Thread: It wasn't abortion or gay marriage

I agree, along with their general environmental policies, as well. But as long as the left seems intent on directly eroding and treading on my civil and economic rights, I can't vote for them. If the Republicans become bent on reversing Roe vs. Wade, I may reverse course. Until then, I'll try to work within Republicans for Choice and limit the damage of the Religious Right and other more extreme conservatives.

It's too bad the left will most likely not be smart enough to assist the moderate right into salvaging at least a few of their progressive agenda, such as the environment and a woman's right to choose. They want you to take the WHOLE distateful package or nothing, rather than selecting and protecting the needed gems.

http://chrisevans3d.com/files/iq.htm

IQ and Politics

State Avg. IQ 2004
1 Connecticut 113 Kerry
2 Massachusetts 111 Kerry
3 New Jersey 111 Kerry
4 New York 109 Kerry
5 Rhode Island 107 Kerry
6 Hawaii 106 Kerry
7 Maryland 105 Kerry
8 New Hampshire 105 Kerry
9 Illinois 104 Kerry
10 Delaware 103 Kerry
11 Minnesota 102 Kerry
12 Vermont 102 Kerry
13 Washington 102 Kerry
14 California 101 Kerry
15 Pennsylvania 101 Kerry
16 Maine 100 Kerry
17 Virginia 100 Bush
18 Wisconsin 100 Kerry
19 Colorado 99 Bush
20 Iowa 99 Bush
21 Michigan 99 Kerry
22 Nevada 99 Bush
23 Ohio 99 Bush
24 Oregon 99 Kerry
25 Alaska 98 Bush
26 Florida 98 Bush
27 Missouri 98 Bush
28 Kansas 96 Bush
29 Nebraska 95 Bush
30 Arizona 94 Bush
31 Indiana 94 Bush
32 Tennessee 94 Bush
33 North Carolina 93 Bush
34 West Virginia 93 Bush
35 Arkansas 92 Bush
36 Georgia 92 Bush
37 Kentucky 92 Bush
38 New Mexico 92 Bush
39 North Dakota 92 Bush
40 Texas 92 Bush
41 Alabama 90 Bush
42 Louisiana 90 Bush
43 Montana 90 Bush
44 Oklahoma 90 Bush
45 South Dakota 90 Bush
46 South Carolina 89 Bush
47 Wyoming 89 Bush
48 Idaho 87 Bush
49 Utah 87 Bush
50 Mississippi 85 Bush

That being the IQ level (though I don't really take these statistics seriously or the polls by various agencies since they have repeatedly proved wrong in the Indian Election and now in the US Elections), I wonder what could be the rationale that decided the vote.

Abortion and gay rights ofcourse did influence the election and why not? My friends in the US inform me that though the world through Hollywood films and Harold Robbins' books may feel that the Americans are a roll in the hay an hour and wham, ban*, thank you, ma'am types, it is not so. The average middle class Americans, they tell me is very conservative and value all these things rather seriously (though that maybe a broad brush, still...)

Yet, I will concede that National Security was paramount; as also the feeling that right or wrong, Iraq had to succeed, hook or by crook, since it was not making the US look too much of a winner. Given the option between Bush and Kerry, surely Bush appeared more resolute.

Therefore, media or no media reports, I am sure these values did play a major role.

However, my comments are of an onlooker and are my personal views.

If the above were not important issues, then what were the issues. I am sure that it was not health care, social security, education, economy which, though issues, were marginal. A study of the comments on WAB also indicates so.

You're totally missing the point, it isn't even about wedge issues. It's about having no platform. If anything, I see the religious right being used as a scapegoat for a failed democrtic party platform. The majority of people who voted republican are not evangelical chrisitians, therefore, shouldn't the democrats ask themselves what else they're doing wrong? Also, as the site itself notes, the Economist has said those figures are in fact a hoax, I myself am a regular reader so I did catch that a few issues back. Also, as has been stated many times before, even the blue states are mostly red.

Im pro abortion only because of the societal impact. On a personal level, i view it as murder.

Gio,

Gay rights and abortion are not religious issues. It is social issues.

Though I am sure you will say social issues are a byproduct of religious beliefs, but I look at it as purely social issues.

I don't know why religion is brought into all this. Further, even if someone believes it is a religious issue, is that something which one should be ashamed of, so long as they don't thrust their religious views down the throat?

I find nothing religious about these issues.

I look at abortion (unless it is life saving) a health debilitating.

Being gay is fine, but I am sure it must be a very painful experience or a very unsatisfying an experience.

Having had no experience, of course, I am guided by my imagination. Maybe some gay could educate me, theoretically, that is!

Having had no experience, of course, I am guided by my imagination. Maybe some gay could educate me, theoretically, that is!

ROFL

Wow....somebody need to help Ray out.....I think he's really confused.

Being gay or pro-abortion is not issues among the religious sector? How do you figure Ray?

Julie,

In our country, all religions are against taking of life.

Yet, there are abortions. Because one can't endanger the life of a living woman if she has a medical problem.

As far as gay is concerned, it is a matter of choice. In our country, it is not flaunted and anyway, it is also looked down upon.

We don't look at it as a religious issue. We think that it is more of a social issue.

That is why maybe you feel I am wee bit confused. What has religion got to do with abortion or being gay and by gay I am not meaning being happy and cheerful?

Originally Posted by Ray

What has religion got to do with abortion or being gay and by gay I am not meaning being happy and cheerful?

Mathematically, to make sure you have the correct answer, you just reverse the problem....so let's try that shall we?

Originally Posted by Ray

All religions are against the taking of life.

If all religions were NOT against the taking of life, would abortions be such a disputed issue? Being it is just a social issue, place it on a voting ballot as a referendum as a state issue. This would omit the religious view and Federal interference.

Originally Posted by Ray

As far as gay is concerned, it is a matter of choice. In our country, it is not flaunted and anyway, it is also looked down upon.

If ALL religions recognized marriage between two genders, would "being looked down upon" still be a problem to the gay community?

If the religious sectors were completely separated from State, the majority of the religious community would not vote. However, the polls reflect that they do. In the same respect, if the religious sectors were completely separated from the gay communities, marriage between two genders would not be a such a disputed issue, and being gay would become a choice/social issue.

Hence, when states begin recognizing marriage between two genders, the religious sects look to the Federal Government for enactment. Liberals tend to treat abortion and gay marriages like a "hot potato" and fling it back to the states for decision.

For sake of argument, can anyone find any statistics of the religious preferences of gay communities (and I do not mean the smiling and cheerful ones).

Originally Posted by Ray

IQ and Politics

its a hoax

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

Im pro abortion only because of the societal impact. On a personal level, i view it as murder.

So if murder were good for society, you'd support that too? In fact it might be. If we knock off a couple million poor, stupid people, we'd be better off. Once you start allowing murder where do you draw the line. It's completely subjective. Let's say I think Jews are bad for society or blacks or gays or maybe white people are the cause of all evil. So, I decide to do what I think is best for society and kill some number of millions of people. Notice this isn't farfetched. This is the justification for every historical genocide. If you believe abortion is murder, you have an obligation to oppose it because there is not moral justification for murder.

Originally Posted by Leader

So if murder were good for society, you'd support that too? In fact it might be. If we knock off a couple million poor, stupid people, we'd be better off. Once you start allowing murder where do you draw the line. It's completely subjective. Let's say I think Jews are bad for society or blacks or gays or maybe white people are the cause of all evil. So, I decide to do what I think is best for society and kill some number of millions of people. Notice this isn't farfetched. This is the justification for every historical genocide. If you believe abortion is murder, you have an obligation to oppose it because there is not moral justification for murder.

how does this sit with the death penalty?

Originally Posted by parihaka

how does this sit with the death penalty?

What did the baby do to deserve the death penalty?

Originally Posted by Confed999

What did the baby do to deserve the death penalty?

sorry, the problem of following several threads at once, "because there is not moral justification for murder." just wondering how this sits with having a death penalty for murder?