Delusions of Tolerance: Why the Left Cannot Afford to be Too Liberal

I started thinking about this issue, when I noted repeated attempts to blame intolerance on the conservatives in wholesale (which usually assumes that conservatives are all white christian males. I can't be the only mostly conservative person that is an atheist).

I found it interesting that resistance to gays in the military was blamed on "old white people", when the largest voting block of people to oppose gay marriage was black people.

The NBJC report paints a stark picture of the resistance. It cites surveys showing that "65% of African-Americans are opposed to marriage equality compared to 53% of Whites" and that blacks are "less than half as likely to support marriage equality and legal recognition of same-sex civil unions as Whites." It concludes: "African-Americans are virtually the only constituency in the country that has not become more supportive over the last dozen years, falling from a high of 65% support for gay rights in 1996 to only 40% in 2004." Nor is the problem dying out: "Among African-American youth, 55% believed that homosexuality is always wrong, compared to 36% of Latino youth and 35% of White youth."

http://www.slate.com/id/2204534/

Blacks and whites are proportionally represented for military population.

Then I started thinking... Maybe it is a good idea to see how religion might play into this...

According to the 1995 National Longitudinal Survey of Adolescent Health, white adolescents- a numerical majority-dominate most denominations and traditions, except the Islamic, Adventist, Jehovah's Witness, Holiness, Buddhist, Hindu, and African Methodist communities.

Measured alternatively as the percent of racial groups in different religious traditions, 47.7 percent of African-American youth are Baptist; 55.7 percent of Hispanic youth are Catholic; 35.5 percent of Asian youth are Catholic, while another 11 percent are Buddhist. White adolescents are 22.7 percent Catholic, 20.3 percent Baptist, 7.1 percent Methodist, with the remainder distributed among many different traditions, each claiming less than 5 percent of the total.

http://www.youthandreligion.org/n...-2002.html

So, then I started thinking it might be useful to consider how race and religion might play into voting patterns...









So, then I had to ask myself... How dependent is the Democratic party in having vast majorities of the minority vote...



What does all of this mean? Democrats have a lot of social conservatives amongst themselves, that they cannot afford to alienate if they desire to become elected (or maintain office).

This does not mean that I believe that minorities will suddenly vote Republican, if Democrat politicians offend their sensibilities... But, I think that sort of alienation would undermine voter turnout, and spell doom for Democrat politicians.

This is one of the primary reasons gay rights will not really get off the ground. Democrats drag their feet, because substantial portions of their constituency are very socially conservative. They prefer instead to let gay rights issues linger on the back burner, behind other "more pressing issues"; to be brought out at the last minute (such as right now, just before republicans are going to remove Democrat's controlling numbers in Congress).

They want to pass off the responsibility to Republicans, for something they lack the courage to support. Which is smart for them, really. They are never forced to confront the fact that they really do not care about gay people, since they are not a significant portion of the voter block.

It is one of the main reasons Obama has paid a lot of lip service to it, but has not done anything substantial for gay rights, and also explains why Congress has done nothing. For Obama to have any hope in 2012, he cannot afford to alienate Blacks and Hispanics. He is rather dependent on their vote.

In the end (pardon the pun), that is why gays are ass out, and likely to stay there for some time to come.

Quote from JackHandey : This is one of the primary reasons gay rights will not really get off the ground. Democrats drag their feet, because substantial portions of their constituency are very socially conservative. They prefer instead to let gay rights issues linger on the back burner, behind other "more pressing issues"; to be brought out at the last minute (such as right now, just before republicans are going to remove Democrat's controlling numbers in Congress).

I feel like you could substitute the pro-life abortion issue in that statement as to how democrats keep their pro-choice constituency coming to the polls (watch out, because those "conservatives" are going to take away your abortion rights). I don't see it happening yet the issue still continues to get used in elections time and time again.

There is something called the "down low" maybe you need to look into it.....

Posting survey results from christian and right-wing websites.... Oh no bias there..
Thats like calling the KKK hideout and asking them their opinions on race, and then posting that as representative of the majority

Don't worry about blacks... even if Obama is gay himself... blacks will still vote for him because having a right-wing possibly racist republican would be far worst then a gay or gay-accepting president

Look on the bright side: if the system collapses you'll be able to use your weapons to enforce your bigotry all you want, until someone gets the jump on you, maybe even for the same reason.

Quote from Ryu-bom : There is something called the "down low" maybe you need to look into it..... Posting survey results from christian and right-wing websites.... Oh no bias there.. Thats like calling the KKK hideout and asking them their opinions on race, and then posting that as representative of the majority

What right-wing websites has he cited? What Christian websites has he cited? Do you have any clue yourself? Or do you think it just sounds good? Throwing shit out and seeing what sticks?

Quote from Ryu-bom : Don't worry about blacks... even if Obama is gay himself... blacks will still vote for him because having a right-wing possibly racist republican would be far worst then a gay or gay-accepting president

What about a racist democratic president?

Which party has had congressional members that were part of the Klan? Which party was majorly responsible for their rise?

Maybe this explains why the Obama Administration has been fighting lawsuits to legalize gay marriage.

I reject your facts, and instead offer an ad hominem.

Sincerely,
Ryu-bom

Quote from redpoint5 : I reject your facts, and instead offer an ad hominem.

LOL, best rebuttal ever (in its non-sarcastic value)! That's almost what I did - except I didn't even read the OP, something I'm not sure I've ever done before. It's just so hard to listen to people who use generalizations like "liberal" or "progressive" and use that fallacy to encompass the rest of their argument. Political slang will get us nowhere. Though I can probably go back and read his argument and pull out the fallacy/fallacies and see what he's actually arguing. OK, I'll do that, but if I don't post anything else then I found it uninteresting as it seems a moot point to argue petty social welfares until the massive thefts and frauds upon us from the world's true rulers are addressed, else we're just still beggin' for scraps rather than returning our stolen wealth.

Quote from redpoint5 : I reject your facts, and instead offer an ad hominem. Sincerely, Ryu-born

What facts...... Ryu-bom isn't making sh*t up...

Look at who funded this little survey Lilly Endowment, Inc.... You want to google or should I post it?

Thats like the Advancement of White People funding a survey about race and superiority...

And tell me any self-respecting SOCIOLOGIST, that do not take into account... the prevalence of African Americans who participate in the DOWN LOW

Sincerely,
Ryu-bom

p.s.
I still reject your facts.

Quote from Ryu-bom : What facts...... Ryu-bom isn't making sh*t up... Look at who funded this little survey Lilly Endowment, Inc.... You want to google or should I post it? Thats like the Advancement of White People funding a survey about race and superiority... And tell me any self-respecting SOCIOLOGIST, that do not take into account... the prevalence of African Americans who participate in the DOWN LOW

I guess it being conducted by professors of sociology at two highly ranked post-secondary institutions means nothing, right? And that you're only talking about one of his many sources?

What about Gallup, or Pew? Are they just racist right-wing Christian nutjob research groups, as well?

Also:

An ad hominem (Latin: "to the man"), also known as argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to link the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise.

You're trying to say the argument isn't valid because it was made by a research group funded by a Christian group. That's still an ad hominem.

Quote from JackHandey : I started thinking about this issue, when I noted repeated attempts to blame intolerance on the conservatives in wholesale (which usually assumes that conservatives are all white christian males. I can't be the only mostly conservative person that is an atheist). I found it interesting that resistance to gays in the military was blamed on "old white people", when the largest voting block of people to oppose gay marriage was black people. The NBJC report paints a stark picture of the resistance. It cites surveys showing that "65% of African-Americans are opposed to marriage equality compared to 53% of Whites" and that blacks are "less than half as likely to support marriage equality and legal recognition of same-sex civil unions as Whites." It concludes: "African-Americans are virtually the only constituency in the country that has not become more supportive over the last dozen years, falling from a high of 65% support for gay rights in 1996 to only 40% in 2004." Nor is the problem dying out: "Among African-American youth, 55% believed that homosexuality is always wrong, compared to 36% of Latino youth and 35% of White youth." http://www.slate.com/id/2204534/ Blacks and whites are proportionally represented for military population. Then I started thinking... Maybe it is a good idea to see how religion might play into this... According to the 1995 National Longitudinal Survey of Adolescent Health, white adolescents- a numerical majority-dominate most denominations and traditions, except the Islamic, Adventist, Jehovah's Witness, Holiness, Buddhist, Hindu, and African Methodist communities. Measured alternatively as the percent of racial groups in different religious traditions, 47.7 percent of African-American youth are Baptist; 55.7 percent of Hispanic youth are Catholic; 35.5 percent of Asian youth are Catholic, while another 11 percent are Buddhist. White adolescents are 22.7 percent Catholic, 20.3 percent Baptist, 7.1 percent Methodist, with the remainder distributed among many different traditions, each claiming less than 5 percent of the total. http://www.youthandreligion.org/n...-2002.html So, then I started thinking it might be useful to consider how race and religion might play into voting patterns... So, then I had to ask myself... How dependent is the Democratic party in having vast majorities of the minority vote... What does all of this mean? Democrats have a lot of social conservatives amongst themselves, that they cannot afford to alienate if they desire to become elected (or maintain office). This does not mean that I believe that minorities will suddenly vote Republican, if Democrat politicians offend their sensibilities... But, I think that sort of alienation would undermine voter turnout, and spell doom for Democrat politicians. This is one of the primary reasons gay rights will not really get off the ground. Democrats drag their feet, because substantial portions of their constituency are very socially conservative. They prefer instead to let gay rights issues linger on the back burner, behind other "more pressing issues"; to be brought out at the last minute (such as right now, just before republicans are going to remove Democrat's controlling numbers in Congress). They want to pass off the responsibility to Republicans, for something they lack the courage to support. Which is smart for them, really. They are never forced to confront the fact that they really do not care about gay people, since they are not a significant portion of the voter block. It is one of the main reasons Obama has paid a lot of lip service to it, but has not done anything substantial for gay rights, and also explains why Congress has done nothing. For Obama to have any hope in 2012, he cannot afford to alienate Blacks and Hispanics. He is rather dependent on their vote. In the end (pardon the pun), that is why gays are ass out, and likely to stay there for some time to come.

You are a very strange bro with too much free time.

Of course these SOCIOLOGIST from the high ranking universities who got paid private interest money had no intention on skewing or fudging their results....

Any self-respecting sociologist who studied black culture would take into account the prevalence of DOWN LOW in their results

Did they do anonymous surveying or was this a face to face survey.... Find me any closeted gay who will do a face to face survey and SAY I'M SUPER DUPER GAY!!!!

Even Larry Craig couldn't admit he was gay with his pants down and tapping a man's feet looking to get his grove on...

Quote from PaintTheSkyGrey : What right-wing websites has he cited? What Christian websites has he cited? Do you have any clue yourself? Or do you think it just sounds good? Throwing shit out and seeing what sticks? What about a racist democratic president? Which party has had congressional members that were part of the Klan? Which party was majorly responsible for their rise?

Which party has had multiple instances of homosexuality?