Kirk Cameron defends Todd Akin

[Alt+F4]

Democrats hate Christians.

That I don't get. Everyone in my family is a Christian and they all vote Democratic. Personally I refuse to vote for a Mormon or Obama (for reasons related to his education policy, nothing other).

Here's the thing about Democrats and Republicans; both groups really, really care about the United States, they just do it in different ways.

 

[aggle-rithm]

Now we're left with a bunch of people who won't hesitate to bring the country to its knees in order to further their own agendas.

They're like really vicious, vindictive kindergarteners, is what I'm trying to get across here.

 

[AvalonXQ]

It worked well for the first two hundred years or so, but recently things have became polarized like never before.

Is there any hard evidence of this? What was the degree of polarization in the past, and can we really show that it's worse now?

 

[carlitos]

There is a book about the polarization, called The Big Sort. I haven't read it, but did hear Bill Clinton recall some data from it.

The Big Sort: Why the Clustering of Like-Minded America Is Tearing Us Apart [Hardcover]
Bill Bishop (Author)

The untold story of why America is so culturally and politically divided

America may be more diverse than ever coast to coast, but the places where we live are becoming increasingly crowded with people who live, think, and vote as we do. This social transformation didn't happed by accident. We’ve built a country where we can all choose the neighborhood -- and religion and news show -- most compatible with our lifestyle and beliefs. And we are living with the consequences of this way-of-life segregation. Our country has become so polarized, so ideologically inbred, that people don’t know and can’t understand those who live just a few miles away. The reason for this situation, and the dire implications for our country, is the subject of this groundbreaking work.

In 2004, the journalist Bill Bishop, armed with original and startling demographic data, made national news in a series of articles showing how Americans have been sorting themselves over the past three decades into alarmingly homogeneous communities -- not by region or by red state or blue state, but by city and even neighborhood. In The Big Sort, Bishop deepens his analysis in a brilliantly reported book that makes its case from the ground up, starting with stories about how we live today and then drawing on history, economics, and our changing political landscape to create one of the most compelling big-picture accounts of America in recent memory.

 

[remirol]

I've long considered that it's not accidental that both coasts and the big cities -- places where you are forced to interact with people who aren't like you, who don't think like you, and who may hold a mindset that you don't even understand -- are consistently voting blue. It's trivial to look at the electoral map today and see this.

In contrast, the Republicans desperately cling to outmoded ideologies that attempt to enforce a single set of beliefs on everyone, and their party support reflects it: older white Christians*.





* I don't have a problem with Christianity as a religion, despite being an atheist. I have a problem with any Christian who believes that theirs is the only true and correct interpretation _and_, as a result of same, attempts to use anything in their religion to justify any action or law enforcing something on a non-Christian.

More simply put: You can justify "thou shalt not murder" without needing religion to do so. If a proposed law can't be justified without pointing at _any_ religion's holy book, it shouldn't be passed.

 

[Silly Green Monkey]

Repubs have been pushing the notion that Christian=Republican=Christian therefore NotRepublican=NotChristian for my entire life. They've been so successful that people seem to think that anyone who is Christian will be Republican and anyone who's not Republican is the antichrist.

 

[remirol]

Repubs have been pushing the notion that Christian=Republican=Christian therefore NotRepublican=NotChristian for my entire life. They've been so successful that people seem to think that anyone who is Christian will be Republican and anyone who's not Republican is the antichrist.

Very true. I would be unwelcome in the Republican Party as an atheist, and that's a huge mistake on their part, TBH; I would prefer to identify as 'fiscally conservative, socially liberal'.

Right now I perceive the Democrats as being "largely fiscally irresponsible, socially liberal" and the Republicans as being "slightly less fiscally irresponsible, socially conservative". Sorts that clean out right there, don't it just?

The Republicans' blind adherence to the fundies, learned from the Bush years and provoked by their failures during the Clinton years, has cost them badly. With any luck they will splinter, discard the fundies, and return to their roots as fiscally conservative. I'm not holding my breath, though.

 

[AvalonXQ]

I've long considered that it's not accidental that both coasts and the big cities -- places where you are forced to interact with people who aren't like you, who don't think like you, and who may hold a mindset that you don't even understand -- are consistently voting blue.

I've long considered that it's not accidental that both coasts and big cities -- people with no sense of community and very little respect for those around them, people who are generally self-interested and self-absorbed and are used to having their needs met by an impersonal infrastructure without having to rely on a network of people with actual names and faces -- vote blue. They don't trust their fellow citizens and like the idea of the State telling everyone what to do. They don't care to create a community of mutual trust and benefits when they can just force it all to happen at gunpoint.

Quite frankly, when you live in this sort of amoral environment where there are no real incentives to treat others well, intrusive government is necessary just to keep society functioning. But blue voters make the mistake of generalizing this to all government policy, and the result is a big government.

In contrast, people in less urban areas -- where actual communities exist, where personal decency and accountability are still considered important, where your needs are often met primarily by your own effort and the work of those around you with State resources providing very little -- vote red.

When you live in this sort of voluntary give-and-take community, a web of personal relationships and interdependencies coupled with self-reliance, intrusive government can really disrupt relationships that must, in order to survive changing circumstances, be flexible. Government is primarily seen as a last-resort weapon to deal with something that has gotten really out of hand, and the intrustion of government into day-to-day affairs is pretty much certain to push things towards failure. Which, again, is why red voters generalize these experiences into a government policy that says "citizens should be trusted; government regulation is bad."

 

[Silly Green Monkey]

Damn, you're vicious.

 

[remirol]

*mindless response snipped*

Do you disagree that the coasts and major cities are largely multicultural and areas where one is much more likely to interact with people noticeably unlike oneself? If so, why?

Do you disagree that "the heartland" is largely homogeneous, white and Christian? If so, why?

 

[AvalonXQ]

Very true. I would be unwelcome in the Republican Party as an atheist, and that's a huge mistake on their part, TBH; I would prefer to identify as 'fiscally conservative, socially liberal'.

There are plenty of Republican atheists out there. I'm not sure why you think you'd be unwelcome.

I'm a socially liberal secularist myself, and my ideas are quite welcome in Republican circles.

 

[AvalonXQ]

My response was not mindless. It was harsh, but also accurate.

Do you disagree that the coasts and major cities are largely multicultural and areas where one is much more likely to interact with people noticeably unlike oneself?

No.

If so, why?

Because I've lived there.
Cities bulkanize. Groups become heavily insular and racist. A new Bulgarian family moves into the area, they move into the Bulgarian neighborhood and interact with the new Bulgarians. They're quickly taught why they have to side-step the Koreans and what black neighborhoods are dangerous and where to go to find cheap Guatamalan labor. Because racial and cultural identity is so emphasized, you interact with people different than yourself at arms length, and the only stereotypes and problems are just carried down into a new generation.

Do you disagree that "the heartland" is largely homogeneous, white and Christian?

No.

If so, why?

Because I've lived there. There are plenty of minority families in the areas I've lived, but not enough to form sub-communities. So they join the same churches and schools and community groups, they live in the same neighborhoods, as the rest of us. Which means our moms swap recipes, our dads play golf, our kids invite each other over to each others' houses.
I had far more opportunities to see non-Christian and non-European contributions to a shared culture when I lived in the heartland than I ever have in the city. You learn very quickly in the city where your culture is, and that's where you're welcomed and expected to stay. And then the city folk can point to all the minorities their city has, way over there.


EDIT: On the multiculturalism issue.

People anywhere can be incredibly intolerant, and you never know what's going to set them off. And if you are the object of intolerance in a small community, that's pretty much it for you. You're done, there's nowhere to go; you deal with the shunning and the nastiness or you move.
In a big city, you can deal with the intolerance (which, again, is just as present) by walking away from the racist guy who you will probably never meet again, or by not getting in the elevator with that particular apartment tenant, or by returning to your insular group. Outiside of maybe your employer and landlord, you are not dependent on specific individuals for continued survival. So when people behave badly, the effects are less pronounced in the city and there are more ways to deal with it.

 

[TheRedWorm]

Damn, you're vicious.

WWJH who would jesus hate

 

[remirol]

There are plenty of Republican atheists out there. I'm not sure why you think you'd be unwelcome.

Name three high-profile Republican atheists, please.

In case you've missed it, the loud blaring coming from the Republican party for the last year is CHRISTIAN NATION CHRISTIAN NATION CHRISTIAN CHRISTIAN GOD GOD GOD CHRISTIAN GOD. You don't think that makes me just a little teensy bit nervous? Maybe just a little bit of "yeah, these people don't want me around"?

Or perhaps it's just that I live in a Bible Belt state, where there is no shortage of Republicans and fundies, and thus have had enough personal experience with what responding to the question "what church do you go to?" with "I'm an atheist, actually" brings.

You should try it sometime. It would be quite educational for you.

I'm a socially liberal secularist myself

Elsewhere you have openly identified as Christian and you have complained in this very thread about being derided for your Christian views. What do you mean here when you say 'secularist'?

 

[AvalonXQ]

Elsewhere you have openly identified as Christian and you have complained in this very thread about being derided for your Christian views. What do you mean here when you say 'secularist'?

A believer in secular government and the separation of church and state. I'm a libertarian; I don't need anybody else to be coerced into Christian morality.

 

[remirol]

No.

You mean to say "Yes" here, I think.

Because I've lived there.
Cities bulkanize. Groups become heavily insular and racist. A new Bulgarian family moves into the area, they move into the Bulgarian neighborhood and interact with the new Bulgarians. They're quickly taught why they have to side-step the Koreans and what black neighborhoods are dangerous and where to go to find cheap Guatamalan labor. Because racial and cultural identity is so emphasized, you interact with people different than yourself at arms length, and the only stereotypes and problems are just carried down into a new generation.

I live there now. I've lived in downtown Atlanta and I currently live in a suburb of Atlanta. Of course new immigrants move next to what they're familiar with; it's a big place, a new COUNTRY, and it's scary. Many can barely speak the language.

Every new generation integrates more though, whether their parents like it or not. They said the same things you did about the Irish, Italians, Polish, and many other subgroups back when significant immigration into New York was occurring. Today there are still some heavily ethnic areas in New York, but you also find quite a large melting pot of multicultural areas, where people of all ethnicities live side by side and work together.

Racial and cultural identity has not faded at all -- rather, in New York it remains something to be proud of, as it does in many other cities, and everyone begins to interact. Yes, there are always problems, and that's because when you cram so many people together into a small space, you _get_ problems. But the end results are far better than completely segregating everyone away from each other.

No.

As above.

Because I've lived there. There are plenty of minority families in the areas I've lived, but not enough to form sub-communities. So they join the same churches and schools and community groups, they live in the same neighborhoods, as the rest of us. Which means our moms swap recipes, our dads play golf, our kids invite each other over to each others' houses.

I've lived there too, in a suburb in West Michigan. I didn't even understand what a black person was until I was 10, because we only had one black family in my entire school. I've seen what happens when I've traveled through the more sparsely populated areas in Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Louisiana; the areas segregate off almost completely. I spent a lot of time passing through a lot of small towns around the South for various reasons, and there isn't any of this "same church", "same school" stuff you're talking about.

You learn very quickly in the city where your culture is, and that's where you're welcomed and expected to stay. And then the city folk can point to all the minorities their city has, way over there.

I'll let individuals in each city weigh in, but I can assure you that in Metro Atlanta, that's not how it's _actually_ happening. There are enclaves, (see what I mentioned above WRT "of course immigrants move near what they're familiar with") but even out where I live, my immediate neighbors are from Jamaica and the Dominican Republic, respectively. When I lived downtown, anywhere I went I routinely saw Asians*, blacks, Hispanics, you name it.

A believer in secular government and the separation of church and state. I'm a libertarian; I don't need anybody else to be coerced into Christian morality.

In short, you identify as "Christian" when asked, and in my hypothetical question about "what church do you go to", you name an actual church that people in the area would recognize.

I'm sorry, but your situation isn't even remotely equivalent to an atheist. What you are is a Christian who believes in the separation of church and state, and this policy we will agree on. But what you don't seem to understand is that in order for your ideas to be even heard, you're passing a litmus test that's administered in the first one or two questions -- a litmus test that I either fail, or evade ("I don't really go to church these days", "I haven't gone to church in awhile"). I typically opt for telling the truth, and I assure you -- it's a lot different arguing in favor of secularism when you haven't passed the 'One Of Us' litmus test.

 

[TheSapient]

I've long considered that it's not accidental that both coasts and big cities -- people with no sense of community and very little respect for those around them, people who are generally self-interested and self-absorbed and are used to having their needs met by an impersonal infrastructure without having to rely on a network of people with actual names and faces -- vote blue. They don't trust their fellow citizens and like the idea of the State telling everyone what to do. They don't care to create a community of mutual trust and benefits when they can just force it all to happen at gunpoint.

Quite frankly, when you live in this sort of amoral environment where there are no real incentives to treat others well, intrusive government is necessary just to keep society functioning. But blue voters make the mistake of generalizing this to all government policy, and the result is a big government.

In contrast, people in less urban areas -- where actual communities exist, where personal decency and accountability are still considered important, where your needs are often met primarily by your own effort and the work of those around you with State resources providing very little -- vote red.

When you live in this sort of voluntary give-and-take community, a web of personal relationships and interdependencies coupled with self-reliance, intrusive government can really disrupt relationships that must, in order to survive changing circumstances, be flexible. Government is primarily seen as a last-resort weapon to deal with something that has gotten really out of hand, and the intrustion of government into day-to-day affairs is pretty much certain to push things towards failure. Which, again, is why red voters generalize these experiences into a government policy that says "citizens should be trusted; government regulation is bad."

See, I'd say that people who live in cities form relationships and communities that are just as deep those found in rural areas. They just form more of them, and with a broader demographic. And when you belong to a larger, more diverse community, you care more about how policy affects people in general. Red voters generalize their narrow experiences into a belief that government should force everyone to behave like them.

 

[Silly Green Monkey]

I've lived there too, in a suburb in West Michigan. I didn't even understand what a black person was until I was 10, because we only had one black family in my entire school. I've seen what happens when I've traveled through the more sparsely populated areas in Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Louisiana; the areas segregate off almost completely. I spent a lot of time passing through a lot of small towns around the South for various reasons, and there isn't any of this "same church", "same school" stuff you're talking about.

That reminds me, I grew up in Price Utah. I knew of ONE black person in the entire Price-Wellington-Spring Glen area, and he went to our church. The most 'racial' mixing we got were Mexicans and Navajo. I went to a private Christian school for my first eight years, and everyone in the school went to the church providing the building and the teachers, and everyone looked the same. Can't blame large cities for segregating when entire STATES get away with it.

 

[AvalonXQ]

I've seen what happens when I've traveled through the more sparsely populated areas in Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Louisiana; the areas segregate off almost completely. I spent a lot of time passing through a lot of small towns around the South for various reasons, and there isn't any of this "same church", "same school" stuff you're talking about.

Just to address one point -- I've lived in small communities in the Midwest, not the South, so your description of how Southern communities work may very well be accurate and outside my experience.

The only Southern place I ever lived was Nashville.

 

[AvalonXQ]

See, I'd say that people who live in cities form relationships and communities that are just as deep those found in rural areas. They just form more of them, and with a broader demographic.

I can't agree. I've seen how disaffected, insular, and downright rude people become in the big cities. People don't know their neighbors' names; they don't think twice about small acts of cruelty or selfishness as long as they can get away with them.
Would you leave your briefcase unattended on the sidewalk in a big city for even five minutes? I certainly wouldn't, but I'd do it in my hometown without thinking twice.

Red voters generalize their narrow experiences into a belief that government should force everyone to behave like them.

I'd say it's blue voters that do that.