you keep using that word

"macanamera" (macanamera) 04/12/2016 at 14:12 • Filed to: None

8

44

I don’t think it means what you think it means

EL_ULY > macanamera 04/12/2016 at 14:18

0

Revolution, the only solution,
The armed response of an entire nation,
Revolution, the only solution,
We’ve taken all your shit, now it’s time for restitutioooooon!!!!

Mercedes Streeter > macanamera 04/12/2016 at 14:18

0

To be fair, a Bernie white house probably would be a historical political revolution. As it currently stands, American politics are hardly an actual democracy, rather controlled by those who can vote with their offshore wallets...Or worse, voting with their religion. :(

BorkBorkBjork > macanamera 04/12/2016 at 14:21

6

I love revolutions! They have such wonderful posters.

Seriously though, an election isn’t a revolution. Revolutions kill people. Quit acting like you’re some kind of political crusaders, Sanders supporter.

dogisbadob > macanamera 04/12/2016 at 14:26

0

awesome hitler glowstick gif

Andy Sheehan, StreetsideStig > macanamera 04/12/2016 at 14:29

2

A Bernie presidency might trigger a revolution. Just not the kind the socialists want.

and 100 more > macanamera 04/12/2016 at 14:29

9

As opposed to what, the Trump campaign?

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > Mercedes Streeter 04/12/2016 at 14:29

3

Well they vote based on their values. We all do. Whether that is religion, or beliefs in economic strategies, or based on a coin toss. Our system says all of those are valid enough reasons for a person to push one button over another.

I really dislike the concept of someone not being allowed to vote according to their beliefs when everyone else gets to vote with theirs.

Not trying to start a fight, but that phrase is so counter to everything a democracy is built on it forces me to speak up.

Mercedes Streeter > PotbellyJoe and 42 others 04/12/2016 at 14:35

1

But you’re misunderstanding me here. Normal people have very little control over what happens in this country, it’s the people who have the ability (money & power) to abuse the system. If you don’t believe me, then take a look at North Carolina, Tennessee, South Dakota, Indiana, Wisconsin, and Mississippi...all states currently working hard (and most of them successful so far) to strip me of my rights.

Or hell, the silly Superdelagates...

I’m all for voting for any reason, but I’m not for our current system.

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > Mercedes Streeter 04/12/2016 at 14:40

4

Or worse, voting with their religion. :(

but

I’m all for voting for any reason, but I’m not for our current system.

You contradict yourself.

And the little people actually hold all of the power, it’s when only 15% of them show up to midterm elections, or off-cycle elections that 85% bequeath their power to the others.

unclevanos (Ovaltine Jenkins) > and 100 more 04/12/2016 at 14:40

2

BUILD WALL

I’m sorry but all of the civil engineers here are saying it as joke so I had to.

HammerheadFistpunch > macanamera 04/12/2016 at 14:43

9

Wait...what does “honk” really mean?

duurtlang > PotbellyJoe and 42 others 04/12/2016 at 14:44

2

While I agree one should be able to vote for the candidate of their choice, no matter what that choice is based on, I’m really glad I’m not even aware of what religion my president prime minister supports. If any. Having a president with a very clear religious identity, whatever it is, makes it hard for said president to surpass differences to be a president of every citizen and not just a president of his ingroup.

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > duurtlang 04/12/2016 at 14:46

2

And I’m not saying that a person’s religion should be a litmus test for office. For some they want to vote for a candidate that shares their religious views. For some it’s voting for the candidate that doesn’t hold those religious views. For others it’s voting for the candidate that is willing to wear a flag on their lapel.

I’m saying voters should be able to vote with their values in place, whether that puts a person in office who adheres to a certain religion is entirely dependent on the voting populace.

Big difference between requiring and inquiring of the candidate.

duurtlang > PotbellyJoe and 42 others 04/12/2016 at 14:48

0

I think we agree with each other.

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > duurtlang 04/12/2016 at 14:52

0

I agree that those are your values for voting and that they are valid.

Bman76 (no it doesn't need a WS6 hood) M. Arch > macanamera 04/12/2016 at 14:54

0

Rapid evolution  revolution.

Mercedes Streeter > PotbellyJoe and 42 others 04/12/2016 at 14:58

0

You’re taking my statements out of context. “Voting with religion” refers to people abusing the system to meet some shitty agenda...which currently are the various “religious freedom” laws many states are clamoring over...which all those laws allow people to do is legally discriminate people they don’t like.

And in the end, I’ll still say that we should be able to vote for any reason, but the shitty people should not be the ones getting our laws passed.

And it’s still mostly false that the little people hold all of the power. If I got “caught” using the women’s restroom in North Carolina, there’s absolutely nothing I can do about it except protest.

ETA: Sorry for sounding angry. I’m not angry with you, I’m angry with America. What’s going on right now is beyond pathetic, it’s inhumane.

ETA 2: I’m also deeply depressed. What bearing does that have on my logic? I’m not entirely sure. :(

Ash78, voting early and often > duurtlang 04/12/2016 at 15:03

1

There is an interesting difference between Europe and the US is that many people say we’re more religious because it has been separated from the state for so long (unlike, for example, some of the archaic religious links that still exist there, such as on German tax forms or within the various monarchies). On the other hand, the US is one of the few countries founded upon the notion that our rights are conferred to us by "a creator" and not by other people. That can be dangerous when people co-opt it and force sub-sets of those religious beliefs on others. But on the whole, the majority of Judeo-Christian beliefs are beneficial to society. It's just those various gray areas that cause the most hassles today. But that tends to be what happens when people overreach and let their own biases show through in the name of a higher power.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > HammerheadFistpunch 04/12/2016 at 15:09

0

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > Mercedes Streeter 04/12/2016 at 15:14

0

No. You’re missing the point of my post. I’m going to break this down one more time and if this doesn’t get to it, we’ll agree to disagree.

“Voting with religion” even in the case you just exemplified is still voting with their values. For as long as there will be democracy, there will always be this possibility. You disagree with those values, as many do, because your values are different. You will then vote with your values. This is equally valid.

What stops “shitty” (again, according to your values) laws from being passed is that enough people with similar values to yours, show up at the polls and defeat this legislation, or a Senator or House Representative, or a State Representative, or a Mayor, or a School Board or any other voting that impacts your life. This is the power of democracies, we all get a say in how we are governed.

So even in that, your values are valid, as are everyone else’s and the populace that holds the highest portion of the people showing up to vote get to make the rules for the prescribed time period they will hold that office.

This is why when we vote we try to get other like-minded individuals behind a cause or candidate so that our values will not be outvoted by contradicting values.

Now, obviously there are courts in our land to monitor that laws are equally applied, but let’s remember how those individuals are selected as well. The little people vote with their values to elect representatives that will operate with their values in mind and they will approve of a judicial appointment based on whether they feel that appointee will apply the law according to how the representative interprets the law, so ultimately the court will reflect the voting populace’s interpretation of the law.

Mercedes Streeter > PotbellyJoe and 42 others 04/12/2016 at 15:18

0

I agree with you fully. What you wrote there is how a Democracy is supposed to work. I guess what I’m trying to say is that in our current reality, it isn’t perfect...it’s corrupted like a bad hard drive.

For example: Nobody actually had the time to vote against the laws I’m talking about...they were quite literally sneaked past anyone who’d vote against them. :(

JawzX2, Boost Addict. 1.6t, 2.7tt, 4.2t > Andy Sheehan, StreetsideStig 04/12/2016 at 15:22

1

I think we’re much closer to civil war in this country than anyone wants to admit.

/A Bernie supporter who owns plenty of guns.

duurtlang > Ash78, voting early and often 04/12/2016 at 15:26

1

But that tends to be what happens when people overreach and let their own biases show through in the name of a higher power.

That’s the issue I have with using religion as an argument for people to vote for you. The whole “my opinion is right because I belong to religion x” or “this is right because [insert religious argument]” should, imho, not be used by a politician. Ever. A politician should be able to give a rational explanation for why something is or isn’t right. Murder isn’t wrong because it says so in a holy book. Murder is wrong for a whole variety of rational reasons. Using religion in politics is a cop out, it’s too easy and automatically exclusive to many people.

Don’t get me wrong, I obviously have zero issue with people with religious believes being active in politics. I just don’t believe they should publicly use religious reasons or their religious background as an argument during policy making that involves everyone.

German tax forms

That’s an interesting one. My girlfriend is both German and living in Germany. She constantly complains about the church tax she pays, even though she can opt out easily. She refuses to opt out. She also doesn’t believe in any god, yet considers herself christian (culturally, I guess). Both, church tax and being agnostic/atheistic while considering oneself culturally religious, are such foreign concepts to me. Probably because I’m not German myself.

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > Mercedes Streeter 04/12/2016 at 15:27

2

In a representative government, nothing is “sneaked through” as the vote took place when people selected who would represent them in state chambers.

If we were a pure democracy where everything was put to the people every time a decision was to be made, we would never get anything done because each decision would take 6-12 months to organize a vote.

That’s why it is important to vote according to your values at all representative elections, to ensure that your representative supports yours. Don’t blame the people who win a vote, blame your peers of common values who didn’t vote resulting in those values losing.

JawzX2, Boost Addict. 1.6t, 2.7tt, 4.2t > PotbellyJoe and 42 others 04/12/2016 at 15:27

3

Separation of Church and State was a Good Idea 250 years ago, and it still is. If we are able to LEAVE RELIGION ENTIRELY OUT OF POLITICS, only then, is freedom of religion is a real thing. Otherwise it’s just freedom of whoever-is-in-power’s religion.

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > JawzX2, Boost Addict. 1.6t, 2.7tt, 4.2t 04/12/2016 at 15:28

0

And those are your values. I hope you go to the polls and exercise your power to put those values in power so that the government will represent you fully.

JawzX2, Boost Addict. 1.6t, 2.7tt, 4.2t > PotbellyJoe and 42 others 04/12/2016 at 15:30

2

Thanks, I have already this year, and I will continue to down the line.

Ash78, voting early and often > duurtlang 04/12/2016 at 15:32

1

I prefer my politicians be at least “tacitly Christian” but I would have no problem with, say, a secular Jew or basically anyone with some sort of underlying principles that go beyond simple utilitarian theory or rule of law. Murder is wrong BOTH because it says so in a holy book AND because it’s the natural order of things (regardless of philosophy) that stealing someone’s life is wrong. I think those two notions align very well in most cases. But then you have things like homosexuality — “one book tells me God punishes gays, another tells me I should love them like everyone else.” And then secular society ranges from accepting to hating. It’s no wonder people get so confused...they mix and match any two (or more) of those to push an agenda. But back to your point, I’m not a “single issue” voter — I could never vote for Trump in part because I don’t approve of his character, most of his policies are heavyhanded, and I especially dislike his "fake religion" which reeks of the worst form of pandering to me.

Bourbon&JellyBeans > macanamera 04/12/2016 at 15:49

0

Except the Nazis were elected.

Mercedes Streeter > PotbellyJoe and 42 others 04/12/2016 at 15:51

0

And I agree with that through and through. :)

But you have to agree that the system is still abused and corrupt...otherwise Superdelegates and the current iterations of Super Pacs (which pretty much legalize bribery) would not exist.

Andy Sheehan, StreetsideStig > JawzX2, Boost Addict. 1.6t, 2.7tt, 4.2t 04/12/2016 at 15:54

0

Agreed.

/A person who refuses to support any of the candidates still running

Mercedes Streeter > Ash78, voting early and often 04/12/2016 at 15:57

2

Honestly, I don’t care what religion my politician is...all I ask is that maybe they consider the “humanity” of a situation before letting their religion dictate how they lead. Maybe your book says “yo dude, hate these guys”, but common sense tells you “how these people live their lives are not my decision”, logically one should choose the latter...But history is peppered with people who stubbornly choose the former.

Ash78, voting early and often > Mercedes Streeter 04/12/2016 at 16:01

1

I have a hard time even trying to hate anyone (maybe the IRS, but not the individuals who work there). Lack of humanity is the key. Even if I believe God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for their choices, I also believe that no sin is worse than any other. And then there's that whole thing where God sent His son to tell us about acceptance of people — everyone. You can still hate the sin, but you are not allowed to be selective of that sin based on what you personally think is weird or bad in your own view. There's just too much of that, and far too little of people sitting down face-to-face to realize that we're all just humans — all of us flawed and fallen in the Christian sense, all equally so.

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > Mercedes Streeter 04/12/2016 at 16:11

0

Except that the courts, and lawmakers have allowed that and we allowed them, so by extension we have allowed all of that to play into our politics.

BorkBorkBjork > Bourbon&JellyBeans 04/12/2016 at 16:22

0

Don’t cut yourself on all that edge.

Mercedes Streeter > PotbellyJoe and 42 others 04/12/2016 at 16:38

0

Indeed. However, there are many cases in which what the people thinks pretty much does not matter.

For example: The superdelegates. It can be entirely possible that Bernie Sanders gets the popular vote (meaning that people went out and voted for who they believed in), BUT Hillary still wins the nomination because of the superdelagates who have the ability to swing an election any way they want.

And it’s not like the people asked for the superdelegates, they only exist to stop the people from voting in someone who the DNC disagrees with.

Mercedes Streeter > Ash78, voting early and often 04/12/2016 at 16:45

0

Exactly! One thing my mum’s church recently told me was that no sin is worse than another sin. The person stuffing food down their throats is no worse than the person in a same-sex relationship. Even stealing, same level of sin. Yet, somehow society grades sins from acceptable to absolutely not...then makes laws in an attempt to enforce their made up belief?

*shrug* People are quite selective in what parts of their religions that they actually listen to.

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > Mercedes Streeter 04/12/2016 at 16:46

0

You’re still evaluating only on the ends and even then it is short-sighted.

The system is in place because the people support it. There is no power in American politics that wasn’t put in place by a representative of the people, or by extension of the people’s representatives.

The superdelegates are typically elected officials of the party, or appointees of representatives. So they are still representative, they just may be representative of a past elections. That’s still representative.

Mercedes Streeter > PotbellyJoe and 42 others 04/12/2016 at 16:50

0

I suppose we’ll have to agree to disagree? :) Perhaps I’ll read this again when I’m less depressed, then facepalm myself because I completely misunderstood.

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > Mercedes Streeter 04/12/2016 at 16:59

0

I’m just trying to stretch your understanding a little. It makes it far less frustrating, but definitely drives home the importance of all of it.

If you keep all of this in mind it’s easier to ignore the hyperbole and rhetoric of the panderers trying to hype up the people who are ignorant of their own reality.

Frankly, we’re all too smart for that.

If we want change, or fixes, or just the status quo we must vote for it by voting for people who will work for us to achieve that.

Mercedes Streeter > PotbellyJoe and 42 others 04/12/2016 at 17:42

0

Eh, I’d bet I’d better understand if I were not drowning in anxiety and stress. :( I’ll return at a later time and most definitely hit myself in the head after realizing that I completely misunderstood you the whole time.

I guess a comforting note is that I am voting for Sanders (provided he makes the nomination), so when I’m not all emotionally unstable, I am likely to be more...functional?

KirkyV > duurtlang 04/14/2016 at 11:19

0

I rather miss the - really very recent, relatively speaking - days when this was the case here in the UK. Up until Cameron, our PMs had - like most modern Western political leaders - made a point of avoiding any particular mention of their personal faith.

Dsscats > Mercedes Streeter 04/23/2016 at 14:03

0

But the fact that normal people have very little control over what happens in America is neither new nor will it change with Bernie Sanders being elected.

Mercedes Streeter > Dsscats 04/23/2016 at 23:03

0

Both of those are facts. :)

But still, that’s not a strong argument for me to not vote for the candidate that’s putting the most effort towards the things I care about most.

No doubt Hillary would be a good President overall. She’s basically promising to be Obama 2, which isn’t a bad thing at all.

However, she simply doesn’t care about the things that affect myself and my community the most. And worse, she recently said to vote for her on her merits..and in the same breath, said that her being a woman is most definitely one of those merits we should vote for... Which considering her decades of fighting for women’s rights, it’s a slap to the face of Feminism. Plus, her track record on supporting people of colour has been also sketchy at best.

So while I’d LOVE to see a female President, I think I’d rather see someone like Elizabeth Warren instead. I’ll say it now, this election sucks. None of the candidates are perfect... So choose the one that fits you. :)