River Valley Blogs

To one o six pm poster wrote on Dec 20, 2008 3:49 PM:

" If you knew "Johnny Tess" you wouldn't have to ask that question. I dare say that Michael Welch IS NOT a hypocrite. Johnny Tess, Izzy, Kizarny, Ronnie and a number of others are just like to spin wheels and they aren't really worth answering. Hope that helps you. "

To Michael wrote on Dec 2, 2008 1:06 PM:

" So, why not humor Izzy and answer his questions posed at 935am, then move on? Not answering does give the impression you were caught being a hypocrite.. "

Michael Welch I Understand That Boys Will Be Boys In The Bathroom... wrote on Dec 2, 2008 11:19 AM:

" Welch is bored with this actually but he does understand that you are not. This is indeed right up your uh 'alley' and there it really belongs!... "

To Kizarny wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:11 AM:

" Welch probably has no good answers, so is sidestepping the issues. His hypocrisy being brought to light probably makes him uncomfortable. "

Kizarny wrote on Dec 1, 2008 12:15 PM:

" Content analysis would show that Welch is refusing to answer Izzys questions. "

Michael Welch Who Has Stopped You... wrote on Dec 1, 2008 11:39 AM:

" You seem to have no trouble going on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on with your continuous 'complaining.' I obviously am not stopping you... "

Izzy to Welch wrote on Dec 1, 2008 9:35 AM:

" See my comment to you on the "guru" blog. How are my comments any more "dull" than obsession with "JohnnyTess"? How am I any more "flighty" than you, whining and complaining for months about the public dole comment? Tell me, Michael,what are the rules? Welch can complain, but no one else better dare do so? "

Michael Welch Whoz Iz... wrote on Nov 29, 2008 10:26 AM:

" My comment is apter than ever; you are a DULLARD 'Iz' and even self condemned to ever be because you keep up this perpetual silliness as your life's work. Bye flighty thing... "

Izzy to Welch wrote on Nov 26, 2008 2:59 PM:

" No, Welch, I am fine. I dont think I went on about it anymore than you did regarding the comments about you being on the public dole. Do you really not see the hypocrisy in criticizing "Johnny-Tess" repeatedly to this day, yet call Harsch's post humane and generous? Get real. His comment was out of line and you know it. "

Michael Welch Advice You Wont Take I Think... wrote on Nov 26, 2008 1:03 PM:

" Are you REALLY SO UPSET or is it just SO MUCH 'FUN' (for you apparently) to go at this anti-Rick bit forever and ever amen!? You've MADE your point eh -- you want ME to make it again?! FOR you? You're just proving how DULL you can be, 'IF,' so drop it already; move on; because the more obsessive you become the sillier YOU look, not Harsch. Yet blather on if it so 'thrills' you -- whatever fries your bacon if you pardon the expression... "

harsch wrote on Nov 26, 2008 1:00 PM:

" well 'izzy', see your 'response' to me on the next blog... "

Izzy Fabin to Welch wrote on Nov 26, 2008 12:00 PM:

" Okay, I see. Rick accusing me out of the blue of approving of men over 40 having affairs with girls under 15 was just a "joke"? And, because we dont all see the humor in that, we are dullards. So much for discussing ideas, and honest and generous posts. I thought you may somehow justify his comments, but I was hoping for something a little more inventive than "it was a joke, and you are dullards for not 'getting' it." "

To Brian Smith from Jimmy wrote on Nov 26, 2008 11:38 AM:

" I've got a post here regarding Jon Stewart that says it was submitted by you, but the IP looks different. Was that one of yours, because if it isn't, I don't want to post something under your name that wasn't written by you. By the way, Happy Thanksgiving! "

Michael Welch WAKE UP -- Uhnh Wha Hmmm Whazzup... wrote on Nov 26, 2008 11:08 AM:

" It seems to me that the numerous anti-Harsch comments are as 'vile' as any and have REALLY become obsessive. Rick's joking and dangling you along but the dullards and not so dullards latch onto ANYTHING so to confirm and continue their rabid harassment. I warned you that Harsch does NOT suffer fools and yet you continually demand that he sing while you praise yourselves -- and HE just gets bored with you, as I do. You're FAR MORE BORING as anti-Rickists; it's as if you were all little teeny tiny Stalins and Rick was a Gulliverian Trotsky -- you MUST UNGHH! OOOFFF! UUUHHHH! p-u-l-l h-i-m D-O-W-N AT LAST!!! But you can't: for Rick is above and beyond you like Christ ascending through the clouds while you remain below shaking your helpless weak wristed fists! Sorry!... "

Allen to BGS wrote on Nov 26, 2008 9:34 AM:

" Congrats on the last part of your post. You may be capable of at least some independent thinking.
As to the rest of your post, you got yourself a deal. You or I dont make public policy, but lets just pretend a moment: I will "buzz off" immediately, if they do the same. I dont want to hear anymore about it. They leave me alone, I leave them alone. Starting.......now. "

BrianGSmith wrote on Nov 26, 2008 3:04 AM:

" Liberals want to smoke pot and date people from other races and conservatives want to stop them with guns.

paraphrased from our liberal oracle
Jon Stewart "

Dear Allen wrote on Nov 26, 2008 3:02 AM:

" If I understand you correctly you are claiming homosexuals are continually trying to pull YOU into their bedrooms and have the government pay for it?

Are they Halliburton contractors or evangelical preachers by any chance?

Your claims are beyond bizarre....the gay community, often quite wealthy, don't need your pennies Allen...they just want you to buzz off. (not that way, sicko)

Having said that I must note I am not a fan of the ridiculous and infantile 'gay pride' parades.....I find them rather disgusting and pathetic and hope the gays can get over the need to do that krappe on public streets.

BGS "

Liberals wrote on Nov 25, 2008 11:43 PM:

" You call yourselves liberal? Here is one dictionary's definition: liberal (lbr-l, lbrl)
adj.
1.
a. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.

Start living up to it! "

To Welch wrote on Nov 25, 2008 3:27 PM:

" Wake up! You are usually quicker on the uptake than this. The below comments concerning Harsch are obviously in response to his libelous comments toward Izzy concerning young girls, which you apparently see no problem with since you arent all over his case like you are on everyone else who would make a similar comment. Why the silence, Michael? Another case of giving your friend a pass, no matter how nasty and vile he is? "

Harsch to Fabin wrote on Nov 25, 2008 11:02 AM:

" Sorry--over-estimated you. "

Michael Welch Moral Decay Becomes Mental Decay Too... wrote on Nov 25, 2008 10:50 AM:

" The religious right talks about nothing BUT their fascist fantasies and Rick Harsch; absolutely I'm correct to observe that should Rick stop writing they'd all be reduced to the 'basement' all right -- isn't 'Star Trek' ON YET?!!! Poor folks -- nothing so interesting in their WHOLE LIVES than that Rick Harsch exists!... "

Izzy Fabin to Harsch wrote on Nov 24, 2008 3:00 PM:

" I re-read the post. Sorry, still no humor. But, after re-reading some of YOUR posts, I am very disturbed by your fondness for barnyard animals. "

harsch wrote on Nov 24, 2008 2:02 PM:

" Again: read ronnie's post as suggested. Think for yourself. Be a right winger, but be your OWN right winger. Ronnie, take it easy; you wrote something unintentionally hilarious, that cdould be all. Just take it easy, and I am sure everything will be all right. "

Finally wrote on Nov 24, 2008 11:37 AM:

" Harsch admitted below his penchant for reeducating people in his basement. "

Michael Welch Decay Corruption And Corrosion For Eight LONG Years... wrote on Nov 24, 2008 10:42 AM:

" Oh gee GENUINE 'conservatism' seeks to preserve what is valuable and necessary and REAL 'liberalism' provides the generosity of spirit and experimentation that permits preservation under new and difficult circumstances. THAT I realize is an EXTREMELY idealistic rendition but OF COURSE we want to CONSERVE what is precious to us and 'US' but we don't wish to at the expense of rot. I can't see that the Bush administration 'preserved' anything especially but corrupted the constitution and despoiled our ideals. McCain in his campaign initially attempted a renewal with his 'Country First' but he corroded with Palin's nasty neo-McCarthyism or rather 'Nixonland' approach to crypto-'traitors' amongst 'US'! Who's a 'conservative' anymore? I can't think of a REAL one... "

To Harsch wrote on Nov 24, 2008 10:20 AM:

" Read Ronnies post per your request. Sorry, no humor there. Just a sad commentary on political-correctness run amuk. "

Ronnie to Harsch wrote on Nov 24, 2008 10:14 AM:

" Please yield. My post brought up some "apt" points. Again, you choose to carry out these personal vendettas and issues and name calling in order to avoid the issues. Why is it ok(even "funny") for liberals to call conservatives intolerant and homophobic for not wanting their tax dollars to go towards things they oppose, such as abortion and same sex marriage? Yet, these same liberals whine and cry if someones dares use their tax money to put up a nativity scene or a Ten Commandments marker? Why is one ok but not the other? Try discussing the issues instead of constantly yipping and tearing at my flank. As Welch implores all of us-lets discuss issues. Enough of the parsing. "

harsch wrote on Nov 24, 2008 9:56 AM:

" More apt would be to define a fanatic, perhaps, as someone who can't see the truth for his blind allegiance. Read Ronnie's post again: I did, and it retains its unintentional humor. "

Definition of a Conservative wrote on Nov 24, 2008 9:15 AM:

" Two can play that game. Definition of a conservative: a person who questions someone's patriotism when they challenge the status quo; a person who holds extreme positions with moral pretensions "

Allen to BrianGSmith wrote on Nov 24, 2008 9:08 AM:

" Thats the whole point. We DONT want our nose in anyones bedroom. Thats why I keep saying "Do what you want behind closed doors. Just dont ask me to help sanction or endorse or pay for it." I want out of their bedrooms, but they keep trying to pull me back in. Who is the sick one here? "

Definitions of Liberalism and Conservatism wrote on Nov 24, 2008 9:05 AM:

" Ronnie touched on this. Of course, rather than discuss, Harsch treated it as a joke. Apparently its "funny" to preach tolerance and acceptance for everything you hold near and dear, then whine and cry when you are exposed to something you dont agree with. Liberal: One who chastises others for their intolerance if they dare speak out against things such as abortion and same sex marriage. Additionally, the liberal will immediately call for the removal of any 10 Commandment markers and silence any prayers that they disagree with. In short, many liberals are hypocritical and proud of it. They laugh about it, as harsch did below. Conservative: One who doesnt do these things. "

simple answer wrote on Nov 24, 2008 8:43 AM:

" WORSE "

No Surprise to Bowers... wrote on Nov 24, 2008 7:39 AM:

" that reasonable, intelligent people believe 9/11 was a government conspiracy. Just look at the evidence, for crying out loud. Why anyone believes our government on anything is simply amazing to me. "

Bowers wrote on Nov 24, 2008 7:36 AM:

" Gee, if all the sex and violence from Hollywood bothers you, then don't go to the movies that feature it; monitor the TV shows you watch, the magazines and books you read. Nobody is forcing you to see these things. What bothers me is not the violence in the movies or TV, but the violence of American foreign policy. We've killed over a million Iraqis since our illegal invasion and subsequent occupation, which is also illegal. "

Why does any of this surprise you wrote on Nov 23, 2008 10:23 AM:

" We have reasonable, intelligent people who believe that "9/11" was a government conspiracy. Even a higher percentage are "sure" that W's only reason to go to war against Sadam Hussien was because he tried to have daddy assasinated. Guns were purchased in October at a very high rate because a certain percentage of people are/were convinced they wouldn't be able to purchase them after 1/25/09. "

Eddie wrote on Nov 23, 2008 8:50 AM:

" Hollywood and TV networks produce only what (they think) the people want. Their only goal is making a profit, so they will produce whatever shows will attract the largest audience. In today's society, the programming is primarily sex and violence (imagine that....). The graphic nature of the sex/violence is getting worse and worse every generation. It's like a drug addiction; audiences need more and more over time. If the American people don't like what Hollywood produces, they only have to NOT buy it, and Hollywood will change its programming. All we have to do is STOP seeing/buying the films/TV shows. Instead of whining about it, just STOP buying it. "

Yo wrote on Nov 22, 2008 10:33 PM:

" An Anti Defamation world - unless you include ALL countries like Iran, Afganistan, etc. Those countries who harbor terrorists who want to do harm to Americans for our success. Unless you further make it illegal to make fun of Overweight, Bald, Fat, White Men or Christians - it'll never happen. Seems to me the only two groups left to made fun of without breaking a law - there should be one - or none for all groups. The Bullies of the world eventually would die off, be killed off(War) or be abandoned with low ratings and the problem will fade. I doubt it though in our lifetime. "

Willie wrote on Nov 22, 2008 12:14 PM:

" The partisanship that runs this country is so busy with their tit for tat lawmaking that they have created a condition that while trying to enforce tolerance has left us without the freedom to exercise tolerance. Hollywood seems above this as do professional athletes. Do to their wealth and extravagance, are mad with power (very much like Emporer Caligula) that they think they are above the law (and often appear to BE succesfully above the law). Will those following the "Golden Calf" be doomed to die in the "great flood"? (I personally won't be joining Tom Cruise and scientology anytime soon). Will Rome burn with Nero at the helm? Or will it all end with the masses calling for the head of Marie Antoinette on a platter? I'm sure our "judgement day" will be sooner than later. "

Willie wrote on Nov 22, 2008 11:59 AM:

" Is this Hollywood's fault or our own? Does art imitate life? Does life imitat art? Or is it art imitates life imitats art? The challenges of the Great Depression and a World War put and end to that particular decline of morals and values. The question remains: What will be the catalyst that will get the American society to right itself once again? I think we are just in the beginning of that process. "

Willie wrote on Nov 22, 2008 11:59 AM:

" Morals and values have declined over the past 50 years as they did the previous 50 years (those dad burn flappers dag gummit). What is acceptable now wasn't in our grandparents' generation as was the same for their grandparents. Coming from the Puritanical settlers values, it has been an extreme decline. The question remains, is this normal and inevitable or have we entered the slippery slope that is the decline of an empire. Many would argue that our times rival Sodom and Gomorrah or Roman emporer Caligula's total lack of morality. "

Michael Welch Whos Jack Elam... wrote on Nov 22, 2008 10:20 AM:

" Well everyone in Hollywood doesn't think the same thing -- until CERTAIN PEOPLE THINK IT! That's Hollywood for you -- what's hot is hot and what's not is not which is in part why so many fine even truly great directors, actors and actresses fade from such promise and achievement to doing American-International pics or as a nostalgia-bound 'guest star' in a flaming disaster film. Hollywood is usually cruel to its heroes. I once saw a feature about Howard Hawks' last movie 'Rio Lobo' in which a very good character actor named David Huddleston (he was THE 'Big Lebowski' in the Coen movie hmm) remarks to another colleague of skill and talent 'This is your life as a film actor: First "Who's Jack Elam?" Then "Get me Jack Elam!" Then "Get me a Jack Elam type!" And finally "Who's Jack Elam?"'... "

RE Definitions wrote on Nov 22, 2008 4:24 AM:

" I use Webster's definition of Liberal and Conservative and then I 'ism' - ize them...

Liberals are progressive freedom fighters.

Conservatives like things as they are and fear the challenges of change....so they usually cry wolf the loudest.

BrianGSmith "

Dear Ronnie Gossett wrote on Nov 22, 2008 4:20 AM:

" I would welcome an open....wide open dialogue about religion and christianity.

After Bush said Jesus was his favorite philospher he should have been drilled by journalists to reveal this philosophy he thinks Jesus is passing and how Bush would apply such a philosophy to governing. Instead...Bush gets a pass and proceeds to run the most anti-christian government in US history (think torture, homelessness, taxcuts for the rich, war, etc..).

Bush and many on this blog are all consumers of CHRISTIAN LITE...where one has only to say they are christian but never have to explain what that means, etc...

BrianGSmith
Deist "

BrianGSmith wrote on Nov 22, 2008 4:13 AM:

" A nation of obese moralists.......hilarious.

This whole 'morals' argument is bs.....Society lays down the norms....the US is for freedom......so quit poking your noses in other people's bedrooms you creeps.

Christians should be judging no one.....otherwise they fail to follow the words Jesus implored....again. "

Eddie wrote on Nov 21, 2008 9:50 PM:

" Hollywood and the major television networks care about one thing - making money. They will promote any kind of film or programming that attracts lots of viewers. It doesn't matter what the subject matter is. It doesn't matter if it offends certain people's moral values. This is why sex and violence are so prevalent in our films and TV shows - people are attracted to them. With each passing generation, the content of films and TV becomes more and more graphic, vulgar, and outrageous. People want more and more. Hollywood and its audience feed each other; it's a cycle that must be broken somehow. "

happymom wrote on Nov 21, 2008 6:32 PM:

" Most of what flows out of the sewage pipe called Hollywood is what the gutter-minded Americans demand of it. And there is one book that SHOULD BE BURNED and that is the American Tax Code. "

doctor9 wrote on Nov 21, 2008 3:15 PM:

" At least part of the problem is this notion that every person in Hollywood thinks exactly the same, and shares some sort of group mind, bent on some form of world domination through TV and movies. That sort of thinking is just silly, right up there with all the other conspiracy theories. I'm assuming that "Observation" chose that name so he/she could post an intentionally ironic post. "

harsch...just for the fun of it wrote on Nov 21, 2008 12:55 PM:

" Follow Ronnie Gosset's post from 'there are probably many left-wingers' through his pacing and muttering of 'woulds' to the final epizany of certainty: 'But the liberals think their "dangerous" ideas should be accepted and tolerated. Any other "dangerous" ideas should be banned.' One of the funniest posts I've ever read. "

Michael Welch From Fantasy To Reality... wrote on Nov 21, 2008 12:17 PM:

" Obama has an opportunity to be sensible about Iran -- it is a 'complicated' country which is NOT 'primitive' and its folks have an underlying desire for a more 'world wide' culture. Its history like so many countries is sad but the US played a terrible role in obstructing Iranian democracy in the 1950s in order to make it a US 'client-CIA state.' The excesses of Iran are directly attributable to those of the United States empire. By the way the US 'intelligence' agencies have just released a paper on the DECLINING American empire and predicting a much more diversified world structure by 2025. It remains to be seen of course but that understanding IS a first step away from Bushian fantasy to (we hope!) Obaman realism... "

Starfish to Exasperated Ed wrote on Nov 21, 2008 11:29 AM:

" We DO have such a theocratic country: Iran! Oops, sorry--I guess they're Islamic. . . Sorry, sometimes all you goyim look a like--particularly when you do this imperialistic self-pity thing.

Seriously, though, much of Latin America is as you describe. "

Candy Volored Clown wrote on Nov 21, 2008 11:24 AM:

" Exasperated Ed, you are correct. We dont want to expose any people to ideas that arent their own. That would be dangerous. "

Think about it wrote on Nov 21, 2008 11:11 AM:

" I think its best that all "dangerous ideas" are allowed and accessible in public schools/libraries. Sunlight is the best disinfectant. Once you start banning things from the public view there is almost a cult like drift towards the topic. "

To Ronnie wrote on Nov 21, 2008 11:09 AM:

" Right on, my brother! BGS thinks it is "dangerous" to hold conservative political and religious views. They are comparable to "Talibanism", you see.
Harsch thinks opposing same sex narriage is "dangerous". Why, that is homophobic. And to say that we should focus on Obamas record or lack thereof? Why, that is purporting the dangerous idea of racism.
Are we better or worse? I guess it depends on your perspective. I say "Who knows?" "

Bowers wrote on Nov 21, 2008 11:04 AM:

" Jimmy, what do you call a Yugo's shock absorbers? Give up? Passengers. "

Exasperated Ed wrote on Nov 21, 2008 10:55 AM:

" I tell ya, there's so much discrimination against Christians in this country..ya know what we need? A homeland for Christians, sort of like Israel, but for Christians. Then we could have prayer in schools, and 10 Commandments monuments wherever we wanted them, and crosses up on hills with no controversy, and no danger of same sex marriages. A Bible in every home, school and library. Nativity scenes on all public property. Boy, that would be great. "

Michael Welch Freedom Of Religion Means EVERYBODYS Religion... wrote on Nov 21, 2008 10:50 AM:

" I don't plump for 'banning' anything of the mind really and I LIKE discussing religions usually, though I say that IF you open such a discussion but EXPECT only pious reverence in response then best hold THOSE 'discussions' in church, not in public. I LIKE Jesus (re: Harsch) but I -- just as others -- have 'my own' Jesus and he ain't necessarily yours. PRAYERS in schools when I was a kid were ALWAYS 'Christian' oriented and we sang CHRISTMAS carols, not Channukah ones. THAT was unfair -- as a NINE YEAR OLD Spencer Weiss, (with Sandra Moser one of the two Jewish kids in my 4th grade class) pointed out to the teacher who harrumphed. But the nine year old was right and Mrs Ten Harkel, a nice old lady if a bit querulous, was wrong... "

Michael Welch My REAL Religion... wrote on Nov 21, 2008 10:39 AM:

" I don't think then that it is at all 'delusional' to believe Hollywood and American values aren't 'similar.' (Ronald Reagan after all as prez was actually the leading preacher of THAT doctrine eh.) When I was a kid in Phoenix I had a friend whose father was an evangelical minister; once at his home I remarked I was going to see some now forgotten Clint Walker western AND on the second bill yep none other than John Huston's 'Moby Dick.' ('My FIRST time' as they say!) My evangelical friend tried to dissuade me from the movies because they were 'bad,' 'corrupt,' 'unChristian' and it was then and there I KNEW I'd NEVER 'believe' as folks like he believed. The movies WERE MY 'CHURCH'; and in another way (a la DVD) I now hold 'regular services' almost daily... "

Michael Welch Its A Mix -- Yeah Tom Mix AND Other Kinds... wrote on Nov 21, 2008 10:30 AM:

" I'll bite on 'conservatism' and 'liberalism' with a Holy- er Hokey- er Hollygollywood tie-in. THE MOGULS (Louie B. Mayer, William Fox, Sam Goldwyn, Harry 'King' Cohn, Irving Thalberg, Jack and Harry Warner, David 'O' for pizzaz Selznick et. al. -- yup pod'ners ALL JEWS you betcha) were politically conservative guys who wanted to make The Big Money. At the SAME TIME they wanted to present an American 'main street' (in Andy Hardy's home town or on John Wayne's range) that might go 'wrong' at times but with some stern judge's aid or amblin' cowpoke's help could be set right again: a 'liberal' vision. What you THINK is 'bad' (the prostitute 'Dallas' in 'Stagecoach'; Jews in US society) ain't necessarily and what you THINK is 'good' (solid citizen bankers but who abscond with the savings; rigid Catholics and protestants in control) ain't either... "

Michael Welch TOLERANCE... wrote on Nov 21, 2008 10:17 AM:

" Hollywood USED to be 'pretty much run by Jews' -- in the yeah 'good old days' when studios, mega and mini alike, sought a very broad range of diverse entertainment from the prestigious (Mickey Rooney as 'Puck' and Jimmy Cagney as 'Bottom' with the head of a donkey in 'Midsummer Night's Dream' -- yes it did happen!) to 'Dick Tracy's G-Men,' the pic Jennifer Jones made just before she played her Oscar winning saint in 'The Song of Bernadette.' Hollywood was a 'wide open town in those days' and sure it 'changed' accepted morality; with all those Jewish 'titans' it TAUGHT TOLERANCE. Not the 'worst' lesson for 'US' I'd say... "

Observation wrote on Nov 21, 2008 10:04 AM:

" Anyone who DOES think the people who run the TV networks and major Hollywood studios share the religious and moral values of most Americans is delusional. "

RonnieGossett wrote on Nov 21, 2008 10:00 AM:

" Yes, it is disturbing that many people think dangerous ideas should be banned from public school libraries. There are probably many left-wingers that, despite being all puffed up and proud regarding their supposed tolerance and open-mindedness, think dangerous ideas should be banned. Any mention of religion, particularly Christianity? They would scream "bloody murder" and "separation of church and state". We would have a good old-fashioned book burning on the spot. And if a public school library actually had the Bible available? Despite it being the worlds all time best seller, the ACLU and Freedom From religion foundation would be all over it. Yes, "dangerous" is subjective. But the liberals think their "dangerous" ideas should be accepted and tolerated. Any other "dangerous" ideas should be banned. "

Definitions of Conservatism and Liberalism wrote on Nov 21, 2008 9:58 AM:

" I'd like to get everyones own definition of Conservatism and Liberalism. "

Starfish wrote on Nov 21, 2008 9:35 AM:

" Better. "

Cagefighter wrote on Nov 21, 2008 9:24 AM:

" Interesting. Some of the questions are open to interpretation. "Too tolerant in its acceptance of different ideas and lifestyles". I can see 2 different people, who hold identical beliefs, answering this question differently. Some may be thinking along the lines of abortion, and think "Yes, we are too tolerant in allowing women to legally kill their babies in the name of choice". This person may not even be thinking in terms of, say, same sex marriage. On the other hand, someone else may think "No, we are not TOO tolerant. Even though we dont celebrate and officially endorse homosexual behavior, we dont persecute people for engaging in this behavior." They may not even be thinking along the lines of, say, abortion. Two people who actually hold identical beliefs, but answering the question differently. "

Comments »

Post a comment (150 word limit) »