What's your political persuasion?

I think it goes without saying that most atheists are liberal, especially on social issues. Atheists tend to disagree with religion and by extension they disagree with some of their ethics or at least disagree with encoding a religion's ethics into law. Also, atheists want less war because as they see it, war is often the result of religious tension and they want unity among countries. Many atheists also want better working conditions for individuals by supporting trade unions and have government regulate the economy to prevent monopolies from controlling the economy and zapping the resources from the middle and lower classes.

I consider myself a conservative, which is someone who supports a regulated society and a minimally regulated economy. I also consider myself an American Constitutionalist. I'm primarily concerned with issues of separation of church and state, abortion, and same-sex marriage. I believe that the separation of church and state is necessary to prevent religion from corrupting government by enforcing laws of a certain religion onto people of different religions without any logical reason. I believe it's also necessary to keep the church free from the state so that it can do as it pleases so as long as it follows any necessary laws. I believe life begins at conception and the government should recognize that legally. I think marriage is not a civil right and any type of marriage, whether traditional or same-sex marriage, is not Constitutionally protected and the state and local governments can designate marriage however they like.

I'm also for war in cases of defense, both to prevent an attack or as retribution. I think I would've supported the Iraqi War, given what the government was saying regarding the Al-Qaeda tie-in to Saddam Hussein and I wouldn't have the troops pull out. I do support gun rights as a means of defense against the government. I'm for the death penalty as long as we're 100% certain of that individual's verdict. I support strong illegal immigration control. I'm for minimal government regulation of the economy and I do not support a welfare state or taxes on people who earned their money. I can understand why some people would be wary of corporations, but I do not think that some corporations are not that bad. Walmart is a good example of this.  I don't put a lot of stock in global warming happening. In fact, I tried watching a recent documentary called The Age of Stupid and I just couldn't get into it because of how silly the world was portrayed in 2055, after global warming had occured. I do not support most of the environmentalism as I see it similar to religion: it sees man as evil, where as religion sees man as an enemy of God, environmentalism sees man as an enemy of nature. Environmentalism values nature more than man much in the same way that religion values God more than man. We all have to do "our part" according to them to make a world a better place when we are in fact working against our own selves. Sure, let's fix the environment, but let's not buy into this pseudoscience that is global warming and seek solutions that won't work to restore it. Let's do it for selfish reasons, because we want to live comfortably in our environment, but let's not let the environment dictate who we are.

The issues that I'm not conservative on are the separation of church and state, freedom of religion, and most gay rights issues other than same-sex marriage. I do believe though that a traditional family is necessary for society, which is why I'm against same-sex marriage. I'm both uncertain and apathetic to Israel. Other issues I neglected to mention I either did not care much or does not come to mind when I think about politics in general.

Although I consider myself a Constitutionalist in that I support the ideal of the Constitution, I do not agree with it entirely. For one, the Constition only prevents Congress from prohibiting the five freedoms of the First Amendment. It does not apply to the other branches or to state and local governments. I do not see how the Due Process Clause extends the First Amendment to all forms of government when it doesn't mention it or anything relating to it.

What's your political persuasion?

Good post Genetic. Your earlier posts and sigs have caused me to do some research on Ayn Rand and her "Objectivism" movement. She has some very harsh critics!!

I find your own views on conception, reasoning for war, same sex relationships, sentencing for murderers, Israel, American constitutional rights, corporations and environmentalism somewhat at odds with my own. I think many of these issues could be argued against logically too. I also think the global dimension to our existence is ignored rather in favour of a US-centric bias, which is unavoidable, I guess.

I guess the amount of regulation in society does depend on that society in question. Much regulation that currently exists is not effective, so it's more about how well-regulated something is than how much regulation is applied.

I started my political education at 15 as an pacifist anarchist, since I was a punk and into a political band called "Crass". One thing I noticed fairly quickly is that political extremes can be quite similar, with militant and violent anarchist activists seeming to behave like the fascists they opposed! I think I've developed a UK-oriented poliical head now, where I don't favour any political party - I have left-wing, right-wing and centrist views on various things. But I am most interested in politics and how it can be changed to become more culturally acceptable, understandable, and accessible to more people.

Currently, I think politics is used in the most unacceptable ways to promote or suppress ways of thinking: i.e. Some of our friends in the Christian Union are linking "democrats" with atheists, for example. (Are you too?) If you truly desire a separation of church and state, why the need to associate religious and political views?

traditional family, a necessity for society I don't think this has any bearing in reality. There has never been a time where "traditional" families where the norm. In any society there will always be homosexuals, there will always be single parents, there will always be family units that do not adhere to our perception of reality. Frattracide

Studies show that children of married families do better than children of single families. I have not read enough about same-sex parents.

Good post Genetic. Your earlier posts and sigs have caused me to do some research on Ayn Rand and her "Objectivism" movement. She has some very harsh critics!!

RationalAtheist

Actually, I'm socially conservative on social issues. Ayn Rand would disagree with me, probably saying that I espouse a particular dogma of my own and that I resort to mysticism, especially on the issue on abortion as she did not support the pro-life movement.

I find your own views on conception, reasoning for war, same sex relationships, sentencing for murderers, Israel, American constitutional rights, corporations and environmentalism somewhat at odds with my own. I think many of these issues could be argued against logically too. I also think the global dimension to our existence is ignored rather in favour of a US-centric bias, which is unavoidable, I guess.

RationalAtheist

I do have a US-centric bias for sure. :P

Currently, I think politics is used in the most unacceptable ways to promote or suppress ways of thinking: i.e. Some of our friends in the Christian Union are linking "democrats" with atheists, for example. (Are you too?) If you truly desire a separation of church and state, why the need to associate religious and political views?

RationalAtheist

I am a secular conservative. I'm not a member of the Republican Party, but I do vote for the person who I think is best for the job, which has been mostly Republican. The only Democrat I voted for was Barack Obama in the Democratic presidential primaries, so it was unavoidable then, but I was a liberal at the time. I regret that vote now.

I'm very much to the left, although I would never describe myself as a liberal, nor am I a member of the Democratic party. As for some of my positions on specific issues, I'm pro-choice, I support LGBT rights, I support the welfare state, I support the government doing as much as it reasonably can to protect the environment, and I support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, although my support for both campaigns has dwindled over the years. 

Overall, I am mostly apathetic towards politics, and kind of see it in the same way as I see the Council in Mass Effect: useless bureaucracy.

But I do have responses to some of the things posted in the OP.

~~~

I don't necessarily "disagree" with religion per se, only I don't agree with some of its methods. I'm definitely for some of the moral teachings they posit, such as compassion towards others, etc.

I don't agree that war is the result of religious tension; it is in fact the extreme form of conflict between disagreeing parties, which doesn't necessarily need to be violent, but it (conflict) must exist for peace to exist.

I don't support unions, especially in first world countries because we already have enough regulations in place that we don't need to be feeding a hierarchy more money for doing almost nothing (I pay union dues out the ass and have never once needed to go to my union(s) for anything). Hell, my monthly union magazine once showed a pie chart showing the allocation of all where the union dues ended up, and only 15% would only directly benefit me if I needed it. The rest went to maintaining the union; bull**** I say.

I do not know where exactly I stand on the economy, but my overall stance towards its regulation is that "less involvement = better".

~~~

Separation of church and state: no one religious community should ever hold political control over a population other than its direct community.

Abortion: I don't like that its legal, I don't like the idea of letting people kill their unborn children and not letting them have a chance at life, but there is little I can do about it and despite highly disagreeing towards it, must respect others positions, as I am not a law maker or enforcer.

Same-sex marriage: Marriage is a legal contract held between two consenting adults that wish to infer financial and legal benefits on their proposed family unit and any children that might result of its formation. There is no reason why any "preference" needs to be involved. At all. It is not about "love" in the slightest when it comes to the legal side of the issue.

War: Like I mentioned before, war is sometimes a necessary action if diplomacy has been exhausted. However, it should only be fought to defend human rights and the lives of innocents... not in the pursuit of material resources or an economic hold in another region.

Gun rights: Any human being should be able to do whatever they need to within their power to defend themselves from others. However, they must abide by the law and not violate the rights of others.

Death penalty: It is a barbaric practice that must end. For all we know, we could be executing innocent individuals and taking from them their lives that for all we know, only get one of. It is an entirely amoral practice that creates and endless paradox.

Illegal immigration: If people want to benefit from the resources and services offered by a country, then they must immigrate legally. Period. However, it would help if the immigration laws were more lax and geared towards helping people immigrate and adapt and not towards keeping them out.

Welfare: More often than not people take advantage of the system. Too many times do I see someone taking my hard earned money because they are too lazy to support themselves. I support the idea "A man is entitled to the sweat of his brow" and no one should be capable of taking it from him.

Taxes: They are necessary to provide services and programs for citizens. I am all for paying them, so long as they go towards something that benefits myself and people around me.

Global warming: A hoax perpetrated by politicians and scientists to create greater personal-interest economic programs that see money come to their pockets and not actually trying to benefit the planet. The Earth's climate does change, but our effect on it is negligible (especially when regarding carbon dioxide). Alternative fuels and more efficient transportation are a must (for sustainability) but they are not necessary to "save the planet."

Environmentalism: The Earth itself is a living being and a wonder to behold. It is a system that is fully integrated into everything else and must be maintained. However, we must understand that its destruction is not solely at our hands, and the surrounding universe can do far more, far more quickly, than humanity could ever conjure. We are not the planet's "saviours" or "caretakers" merely another life-form that benefits from and contributes to the overall system.

Traditional family: As statistics show, single mothers, single fathers, homosexual couples and non-traditional structures are more than capable of raising normal, healthy children. I am in full support of anyone who wishes to raise and support children so long as they are financially and emotionally capable of doing so. I also support the taking away of children from unfit parents and the almost fascist idea of keeping unfit parents from having children in the first place. No child should ever be born to unfit parents, even if they are the "traditional" nuclear family. It is such a common occurrence to see children born into unfit homes growing up with psychological issues that effect not only their lives, but the lives of their children. It is a disease that is passed down from generation to generation.

~~~

I do not know what to call my political/economic stance, but "non-involvement" is one of my biggest issues with government. I support ideas like health care (so long as people receiving it are paying taxes), public works and law enforcement, but beyond that, I think bureaucracy is an absolute waste of time and resources. If Mass Effect and many years of real-life experience have taught me anything, its that bureaucracy prevents things from getting done.

I don't give a damn, really.

I don't give a damn, really.

 

 

Animatronic64

Pretty much what this guy said.

I'm a dirty rotten commie liberal. :P  I have defined positions on the issues in question, but given that I am not and likely never will be in a situation to affect anything, and given that on many of them I likely have not fully considered all of the relevant facts and data that I would need to fully back up the position, I see little purpose in sharing my uneducated positions that likely could be torn apart by someone with more knowledge and insight than I.

I'm a dirty rotten commie liberal. :P  I have defined positions on the issues in question, but given that I am not and likely never will be in a situation to affect anything, and given that on many of them I likely have not fully considered all of the relevant facts and data that I would need to fully back up the position, I see little purpose in sharing my uneducated positions that likely could be torn apart by someone with more knowledge and insight than I.

GabuEx

Meh, I think you're overestimating how much everyone else knows. It seems to me for every nuanced, intricate argument defending or attacking a political position, there is an equally nuanced, intricate argument on the other side. In my opinion, it is better to establish general principles that act as a general guide (though by no means absolute) for deciding political issues. What I am trying to ask is what are your principles that guide your general political views? 

Reality has a well known liberal bias, as someone once said. :P

I'm basically liberal on most social issues, but I don't associate myself with the left or a political party in general. Politics is far too convulted these days to be deeply involved in. Society is simply too large for things to work the way I wish they would.