Recommend
3 
 Thumb up
 Hide
63 Posts
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Conservatives and the "pro-family" myth. rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Trey Chambers
United States
Houston
Texas
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

Trump, Ivanka, and the GOP Congress sure have made a lot of progress on a federal maternity leave policy over the past year and a half. Oh no wait, they gave a huge tax cut to corporations instead, meanwhile the conservative Supreme Court just made it harder for workers to sue employers.

You would think this would be something conservatives and liberals could agree on, conservatives supposedly being "pro-family" and all. Just more evidence that they only care about unborn children, and not one bit about them once they are actually born. Nor do they care about mothers more than shareholders. In case you needed any more evidence.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kelsey Rinella
United States
Rochester
New York
flag msg tools
I am proud to have opposed those who describe all who oppose them as "Tender Flowers" and "Special Snowflakes".
badge
Check out Stately Play for news and reviews of games worth thinking about.
Avatar
mbmb
Shampoo4you wrote:
Just more evidence that they only care about unborn children, and not one bit about them once they are actually born.


For what it’s worth, I hate this piece of rhetoric and think it relies on deliberately misconstruing what conservatives say and do.
9 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trey Chambers
United States
Houston
Texas
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
rinelk wrote:
Shampoo4you wrote:
Just more evidence that they only care about unborn children, and not one bit about them once they are actually born.


For what it’s worth, I hate this piece of rhetoric and think it relies on deliberately misconstruing what conservatives say and do.


I suppose you have some evidence that conservatives care about what happens to children after they are born? Particularly the children of, say, poor children born to unemployed single mothers?
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Myers
United States
Redmond
WA
flag msg tools
Mandelbrot/Simurgh hybrid etc etc
badge
I made both of these fractals, hurray!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
rinelk wrote:
Shampoo4you wrote:
Just more evidence that they only care about unborn children, and not one bit about them once they are actually born.


For what it’s worth, I hate this piece of rhetoric and think it relies on deliberately misconstruing what conservatives say and do.


I agree that it goes against what they say, but it doesn't seem to be all that different from how they vote. CHIP funding reduction, etc.
23 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Elias Någonsson
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
Terwox wrote:
rinelk wrote:
Shampoo4you wrote:
Just more evidence that they only care about unborn children, and not one bit about them once they are actually born.


For what it’s worth, I hate this piece of rhetoric and think it relies on deliberately misconstruing what conservatives say and do.


I agree that it goes against what they say, but it doesn't seem to be all that different from how they vote. CHIP funding reduction, etc.


See also: opposition to research on child abuse. And opposition to harsher measures against cops killing kids. And arguing for low age of criminal responsibility and for trying children as adults. And everything about the education system.

They do in general care about children remaining *alive*, as long as it doesn't inconvenience other deeply held beliefs such as "we need guns to protect against a violent government" and "cops sre government so their violence is great". But they don't care about more than keeping them alive. *Life* is sacred, but everything else, such as physical and mental health, happiness, freedom, etc - that doesn't matter much.

(Of course individuals might think differently, but the group as a whole end up with that apporoach)
14 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Erik Henry
United States
Houston
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind—Einstein
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hey! Lesotho and Papua New Guinea don’t have paid maternity leave either. It’s not like we’re the only country that doesn’t.
17 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
G Rowls
msg tools
Professional Agitation Consultant... HTTP Error 418 I'm a Teapot!
Avatar
mbmb
rinelk wrote:
Shampoo4you wrote:
Just more evidence that they only care about unborn children, and not one bit about them once they are actually born.


For what it’s worth, I hate this piece of rhetoric and think it relies on deliberately misconstruing what conservatives say and do.


how dare you judge conservatives using the metric of what they claim they stand for and what actions they do.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kelsey Rinella
United States
Rochester
New York
flag msg tools
I am proud to have opposed those who describe all who oppose them as "Tender Flowers" and "Special Snowflakes".
badge
Check out Stately Play for news and reviews of games worth thinking about.
Avatar
mbmb
sajberhippien wrote:
Terwox wrote:
rinelk wrote:
Shampoo4you wrote:
Just more evidence that they only care about unborn children, and not one bit about them once they are actually born.


For what it’s worth, I hate this piece of rhetoric and think it relies on deliberately misconstruing what conservatives say and do.


I agree that it goes against what they say, but it doesn't seem to be all that different from how they vote. CHIP funding reduction, etc.


See also: opposition to research on child abuse. And opposition to harsher measures against cops killing kids. And arguing for low age of criminal responsibility and for trying children as adults. And everything about the education system.

They do in general care about children remaining *alive*, as long as it doesn't inconvenience other deeply held beliefs such as "we need guns to protect against a violent government" and "cops sre government so their violence is great". But they don't care about more than keeping them alive. *Life* is sacred, but everything else, such as physical and mental health, happiness, freedom, etc - that doesn't matter much.

(Of course individuals might think differently, but the group as a whole end up with that apporoach)


Bold type added. And, yes, it’s a big deal, which does a lot of harm. But conservatives generally think that the welfare of children is the responsibility of their families, and that de-emphasizing the role of the family by using the state as a backup will be worse for more of them in the long run than allowing families the freedom to fail (with the children then helped out by private charities, to which they give at impressive rates). What isn’t explained by other priorities is satisfactorily addressed by this general orientation.

Keep in mind, too, that conservatives and liberals are much less different than the media suggests.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mortego
United States
New Kensington
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
my opinion, not a fact:

Pro-Life: from unborn to 18 years old. Free healthcare, nutrition, education and anything else they need to be a productive citizen.

Pro-Birth: doesn't like others to have abortions, no other concern needed.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trey Chambers
United States
Houston
Texas
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
rinelk wrote:
sajberhippien wrote:
Terwox wrote:
rinelk wrote:
Shampoo4you wrote:
Just more evidence that they only care about unborn children, and not one bit about them once they are actually born.


For what it’s worth, I hate this piece of rhetoric and think it relies on deliberately misconstruing what conservatives say and do.


I agree that it goes against what they say, but it doesn't seem to be all that different from how they vote. CHIP funding reduction, etc.


See also: opposition to research on child abuse. And opposition to harsher measures against cops killing kids. And arguing for low age of criminal responsibility and for trying children as adults. And everything about the education system.

They do in general care about children remaining *alive*, as long as it doesn't inconvenience other deeply held beliefs such as "we need guns to protect against a violent government" and "cops sre government so their violence is great". But they don't care about more than keeping them alive. *Life* is sacred, but everything else, such as physical and mental health, happiness, freedom, etc - that doesn't matter much.

(Of course individuals might think differently, but the group as a whole end up with that apporoach)


Bold type added. And, yes, it’s a big deal, which does a lot of harm. But conservatives generally think that the welfare of children is the responsibility of their families, and that de-emphasizing the role of the family by using the state as a backup will be worse for more of them in the long run than allowing families the freedom to fail (with the children then helped out by private charities, to which they give at impressive rates). What isn’t explained by other priorities is satisfactorily addressed by this general orientation.

Keep in mind, too, that conservatives and liberals are much less different than the media suggests.


And for families who struggle and do not get help from charities? 1 in 6 children in America are not guaranteed their next meal.

http://www.feedingamerica.org/hunger-in-america/child-hunger...

It looks like these private charities (often churches, who spend the money on other things besides helping the poor) don't quite do enough. Imagine that.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
G Rowls
msg tools
Professional Agitation Consultant... HTTP Error 418 I'm a Teapot!
Avatar
mbmb
Quote:
Bold type added. And, yes, it’s a big deal, which does a lot of harm. But conservatives generally think that the welfare of children is the responsibility of their families, and that de-emphasizing the role of the family by using the state as a backup will be worse for more of them in the long run than allowing families the freedom to fail (with the children then helped out by private charities, to which they give at impressive rates). What isn’t explained by other priorities is satisfactorily addressed by this general orientation.


but but why is there soo much poverty in the US then and why are the conservative states over represented in the top 10 lists?

After all the government is so bad but those wonderful private charities aren't making that much of a difference either.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Johnson
United States
Azusa
California
flag msg tools
One of Alabama 3's finest songs, especially the versions on the single this image is from...
badge
Sweet Pretty M*th*rf*ck*ng Country Acid House Music - All night long!
Avatar
Erik17 wrote:
Hey! Lesotho and Papua New Guinea don’t have paid maternity leave either. It’s not like we’re the only country that doesn’t.


Lana: “Every single country on the planet except for us, Liberia and Burma.”

Archer: “Wow really?”

Lana: “Yup.”

Archer: “Cause you never really think of those other two as having their shit together.”
16 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kelsey Rinella
United States
Rochester
New York
flag msg tools
I am proud to have opposed those who describe all who oppose them as "Tender Flowers" and "Special Snowflakes".
badge
Check out Stately Play for news and reviews of games worth thinking about.
Avatar
mbmb
erensberger wrote:
rinelk wrote:
But conservatives generally think that the welfare of children is the responsibility of their families, and that de-emphasizing the role of the family by using the state as a backup will be worse for more of them in the long run than allowing families the freedom to fail (with the children then helped out by private charities, to which they give at impressive rates). What isn’t explained by other priorities is satisfactorily addressed by this general orientation.


Why not support families' success?


Bcause very few ways we can do that don’t also reduce the pressure on families to be responsible for their own success.

But, once we’re at this level, of admitting that supporting families is a genuine goal of the right and debating about which methods are best, I’m cool. I have no problem at all with “The right supports families through well-intentioned but suboptimal policies”. It’s “The right doesn’t care about kids” that bugs me. I mean, abstinence education is obviously a practical catastrophe, but it’s well-meant and reflects care for kids.
9 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trey Chambers
United States
Houston
Texas
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
rinelk wrote:
erensberger wrote:
rinelk wrote:
But conservatives generally think that the welfare of children is the responsibility of their families, and that de-emphasizing the role of the family by using the state as a backup will be worse for more of them in the long run than allowing families the freedom to fail (with the children then helped out by private charities, to which they give at impressive rates). What isn’t explained by other priorities is satisfactorily addressed by this general orientation.


Why not support families' success?


Bcause very few ways we can do that don’t also reduce the pressure on families to be responsible for their own success.

But, once we’re at this level, of admitting that supporting families is a genuine goal of the right and debating about which methods are best, I’m cool. I have no problem at all with “The right supports families through well-intentioned but suboptimal policies”. It’s “The right doesn’t care about kids” that bugs me. I mean, abstinence education is obviously a practical catastrophe, but it’s well-meant and reflects care for kids.


I'm still waiting for evidence that this GOP led government has done anything to prove they care about families.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mortego
United States
New Kensington
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shampoo4you wrote:


I'm still waiting for evidence that this GOP led government has done anything to prove they care about families.


I've got some Bad News for you...
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Born To Lose, Live To Win
United States
South Euclid
Ohio
flag msg tools
badge
Metal Undivided, Chaos For All
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shampoo4you wrote:
I'm still waiting for evidence that this GOP led government has done anything to prove they care about families.
Rinelk's point of rejecting the nanny state as "The road to hell is paved with good intentions" IS proving they care about families in the way they think works. That it doesn't, and never has, is what their problem is. It's not that that they don't care, many do, but they just have broken ideas on how to fix it. At least from a liberal POV. That's not to say that there are not conservatives who don't give a crap about people not like them, but you can't use that bunch to paint all conservatives.

A better point would be harping on how conservatives ignore the consequences of their actions in government that ends up making things worse. Focusing on the negative consequences and saying they do it on purpose because they don't care about people, or even hate them, is not productive to convincing people their actions are harmful. Operating from an assumption that they do care about people and then appealing to that empathy, whether it exists or not, puts them in the position of trying to live up to their lip service. The way many liberals handle it now, conservatives can easily dismiss them as strident, irrational loons and avoid engaging their fellow conservative's hypocrisy.
6 
 Thumb up
2.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trey Chambers
United States
Houston
Texas
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
TheChin! wrote:
Shampoo4you wrote:
I'm still waiting for evidence that this GOP led government has done anything to prove they care about families.
Rinelk's point of rejecting the nanny state as "The road to hell is paved with good intentions" IS proving they care about families in the way they think works. That it doesn't, and never has, is what their problem is. It's not that that they don't care, many do, but they just have broken ideas on how to fix it. At least from a liberal POV. That's not to say that there are not conservatives who don't give a crap about people not like them, but you can't use that bunch to paint all conservatives.

A better point would be harping on how conservatives ignore the consequences of their actions in government that ends up making things worse. Focusing on the negative consequences and saying they do it on purpose because they don't care about people, or even hate them, is not productive to convincing people their actions are harmful. Operating from an assumption that they do care about people and then appealing to that empathy, whether it exists or not, puts them in the position of trying to live up to their lip service. The way many liberals handle it now, conservatives can easily dismiss them as strident, irrational loons and avoid engaging their fellow conservative's hypocrisy.


As pointed out earlier in the thread, they've actively done things that have harmed families.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Adrian Hague
United Kingdom
Bristol
Bristol
flag msg tools
badge
RAWKET LAWNCHA!!!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
On a related note, why does the USA incarcerate more children than any other country in the world?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youth_incarceration_in_the_Uni...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Kearns
United States
Bloomington
Indiana
flag msg tools
Silence is golden.
badge
Your sea is so great and my boat is so small.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The idea of "families" typically falls within a very prescribed set of conditions.

White hetero-normative two parent families in particular.

This isn't just liberal-conservative, but one way to help families would be to legalize marijuana.

Marijauna related arrests put a lot of black men behind bars and seriously destabilize families, while not really protecting anyone from anything (as marijuana is less harmful as a substance than alcohol).
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
rinelk wrote:
erensberger wrote:
rinelk wrote:
But conservatives generally think that the welfare of children is the responsibility of their families, and that de-emphasizing the role of the family by using the state as a backup will be worse for more of them in the long run than allowing families the freedom to fail (with the children then helped out by private charities, to which they give at impressive rates). What isn’t explained by other priorities is satisfactorily addressed by this general orientation.


Why not support families' success?


Bcause very few ways we can do that don’t also reduce the pressure on families to be responsible for their own success.

But, once we’re at this level, of admitting that supporting families is a genuine goal of the right and debating about which methods are best, I’m cool. I have no problem at all with “The right supports families through well-intentioned but suboptimal policies”. It’s “The right doesn’t care about kids” that bugs me. I mean, abstinence education is obviously a practical catastrophe, but it’s well-meant and reflects care for kids.


Two things that fall under a similar overarching heading.

1)allowing families to fail: This is inane on the face of it if you care for the welfare of children. Families don't fail oike businesses. 'Oh gee, we had a couple bad quarters, best fold and call it a day.' When a family fails it's generally at the end of a long grinding path fraught with malnutrition, abuse (emotional/physical) recrimination, abandonment, missed opportunity, and sometimes death for the children involved. If you care about kids maybe try to get them some help before they're crippled-sometimes litterslly for life.

2)The abstinence nonsense might have been well intentioned a few decades ago, but it's long since been proven useless and yet it is still pushed.

The overall is either a blinding incompetence or willful ignorange to the practical results of espoused theories. You can't keep hitting someone in the face with an axe and yelling 'I'm helping!' And expect people to praise your sincere efforts.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bat Profile
United States
Sandworms USA
Plateau of Leng
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
rinelk wrote:
Shampoo4you wrote:
Just more evidence that they only care about unborn children, and not one bit about them once they are actually born.


For what it’s worth, I hate this piece of rhetoric and think it relies on deliberately misconstruing what conservatives say and do.


You forgot to put that in green
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Kearns
United States
Bloomington
Indiana
flag msg tools
Silence is golden.
badge
Your sea is so great and my boat is so small.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AdrianPHague wrote:
On a related note, why does the USA incarcerate more children than any other country in the world?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youth_incarceration_in_the_Uni...


from the link

Quote:
Criticisms of racism

Critics of the juvenile justice system believe that the system is unfairly stacked against minority youth. Minority youth are disproportionately represented in incarcerated populations relative to their representation in the general population. A recent report from the National Council on Crime and delinquency found that minority youth are treated more severely than white youth at every point of contact with the system—from arrest, to detention, to adjudication, to incarceration—even when charged with the same crime.[12] In 1995, African American youths made up 12% of the population, but were arrested at rates double those for Caucasian youths.[13] The trend towards adult adjudication has had implications for the racial make-up of the juvenile prison population as well. Minority youth tried in adult courts are much more likely to be sentenced to serve prison time than white youth offenders arrested for similar crimes.[14]
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
G Rowls
msg tools
Professional Agitation Consultant... HTTP Error 418 I'm a Teapot!
Avatar
mbmb
rinelk wrote:
erensberger wrote:
rinelk wrote:
But conservatives generally think that the welfare of children is the responsibility of their families, and that de-emphasizing the role of the family by using the state as a backup will be worse for more of them in the long run than allowing families the freedom to fail (with the children then helped out by private charities, to which they give at impressive rates). What isn’t explained by other priorities is satisfactorily addressed by this general orientation.


Why not support families' success?


Bcause very few ways we can do that don’t also reduce the pressure on families to be responsible for their own success.

Quote:
But, once we’re at this level, of admitting that supporting families is a genuine goal of the right and debating about which methods are best, I’m cool. I have no problem at all with “The right supports families through well-intentioned but suboptimal policies”. It’s “The right doesn’t care about kids” that bugs me. I mean, abstinence education is obviously a practical catastrophe, but it’s well-meant and reflects care for kids.


or more a desire to enforce sex is shameful and should only be used to procreate.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kelsey Rinella
United States
Rochester
New York
flag msg tools
I am proud to have opposed those who describe all who oppose them as "Tender Flowers" and "Special Snowflakes".
badge
Check out Stately Play for news and reviews of games worth thinking about.
Avatar
mbmb
Shampoo4you wrote:
As pointed out earlier in the thread, they've actively done things that have harmed families.


I agre with that, but they don’t.

erensberger wrote:
rinelk wrote:
erensberger wrote:
Why not support families' success?


Bcause very few ways we can do that don’t also reduce the pressure on families to be responsible for their own success.

But, once we’re at this level, of admitting that supporting families is a genuine goal of the right and debating about which methods are best, I’m cool. I have no problem at all with “The right supports families through well-intentioned but suboptimal policies”. It’s “The right doesn’t care about kids” that bugs me. I mean, abstinence education is obviously a practical catastrophe, but it’s well-meant and reflects care for kids.


You're the one that said "conservatives" want to allow families to fail, so that's explicitly not supporting families.

Look, what's so terrible about "reducing pressure" on families which are at risk? Isn't too much pressure, often, exactly the problem? Are the moral lessons you find in poverty and violence really worth more than the actual lives of the people involved?


I don’t think so. They do. So we can work on that-offer data and anecdotes to help them see the costs of their policies, and correct their rose-colored history goggles. See how different that is from saying they just don’t care?

Shadrach wrote:
The overall is either a blinding incompetence or willful ignorange to the practical results of espoused theories.


Exactly. That’s what I think we ought to be criticizing. The epistemology of the right is horribly broken.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Junior McSpiffy
United States
Riverton
Utah
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
rinelk wrote:
erensberger wrote:
rinelk wrote:
But conservatives generally think that the welfare of children is the responsibility of their families, and that de-emphasizing the role of the family by using the state as a backup will be worse for more of them in the long run than allowing families the freedom to fail (with the children then helped out by private charities, to which they give at impressive rates). What isn’t explained by other priorities is satisfactorily addressed by this general orientation.


Why not support families' success?


Bcause very few ways we can do that don’t also reduce the pressure on families to be responsible for their own success.

But, once we’re at this level, of admitting that supporting families is a genuine goal of the right and debating about which methods are best, I’m cool. I have no problem at all with “The right supports families through well-intentioned but suboptimal policies”. It’s “The right doesn’t care about kids” that bugs me. I mean, abstinence education is obviously a practical catastrophe, but it’s well-meant and reflects care for kids.


C'mon, Kelsey. Why would you ever think there is any problem with an argument like "Since my definition of 'pro-family' is different than their definition, that means they don't care about families at all?" I mean, that's the stuff of Plato right there, that is.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.