Congress introduces a national abortion ban on its first day back.

[Andalusian girls]

my experience reinforces your own entirely. i live in one of the most liberal and secular cities of Southern California, worked at the city's homeless shelter for three years + still do volunteer work for various outreach programs targeting that populace, and I'd say about 50% of the volunteers we get are faith-inspired Christians, 30% liberal activists (primarily university students), and 20% a smorgasbord of various others drawn there for one reason or another (including myself, a devout atheist).

i do not care for the ideology, i do not care for any religious ideology, but there was a marked difference in willingness to devote time for volunteering and money for fundraising when comparing devout Christians (a minority of those who claim the title) to the rest of the populace.

[BerenTebogo]

Personally, I won't even volunteer my time for people I like, let alone people I don't know.

But I am constantly donating clothes, blankets, winter clothing, food, books, etc as often as I can. I see that as my contribution. I don't want to be out in the cold in the winter any more than they do, but I also don't need 5 different winter jackets when I know I'm just going to wear 2 max, so people who need them should have them.

That's about as far as my thinking ever goes.

[Cantih]

I'm guessing religious types in major cities (in more liberal regions, at least) on average tend toward less craziness than rural religious types.
I'm sure we'll also have small town BGers who can vouch for sensible ones they know in their area.

[Marootsoobutsu]

I'm guessing religious types in major cities (in more liberal regions, at least) on average tend toward less craziness than rural religious types.
I'm sure we'll also have small town BGers who can vouch for sensible ones they know in their area.

Well, my second church was in Ellensburg (smallish city/largish town in eastern Washington), which was frankly far more generous with time than here, though it was faced with less abject poverty and a lot more mild poverty. It tended to give less in money.

Though I will readily admit that the rural Christians I know (particularly family, bless 'em), are much less pro-science/pro-education than urban Christians I know (my family has nearly disowned me because I went to the UW), that does not translate to their helping the poor: they tend to do far more than folks in cities do. They adopt-- not cute kids, but teens and other "undesirables". They donate incredible amounts of time and money (well, not incredible dollar-wise, but percentage-of-income-wise), to help those who find themselves in a bad situation. They genuinely and deeply want to help post-birth. It's not a "You're born, slam the door!" They don't want the government to help, because (and, as I said, I tend to agree based on my personal experience with it), the government doesn't really help you get out of a bad situation.. they just make the bad situation more bearable, and they make leaving that small comfort zone a pretty major undertaking. That attitude of help doesn't really translate to gays, or transgendered, or a lot of other places, but when it comes to helping the poor? Abso-freaking-lutely. Yeah, there are those who show up on Sundays and that's it. And the typical 20/80 ratio is probably accurate in rural areas as well as urban-- 20% do 80% of the work. But I really found that, in rural areas, that total amount of work was greater per person than in urban.

Granted, my time there was about a total of 16 months spread over 6 years, but my wife's experiences (largely in the flyover states), were about the same. You may get more extremism that offends liberal sensibilities in the rural areas, but you're also going to find greater degrees of generosity. The fuel that fires one tends to fire the other, too.

[Cantih]

Fair enough.

[Gredival]

I swear, I live in a completely different world from y'all. Like, I've been tutoring in Seattle's poorer areas for about 20 years... math, reading. And easily 80% of the people who give books, who give money, who give time, who come in and actually DO THINGS to help the poor are the religious right.

I completely believe that "true believer" Christians are probably some of the most represented segments in the mass of people who actually personally to go out of their way to volunteer their time for charity. Those people aren't the hypocrites people are railing against though.

The people that you describe, who are pro-life but are also genuinely concerned about the welfare of the less fortunate and merely feel that government is the wrong medium through, seem to be a very rare breed. Not just in my personal experience, but when you took to the leaders of the right. It's only the occasional (fringe) politician, like Mike Huckabee, who fall into this category.

It's the other two, more common, types of right-aligned pro-life politicians/voters that are at issue, who treat outlawing abortion as more important than other quality of life issues:

1) The "business/establishment" wing of the right, who honestly don't care about abortion. However politicians in this category use it as a wedge issue because they realize they need social conservatives as well as fiscal conservatives in order to win elections. They'll be pro-life on record, but the lack of attention they pay to the issue reveals it's just adopting party stance. They oppose the social safety net usually out of economic principle. This is the Chris Christie, Mitch McConnell, and Mitt Romney style politician.

2) You have those who sincerely oppose abortion, but also flat out are principally against the social safety net (bootstraps or anti-government and what not). This is the Ted Cruz and Rick Santorum style of politician, and some of these people have pretty much outright disdain for the less fortunate. I'd argue that many religious right voters falls into this category, but there are a lot of non-religious people in this category. The religious amongst this subset seem to display some disconnect between the messages about protecting unborn lives and the other parts of the New Testament where Jesus railed against moneylenders, extolled the virtues of charity, says the rich cannot pass to the kingdom, etc. The nonreligious in this category are like the people from the first except for some non-faith based opposition to abortion. In my personal experience, it's usually the belief that people should be "responsible" for the consequences of having sex. Such a view is usually coupled with objections to birth control and sex education, revealing that it's basically a non-religious but nonetheless "conservative" view on the appropriate place of sex in culture and society. These people often do not perceive, or care about, the disparate impact of consequences that regulating abortions has on women vs. men.

The phenomena of hypocritical/irrational politics is nothing new. After all we've seen people who have personally and substantially benefited from Obamacare nonetheless vote for politicians vowing to kill it.

[BaneTheBrawler]

let's be honest, did priran *really* request his account be locked lol

Yes. He didn't like my New World Order. The topics being discussed are far more interesting, though, so please don't derail any further into that.

[kuronosan]

You have to understand Maru. I don't think of it as religious right or fundamental lefty or anything else. The way I look at it is simple. If your agenda is to subvert the rights and freedoms of other human beings in a morally unjust way because they do something you aren't even affected by, but dislike, I have a problem with you. As long as someone is not committing what I feel are the major sins (larceny, murder, and all-around being bad to others) I say leave them alone.

At that point you aren't a radical left or right whatever. You're just an asshole who has no place in civilized society. When you want more for your own comfort than that of others, you cease to be a productive member of society and turn into everything wrong with it at once.

[Niiro]

When you want more for your own comfort than that of others, you cease to be a productive member of society and turn into everything wrong with it at once.

Also known as Capitalism.

[Marootsoobutsu]

I've been trying to respond to this all day in a way that doesn't devolve into an essay. I'm not sure that I have a way to that really conveys my thoughts, but I'm not sure how interesting that is here.

I don't think I can give a brief answer. in part because things that I think are imperative to understanding where I am coming from probably seem incredibly nonsequitor, and my writing and speaking styles are not given to brevity. But the briefest answer I can give is that my "agenda" is to do as much good in this world, for as many people in this world, while doing as little harm in this world, as I can for as long as I can. The way that two people of differing worldviews would likely go about that is going to be so very, very different that without an intense effort to understand and accept the perspective of the other, malice is often attributed. I deeply suspect that if I went to great depths about my beliefs, I'd get banninated from BG, which would be a great shame to me. I don't come here to share my beliefs, and so I rarely really open up about them. I come here because on the whole, BG is incredibly literate, very well spoken, and folks here tend to be passionate. I can get perspective here, and not be expected to participate. I WANT to know what atheists-- militant, passive, whatever-- think, and WHY they think it. I want the perspectives of people who do not think like me, in part because it challenges my faith, but because I would rather be a bridge builder than a defender of walls, more IRL than on the net, in large part because while I believe in the power of words, I do not have great faith in the power of mine; I think that words are best suited to explain when someone asks with genuine curiosity.

These days, I'm more interested in understanding than explaining. I think most people are far closer in their goals and perspectives than they are willing to admit, to each other or to themselves. I think the "how" tends to differ far more than the "what", but those "hows" can differ so vastly that people don't realize they're discussing the same problem.

I think I'm starting to veer off course here, but... I think that a lot of folks labeled as, as you put it, "assholes", are people trying to achieve the same things, but their experience has led them to entirely different ways on how to achieve it. Not everyone-- I know folks who are just plain full of spite. I just think that assumption is made far more often than it is actually the case.

[Eurell]

I deeply suspect that if I went to great depths about my beliefs, I'd get banninated from BG, which would be a great shame to me.

Unless your beliefs somehow include insulting people and listing off every slur that has ever existed, I don't think there's any way you'd be banned.

[kuronosan]

I understand you perfectly, as I am the same way despite being bereft of the eloquence and probably rife with insanity.

[Rooney]

Maroo, in the last 1-2 pages you've shown you have more reason for your beliefs than "because". That's a step above most. Different viewpoints are always welcome, makes for good discussion.

[notorious bum]

[Mazmaz]

um

[Waraji]

rofl, wouldn't be surprised to see this on a Fox News headline.

[Blubbartron]

Looks like it was written by a 13 year old girl.

[RKenshin]

Suddenly am saddened by the number of people that will believe it's real, as that circles around the interwebs.

[Restrat]

from:

http://www.clickhole.com/article/so-...rk-emails-1654

[BaneTheBrawler]

Looks like it was written by a 13 year old girl.

i know, right? Clickbait garbage is garbage. Shit like that belongs in RIT.