[Phil McAvity]

Everyone is guilty of conservative-thinking to some degree.....

I think what you mean't to say was, "Everyone is blessed with conservative-thinking to some degree......"

the conservative-thinking mind is one that avoids any logic which may make their position seem incorrect. The conservative-thinking mind does not like to question or challenge their own beliefs...they only wish to reinforce it. That's why even empirical evidence that is contrary to their beliefs are ignored or denied.

On the contrary actually, conservatism is steeped in empirical evidence like crime rates, divorce rates, church attendance rates, mental health studies and unemployment rates of days gone by versus today, hence the reason we believe what we believe. Liberalism on the other hand is open to anything that comes along thus it isn't based on anything. I'm not saying society before the 1960's was perfect, as racism and sexism were certainly more prevalent than they are today, but I also think there's ample evidence that points to the fact that overall, society functioned better and more cohesively then, before liberalism really took hold, than it does today.

It's scary to think that it has been estimated that at any given time, about 15% of the general population would qualify for a serious mental disorder.

That doesn't surprise me. I encounter people like this every day at work. Since you make frequent references to mental health issues and the DSM IV though, perhaps you could enlighten me to your expertise on the subject.

Oh...BTW, you have quoted me as saying....
These are not my words.

I never said they were. Go back and read it again and this time pay attention to what you were saying when I quoted you.

 

[jje1000]

On the contrary actually, conservatism is steeped in empirical evidence like crime rates, divorce rates, church attendance rates, mental health studies and unemployment rates of days gone by versus today, hence the reason we believe what we believe. Liberalism on the other hand is open to anything that comes along thus it isn't based on anything. I'm not saying society before the 1960's was perfect, as racism and sexism were certainly more prevalent than they are today, but I also think there's ample evidence that points to the fact that overall, society functioned better and more cohesively then, before liberalism really took hold, than it does today.

Society certainly worked better since things were done for the greater good. Crime rates? Not a problem. Don't report what you see (or pay off the cops), and things will be fine! Divorce? A woman separating from a man is a sin! (She will also be ostracized by the community for betraying her family) Church? Everyone went to church because they were mostly Christian in one way or another. Mental health? Stick 'em in the Provincia Lunatic Asylum and don't worry! Unemployment? Not a concern! You can always pick up a unionized job at the local manufacturing plant.

The problem with wanting the past to return is that the true past is no more. What remains are the memories, and even those have been shaped and transformed, exaggerated into the form we desire or hate.

 

[freshcutgrass]

Well the first one that comes to mind is transit. I understand completely that some may prefer TC and the David Miller plan with its degree of funding-in-place readiness etc., but I also understand that some prefer the subways plan of Ford

The point is, I've heard convincing arguments on both sides which leads me to believe that it isn't so much an issue of one ultimate rational rightness here but differing shades of rightness depending on the perspective in question.

Really...you've heard convincing arguments for Ford's plan??? Please tell what's convincing about it. I'll make it even easier....just tell me what isn't completely stupid about it.

He doesn't really even have a plan for subways...his plan has nothing to do with subways, and everything to do with preventing LRT. Ford doesn't really have any plans "for" anything...everything Rob Ford does is about being "against" things.

this is not to imply that one shouldn't weight the options and make a choice. They should.

And nobody who supports Ford's "plan" has done that. Asking people if they prefer subways or LRT, and answering "subways" is not weighing the options.

 

[Tewder]

Really...you've heard convincing arguments for Ford's plan??? Please tell what's convincing about it. I'll make it even easier....just tell me what isn't completely stupid about it.

He doesn't really even have a plan for subways...his plan has nothing to do with subways, and everything to do with preventing LRT. Ford doesn't really have any plans "for" anything...everything Rob Ford does is about being "against" things.




And nobody who supports Ford's "plan" has done that. Asking people if they prefer subways or LRT, and answering "subways" is not weighing the options.

I'm sorry Freshcutgrass. I simply cannot consider your comments as worthy of response any more. I feel that you are determined that any debate devolves into a polarized, partisan grudge match. I get it: Ford for you is wrong and bad. Period. If you want to conflate that to some objective, rationalized stance well go ahead, but I'm not so masochistic as to want to continue rationally debating anyone's self-aggrandizing narcissistic delusions. Not for me, sorry.

 

[Tewder]

On the contrary actually, conservatism is steeped in empirical evidence like crime rates, divorce rates, church attendance rates, mental health studies and unemployment rates of days gone by versus today, hence the reason we believe what we believe. Liberalism on the other hand is open to anything that comes along thus it isn't based on anything. I'm not saying society before the 1960's was perfect, as racism and sexism were certainly more prevalent than they are today, but I also think there's ample evidence that points to the fact that overall, society functioned better and more cohesively then, before liberalism really took hold, than it does today.

I think you raise a good point, but as with Freshcutgrass I see it as one-sided. In other words, endless conservative thinking would get us nowhere. Every once and a while we need challenging and refreshing 'liberal' ideas and agendas to push the status quo. Society has to continue to move forward and conservatism can be a force against this. At the same time, however, conservative stability and control is needed just as crucially every now and again. Checks and balance.

 

[Phil McAvity]

Society certainly worked better since things were done for the greater good. Crime rates? Not a problem. Don't report what you see (or pay off the cops), and things will be fine! Divorce? A woman separating from a man is a sin! (She will also be ostracized by the community for betraying her family) Church? Everyone went to church because they were mostly Christian in one way or another. Mental health? Stick 'em in the Provincia Lunatic Asylum and don't worry! Unemployment? Not a concern! You can always pick up a unionized job at the local manufacturing plant. The problem with wanting the past to return is that the true past is no more. What remains are the memories, and even those have been shaped and transformed, exaggerated into the form we desire or hate.

I kind of agree with you in that Canadians have a real fondness for government and see it as a kind of sacred cow (fitting analogy in this thread!) so the minute someone like me comes along wanting to scale back government and thus taxes, people go ballistic. Back then people were more guided by church and family than they are today. I think much of our increased fondness for government (and thus it's expansion into almost every facet of our lives) can be attributed to the greater role women are playing in politics and government because historically they have been far greater champions of the nanny state than men have however men are increasingly acquiescing to this way of thinking, sadly. I think given Canada's zeitgeist today, it would be very hard (if not impossible) to return to those laissez-faire, small government, low taxes days. For many reasons a return to those days is probably impossible, but an increase in personal responsibility and less dependance on government is at least the right direction to move.

I think you raise a good point, but as with Freshcutgrass I see it as one-sided. In other words, endless conservative thinking would get us nowhere. Every once and a while we need challenging and refreshing 'liberal' ideas and agendas to push the status quo. Society has to continue to move forward and conservatism can be a force against this. At the same time, however, conservative stability and control is needed just as crucially every now and again. Checks and balance.

I never said that liberalism is all bad. Of course it has it's time and place. Without liberalism institutional racism would be alive and well, torture would be the order of the day, women would be considered your property and mob justice would solve any problem. I knew a guy once who was so conservative he actually liked the middle ages! My belief is that we have achieved every human right (and then some) we have set out to achieve so it's time to turn back the clock a bit and move towards greater responsibility rather than increased rights.

I'm still waiting for freshcutgrass to explain his expertise on mental health issues (ahh the irony!), although i'm not surprised he hasn't answered me. Conversations with liberals are often difficult.