, but they aren't conservatives. Two different opinions but both of the liberal persuasion I would say. I am speaking anecdotally in this last instance, so maybe it's just a few acquaintances and almost no one else thinks this way.

I think you're seeing this as a liberal position because the people you know who hold this opinion are liberal on other issues. If you disconnect the position from the people, is there any reason to call pacifism a liberal or conservative idea?

I could also say the Amish, Mennonites, & Jehovah's Witnesses are pacifist and very socially conservative, therefore pacifism is a conservative value. But I don't think that would be accurate either. Not every position can be classified as conservative or liberal.
« Last Edit: July 05, 2019, 12:53:39 PM by Dabnasty »

Dabnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1737
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #263 on: July 05, 2019, 01:16:53 PM »
I was going to post about forced adoption in the 1960s, when young moms would be told their babies died, but they didn't, and they were given to other families in closed adoptions.

Then, I read this story -- from 2012, where a woman's three children were taken by social workers and adopted to a homosexual couple.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/familys-anguish-as-they-face-third-forced-1676705

I'm going to suppose this is the work of liberals.

Another article about forced adoption:
https://rewire.news/article/2012/05/15/violations-continue-despite-forced-adoption-victories/

I'm also thinking of Rosemary Kennedy, and how she was lobotomized.  There are many, many terrible parts of our past.

2009 article after the first adoption:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/4379200/Mothers-anger-over-gay-couples-adoption-of-her-children.html

Quote
[the mother] said: "I did not under any circumstances want my children to be placed with gay men. I wanted them to have a mum and a dad.

Quote
The 59-year-old grandfather, who has seven children of his own, told the Daily Telegraph: "There is no way we'd have allowed the children to be adopted if we'd known they were going to a gay couple.

Kind of besides the point, but the Mirror left some stuff out for sure. Makes me question the rest of the article, sounds like an odd situation though. Perhaps the social workers were too aggressive but I don't have enough information to have a strong opinion on that.

I suppose you can make the argument that forced adoption is a liberal idea but I don't think that it's a clear cut bad thing either.  Wouldn't you agree that a child should be forcibly taken from their parent if there is reason to believe the child is in imminent danger? Beyond that, it's a matter of what constitutes enough danger to act.
« Last Edit: July 05, 2019, 01:18:58 PM by Dabnasty »

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13627
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #264 on: July 05, 2019, 01:35:48 PM »
I was going to post about forced adoption in the 1960s, when young moms would be told their babies died, but they didn't, and they were given to other families in closed adoptions.

Then, I read this story -- from 2012, where a woman's three children were taken by social workers and adopted to a homosexual couple.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/familys-anguish-as-they-face-third-forced-1676705

I'm going to suppose this is the work of liberals.

The article you posted says nothing of social liberals.  Can you provide a source that supports your assumption?

By their own words, the parents of the children show that they're homophobic bigots.  You appear to be assuming that because of their bigotry is the only reason that their children are being taken away.  I suspect that there's much more to the story than the linked article is revealing.  Like the heroin addiction of the mother.



I'm also thinking of Rosemary Kennedy, and how she was lobotomized.  There are many, many terrible parts of our past.

Performing lobotomies was at one point considered a legitimate medical treatment by the psychologists.  I'm not sure that I see why you believe that this is an example of social liberalism.  Can you explain?

Dabnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1737
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #265 on: July 05, 2019, 01:36:57 PM »
I'm also thinking of Rosemary Kennedy, and how she was lobotomized.  There are many, many terrible parts of our past.

Is a forced lobotomy socially liberal? According to Wikipedia Social liberalism is a political ideology that endorses a regulated market economy and the expansion of civil and political rights. A social liberal government is expected to address economic and social issues such as poverty, health care, education and the climate using government intervention whilst also emphasizing the rights and autonomy of the individual.

Forced lobotomies and eugenics(discussed earlier) do not respect autonomy of the individual. I wouldn't consider these policies socially conservative either, not everything must be one or the other.

KBecks

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1690
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #266 on: July 05, 2019, 01:39:53 PM »
With the adoption story, it's the government coming in, taking and reassigning children when the grandparents were actively involved.  It's sick.  Sorry, I am getting off the topic of social liberal and conservatism, but this is about too much government power over the individual.

The idea that we discussed earlier that gay couples want newborn children concerns me. I do not want mothers to be forced to give up their children except in cases of abusive situations, with evidence.
« Last Edit: July 05, 2019, 01:42:17 PM by KBecks »

iris lily

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3229
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #267 on: July 05, 2019, 01:44:32 PM »
I apologize if this was covered upthread... but I'm curious about the response around this concern


How about the issue of teenage pregnancy?

I'd argue that neither social conservatives nor liberals desire teenage pregnancy.

The difference, as I see it, is the approach to solving the problem.

Conservatives favor: marginal sex education, less access to family planning, having the baby, adoption or not, marrying, and getting on with life.

Liberals favor:          comprehensive sex education, more access to family planning, having the baby, adoption or not, marrying, and getting on with life [if that's what you want]

Liberals also favor:    having the choice not to have the baby, having the choice not to marry too young to someone you don't want to marry, and then getting on with life
Your characterization of what conservatives want is probably off by quite a bit.

I am not much of a social conservative when it comes to this topic, on the other hand, I side with those conservatives who think that government sex education isnít very effective and if parents donít take on this job and make it a family value they are contributing to the problem.

You're right. parents who don't teach their kids about life are contributing to the problem. So what are we going to do about it? Do you have any suggestions as to how we can make parents raise their kids properly? Saying they ought to and walking away doesn't solve anything.

And as others have said, sex ed in schools is verifiably effective and it's probably better for kids to get a consistent education rather than be taught solely by their parents, some of whom were never taught properly themselves. Parents having "the talk" with their kids should be more about the emotional aspect* of relationships while education in school covers anatomy, statistics, and other factual information.

*ETA: not suggesting that parents should only teach the emotional aspect, just that I don't expect parents to be pulling out textbooks and diagrams for their presentations.

What are ďweĒ going to do about it? When ď itĒ means parents s who do not teach values about and around Reproduction?

Gosh, Why donít we just let it lie. Why do we have to do anything about it. Why does the government have to lumber in to attempt its solution to every social problem? It Cannot solve every problem and it need not try.

« Last Edit: July 05, 2019, 01:48:12 PM by iris lily »

Telecaster

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1824
  • Location: Seattle, WA
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #268 on: July 05, 2019, 01:48:26 PM »
  Biological facts taught in school i.e. the government are fine but they donít go far enough to provide effective life lessons, and there are nuances to just the biological facts that might be in violation of some values.

Which are poor reasons not to teach them.

Quote
My position that is if parents arenít doing the job then they doing their children a disservice.
Counting on the government to do this job is shirking  their parental duty.

I agree.  And if parents don't do it, not only are they doing their children a disservice, they are doing society a disservice.   Therefor society needs to try to make sure it happens. 

Dabnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1737
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #269 on: July 05, 2019, 01:49:46 PM »
I apologize if this was covered upthread... but I'm curious about the response around this concern


How about the issue of teenage pregnancy?

I'd argue that neither social conservatives nor liberals desire teenage pregnancy.

The difference, as I see it, is the approach to solving the problem.

Conservatives favor: marginal sex education, less access to family planning, having the baby, adoption or not, marrying, and getting on with life.

Liberals favor:          comprehensive sex education, more access to family planning, having the baby, adoption or not, marrying, and getting on with life [if that's what you want]

Liberals also favor:    having the choice not to have the baby, having the choice not to marry too young to someone you don't want to marry, and then getting on with life
Your characterization of what conservatives want is probably off by quite a bit.

I am not much of a social conservative when it comes to this topic, on the other hand, I side with those conservatives who think that government sex education isnít very effective and if parents donít take on this job and make it a family value they are contributing to the problem.

You're right. parents who don't teach their kids about life are contributing to the problem. So what are we going to do about it? Do you have any suggestions as to how we can make parents raise their kids properly? Saying they ought to and walking away doesn't solve anything.

And as others have said, sex ed in schools is verifiably effective and it's probably better for kids to get a consistent education rather than be taught solely by their parents, some of whom were never taught properly themselves. Parents having "the talk" with their kids should be more about the emotional aspect* of relationships while education in school covers anatomy, statistics, and other factual information.

*ETA: not suggesting that parents should only teach the emotional aspect, just that I don't expect parents to be pulling out textbooks and diagrams for their presentations.

What are ďweĒ going to do about it? When ď itĒ means parents s who do not teach values about and around Reproduction?

Gosh, Why donít we just let it lie. Why do we have to do anything about it. Why does the government have to lumber in to solve every social problem? Cannot solve every problem and it need not try.

Oh damn, we may not find any common ground on this one. I think if we can teach children(who don't get to choose their parents) something that will vastly improve their lives, that's probably one of the better uses of government.

Are you against personal finance, responsibility, and social etiquette being taught in school for the same reasons? After all, parents should be teaching these to their kids.

iris lily

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3229
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #270 on: July 05, 2019, 04:10:46 PM »
I apologize if this was covered upthread... but I'm curious about the response around this concern


How about the issue of teenage pregnancy?

I'd argue that neither social conservatives nor liberals desire teenage pregnancy.

The difference, as I see it, is the approach to solving the problem.

Conservatives favor: marginal sex education, less access to family planning, having the baby, adoption or not, marrying, and getting on with life.

Liberals favor:          comprehensive sex education, more access to family planning, having the baby, adoption or not, marrying, and getting on with life [if that's what you want]

Liberals also favor:    having the choice not to have the baby, having the choice not to marry too young to someone you don't want to marry, and then getting on with life
Your characterization of what conservatives want is probably off by quite a bit.

I am not much of a social conservative when it comes to this topic, on the other hand, I side with those conservatives who think that government sex education isnít very effective and if parents donít take on this job and make it a family value they are contributing to the problem.

You're right. parents who don't teach their kids about life are contributing to the problem. So what are we going to do about it? Do you have any suggestions as to how we can make parents raise their kids properly? Saying they ought to and walking away doesn't solve anything.

And as others have said, sex ed in schools is verifiably effective and it's probably better for kids to get a consistent education rather than be taught solely by their parents, some of whom were never taught properly themselves. Parents having "the talk" with their kids should be more about the emotional aspect* of relationships while education in school covers anatomy, statistics, and other factual information.

*ETA: not suggesting that parents should only teach the emotional aspect, just that I don't expect parents to be pulling out textbooks and diagrams for their presentations.

What are ďweĒ going to do about it? When ď itĒ means parents s who do not teach values about and around Reproduction?

Gosh, Why donít we just let it lie. Why do we have to do anything about it. Why does the government have to lumber in to solve every social problem? Cannot solve every problem and it need not try.

Oh damn, we may not find any common ground on this one. I think if we can teach children(who don't get to choose their parents) something that will vastly improve their lives, that's probably one of the better uses of government.

Are you against personal finance, responsibility, and social etiquette being taught in school for the same reasons? After all, parents should be teaching these to their kids.

 Actually yes, I thought of personal finance in the same context as sex education. Whatever the public schools teach, and we had a section on personal finance in Home Ec decades ago because I am a very old, itís just the facts maíam. That section of that class was about budgeting. Household budgets.
It was Just. the. facts.

It doesnít internalize in children why you would save  for a rainy day, the freedom that money gives you, why debt is a soul sucking black hole of wrong, why Interest is The
Enemy. School cant teach those things because those are my values those are not universal values.Well the school teach that there is such things as ďgood debt? ďI would take issue with that. With the school teach you should pay off your mortgage? There are many here who will take issue with that.

As far as social etiquette Ė is that actually an academic topic? Of course it isnt. It is perfectly fine that teachers guide children in the social etiquette of school. Every Social institution has a set of etiquette rules and children will learn that this particular school has this particular set of etiquette rules. I would be very careful about generalizing what the public school is teaching for all levels of society because it simply is not true.

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 27773
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Traveling the World
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #271 on: July 05, 2019, 08:54:32 PM »
That just means we should have the schools do it better, not not do it at all.

Social conservatives tend to think sex ed shouldn't happen in a public school at all.

I agree that ideally the children would get good messaging at home about sex, finances, etc.

If we agree that it isn't always the case, is it better to also have that education done in school, or not at all?
We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, and now travel the world full time with two kids.
If you want to know more about me, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (rarely) blog at AdventuringAlong.com. Check out our Now page to see what we're up to currently.

Kyle Schuant

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 727
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #272 on: July 06, 2019, 01:27:18 AM »
Social conservatives tend to think sex ed shouldn't happen in a public school at all.
Generally, sex education in school tends to be in the mechanics of sex and reproduction, nowadays with some token mention of consent, etc. I find it amusing that when Amish kids go to school, their parents raise no objections to their kids having sex ed - because their children have been exposed to the mechanics of sex and reproduction from early on - they live on a farm! And the Amish are nothing if not socially conservative. But urban conservatives flip out about it.

I have no objection to schools teaching my children about sex and saving money and so on. The values they espouse may or may not be my values, but my values are hammered into them long before the school gets around to the topic, and anyway my children will be exposed to many more and different values simply by the fact of their watching TV and having friends who they talk to, etc.

Both progressives and conservatives seem to think that they can bring their children up in an insulated bubble of progressivism or conservatism. It doesn't work like that.

Wrenchturner

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 180
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Canada
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #273 on: July 06, 2019, 08:55:12 AM »
This place moves too fast for me.  Don't you people have jobs or something :)

My comment on borders/military was regarding very early civilization.  As long as we have had cities, we have had borders and a military.  And we still have them, so that suggests some utility and it's a pretty conservative idea imo.  Animals have herd lookouts, too.

There are archetypal ideas that align with the political left/right, for example, the left likes progress, new ideas, inclusion, empathy.   Conservative archetype reminds us of the Danger of the Other, which is why conservatives talk about borders and walls.  It's also why the pathology of conservatives leans towards exclusion, racism, bigotry, etc.  There needs to be a balance struck.  (the pathology of the left archetype is something like chaos/madness that results from no distinctions, like 60+ genders in NY).

But that doesn't mean the Other isn't dangerous.  Nature is a dangerous place and other people can be too.  An easy example is the proliferation of illness that occurred when the Europeans arrived in the New World.  We have an immune system for a reason.  This also brings in the idea of antifragility, which is a fascinating idea.

On top of this, the word "liberal" is often used to mean libertarian, but not all people on the left are libertarian.  Indeed, it's at least a two-dimensional platform:


arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 27773
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Traveling the World
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #274 on: July 06, 2019, 09:16:42 AM »


On top of this, the word "liberal" is often used to mean libertarian

Huh?

Libertarians are typically, nowadays, much more aligned with the conservative right (see: the Paul family).

When would the word liberal be used to mean libertarian, except if it's used incorrectly?
We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, and now travel the world full time with two kids.
If you want to know more about me, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (rarely) blog at AdventuringAlong.com. Check out our Now page to see what we're up to currently.

iris lily

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3229
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #275 on: July 06, 2019, 09:42:42 AM »
That just means we should have the schools do it better, not not do it at all.

Social conservatives tend to think sex ed shouldn't happen in a public school at all.

I agree that ideally the children would get good messaging at home about sex, finances, etc.

If we agree that it isn't always the case, is it better to also have that education done in school, or not at all?

Schools can give just the facts but  It seems in escapable to me that they impart fax without values.

I would like to know whose values theyíre promoting. Can you tell me that?

And one big problem is that our society is expecting way way way too much of teachers. Classroom teachers should not be expected to teach all of these life skills,  they have academic subjects that they specialize in. Thatís what I want them to teach, they are the experts in that.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2019, 09:44:36 AM by iris lily »

iris lily

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3229
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #276 on: July 06, 2019, 09:48:56 AM »
Social conservatives tend to think sex ed shouldn't happen in a public school at all.
Generally, sex education in school tends to be in the mechanics of sex and reproduction, nowadays with some token mention of consent, etc. I find it amusing that when Amish kids go to school, their parents raise no objections to their kids having sex ed - because their children have been exposed to the mechanics of sex and reproduction from early on - they live on a farm! And the Amish are nothing if not socially conservative. But urban conservatives flip out about it.

I have no objection to schools teaching my children about sex and saving money and so on. The values they espouse may or may not be my values, but my values are hammered into them long before the school gets around to the topic, and anyway my children will be exposed to many more and different values simply by the fact of their watching TV and having friends who they talk to, etc.

Both progressives and conservatives seem to think that they can bring their children up in an insulated bubble of progressivism or conservatism. It doesn't work like that.

 Yes, you are right. Kids are not in bubbles, and they do have to learn to switch between situations where values are one thing and somewhat different in another situation. So in that regard, your post makes a lot of sense.All homes teach something about finance and sex and reproduction, even if the parents never specifically and openly talk about it. That right there is a teaching, that this stuff is secretive and should be hidden. Not good


Wrenchturner

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 180
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Canada
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #277 on: July 06, 2019, 10:15:35 AM »


On top of this, the word "liberal" is often used to mean libertarian

Huh?

Libertarians are typically, nowadays, much more aligned with the conservative right (see: the Paul family).

When would the word liberal be used to mean libertarian, except if it's used incorrectly?

Classical liberalism.  A UK term.  I wasn't sure if this was contributing to the misunderstandings in this thread.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4184
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #278 on: July 06, 2019, 10:19:25 AM »


On top of this, the word "liberal" is often used to mean libertarian

Huh?

Libertarians are typically, nowadays, much more aligned with the conservative right (see: the Paul family).

When would the word liberal be used to mean libertarian, except if it's used incorrectly?

Classical liberalism.  A UK term.  I wasn't sure if this was contributing to the misunderstandings in this thread.

Liberalism as it is used in Europe is not at all how it is used in the US in everyday parlance. So yes, a significant potential source of misunderstanding. You would likely be hard-pressed to find many Americans who understand what liberalism means in a UK context.

Wrenchturner

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 180
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Canada
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #279 on: July 06, 2019, 10:53:01 AM »
If libertarians are closely aligned with the conservative right, is this because conservatives actually tend toward libertarianism more, or is it because the authoritarian left doesn't want to acknowledge the libertarian left?

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4184
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #280 on: July 06, 2019, 11:09:13 AM »
If libertarians are closely aligned with the conservative right, is this because conservatives actually tend toward libertarianism more, or is it because the authoritarian left doesn't want to acknowledge the libertarian left?

I think itís basically because the conservative right and libertarians have in common not wanting their money to go to programs that benefit people who arenít them.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13627
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #281 on: July 06, 2019, 11:32:48 AM »
If libertarians are closely aligned with the conservative right, is this because conservatives actually tend toward libertarianism more, or is it because the authoritarian left doesn't want to acknowledge the libertarian left?

I think itís basically because the conservative right and libertarians have in common not wanting their money to go to programs that benefit people who arenít them.

Kind of.

In theory, libertarianism is a mix of economic and social theory - social liberalism with economic conservatism.  In practice, most libertarians tend to vote with conservatives because the conservatives talk a lot about smaller government.  They might complain about some of the more extreme social conservative policies, but the smaller government/lower taxes (taxes are of course, theft  :P ) argument seems to be more important to Libertarians than the social one.

TrudgingAlong

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 179
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #282 on: July 06, 2019, 11:40:39 AM »
Social conservatives tend to think sex ed shouldn't happen in a public school at all.
Generally, sex education in school tends to be in the mechanics of sex and reproduction, nowadays with some token mention of consent, etc. I find it amusing that when Amish kids go to school, their parents raise no objections to their kids having sex ed - because their children have been exposed to the mechanics of sex and reproduction from early on - they live on a farm! And the Amish are nothing if not socially conservative. But urban conservatives flip out about it.

I have no objection to schools teaching my children about sex and saving money and so on. The values they espouse may or may not be my values, but my values are hammered into them long before the school gets around to the topic, and anyway my children will be exposed to many more and different values simply by the fact of their watching TV and having friends who they talk to, etc.

Both progressives and conservatives seem to think that they can bring their children up in an insulated bubble of progressivism or conservatism. It doesn't work like that.

 Yes, you are right. Kids are not in bubbles, and they do have to learn to switch between situations where values are one thing and somewhat different in another situation. So in that regard, your post makes a lot of sense.All homes teach something about finance and sex and reproduction, even if the parents never specifically and openly talk about it. That right there is a teaching, that this stuff is secretive and should be hidden. Not good

I find it interesting when parents try to limit the views their kids are exposed to. We have always done the opposite: true to expose them to many, many ideas and viewpoints. We have also discussed them with them and helped them learn how to analyze and build their own world view from them. My children are not carbon copies of me. They may not choose the same values as we do. And I am truly okay with that. After all, I no longer practice the same intense religion I was raised with, nor does my husband, yet our life is pretty great. We are happy making our own choices about life, so why shouldnít our kids have that same freedom? As long as they donít land on prison or harm others, I will always support their right and desire to choose their own path, whatever it is. I wish more people were okay with this. I think it would solve a lot of the adult relationship problems people experience with their kids as they grow up and leave the house.

Roland of Gilead

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1770
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #283 on: July 06, 2019, 11:50:24 AM »
Kind of.

In theory, libertarianism is a mix of economic and social theory - social liberalism with economic conservatism.  In practice, most libertarians tend to vote with conservatives because the conservatives talk a lot about smaller government.  They might complain about some of the more extreme social conservative policies, but the smaller government/lower taxes (taxes are of course, theft  :P ) argument seems to be more important to Libertarians than the social one.

That pretty much sums up how I vote.   I lean liberal on most social issues but I get annoyed with some of the attempts by government to take over control of our lives.   A small demonstration of this is the soda tax in Seattle.   Control the way poor people consume while ignoring the double tall latte with whip cream that the rich consume.   Just fucking leave me alone is my view, which sort of is libertarian....certainly is not republican or democrat.

Wrenchturner

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 180
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Canada
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #284 on: July 06, 2019, 12:06:43 PM »
If libertarians are closely aligned with the conservative right, is this because conservatives actually tend toward libertarianism more, or is it because the authoritarian left doesn't want to acknowledge the libertarian left?

I think itís basically because the conservative right and libertarians have in common not wanting their money to go to programs that benefit people who arenít them.
The authoritarian left also does this, but you may have a point.

Wrenchturner

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 180
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Canada
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #285 on: July 06, 2019, 12:10:03 PM »
If libertarians are closely aligned with the conservative right, is this because conservatives actually tend toward libertarianism more, or is it because the authoritarian left doesn't want to acknowledge the libertarian left?

I think itís basically because the conservative right and libertarians have in common not wanting their money to go to programs that benefit people who arenít them.

Kind of.

In theory, libertarianism is a mix of economic and social theory - social liberalism with economic conservatism.  In practice, most libertarians tend to vote with conservatives because the conservatives talk a lot about smaller government.  They might complain about some of the more extreme social conservative policies, but the smaller government/lower taxes (taxes are of course, theft  :P ) argument seems to be more important to Libertarians than the social one.

I definitely agree with the bolded part, but I still think libertarianism can be separated from left/right.  At least I'd hope so because it would make this discussion a lot easier.  It might be worth trying to lay out the differences between left- and right-leaning libertarians.  Maybe I'll get around to it.

John Galt incarnate!

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 469
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #286 on: July 06, 2019, 12:27:46 PM »

I think itís basically because the conservative right and libertarians have in common not wanting their money to go to programs that benefit people who arenít them.

Broadly speaking, conservatives/classical liberals/libertarians tend to favor laissez faire more than statism.

iris lily

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3229
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #287 on: July 06, 2019, 12:46:48 PM »
Social conservatives tend to think sex ed shouldn't happen in a public school at all.
Generally, sex education in school tends to be in the mechanics of sex and reproduction, nowadays with some token mention of consent, etc. I find it amusing that when Amish kids go to school, their parents raise no objections to their kids having sex ed - because their children have been exposed to the mechanics of sex and reproduction from early on - they live on a farm! And the Amish are nothing if not socially conservative. But urban conservatives flip out about it.

I have no objection to schools teaching my children about sex and saving money and so on. The values they espouse may or may not be my values, but my values are hammered into them long before the school gets around to the topic, and anyway my children will be exposed to many more and different values simply by the fact of their watching TV and having friends who they talk to, etc.

Both progressives and conservatives seem to think that they can bring their children up in an insulated bubble of progressivism or conservatism. It doesn't work like that.

 Yes, you are right. Kids are not in bubbles, and they do have to learn to switch between situations where values are one thing and somewhat different in another situation. So in that regard, your post makes a lot of sense.All homes teach something about finance and sex and reproduction, even if the parents never specifically and openly talk about it. That right there is a teaching, that this stuff is secretive and should be hidden. Not good

I find it interesting when parents try to limit the views their kids are exposed to. We have always done the opposite: true to expose them to many, many ideas and viewpoints. We have also discussed them with them and helped them learn how to analyze and build their own world view from them. My children are not carbon copies of me. They may not choose the same values as we do. And I am truly okay with that. After all, I no longer practice the same intense religion I was raised with, nor does my husband, yet our life is pretty great. We are happy making our own choices about life, so why shouldnít our kids have that same freedom? As long as they donít land on prison or harm others, I will always support their right and desire to choose their own path, whatever it is. I wish more people were okay with this. I think it would solve a lot of the adult relationship problems people experience with their kids as they grow up and leave the house.

Yes, you guiding your children in exposing them to a variety of ideas or ď viewsĒ is great because YOU are driving the train, giving them context, helping them learn. These latter things are more important then the varying views. Kids do not live in a bubble and they are going to get varying views no matter what.Iím sure you do steer them away from certain content that is not age-appropriate. Or maybe you donít? Maybe you think itís perfectly fine for five year olds to freely access rough porn whenever they choose, to name an extreme example.


arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 27773
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Traveling the World
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #288 on: July 06, 2019, 01:17:51 PM »
That just means we should have the schools do it better, not not do it at all.

Social conservatives tend to think sex ed shouldn't happen in a public school at all.

I agree that ideally the children would get good messaging at home about sex, finances, etc.

If we agree that it isn't always the case, is it better to also have that education done in school, or not at all?

Schools can give just the facts but  It seems in escapable to me that they impart fax without values.

I think that's ideal. Schools give facts, and they get their values at home.

Quote
I would like to know whose values theyíre promoting. Can you tell me that?

You're missing my point. I'm not arguing for, or against, whatever is being taught right now.

My question is: Do you want them to not teach any sex education at all?

Most conservatives think there should be no sex education in school. Most liberals think there should be.

I think the data based approach is that sex education (and family planning/contraceptive use) leads to better outcomes for individuals. The number one cause of death worldwide for teenage girls? Childbirth.

If you want it to come from the home, that's great... but what about those kids who don't get sex ed at home?
We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, and now travel the world full time with two kids.
If you want to know more about me, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (rarely) blog at AdventuringAlong.com. Check out our Now page to see what we're up to currently.

iris lily

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3229
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #289 on: July 06, 2019, 01:42:10 PM »
That just means we should have the schools do it better, not not do it at all.

Social conservatives tend to think sex ed shouldn't happen in a public school at all.

I agree that ideally the children would get good messaging at home about sex, finances, etc.

If we agree that it isn't always the case, is it better to also have that education done in school, or not at all?

Schools can give just the facts but  It seems in escapable to me that they impart fax without values.

I think that's ideal. Schools give facts, and they get their values at home.

Quote
I would like to know whose values theyíre promoting. Can you tell me that?

You're missing my point. I'm not arguing for, or against, whatever is being taught right now.

My question is: Do you want them to not teach any sex education at all?

Most conservatives think there should be no sex education in school. Most liberals think there should be.

I think the data based approach is that sex education (and family planning/contraceptive use) leads to better outcomes for individuals. The number one cause of death worldwide for teenage girls? Childbirth.

If you want it to come from the home, that's great... but what about those kids who don't get sex ed at home?

Tell me what you mean by sex education, when is it taught, and how. Then
I will tell you if
I agree.

But yeah, specific biological facts of health and reproduction seem fine to me, I would not have a problem with that depending onóthings.

What is a  the real problem is though is there is such a range of maturity.  Some kids are not ready to hear some things at some point, yet the government is one size fits all. Everyone gets the lesson, regardless. That is where parents come into it, knowing their child  and the appropriateness of the lesson for his/her age.

For  the record, my parents let me loose with any book I wanted in the public library, and were transparents about sex (as well as money.) But I wasnít ready to hear about sexual intercourse when I was 10 or even 11, maybe 12? My brother figured it out at age 5. We are all different. That one size fits all is bunk..
« Last Edit: July 06, 2019, 01:45:05 PM by iris lily »

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 27773
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Traveling the World
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #290 on: July 06, 2019, 02:05:41 PM »

Tell me what you mean by sex education, when is it taught, and how. Then
I will tell you if
I agree.

Nah. Not what I'm saying. I'm saying it should be taught.

And then once we agree on that, one can debate the particulars (I mean, one could in theory; I won't). First we have to agree something should be taught.

Conservatives typically don't agree with that.

Quote
What is a  the real problem is though is there is such a range of maturity.  Some kids are not ready to hear some things at some point, yet the government is one size fits all. Everyone gets the lesson, regardless. That is where parents come into it, knowing their child  and the appropriateness of the lesson for his/her age.

For  the record, my parents let me loose with any book I wanted in the public library, and were transparents about sex (as well as money.) But I wasnít ready to hear about sexual intercourse when I was 10 or even 11, maybe 12? My brother figured it out at age 5. We are all different. That one size fits all is bunk..

But would you want the schools assessing whether or not a child is ready? I certainly hope not. The parents should assess that.

So the way that schools do it--at a particular age when the majority is ready, and then allowing the parents to opt-in / opt out for their particular child--is the ideal way to do it.

Would you rather they decide "this child's ready now" and teach a certain child 8 and "this child is not ready now" at age 12 and refuse to teach them?  That seems absurd and invasive. So let's instead have it taught at a set point in school, and the parents decide if their kid is ready, and can sign a consent form to allow them, or refuse to sign.

As is the case now.

We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, and now travel the world full time with two kids.
If you want to know more about me, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (rarely) blog at AdventuringAlong.com. Check out our Now page to see what we're up to currently.

BicycleB

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1161
  • Location: Live Music Capital of the World
  • Older than the internet, but not wiser... yet
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #291 on: July 06, 2019, 02:22:23 PM »

Tell me what you mean by sex education, when is it taught, and how. Then
I will tell you if
I agree.

Nah. Not what I'm saying. I'm saying it should be taught.

And then once we agree on that, one can debate the particulars (I mean, one could in theory; I won't). First we have to agree something should be taught.

Conservatives typically don't agree with that.


Didn't the "tell me what you mean..." remark imply that there is some version she will agree should be taught, and explicitly invite the discussion of particulars?

Fwiw, I too like the school teaches it, but-parents-can-opt-out-for-now system. Though I think it should have a certain  facts required to be learned before graduation, to prevent die-hard abstinence-only parents from using the "not ready yet" objection to fully prevent their children's education.

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 27773
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Traveling the World
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #292 on: July 06, 2019, 03:14:50 PM »
It's shifting the burden to me to come up with some particulars that then she may or may not disagree with.  I'm not interested.

And it's irrelevant to my point whether or not her and I can hash out some particulars. My point is something related to sex ed should be taught, and the local communities (school board, etc.) can decide what (including inputs from parents and such). The particulars don't interest me.

My point is I think something should be taught. Conservatives typically think it shouldn't be taught in school at all.
We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, and now travel the world full time with two kids.
If you want to know more about me, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (rarely) blog at AdventuringAlong.com. Check out our Now page to see what we're up to currently.

iris lily

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3229
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #293 on: July 06, 2019, 04:18:15 PM »

Tell me what you mean by sex education, when is it taught, and how. Then
I will tell you if
I agree.

Nah. Not what I'm saying. I'm saying it should be taught.

And then once we agree on that, one can debate the particulars (I mean, one could in theory; I won't). First we have to agree something should be taught.

Conservatives typically don't agree with that.

Quote
What is a  the real problem is though is there is such a range of maturity.  Some kids are not ready to hear some things at some point, yet the government is one size fits all. Everyone gets the lesson, regardless. That is where parents come into it, knowing their child  and the appropriateness of the lesson for his/her age.

For  the record, my parents let me loose with any book I wanted in the public library, and were transparents about sex (as well as money.) But I wasnít ready to hear about sexual intercourse when I was 10 or even 11, maybe 12? My brother figured it out at age 5. We are all different. That one size fits all is bunk..

But would you want the schools assessing whether or not a child is ready? I certainly hope not. The parents should assess that.

So the way that schools do it--at a particular age when the majority is ready, and then allowing the parents to opt-in / opt out for their particular child--is the ideal way to do it.

Would you rather they decide "this child's ready now" and teach a certain child 8 and "this child is not ready now" at age 12 and refuse to teach them?  That seems absurd and invasive. So let's instead have it taught at a set point in school, and the parents decide if their kid is ready, and can sign a consent form to allow them, or refuse to sign.

As is the case now.

I am not much of a social conservative as I have said before, especially  when it comes to intellectual freedom issues,  and sex education is important In a childís life. It is fine with me if it is taught in Public schools. I would want a lot more for my own children, however ó nuances, specifics, and value laden.But if the masses get the standard government issued thing, well so be it.

One danger is parents expecting too much from that school experience, shifting their own burden to public school teachers.It is a poor substitute for education in the home although certainly teacher and parent instruction can and should complement one another.

Iím in my 60s and we had sex ( reproduction facts ) education in my public school as well as ď your changing body/ healthĒ sessions way back then. It  isnt new.

 I would like to see children taught when they are ready to hear it. Efficient classroom management means it is as you say, the majority are ready for it on day X even though some of them needed it months or years before X while others are not ready on X and can be exempt.

I wonít address the idea that conservatives do not want sex education in schools because Iím not as confident as you are in painting with that broad brush.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2019, 04:19:50 PM by iris lily »

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13627
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #294 on: July 06, 2019, 04:42:41 PM »
While certainly not all social conservatives want to keep sex ed out of classrooms, the resistance to sex ed (or the insistence on teaching methods proven to fail like abstinence) comes entirely from the social conservative side.

KBecks

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1690
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #295 on: July 07, 2019, 12:04:21 PM »
Basic biology and reproduction is fine, but I think what conservatives fear are the things that go far beyond that.

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 27773
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Traveling the World
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #296 on: July 07, 2019, 12:40:15 PM »
Basic biology and reproduction is fine, but I think what conservatives fear are the things that go far beyond that.
Like what?

We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, and now travel the world full time with two kids.
If you want to know more about me, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (rarely) blog at AdventuringAlong.com. Check out our Now page to see what we're up to currently.

PDXTabs

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1042
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Vancouver, WA, USA
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #297 on: July 07, 2019, 01:23:41 PM »
For  the record, my parents let me loose with any book I wanted in the public library, and were transparents about sex (as well as money.) But I wasnít ready to hear about sexual intercourse when I was 10 or even 11, maybe 12? My brother figured it out at age 5. We are all different. That one size fits all is bunk..

Did you manage to avoid witnessing animals mate both in real life and on TV until you were 10 years old? I definitely would have seen it by age five on PBS, but I loved nature documentaries.

FWIW my school started sex ed in 3th grade, which would have made the class 8-9 years old.

iris lily

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3229
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #298 on: July 07, 2019, 02:51:52 PM »
For  the record, my parents let me loose with any book I wanted in the public library, and were transparents about sex (as well as money.) But I wasnít ready to hear about sexual intercourse when I was 10 or even 11, maybe 12? My brother figured it out at age 5. We are all different. That one size fits all is bunk..

Did you manage to avoid witnessing animals mate both in real life and on TV until you were 10 years old? I definitely would have seen it by age five on PBS, but I loved nature documentaries. I did.

FWIW my school started sex ed in 3th grade, which would have made the class 8-9 years old.
I was a  Suburban kid in a rural state, not a farm kid.

The farm kids knew plenty before I did. I didnt watch PBS animal mating shows (did they even  exist in the 1960s?)   And maybe I just didnt want to think about penises entering vaginas at that age. Is that ok?

 That said, by 13 or 14 I was reading Lady Chatterleyís  Lover and The Well of Loneliness (seminal lesbian literature in case you dont know) as well as the standards of Jane Austen, the Brontes, , Madame Bovery, etc.

 
« Last Edit: July 07, 2019, 02:54:55 PM by iris lily »

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13627
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Are social conservatives always wrong?
« Reply #299 on: July 07, 2019, 03:25:17 PM »
You could devote a life to study of Victorian literature and never fully grasp the mechanics of sex.  Like, you would be pretty sure that sex is dirty/bad, but beyond that?  It was a weird era.  :P