Conservative women?

[drobert44]

I am a conservative, and a libertarian. I dont care what you do, just dont scare the horses or raise taxes....

 

[mollylonglegs2020]

I'm not trying to attack individuals. I often hate the tone here in the politics room; slinging insults and calling people morons doesn't lead to constructive dialogue. And this doesn't seem to be a both sides thing. I find, my personal experience is, that it's people who identify as on the right who make the most insulting, angry, ill-informed and hateful statements. I know that all conservatives are not like this, but a large number of them who are, are very loud here and on other platforms.

I love personal freedom. That's why I'm not a member of a club, conservatism, that wants to tell me who I can fuck and how. I'm also not religious, so all of that morality stuff that comes from religion doesn't make sense to me. People should keep their religious beliefs to themselves. If you are a decent conservative, you should be opposed to bigotry, you should give up anti-gay and anti-Trans hate and recognize that human society contains a huge variation of ideas and ways of being. You should practice minding your own business, and stop trying to tell others how to be.

From what I've seen, conservatism equals bigotry and authoritarianism. And the fact I see very few conservatives condemning political violence, or trying to pin it on others, makes me feel even more strongly that I don't want to associate with that political ideology.

 

[adrina]

You might not be a conservative then. You might be checking the moderate box and not know or understand it.

So how many independents do you know that would like to see their daughter named "DeSantis" - or at least be willing to go on record as saying so just to "own the libs"? Is that "independent"?

Asking for a friend.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

Yes, what @mollylonglegs2020 said. The GOP continues to demonize anyone who isn't hetero, and monogamous, so that isn't going to fly here very well

A lot of porn targeted at men is misogynistic; it's been my experience that conservative men like smut as long as it reinforces the patriarchy. They love stories about men cheating on their wives, but hate stories about women doing the same.

 

[adrina]

I'm not trying to attack individuals. I often hate the tone here in the politics room; slinging insults and calling people morons doesn't lead to constructive dialogue. And this doesn't seem to be a both sides thing. I find, my personal experience is, that it's people who identify as on the right who make the most insulting, angry, ill-informed and hateful statements. I know that all conservatives are not like this, but a large number of them who are, are very loud here and on other platforms.

I love personal freedom. That's why I'm not a member of a club, conservatism, that wants to tell me who I can fuck and how. I'm also not religious, so all of that morality stuff that comes from religion doesn't make sense to me. People should keep their religious beliefs to themselves. If you are a decent conservative, you should be opposed to bigotry, you should give up anti-gay and anti-Trans hate and recognize that human society contains a huge variation of ideas and ways of being. You should practice minding your own business, and stop trying to tell others how to be.

From what I've seen, conservatism equals bigotry and authoritarianism. And the fact I see very few conservatives condemning political violence, or trying to pin it on others, makes me feel even more strongly that I don't want to associate with that political ideology.

I'm tired of staying quiet while these individuals trample all over everyone else's lives and freedoms in their perverted quest to control what goes on in bedrooms and uteri. There's no decency in that.

 

[Lazaran]

Said one thing. Voted the opposite.

Liked a post directed at owning the libs.

So just how accepting, compassionate and open minded are you really?

Yeah, I would say Alley-TRASH-Fl is just a GARBAGE level troll.

The ones that say they think one way but vote the other are an obvious WASTE of time and oxygen.

Alley-TRASH-Fl

 

[mollylonglegs2020]

I stand for the rights of the most vulnerable: females in gestation...

You stand for minding other people's business. What I do with my body is my affair, and you have no say in it.

 

[Dribble]

My dog wouldn't even hump the leg of a conservative woman....why would I give them time? Good to know where the trailer park princesses live. Don't need a case of crabs at my age

 

[SirTasksAlot]

You stand for minding other people's business. What I do with my body is my affair, and you have no say in it.

I would never *mind them; that's redolent of authoritarianism (which I abhor). In fact, your rebuttal was exactly mine when the germ-theory advocates went on their rampage back in mid-2020...

 

[lil_jenni]

Oh, I should stay away from the politics board. I know this. But I saw this on the recent posts thread and was curious.

To the OP -- you will probably find some other conservative women on here, but it's likely going to be a significant minority. My experience is that most of the women I've met on lit are moderate to liberal... Like me.

I do have a question for you. I'm a bisexual elementary school teacher. According to some conservatives, that makes me a threat because LGBTQ people supposedly try to groom children (an insidious and unsupported generalization). And yet, most of the groomers that are actually found in school settings are heterosexual men grooming young women. What are your thoughts on that? Would you support a.candidate who aligns with your fiscal beliefs but demonizes someone like me with no evidence?

 

[mollylonglegs2020]

I would never *mind them; that's redolent of authoritarianism (which I abhor). In fact, your rebuttal was exactly mine when the germ-theory advocates went on their rampage back in mid-2020...

I don't know what you're talking about. It certainly doesn't seem related to this thread. It sounds like whataboutism to me; trying to divert the conversation to something irrelevant.

If you support personal liberty and freedom, you should support a pregnant person's right to soverignty over their own bodies. It is the only decent, consistent position. If you oppose abortion, then you oppose personal freedom.

 

[schism666]

this thread turned out exactly as expected

 

[adrina]

I don't know what you're talking about. It certainly doesn't seem related to this thread. It sounds like whataboutism to me; trying to divert the conversation to something irrelevant.

If you support personal liberty and freedom, you should support a pregnant person's right to soverignty over their own bodies. It is the only decent, consistent position. If you oppose abortion, then you oppose personal freedom.

It's him trying to excuse his vote for Trump, regardless of Trump's promise to place anti abortion judges, so that he can feel innocent because he was "deceived".

 

[SirTasksAlot]

I don't know what you're talking about. It certainly doesn't seem related to this thread. It sounds like whataboutism to me; trying to divert the conversation to something irrelevant.

If you support personal liberty and freedom, you should support a pregnant person's right to soverignty over their own bodies. It is the only decent, consistent position. If you oppose abortion, then you oppose personal freedom.

The thread is about the presence of conservative ppl on Lit. Then a lit reader directed an unprovoked insult at the thread-initiator, and a few others chimed in.

Regarding personal sovereignty and freedom--and responsibility: I do believe in these--at the same time I believe in the personal sovereignty (and protection of) the life in the womb. They are not mutually exclusive.

^How is it irreverent? It is an analogy which is totally and wholly relevant.

Be well.

 

[mollylonglegs2020]

I also couldn't keep away. I'm definitely a threat, too.
And the vast majority of reported sexual violence is perpetrated by cis-het men.
(Its worth noting that there's good reason to think a lot of men are victims of sexual violence by women, but since it doesn't get reported, because of conservative views on masculinity, we are ion the dark for those numbers)

Conservatives don't seem to recognise this. I see many conservatives thinking they can just make up their own reality, and that reality is often binary; black or white. They don't care for truth or nuance or tolerance at all.

In fact, conservatism is nothing more than the belief that society should be dominated by an aristocracy. This is incompatable with democracy and a modern pluralistic society. Conservatives seem willing to say anything at all that will bolster the power of that aristocracy. Even when the conservative in question isn't a member of the aristocracy.

 

[mollylonglegs2020]

The thread is about the presence of conservative ppl on Lit. Then a lit reader directed an unprovoked insult at the thread-initiator, and a few others chimed in.

Regarding personal sovereignty and freedom--and responsibility: I do believe in these--at the same time I believe in the personal sovereignty (and protection of) the life in the womb. They are not mutually exclusive.

^How is it irreverent? It is an analogy which is totally and wholly relevant.

Be well.

You have no say over what goes on inside my body. That you think you ought to, demonstrates your authoritarian contempt for personal freedom.

 

[adrina]

The thread is about the presence of conservative ppl on Lit. Then a lit reader directed an unprovoked insult at the thread-initiator, and a few others chimed in.

Regarding personal sovereignty and freedom--and responsibility: I do believe in these--at the same time I believe in the personal sovereignty (and protection of) the life in the womb. They are not mutually exclusive.

^How is it irreverent? It is an analogy which is totally and wholly relevant.

Be well.

Do you require handling with kid gloves? That seems awfully sensitive. Perhaps you need a safe space?

If you don't like the bed, then don't lay in it. Simple as.

 

[lil_jenni]

I would never *mind them; that's redolent of authoritarianism (which I abhor). In fact, your rebuttal was exactly mine when the germ-theory advocates went on their rampage back in mid-2020...

But they are not the same thing -- that is a false equivalency.

An abortion does not pose a health risk to the population at large, just the woman and the fetus. Sure, one could claim personhood for the fetus and claim the state has an interest in preventing a homicide. But homicide laws are not so much about protecting individuals but rather about protecting society from the lawlessness of homicide (indeed, that is why we have different levels of homicide, from murder to justifiable homicide). And arguably society at large is not put in danger of lawless homicide by allowing abortion. Thus, the state's interest cannot outweigh the individual's liberties because society is not directly harmed by abortion absent moral considerations. And such moral considerations are antithetical to traditional libertarianism.

Disease, on the other hand, does pose significant risks to society at large. One person's actions can have an impact on many others, and thus society (and the state) have an interest in regulating individual exercise of liberty that may be harmful to society. Indeed, the entire purpose of law is curtailing*********ing individual actions that are harmful to society, unless one claims the purpose of the law is to enforce moral strictures. But that would be antithetical to traditional libertarian values.

 

[adrina]

Sure, one could claim personhood for the fetus and claim the state has an interest in preventing a homicide.

Eh that's just a ruse. There is no person on this planet that has the right to someone else's organs.

 

[lil_jenni]

Eh that's just a ruse. There is no person on this planet that has the right to someone else's organs.

I.wouldn't call it a ruse, but it has extremely concerning ramifications.

 

[lil_jenni]

And no person who would save a fetus before an actual baby

The thing is, society does have an interest in protecting fetuses when the woman intends to see her pregnancy through. I think all states have laws against the killing of a fetus in such circumstances, because allowing such killings harm society. The balancing factor is not the harm to the fetus (or even its status as a person) but the harm to society weighed against perianal liberty. If a woman terminates a pregnancy, societal harm is low and thus society has limited interest. If someone else cause the termination against the woman's will, society is harmed.

 

[adrina]

I.wouldn't call it a ruse, but it has extremely concerning ramifications.

What would you call it? I'm not being adversarial, but genuinely curious. It is honestly, at this point, every thinking woman's responsibility to take in every possible point of attack. Because they never quit.

The thing is, society does have an interest in protecting fetuses when the woman intends to see her pregnancy through. I think all states have laws against the killing of a fetus in such circumstances, because allowing such killings harm society. The balancing factor is not the harm to the fetus (or even its status as a person) but the harm to society weighed against perianal liberty. If a woman terminates a pregnancy, societal harm is low and this society has limited interest. If someone else cause the termination against the woman's will, society is harmed.

Again, not to be adversarial, but what exact interest does society against the killing of a fetus? There's multiple points to this question. Does it mean that we need to protect embryos in clinics? Does it mean we need to do everything to make sure pregnant women have access to the appropriate healthcare to ensure a healthy delivery? Does it mean we need to do everything we can to make sure that every embryo develops into a healthy child and into a responsible adult?

The reason I ask these questions is because society's interest seems to only be relevant in this discussion when it comes to a gestating woman. And I have to ask why. Don't you?

 

[John_von_Neumann]

The thread is about the presence of conservative ppl on Lit. Then a lit reader directed an unprovoked insult at the thread-initiator, and a few others chimed in.

If you want AJ's victimhood trophy, you're gonna have to do better than this.

germ-theory advocates

Lol.

 

[SirTasksAlot]

But they are not the same thing -- that is a false equivalency.

An abortion does not pose a health risk to the population at large, just the woman and the fetus. Sure, one could claim personhood for the fetus and claim the state has an interest in preventing a homicide. But homicide laws are not so much about protecting individuals but rather about protecting society from the lawlessness of homicide (indeed, that is why we have different levels of homicide, from murder to justifiable homicide). And arguably society at large is not put in danger of lawless homicide by allowing abortion. Thus, the state's interest cannot outweigh the individual's liberties because society is not directly harmed by abortion absent moral considerations. And such moral considerations are antithetical to traditional libertarianism.

Disease, on the other hand, does pose significant risks to society at large. One person's actions can have an impact on many others, and thus society (and the state) have an interest in regulating individual exercise of liberty that may be harmful to society. Indeed, the entire purpose of law is curtailing*********ing individual actions that are harmful to society, unless one claims the purpose of the law is to enforce moral strictures. But that would be antithetical to traditional libertarian values.

This is a very nice argument for your side--but I did not state they were equivalent. I stated an *analogy. Not the same thing. Anyway, thank you for taking the time to politely spell-out your position.

I would like to comment on your "...harmful to society" idea. It appears to me that this is a short-term/near-term position. What would your side say to the huge number of minorities which make up the vast majority of abortions since Roe v. Wade--and the projected elimination of those segments of our population? Could one argue that something nefarious might be at play; that the Eugenics movement is still alive and well? And that a genocide is happening right under our noses, which is I believe all of us can agree on is "harmful to society".

 

[munch2much]

Wow
She only asked if there were other conservative ladies here.
This thread totally got hijacked