The lonely 6 percent

[30ashopper]

I normally avoid religious and political discussions like the plague, as there is not usually a chance of swaying one's beliefs through any amount of discussion...and with this I am only offering an explanation to the original concept of this post.

Science in itself goes against most religious beliefs, with nothing but facts as it's basis...actually, in it's entirety. If you've ever taken a class in anthropology you've felt the tension between those who absorb the material and those who dispute it. There will always be a battle between those who believe in Creation and those who believe in Evolution, even though anthropology teaches us the 'Eve theory' offering a melding of the two mindsets.

When discussing homosexuality, psychology courses educate students that sexual preference is most often determined in the womb, and not always brought on by overbearing mothers or sexual abuse...as has been told to us for decades.

Sociology classes broaden the minds of students enabling them to better understand groups of people in our own society, who may be 'different' than our own families with regard to religion, heritage, or socio-economic status...and the choices they make in the best interest of themselves or their collective groups.

With Republicans being conservative in their beliefs towards religion, homosexuality, abortion... it is no surprise to me that not many would end up in a science-based career.

For example, the science of medicine would be hard to be a part of if your conservative political beliefs and values prevented you from wholeheartedly caring for your patients.

Did I mention my degree is in psychology? I would have to do research, but I would be willing to bet there are more scientists in the social sciences and health-related fields than any other division...which would definitely explain the political partisanship.

Very interesting up until that last part. What are you implying here, that conservatives aren't compassionate people?

 

[scooterbug44]

I read it that many "conservative" beliefs could prevent acceptance and consideration of certain treatments or therapies.

Stem cells, abortion, contraception, or gene therapy are some examples that spring to mind.

 

[30ashopper]

I read it that many "conservative" beliefs could prevent acceptance and consideration of certain treatments or therapies.

Stem cells, abortion, contraception, or gene therapy are some examples that spring to mind.

Well, IMHO political conservatism does not equate to religious fundamentalism.

 

[scooterbug44]

The items I listed are "conservative" issues and/or part of the Republican platform.

 

[Teresa]

I normally avoid religious and political discussions like the plague, as there is not usually a chance of swaying one's beliefs through any amount of discussion...and with this I am only offering an explanation to the original concept of this post.

After posting in the Political Forum for a few years, many of us have learned that swaying someone's beliefs/positions is not a reason for particpating in these discussions. Sharing your thoughts and beliefs and resources in a positive way (as you have) is really the whole idea. We learn so much from the perspectives of others, we each come from different places and experiences. Coming to a better understanding of others and their positions on issues is the best and only real thing to take from this forum, imo. Not persuading someone to your own thinking. As you said, that doesn't work anyway.

 

[Bob]

Well, IMHO political conservatism does not equate to religious fundamentalism.

it does if you wish to be a republican candidate

 

[30ashopper]

it does if you wish to be a republican candidate

I think there are exceptions to that but I agree in general, republican candidates have to cater to the social conservatives. This is unfortunate in my view, but really, what is a good fiscal conservative supposed to do? The day the democrats start talking about free vs. fair, lower taxes, less spending, and less regulation I'll switch sides. But that's not going to happen now is it?

 

[30ashopper]

Hrm, I just realized what I described is the libertarian platform.

 

[LuciferSam]

I think there are exceptions to that but I agree in general, republican candidates have to cater to the social conservatives. This is unfortunate in my view, but really, what is a good fiscal conservative supposed to do? The day the democrats start talking about free vs. fair, lower taxes, less spending, and less regulation I'll switch sides. But that's not going to happen now is it?

Maybe you should realize the high price you're paying for fiscal conservatism. I'll gladly risk the slight possibility of slightly higher taxes to keep the religious whack jobs out of office. I think of it as a campaign donation. The reality is that the Republicans do no better a job fiscally than the democrats. You've ODd on libertarian koolaid. You are too hung up on theory and priciple to recognize the reality that is right in front of you.

 

[Bob]

I think there are exceptions to that but I agree in general, republican candidates have to cater to the social conservatives. This is unfortunate in my view, but really, what is a good fiscal conservative supposed to do? The day the democrats start talking about free vs. fair, lower taxes, less spending, and less regulation I'll switch sides. But that's not going to happen now is it?

It's a Great Time to Be Rich - BusinessWeek obama caved on taxes for the wealthy.....there is no "fair" for the lower/middle classes. spending becomes a massive issue if you cut taxes,wage multi-war, and implode the economy simultaneously. laying blame, america must look in the non-political mirror and blame ourselves. the ultra rich have never had it so well in this country. we are morphing into a 2 tier society by following policies that cannibalize the middle class.