-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
ConservativeGAF
- Thread starter Reagan's BR
- Start date
- Status
Azzurri
Member
I know people that are doing just the same.
miller_time22
Neo Member
Same here.
Well, based on this post:
Then yes, apparently it is
But in all honesty most conservatives I've seen banned here are because GAf does not like social conservatism at all. Also, for those not socially conservative, GAF tends to poke them all with pointy sticks in large numbers.
Insert Ohyou.gif here.
Bay Maximus
Banned
It's high time this thread was made. Fellow social conservatives, let's get together and talk about the good ol' days.
Perspicacity
Banned
Social conservatism isn't banned. But much of the rhetoric used to defend it is.
DUFFMCWALIN
Member
I just meant that it can be 1 vs 100 sometimes in politic threads and it can get hard to debate against that.
Pollux
Member
I'm socially conservative (to an extent) and prefer the economic policies of, say, Sweden. I'm sorry if that doesn't make any sense.
Hey buddy, long time no see.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
I'd really be interested in what kind of things you social conservatives want to talk about. What kind of policies are you hoping get enacted or changed?
This is pretty much what I want to hear. Not baiting, I'm just genuinely curious. None of my conservative friends are socially conservative so I'm curious on this.
Then yes, apparently it is
But in all honesty most conservatives I've seen banned here are because GAf does not like social conservatism at all. Also, for those not socially conservative, GAF tends to poke them all with pointy sticks in large numbers.
That's because this:
...is what leads to the bans.
That's not to say all the arguments are ban worthy, just the ones that are especially hateful.
ToxicAdam does (did?) a good job on his own.
There's almost no way to defend social conservatism without it being considered hateful.
So, it's not exactly surprising.
Wow...
Anywho, I don't like to be labled, but I guess it would be conservative if I had to be. Certain threads I just stay out of and I mostly stick to just talking about games or electronics.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
As was indicated earlier, Obama and the democratic party in general are solidly conservative from both a European and recent US perspective. Yes, Neogaf tends to span a little more left of them, but I think the conservative victimisation is vastly overstated - posters with extremist positions usually end up banned, but those with reasonable but differing ones tend to do alright. The problem is that US politics has shifted right wards to an alarming extent to where certain positions are extremist yet publicly accepted.
Valjean Lafitte
Banned
I'd like to say I'm a conservative but I'm embarrassed by so many misguided people of my political affiliation that I think I'm somewhere left-of-right. That is to say, I don't want to identify with my fellow conservatives even if I share some of their views but at the same time I would never want to be confused for a liberal. So, center, I guess.
Someone should start a CenterGAF thread.
Someone should start a CenterGAF thread.
Proponents of traditional Judeo-Christian views on the family unit, life-at-conception, and marriage.
Coupled with gun rights advocacy, usually harsh views on drug use/legalization, and some skepticism of affirmative action.
There are some who deny evolution. There's a more extreme element that wants to legislate Creationism.
That's what comes to my head when I think of stereotypical social conservatism.
This is why I asked if people actually think you get banned for being conservative. Playing the victim is a huge pet-peeve of mine and it gets thrown around plenty around here.
This is because social conservatism will generally get you banned, somewhere or another.
This is kind of key. Even people who claim to be conservative these days are often fairly centrist when compared to the "official" platform of the GOP at this point. And then when you consider that "conservative" in, say, Europe would barely even get you past the "center leaning liberal" marker on the US barometer...yeah, it's pretty hard to say these days.
CornBurrito
Member
So you're saying you don't want discussion on a discussion board?
This isn't a "post your opinion" site. Well, it is, but the point is that people can and will respond. And sometimes they'll challenge you to provide evidence!
Pollux
Member
Well, I'm against abortion except in certain circumstances (this is still an evolving position) but I would say, I would be ok with it in: rape, incest, threat to the mother's life. AT the same time I would like to see a huge increase in government funding for childcare - if we're going to force women to keep these kids we damn well better pay for it.
So you're saying you don't want discussion on a discussion board?
This isn't a "post your opinion" site. Well, it is, but the point is that people can and will respond. And sometimes they'll challenge you to provide evidence!
I can't speak for the poster you're quoting, but the reason why I don't get involved normally is not because I'm afraid of being challenged by evidence, but due to fact that, for every one of me, there's ten other liberal posters that I'd have to respond to. It'd be a much larger time commitment to explain myself, because there's some foundational/philosophical underpinnings I'd have to set up to explain where I'm coming from. When liberals speak to liberals (or conservatives to conservatives), that whole process can be bypassed because there's some readily-accepted assumptions already at play in the discussion.
D
Deleted member 47027
Unconfirmed Member
There's just really not much to say. Most of poligaf is their own thing, and it's not really worth the time to interject considering it paints a huge target on you and people start going ham if you're a conservative. We've all seen it happen and things devolve (hur) into a real mess of things, and it's simply not worth it.
But we read. Oh, we read...and we lurk. People like myself like to know all angles, we just don't like to beat each angle to death in front of a crowd who is quick to try to tear you down.
I know social conservative rhetoric is what gets a lot of people banned, but there's still a stigma attached that says "don't even bother talking, it's not worth it." and it isn't. So I'm quiet and talk about the things I like in other threads.
WHAT UP WRASSLEGAF.
But it's like earlier, some dude said "IF YOU ARE VOTING FOR ROMNEY THAT MEANS YOU ARE:" and listed 5 reasons that just run down anyone with a different viewpoint. 1 was that you hate black people, and on and on. I'm just not interested in getting into any discussion with someone that stupid.
Anyway, love most of you and it's nice to see a pretty level thread. I can't help but think its days are numbered.
But we read. Oh, we read...and we lurk. People like myself like to know all angles, we just don't like to beat each angle to death in front of a crowd who is quick to try to tear you down.
I know social conservative rhetoric is what gets a lot of people banned, but there's still a stigma attached that says "don't even bother talking, it's not worth it." and it isn't. So I'm quiet and talk about the things I like in other threads.
WHAT UP WRASSLEGAF.
But it's like earlier, some dude said "IF YOU ARE VOTING FOR ROMNEY THAT MEANS YOU ARE:" and listed 5 reasons that just run down anyone with a different viewpoint. 1 was that you hate black people, and on and on. I'm just not interested in getting into any discussion with someone that stupid.
Anyway, love most of you and it's nice to see a pretty level thread. I can't help but think its days are numbered.
heliosRAzi
Banned
I'm not conservative, but I do like to get different viewpoints on things: what's so wrong about Obamacare?
Here's the thing, we all understand your foundational/philosophical underpinnings. We really, really do. You can skip that. Just show us the hard evidence that what you're saying is based in reality rather than pure philosophy and wishful thinking. Show us studies. Show us concrete evidence why you believe what you believe. And, no offense, but if you can't, you should probably stop believing it. If your worldview can't stand up to scrutiny, then you need to change it.
To be more specific, I'd like to know what's wrong with Obamacare now that wasn't wrong with the concept when it was endorsed by the conservative Heritage Foundation and put into use by Romney himself.
Well I'm generally against abortion, except in some special cases. It depends on the situation. That's one of the biggies I guess.
Smaller stuff include: I don't curse or name call. I just don't think it sounds...right. I believe one can have much better discussions without it.
I also don't like drinking to the point of getting drunk, and think there should be even more laws in place to try and prevent it. These are smaller issues.
I have others but I'm afraid to say because that's where it becomes a slippery slope...
CornBurrito
Member
It is sadly the nature of internet posting. If you were all in a real physical room together, it would probably be handled more "civilly." But online there's no concept of people talking over each other, so everyone speaks at once. If you get what I mean.
Just respond to one poster, or two.
It props up the horrible private health care insurance system instead of crushing it with nationalized universal health care.
(I'm not a conservative though, just couldn't resist)
heliosRAzi
Banned
Well, shit, I want UHC, but we have the ACA now which does some good things that I can't see why people would want to repeal it (like the preexissting conditions bit, lifetime caps and such)
In my experience, plenty of gaffers walk into it with the "liberal understanding of conservativism," which is to say, a strawman. So I totally disagree with that notion.
And this represents the other reason that posters were bringing up why they stick out of these things, because there's no point in discussing them: you're already walking into this assuming I'm wrong, suggesting that I have no evidence, and that I should probably change my views.
What was the point of these two sentences otherwise?
Yeah, I get what you mean, and that's usually why I'm much more willing to discuss these political issues face-to-face than on a message board.
I think the term "fiscal conservative" is a little strange to use. Of course there's a ton of people that will claim they are.
It's not like it's a tenant only conservatives hold.
Most "liberal" gaf posters aren't like Oprah saying "and you get a dollar and you get a dollar. EVERYONE GETS A DOLLAR!!" Though there are some out there (coughEmpty_vesselcough)
There's plenty of "liberal" gaffers that would gladly cut spending. Instead they'd start with defense spending and corporate welfare.
Again it depends through which lens you look at it. To my european friends I'm a centrist, whereas in America I'm a godless commiesocialist.
SuperAngelo64
Banned
ShadyMilkman
Banned
Fiscal conservative and social liberal
And I read the bible regularly
Paradox
And I read the bible regularly
Paradox
The conservative reasoning would be that it is the government forcing you to do something (buying health insurance), leading to a slippery-slope argument. If we let them do that, who knows what they'll do next! They'll force you to stop eating McDonalds! They'll force you to read Marx! They'll force you to gay marry!
These are all things I've heard with quite some seriousness on talk radio mind you.
edit: As a sidenote, from the far left perspective, most of GAF is conservative.
I was Republican for quite a while. Most of the people around here have read books or studied this stuff. Sure we're not Republican or "conservative" now, but we still understand it enough that you can skip the philosophy lesson and get to the straight proof.
Who said that? I'm walking in assuming if you have something to say you should have proof to back it up. I don't post my sources all the time, but you can bet your ass if you call me on something I'll be able to back it up with something concrete, or if I can't then I need to find it or change that stance. This has nothing to do with assuming someone's wrong, and everything to do with all of us discussing and getting to the bottom of the issues using real evidence. We can do something great here on the internet when it comes to discussions that people just standing around in a room can't. It's easy to link people to your evidence. It's easy to search the internet to find that thing which may escape you in real life, and get those hard numbers.
Look, I'm not here on the internet to spread liberalism or whatever. I'm here to find the best answers for all these things no matter where on the spectrum it lands. As I said, I used to be pretty hardcore Republican, but as the arguments I specifically was making were beaten down, and I saw hard evidence in other arguments I changed my stances slowly but surely. And my stances could still change. So, I don't invite you to "put up or shut up," as it were because I assume you're wrong. I invite you to, because I want my beliefs challenged, and I think you should want yours challenged, too. You shouldn't be afraid of changing stances because better evidence came up. We should be in pursuit of a better answer, not in pursuit of pushing our ideology no matter the evidence.
That's why I laugh when people mope about not being able to participate in PoliGAF. Yes it's difficult to argue with a few different people at the same time, I realize that. But, if you really have a sound base from which you pull your beliefs you should stand up just fine. All we require is you to actually have sources on things.
Red Blaster
Member
My fellow conservatives, would you agree that ACORN is the domestic equivalent of al-qaeda
RustyNails
Member
Agree very much with this. I don't really know any liberals who are all for spending endlessly and needlessly. But what they view as "wasteful" spending differs extremely from the conservative point of view. The way the current Republican platform and conservative movement is shaped, I can't find much of anything to agree with though I do think I am socially conservative. But that just might be inside my family/house type of deal.
I am religious but I find it funny that since I am a minority group/religion in this country I find the secular liberal laws that govern the different groups to be quite reasonable whereas someone from a majority group might not.
I love my poli-gafers but that was one reason I stopped (on top of have to trudge the community forum). Elmo was not tickled.
No, the Bible is pretty liberal by US political conservative standards.
- Status