Posted by irl on December 22, 1997 at 18:57:03:
In response to Oh, my!, written by Marie Bernadette on December 22, 1997 at 18:03:59
My, My, irl, but the topic does raise our blood pressure, does it not? One wonders why.
Indeed I do wonder, and I am sorry about your blood pressure. My personal interest in the discussion is to see something a little more substantial than name-calling and unbacked assertion. I noticed, sadly, that you chose not to respond to any of my questions, including those asking you merely to define your terms.
Ah, well, some discussions are not meant to be, while others are perhaps better left undiscussed.
Liberals and conservatives of every era have argued these subjects back and forth. The liberals write books, complete with statistics, that 'prove' their points and the conservatives write books, complete with statistics, that 'prove' their points. C'est la vie.
The modern usage of the terms has little to do with their historical usage -- does anyone really believe Clinton to be a Jeffersonian liberal, or (on the other hand) Bush to be a vintage Lincoln-era Republican?
Both "liberal" and "conservative" can be taken as great compliments, since both terms embody strengths of human character. You use "conservative" as an pejorative, Marie Bernadette, yet fail to define your meaning any more closely. How are we supposed to take your meaning? As far as I know, there is no single accepted meaning for the word. You further accuse "prudes" of being the root cause of prostitution, yet again fail to define what a "prude" is.
I am left to believe that anyone who is less politically left than you is included as a "conservative", and anyone with more traditional views than yours on sexual mores is a "prude". But since you never actually define your own views on the subjects, except rather obliquely, we are still left in the dark.
Be that as it may, I fear that this entire thread may be inappropriate for this list. I have asked the Powers That Be to check my posts on this thread and remove any that violate the spirit of the board.
I would add only that we would do well to:
1) confine ourselves to on-topic discussions;
2) avoid blatant and undefined name-calling (e.g. "society is more conservative and therefore less concerned with civil rights and so less moral") or patronizing/aggrandizing speech (e.g. the use of the first-person plural when intending the first- or second-person singular).
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.