![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 19 to 43 of 127. Go back in thread:
Posted by Jai Narayan on December 12, 2004, at 21:05:37
In reply to Re: What do conservative Americans stand for? » Bling Bling, posted by MKB on December 12, 2004, at 9:28:09
My dear MKB I see you're back.
Well how is the baby?I hope all went well.
Jai
the following is what I believe in:
Ten Key Values of the Green Party
1. GRASSROOTS DEMOCRACY
Every human being deserves a say in the decisions that affect their lives and not be subject to the will of another. Therefore, we will work to increase public participation at every level of government and to ensure that our public representatives are fully accountable to the people who elect them. We will also work to create new types of political organizations which expand the process of participatory democracy by directly including citizens in the decision-making process.
2. SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
All persons should have the rights and opportunity to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment. We must consciously confront in ourselves, our organizations, and society at large, barriers such as racism and class oppression, sexism and homophobia, ageism and disability, which act to deny fair treatment and equal justice under the law.
3. ECOLOGICAL WISDOM
Human societies must operate with the understanding that we are part of nature, not separate from nature. We must maintain an ecological balance and live within the ecological and resource limits of our communities and our planet. We support a sustainable society which utilizes resources in such a way that future generations will benefit and not suffer from the practices of our generation. To this end we must practice agriculture which replenishes the soil; move to an energy efficient economy; and live in ways that respect the integrity of natural systems.
4. NON-VIOLENCE
It is essential that we develop effective alternatives to society’s current patterns of violence. We will work to demilitarize, and eliminate weapons of mass destruction, without being naive about the intentions of other governments. We recognize the need for self-defense and the defense of others who are in helpless situations. We promote non-violent methods to oppose practices and policies with which we disagree, and will guide our actions toward lasting personal, community and global peace.
5. DECENTRALIZATION
Centralization of wealth and power contributes to social and economic injustice, environmental destruction, and militarization. Therefore, we support a restructuring of social, political and economic institutions away from a system which is controlled by and mostly benefits the powerful few, to a democratic, less bureaucratic system. Decision-making should, as much as possible, remain at the individual and local level, while assuring that civil rights are protected for all citizens.
6. COMMUNITY-BASED ECONOMICS AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE
We recognize it is essential to create a vibrant and sustainable economic system, one that can create jobs and provide a decent standard of living for all people while maintaining a healthy ecological balance. A successful economic system will offer meaningful work with dignity, while paying a “living wage” which reflects the real value of a person’s work.
Local communities must look to economic development that assures protection of the environment and workers’ rights; broad citizen participation in planning; and enhancement of our “quality of life.” We support independently owned and operated companies which are socially responsible, as well as co-operatives and public enterprises that distribute resources and control to more people through democratic participation.
7. FEMINISM AND GENDER EQUITY
We have inherited a social system based on male domination of politics and economics. We call for the replacement of the cultural ethics of domination and control with more cooperative ways of interacting that respect differences of opinion and gender. Human values such as equity between the sexes, interpersonal responsibility, and honesty must be developed with moral conscience. We should remember that the process that determines our decisions and actions is just as important as achieving the outcome we want.
8. RESPECT FOR DIVERSITY
We believe it is important to value cultural, ethnic, racial, sexual, religious and spiritual diversity, and to promote the development of respectful relationships across these lines.
We believe that the many diverse elements of society should be reflected in our organizations and decision-making bodies, and we support the leadership of people who have been traditionally closed out of leadership roles. We acknowledge and encourage respect for other life forms than our own and the preservation of biodiversity.
9. PERSONAL AND GLOBAL RESPONSIBILITY
We encourage individuals to act to improve their personal well-being and, at the same time, to enhance ecological balance and social harmony. We seek to join with people and organizations around the world to foster peace, economic justice, and the health of the planet.
10. FUTURE FOCUS AND SUSTAINABILITY
Our actions and policies should be motivated by long-term goals. We seek to protect valuable natural resources, safely disposing of or “unmaking” all waste we create, while developing a sustainable economics that does not depend on continual expansion for survival. We must counterbalance the drive for short-term profits by assuring that economic development, new technologies, and fiscal policies are responsible to future generations who will inherit the results of our actions.
Posted by MKB on December 12, 2004, at 21:45:57
In reply to Re: What do conservative Americans stand for?, posted by Jai Narayan on December 12, 2004, at 21:05:37
Thanks for posting that, as it was very informative. Is there a stance on abortion?
The baby is beautiful and all went well. Thanks for asking.
Posted by Bling Bling on December 12, 2004, at 22:24:49
In reply to Re: What do conservative Americans stand for? » Bling Bling, posted by MKB on December 12, 2004, at 9:28:09
> 1. Defining marriage as a union of one man and one woman
I don't care either way about gay marriage, why should it be anyone's business.
> 2. Protection for unborn children
Far too many human beings are already here, why force more, especially since they are unwanted.
> 3. Strong defense, including adequate funding for our military
I'd agree with this. But lets not start wars & lets not leave the country except for defending an ally.
> 4. Being proactive against terrorism
This would be good, but the military should have nothing to do with this as they do more harm than good.
> 5. Support for Israel's right to exist
How is this our business?
> 6. Separation of "church" and state - not God and state
Both should be seperated from the state.
> 7. Less taxation
Agree.
> 8. Giving individuals more control over their money
Agree.
> 9. Passing initiatives to help small businesses succeed
Agree.
> 10.Promoting more involvement of churches and private institutions in providing for the underprivileged and making this less a role for the federal government.
State should provide for the underpriviliged.
> 11. Developing an American economy that is not dependent on foreign oil
Agree.
>
> Even though Bush has pushed for No Child Left Behind, this is not a typically conservative stance, and I personally disagree with his handling of education reform.
>Agree.
> I personally favor strong protections of the environment, though this is not typically a conservative stance.
>Agree.
Posted by MKB on December 12, 2004, at 23:14:48
In reply to Re: What do conservative Americans stand for? » MKB, posted by Bling Bling on December 12, 2004, at 22:24:49
You said, regarding gay marriage, why should it be anyone's business? Others have explained the conservative response to this much better than I can.
Regarding the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman, these are the four main points, according to Glenn T. Stanton of Citizen Link at family.org:
1. Same-sex families always deny children either their mother or father.
2. Same-sex family is a vast, untested social experiment with children.
3. Where does it stop? How do we say "no" to group marriage?
4. Schools will be forced to teach that the homosexual family is normal. Churches will be legally pressured to perform same-sex ceremonies.Additional links for understanding the conservative viewpoint on marriage as between one man and one woman:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/002/938xpsxy.asp?pg=1
http://www.family.org/cforum/extras/a0032427.cfm
Posted by Bling Bling on December 12, 2004, at 23:56:49
In reply to Re: What do conservative Americans stand for? » Bling Bling, posted by MKB on December 12, 2004, at 23:14:48
> 1. Same-sex families always deny children either their mother or father.
Same-sex families usually involve adopted kids. Having two dads or 2 mums that love you has to be a heck of alot better than nothing at all.
> 2. Same-sex family is a vast, untested social experiment with children.
Same-sex family is better than a single parent family.
> 3. Where does it stop? How do we say "no" to group marriage?
Yep, I'm for monogamy.
> 4. Schools will be forced to teach that the homosexual family is normal. Churches will be legally pressured to perform same-sex ceremonies.
Why would Schools be forced to do that?
What makes you think that a gay couple would want to get married in a church? I didn't get married in a church.
>
> Additional links for understanding the conservative viewpoint on marriage as between one man and one woman:
> http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/002/938xpsxy.asp?pg=1
> http://www.family.org/cforum/extras/a0032427.cfm
>Both of these links are somewhat homophobic don't you think?
Posted by MKB on December 13, 2004, at 0:40:16
In reply to Re: What do conservative Americans stand for? » MKB, posted by Bling Bling on December 12, 2004, at 23:56:49
No, I don't think they are homophobic. I think they are realistic in examining the slippery slope of redefining marriage. The issue here is the definition of marriage.
Posted by Bling Bling on December 13, 2004, at 1:36:52
In reply to Re: What do conservative Americans stand for? » Bling Bling, posted by MKB on December 13, 2004, at 0:40:16
> No, I don't think they are homophobic. I think they are realistic in examining the slippery slope of redefining marriage. The issue here is the definition of marriage.
>
>What is the actual issue that you have with gay marriage? How will it affect you?
What you are essentially saying is that you think what gays do it wrong.
I think that Rove fella is an absolute genius for harnessing the votes of people who are homophobic to get Bush over the line, but the issue of gay marriage is pretty much a storm in a tea cup.
Posted by MKB on December 13, 2004, at 2:28:30
In reply to Re: What do conservative Americans stand for? » MKB, posted by Bling Bling on December 13, 2004, at 1:36:52
<Sigh> The answer is in the links I gave you.
It involves not so much what someone DOES, but what marriage IS. What if folks demand their "civil rights" to marry in groups, to marry their dog, to marry their mother, to marry a child, etc? Slippery slope, it is. I can guarantee you that polygamy is next.
You sound angry. I'm sorry about that. We need to think rationally, not emotionally.
Posted by Bling Bling on December 13, 2004, at 2:52:56
In reply to Re: What do conservative Americans stand for? » Bling Bling, posted by MKB on December 13, 2004, at 2:28:30
> <Sigh> The answer is in the links I gave you.
>
> It involves not so much what someone DOES, but what marriage IS. What if folks demand their "civil rights" to marry in groups, to marry their dog, to marry their mother, to marry a child, etc? Slippery slope, it is. I can guarantee you that polygamy is next.
>
> You sound angry. I'm sorry about that. We need to think rationally, not emotionally.
>
><groan> I am not angry. It's just that you sound like you are trying to group homosexuals in with pedophiles & other people that practice despicable things. Where is the rationality in that?
Hopefully homosexuals will out-number homophobics one day soon.
Posted by MKB on December 13, 2004, at 3:33:11
In reply to Re: What do conservative Americans stand for? » MKB, posted by Bling Bling on December 13, 2004, at 2:52:56
Nope, I'm not trying to do that. But I am saying that one thing leads to another. This is not about being homophobic. It is about safeguarding the traditional institution of marriage as a covenant between one man and one woman.
Posted by Bling Bling on December 13, 2004, at 4:27:37
In reply to Re: What do conservative Americans stand for? » Bling Bling, posted by MKB on December 13, 2004, at 3:33:11
I seriously doubt that legal gay marriage is going to make any difference to hetro marriages. I seriously doubt that this would make people switch camps. "safeguarding the traditional institution of marriage as a covenant between one man and one woman." sounds driven by religion & the bible, is it?
Posted by ed_uk on December 13, 2004, at 5:11:01
In reply to Re: What do conservative Americans stand for? » Bling Bling, posted by MKB on December 13, 2004, at 2:28:30
>MKB said 'What if folks demand their "civil rights" to marry in groups, to marry their dog, to marry their mother, to marry a child, etc? Slippery slope, it is.'
Hello,I resent the implication that gay marriage is in any way comparable to these. Gay marriage would be a partnership between two consenting adults.
Ed.
Posted by MKB on December 13, 2004, at 8:16:16
In reply to Re: What do conservative Americans stand for? » MKB, posted by Bling Bling on December 13, 2004, at 4:27:37
Are you Bible-phobic?
Posted by MKB on December 13, 2004, at 8:18:21
In reply to Gay Marriage, posted by ed_uk on December 13, 2004, at 5:11:01
There's already a substantial number of people, especially in Utah, who believe polygamy should be legal. That's next. What are you going to say about that?
Posted by MKB on December 13, 2004, at 8:40:28
In reply to Re: What do conservative Americans stand for? » MKB, posted by Bling Bling on December 13, 2004, at 4:27:37
Anyway, you asked what conservative Americans stood for and I tried to tell you. What I hear in your responses is a lot of anger and hate and not rational thinking.
I would say "goodbye" but I can't do that, can I, since "goodbye" means "God be with you."
Guess I'll have to say "adios." Nope, can't do that either, 'cause that means "to God."
OK, then, "Shalom."
Posted by ed_uk on December 13, 2004, at 8:47:58
In reply to Re: Gay Marriage » ed_uk, posted by MKB on December 13, 2004, at 8:18:21
>There's already a substantial number of people, especially in Utah, who believe polygamy should be legal. That's next. What are you going to say about that?
I would imagine that if polygamy was legal, only a very small number of people would be interested. I doubt that it would have a major impact on society as a whole.Regarding gay marriage, it doesn't threaten heterosexual marriage so why does it bother you so much? The bible represents the views of the people who wrote it and the prevailing views of society at the time of writing. My own views on gay marriage are equally valid, and in my opinion, more sensible.
Regarding God.... if there is a God I would not like to presume what 'its' view on gay marriage would be. Such information cannot be found in Leviticus.
Ed.
Posted by MKB on December 13, 2004, at 9:04:23
In reply to Re: Gay Marriage » MKB, posted by ed_uk on December 13, 2004, at 8:47:58
The Bible was written over a period of about 1500 years, and it certainly did NOT represent the prevailing views of society at that time.
Posted by ed_uk on December 13, 2004, at 9:13:48
In reply to Re: Gay Marriage » ed_uk, posted by MKB on December 13, 2004, at 9:04:23
Thank you MKB, I am well aware that the Bible was written by many people over a long period of time.......
I was refering to individual statements regarding homosexuality and not the Bible as a whole. For example... the laws given in (the so often quoted) Leviticus reflect what would have been considered to be acceptable behaviour.
Ed.
Posted by Bling Bling on December 13, 2004, at 9:20:00
In reply to Re: What do conservative Americans stand for? » Bling Bling, posted by MKB on December 13, 2004, at 8:16:16
> Are you Bible-phobic?
>
>Please keep this about politics, save the bible chat for the Faith board.
Posted by MKB on December 13, 2004, at 9:21:47
In reply to Re: Gay Marriage » MKB, posted by ed_uk on December 13, 2004, at 9:13:48
Even at that time and later, polygamy was accepted. Does that mean the Bible teaches polygamy as God's design? Regardless, this is evolving into a faith discussion instead of a political one. What I was trying to do was respond to someone's question about what conservative Americans believe. One of those beliefs is that marriage should be between one man and one woman. Going beyond that tradition is a slippery slope than will eventually create a legal nightmare and will bog down our family courts, not to mention the great harm that will be done to children.
Posted by MKB on December 13, 2004, at 9:23:27
In reply to Re: What do conservative Americans stand for? » MKB, posted by Bling Bling on December 13, 2004, at 9:20:00
You asked what conservative Americans believe and I tried to tell you. I think you are the one who mentioned the Bible first.
Posted by Bling Bling on December 13, 2004, at 9:25:52
In reply to Re: Gay Marriage » MKB, posted by ed_uk on December 13, 2004, at 9:13:48
> Thank you MKB, I am well aware that the Bible was written by many people over a long period of time.......
>Don't forget that the bible was written by people who thought the earth was flat.
Posted by Bling Bling on December 13, 2004, at 9:30:33
In reply to Gay Marriage, posted by ed_uk on December 13, 2004, at 5:11:01
> >MKB said 'What if folks demand their "civil rights" to marry in groups, to marry their dog, to marry their mother, to marry a child, etc? Slippery slope, it is.'
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I resent the implication that gay marriage is in any way comparable to these. Gay marriage would be a partnership between two consenting adults.
>
> Ed.
>Hello Ed,
I agree with you, it wasn't a very nice answer.
Posted by ed_uk on December 13, 2004, at 9:30:59
In reply to Re: Gay Marriage » ed_uk, posted by MKB on December 13, 2004, at 9:21:47
>Going beyond that tradition is a slippery slope than will eventually create a legal nightmare and will bog down our family courts, not to mention the great harm that will be done to children.
Hello MKB,
It is unreasonable of you to state that the legalisation of gay marriage would be harmful to children. What are you suggesting?
Ed.
Posted by MKB on December 13, 2004, at 9:57:05
In reply to Re: Gay Marriage » ed_uk, posted by Bling Bling on December 13, 2004, at 9:25:52
Where did you get that idea? Please quote the verses from the Bible that say that. I'll keep checking back for your answer.
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Politics | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.