Originally Posted By Sport Goofy A Washington Post poll out today finds that 3 out of 4 Republican and Republican-leaning independents thing Obama does not stand for "traditional family values." <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/29/AR2009112902935.html?hpid%3Dtopnews" target="_blank">http://www.washingtonpost.com/...Dtopnews</a> What on earth is that supposed to mean? It seems to me that President Obama and Michelle Obama represent just about the most traditional family unit you could possibly describe -- almost to the point of being boring. Does this poll suggest that you can't be a "traditional" family if you are not white? What about the other Republican icons like Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh -- do they represent "traditional family values" with their divorces, drug addictions, and other erratic behaviors? I'm sorry, but this poll reveals a lot about the mindset of people who associate with the Republican party. I don't want to broadly characterize a whole block of people, but when 75% of people respond to a poll like this it is hard to think otherwise.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 Yeah, I would like to know specific definitions of "traditional family values", if Obama doesn't fit that. Maybe they are not talking about his actual family, but his agenda? If that's the case, then I guess it boils down to the "usual" items, gays and abortion...
Originally Posted By ecdc I think for a majority of conservatives, it's about those issues. But I think they then extend his views to his character. My mom is fiercely pro-life. She doesn't think pro-choice views are possible in "moral" people, therefore, Obama must be "immoral." And his children, raised by him, will be immoral as well. I think that's the mentality. For a minority, it's also code for, "He's black."
Originally Posted By Dabob2 < I guess it boils down to the "usual" items, gays and abortion...> That's exactly what it boils down to. All those groups that have hijacked the word "family," (American Family Association, Focus on the Family, Family Research Council, et al) pay lip service, sometimes, to amorphous things like "strengthening the family, but mostly they're about fighting abortion and gay rights. And they're perfectly fine with supporting the Gingriches of the world who cheat on their spouses, divorce multiple times, etc., as long as they're on the "right side" of those two big issues. Meanwhile, people like the Obamas are "anti-family." It boggles the mind.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>ecdc are you posting from DL this week?<< That last post was indeed brought to you from the Toy Story Midway Mania line. Overall I've been good about leaving my phone in my pocket, but when there's some downtime I can't help myself
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy It's a bit amazing to me how "abortion" and "gay issues" can be so rooted in political decision making. I mean, where else in life do people really make decisions based on those issues. No one polls their family doctor on those issues before they decide if they want treated or not. No one decides what neighborhood to live in based on these things. People don't give schoolteachers a litmus test like this or the same for thei employer. Why are these issues so important in politics when they are practically irrelevant everyplace else in life?
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 "It's a bit amazing to me how "abortion" and "gay issues" can be so rooted in political decision making. I mean, where else in life do people really make decisions based on those issues. No one polls their family doctor on those issues before they decide if they want treated or not. No one decides what neighborhood to live in based on these things. People don't give schoolteachers a litmus test like this or the same for thei employer. Why are these issues so important in politics when they are practically irrelevant everyplace else in life?" I don't understand either. It's possible that it's been so ingrained in people's subconscious that it's knee-jerk reaction a lot of the time. To me, it makes no sense to vote on something against your own welfare because of some "moral" issues. It's true though, most people don't hold others in their everyday lives up to that litmus test, but do it constantly with politicians. I'm sure a lot of them would be surprised at the answers they got if they did do it in daily life. It sure would limit where they go, who they deal with, and what services they get. I think it's crazy to base all decisions on "gays and abortion" for any politician. Things are so nuanced. You know, I voted for Obama, despite me not being all that happy with his stand on gay marriage, but I still decided in his favor. Sometimes you have to look at the bigger picture. Besides, most of the time those "moral" issues are tossed out during every election cycle as red herrings to get the conservative base all worked up. Meanwhile very little legislation is passed either way. I mean Row V. Wade is still on the books.
Originally Posted By dshyates You LIBS are so brainwashed that you just don't understand how big a problem unwanted pregnancies are amongst the gay community.
