Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Brumar89 who wrote (210002)	12/6/2006 2:59:28 PM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (2) of 281500

"Brooks writes that the very act of receiving welfare may make recipients more liberal - and hence less likely to give." Now that was a specific sentence I had a problem with. Notably the word "may". The sentence indicates his bias, perhaps a theory. But he doesn't indicate that it was part of his study. Let's try to reconcile these two statements by Brooks... ".. households headed by a conservative give roughly 30 percent more to charity each year than households headed by a liberal, despite the fact that the liberal families on average earn slightly more." and ... "Religious liberals give nearly as much as religious conservatives, Mr. Brooks found. And secular conservatives are even less generous than secular liberals." Conservatives give 30% more than liberals. Religious liberals and Religious conservatives give about the same, but secular conservatives give less than secular liberals. He has two grouping religious and secular [which seems to be the universe ... if you're not religious or secular what are you?]. In both those groups conservatives don't do any better than liberals, but once the grouping of religion/secular disappears conservatives magically give 30% more. You make a claim that "The rub is that while conservatives include healthy shares of both religious and non-religious folks, liberals are overwhelmingly non-religious. People who are truly religious and truly liberal are simply a very small group." Truly religious. .... How do you establish who is truly religious? The largest religious group in the US are the Roman Catholics, largely known as liberals. Jews are largely known as liberals; a small group. Are we going to judge truly religious based on the number of times a person goes to church and tithes. FLDS and LDS will score very high on the truly religious scale. Churches that require tithing are both more religious and more generous? The claim that liberalism eroes character is my own opinion. I find a primary difference between non-religious liberals and non-religious conservatives to be the attitude to our culture's traditional religiously derived moral values (virtues and vices). Non-religious conservatives are generally respectful of traditional values recognizing that they serve as good and useful guides to conduct regardless of whether one shares the religious beliefs that originally produced them. Liberals tend to be dismissive of traditional values at best and contemptuous and hostile at worst. I find that more self-serving than accurate. jttmab

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next