Comments | viciousattack: Bush isn'tthe "Chosen One" . . . Steve Oedekerk is

viciousattack

Bush isn'tthe "Chosen One" . . . Steve Oedekerk is

Nov 12, 2005 04:24

First off, I could never ally myself with a political party. I could never tacitly concent to the views of a group of power-seeking, fallible humans on an entire package of issues. If I supported a political party I'd inevitably be supporting at least one issue that I disagreed with; thus I'd be a hypocrite (which I already am, but I'd like to keep ( Read more... )

Comments 3

salzman November 12 2005, 19:57:46 UTC

I read your whole post Markie. Here are my thoughts. I have an example I would like to use about how you shouldn't latch on to a party. I have been going to Mars Hill for a while now, and as you know, it's a pretty controversial church. There are some things at that church I don't agree with, but I have come to realize almost every church I have gone to, there are things I don't agree with. So why do I go to Mars Hill? Because for the most part I do agree with them. Not everyone is perfect (heck, that's why Jesus died for us ( ... )

yo viciousattack November 13 2005, 04:59:50 UTC

oh no, i totally see what you're saying, and I agree with it. I'm just in the difficult position of being an idealist. I have trouble bringing myself to do things unless I can do them wholeheartedly, and there's almost nothing that I can do wholeheartedly because pretty much anything we do has ethical pros and cons. I agree, I'd be very happy to have a democrat rather than Bush. I agree that our nation is sinking into an ultra-conservative mindset which is dangerous to ourselves and the rest of the world. I'm just saying, I couldn't bring myself to vote for Kerry because I'm paralyzed by my feelings of what's right, and I DEFINETELY couldn't get myself to vote for Bush for the same reasons. Basically, I'm running in circles. Thinking ethically makes everything hard.

Thanks for the thoughts and the comment

Ethical idealism and note on voting nan_couturier April 3 2006, 16:37:11 UTC

Wow, I love the way you put into words the way I feel about American politics. I hated the '04 election, and was very glad to be out of the country and unable to vote. I didn't think any of the evils was "lesser" in this case, and was loath to have to decide between them. However, I like your stance on voting for third parties. Yet, again, in the more minor parties, there are also issues that are brought to the forefront ahead of others, perhaps somewhat arbitrarily. Do you feel it is ok to align yourself with (or register to vote under) a third party simply because they are the "underdog" and need to have their voice strengthened? I agree that this whole two-party system really sucks, and having more voices forcing presidential debates to address candidates' actual strategies for change would be an improvement over the "middle ground during elections, and then doing whatever they please once elected." But, what, specifically about the other parties themselves would make the system work any better? It seems possible that the ( ... )