Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Conservatives are more attractive than liberals, study finds
Author Message
UCF08 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,262
Joined: Feb 2011
Reputation: 211
I Root For: UCF
Location:
Post: #41
RE: Conservatives are more attractive than liberals, study finds
(07-19-2018 12:50 PM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  
(07-19-2018 10:34 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  The same people eagerly typing snarky responses to how this is now proven are the people poo-pooing tens of thousands of more thorough examples of scientific research which prove climate change is occurring and anthropomorphic. I think it’s because it’s not about actually being accurate or consistent for most conservatives here, it’s about being “right” and belittling your fellow Americans.

Weird.

Since you brought it up.....

It's kind of like the people who poo-poo proven science regarding the genetics and gender snarkily insisting that there are "multiple" (63 at last count) genders and that science is wrong.

Kind of like how people who snarkily post statements about bacteria on a distant moon proves there is "life" but a baby isn't "life" despite being halfway out of the birth canal.

Kind of like people who post snarky anti-vaccine statements claiming it causes "autism" and poo-poo science saying otherwise.

Yeah, it's weird, I'll agree on that.

1. Who is saying that there are 63 genders? That is news to me. But as far as transgender individuals go, there actually is a biological basis for a differentiation between sex and gender given the fact existence of intersex individuals/chromosomal anomalies. Also, most psychiatric information I’m aware of shows promising results from properly supervised transitioning. And, what can I say, I genuinely cannot get thst worked up over what parts a random person has in their underwear.

2. You’re conflating multile meanings of the word “life” to suit your usage here, and it’s pretty nonsensical since it would imply that pro-life individuals would support the charge of genocide for anyone taking antibiotics. No, it’s clear the meaning of the word “life” in “pro-life” refers to the legal rights afforded to a human life, and that is a concept which falls into the weird quasi-legal and quasi-scientific realm of society. That isn’t to say you don’t have a biological argument that a fetus is “living” or “alive”, it’s just that your example is really just terrible.

3. I genuinely could not agree more with you about antivaccers. I seriously question the judgement of anyone who takes that position on that particular subject given the vast amounts of readily available research showing otherwise. Only someone who lacked curiosity, propriety, or the ability to effectively discern fake information would take that position.
(This post was last modified: 07-19-2018 01:09 PM by UCF08.)
07-19-2018 01:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BadgerMJ Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,025
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 267
I Root For: Wisconsin / ND
Location: Wisconsin
Post: #42
RE: Conservatives are more attractive than liberals, study finds
(07-19-2018 01:07 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  
(07-19-2018 12:50 PM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  
(07-19-2018 10:34 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  The same people eagerly typing snarky responses to how this is now proven are the people poo-pooing tens of thousands of more thorough examples of scientific research which prove climate change is occurring and anthropomorphic. I think it’s because it’s not about actually being accurate or consistent for most conservatives here, it’s about being “right” and belittling your fellow Americans.

Weird.

Since you brought it up.....

It's kind of like the people who poo-poo proven science regarding the genetics and gender snarkily insisting that there are "multiple" (63 at last count) genders and that science is wrong.

Kind of like how people who snarkily post statements about bacteria on a distant moon proves there is "life" but a baby isn't "life" despite being halfway out of the birth canal.

Kind of like people who post snarky anti-vaccine statements claiming it causes "autism" and poo-poo science saying otherwise.

Yeah, it's weird, I'll agree on that.

1. Who is saying that there are 63 genders? That is news to me. But as far as transgender individuals go, there actually is a biological basis for a differentiation between sex and gender given the fact existence of intersex individuals/chromosomal anomalies. Also, most psychiatric information I’m aware of shows promising results from properly supervised transitioning. And, what can I say, I genuinely cannot get thst worked up over what parts a random person has in their underwear.

2. You’re conflating multile meanings of the word “life” to suit your usage here, and it’s pretty nonsensical since it would imply that pro-life individuals would support the charge of genocide for anyone taking antibiotics. No, it’s clear the meaning of the word “life” in “pro-life” refers to the legal rights afforded to a human life, and that is a concept which falls into the weird quasi-legal and quasi-scientific realm of society. That isn’t to say you don’t have a biological argument that a fetus is “living” or “alive”, it’s just that your example is really just terrible.

3. I genuinely could not agree more with you about antivaccers. I seriously question the judgement of anyone who takes that position on that particular subject given the vast amounts of readily available research showing otherwise. Only someone who lacked curiosity, propriety, or the ability to effectively discern fake information would take that position.

The point was that proven science is in the eye of the beholder.

1) There's a difference between psychological issues and science. There's a difference between gender and sexual preference. Do I believe that people can have a genetic disposition to homosexuality? Yes, but there are still only two genders. Everything else is fluff so to speak created by people who over complicate issues.

http://thepbhscloset.weebly.com/a-list-o...tions.html

2) Let's be honest, the cornerstone of abortion isn't a "woman's right", it's whether the fetus is a mass of cells or a life. If we consider it a life, then by definition it would be considered murder to kill that life. You can't claim an amoeba to be life yet dismiss fetus cells as not alive or not a human. I'm not a pro-lifer, but the definition of what is "alive"/when something is considered to be "living" is at the very heart of that debate.

3) Agreeing on 1 of 3 ain't bad. If we hit that in the majors, we'd be worth millions.
07-19-2018 01:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UCF08 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,262
Joined: Feb 2011
Reputation: 211
I Root For: UCF
Location:
Post: #43
RE: Conservatives are more attractive than liberals, study finds
(07-19-2018 01:31 PM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  
(07-19-2018 01:07 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  
(07-19-2018 12:50 PM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  
(07-19-2018 10:34 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  The same people eagerly typing snarky responses to how this is now proven are the people poo-pooing tens of thousands of more thorough examples of scientific research which prove climate change is occurring and anthropomorphic. I think it’s because it’s not about actually being accurate or consistent for most conservatives here, it’s about being “right” and belittling your fellow Americans.

Weird.

Since you brought it up.....

It's kind of like the people who poo-poo proven science regarding the genetics and gender snarkily insisting that there are "multiple" (63 at last count) genders and that science is wrong.

Kind of like how people who snarkily post statements about bacteria on a distant moon proves there is "life" but a baby isn't "life" despite being halfway out of the birth canal.

Kind of like people who post snarky anti-vaccine statements claiming it causes "autism" and poo-poo science saying otherwise.

Yeah, it's weird, I'll agree on that.

1. Who is saying that there are 63 genders? That is news to me. But as far as transgender individuals go, there actually is a biological basis for a differentiation between sex and gender given the fact existence of intersex individuals/chromosomal anomalies. Also, most psychiatric information I’m aware of shows promising results from properly supervised transitioning. And, what can I say, I genuinely cannot get thst worked up over what parts a random person has in their underwear.

2. You’re conflating multile meanings of the word “life” to suit your usage here, and it’s pretty nonsensical since it would imply that pro-life individuals would support the charge of genocide for anyone taking antibiotics. No, it’s clear the meaning of the word “life” in “pro-life” refers to the legal rights afforded to a human life, and that is a concept which falls into the weird quasi-legal and quasi-scientific realm of society. That isn’t to say you don’t have a biological argument that a fetus is “living” or “alive”, it’s just that your example is really just terrible.

3. I genuinely could not agree more with you about antivaccers. I seriously question the judgement of anyone who takes that position on that particular subject given the vast amounts of readily available research showing otherwise. Only someone who lacked curiosity, propriety, or the ability to effectively discern fake information would take that position.

The point was that proven science is in the eye of the beholder.

1) There's a difference between psychological issues and science. There's a difference between gender and sexual preference. Do I believe that people can have a genetic disposition to homosexuality? Yes, but there are still only two genders. Everything else is fluff so to speak created by people who over complicate issues.

http://thepbhscloset.weebly.com/a-list-o...tions.html

2) Let's be honest, the cornerstone of abortion isn't a "woman's right", it's whether the fetus is a mass of cells or a life. If we consider it a life, then by definition it would be considered murder to kill that life. You can't claim an amoeba to be life yet dismiss fetus cells as not alive or not a human. I'm not a pro-lifer, but the definition of what is "alive"/when something is considered to be "living" is at the very heart of that debate.

3) Agreeing on 1 of 3 ain't bad. If we hit that in the majors, we'd be worth millions.

1. Im confused. Your link is a list of sexual preferences, a truly *thorough* list of sexual preferences to be fair, but I’m not seeing how it relates to how many genders there are.

2. I firmly disagree, that is the sticking point for the majority of pro-choice advocates I’m aware of. The fact that this clump of cells requires a human to drastically alter their life and take on significant risk of health complications is the driving issue for them. Add in the fact the people most vocally against abortion seem to be the most vocally against preventing unwanted pregnancies and social services in general, and you’ve got the majority of those who are strongly pro-choice.

3. Agree. Cheers!
(This post was last modified: 07-19-2018 01:46 PM by UCF08.)
07-19-2018 01:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
green Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,251
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 389
I Root For: Miami
Location:
Post: #44
RE: Conservatives are more attractive than liberals, study finds
(07-19-2018 01:07 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  2. You’re conflating multile meanings of the word “life” to suit your usage here, and it’s pretty nonsensical since it would imply that pro-life individuals would support the charge of genocide for anyone taking antibiotics. No, it’s clear the meaning of the word “life” in “pro-life” refers to the legal rights afforded to a human life, and that is a concept which falls into the weird quasi-legal and quasi-scientific realm of society. That isn’t to say you don’t have a biological argument that a fetus is “living” or “alive”, it’s just that your example is really just terrible.



https://twitter.com/41actionnews/status/...8668896256

LIFE IS GOOD
07-19-2018 02:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EigenEagle Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,218
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 643
I Root For: Ga Southern
Location:
Post: #45
RE: Conservatives are more attractive than liberals, study finds
Liberals are far worse when it comes to "the other side is evil" thinking. It's not close. There's hard data showing conservatives are more willing to date someone with difference politics and are less likely to let politics interfere in friendships.

There is no right-wing analogue of this. When guys like Sean Hannity and Neal Boortz tweeted how sad they were that Alan Colmes had passed, you don't see a flurry of their followers demanding an apology for daring to speak nicely of someone who doesn't think like them.
07-19-2018 02:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
thespiritof1976 Offline
Ancient Alien Theorist
*

Posts: 5,067
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 518
I Root For: Zeti Reticuli
Location:
Post: #46
RE: Conservatives are more attractive than liberals, study finds
(07-19-2018 02:53 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  Liberals are far worse when it comes to "the other side is evil" thinking. It's not close. There's hard data showing conservatives are more willing to date someone with difference politics and are less likely to let politics interfere in friendships.

There is no right-wing analogue of this. When guys like Sean Hannity and Neal Boortz tweeted how sad they were that Alan Colmes had passed, you don't see a flurry of their followers demanding an apology for daring to speak nicely of someone who doesn't think like them.

Many conservatives liked Alan Colmes, as did I. He was a pretty good bloke. Sorry to see him go.
07-19-2018 02:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
thespiritof1976 Offline
Ancient Alien Theorist
*

Posts: 5,067
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 518
I Root For: Zeti Reticuli
Location:
Post: #47
RE: Conservatives are more attractive than liberals, study finds
(07-19-2018 01:31 PM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  
(07-19-2018 01:07 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  
(07-19-2018 12:50 PM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  
(07-19-2018 10:34 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  The same people eagerly typing snarky responses to how this is now proven are the people poo-pooing tens of thousands of more thorough examples of scientific research which prove climate change is occurring and anthropomorphic. I think it’s because it’s not about actually being accurate or consistent for most conservatives here, it’s about being “right” and belittling your fellow Americans.

Weird.

Since you brought it up.....

It's kind of like the people who poo-poo proven science regarding the genetics and gender snarkily insisting that there are "multiple" (63 at last count) genders and that science is wrong.

Kind of like how people who snarkily post statements about bacteria on a distant moon proves there is "life" but a baby isn't "life" despite being halfway out of the birth canal.

Kind of like people who post snarky anti-vaccine statements claiming it causes "autism" and poo-poo science saying otherwise.

Yeah, it's weird, I'll agree on that.

1. Who is saying that there are 63 genders? That is news to me. But as far as transgender individuals go, there actually is a biological basis for a differentiation between sex and gender given the fact existence of intersex individuals/chromosomal anomalies. Also, most psychiatric information I’m aware of shows promising results from properly supervised transitioning. And, what can I say, I genuinely cannot get thst worked up over what parts a random person has in their underwear.

2. You’re conflating multile meanings of the word “life” to suit your usage here, and it’s pretty nonsensical since it would imply that pro-life individuals would support the charge of genocide for anyone taking antibiotics. No, it’s clear the meaning of the word “life” in “pro-life” refers to the legal rights afforded to a human life, and that is a concept which falls into the weird quasi-legal and quasi-scientific realm of society. That isn’t to say you don’t have a biological argument that a fetus is “living” or “alive”, it’s just that your example is really just terrible.

3. I genuinely could not agree more with you about antivaccers. I seriously question the judgement of anyone who takes that position on that particular subject given the vast amounts of readily available research showing otherwise. Only someone who lacked curiosity, propriety, or the ability to effectively discern fake information would take that position.

The point was that proven science is in the eye of the beholder.

1) There's a difference between psychological issues and science. There's a difference between gender and sexual preference. Do I believe that people can have a genetic disposition to homosexuality? Yes, but there are still only two genders. Everything else is fluff so to speak created by people who over complicate issues.

http://thepbhscloset.weebly.com/a-list-o...tions.html

2) Let's be honest, the cornerstone of abortion isn't a "woman's right", it's whether the fetus is a mass of cells or a life. If we consider it a life, then by definition it would be considered murder to kill that life. You can't claim an amoeba to be life yet dismiss fetus cells as not alive or not a human. I'm not a pro-lifer, but the definition of what is "alive"/when something is considered to be "living" is at the very heart of that debate.

3) Agreeing on 1 of 3 ain't bad. If we hit that in the majors, we'd be worth millions.

"If a Fetus isn't a life then why are you selling it's body parts ?"

-Ben Carson
07-19-2018 02:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UCF08 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,262
Joined: Feb 2011
Reputation: 211
I Root For: UCF
Location:
Post: #48
RE: Conservatives are more attractive than liberals, study finds
(07-19-2018 02:56 PM)thespiritof1976 Wrote:  
(07-19-2018 01:31 PM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  
(07-19-2018 01:07 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  
(07-19-2018 12:50 PM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  
(07-19-2018 10:34 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  The same people eagerly typing snarky responses to how this is now proven are the people poo-pooing tens of thousands of more thorough examples of scientific research which prove climate change is occurring and anthropomorphic. I think it’s because it’s not about actually being accurate or consistent for most conservatives here, it’s about being “right” and belittling your fellow Americans.

Weird.

Since you brought it up.....

It's kind of like the people who poo-poo proven science regarding the genetics and gender snarkily insisting that there are "multiple" (63 at last count) genders and that science is wrong.

Kind of like how people who snarkily post statements about bacteria on a distant moon proves there is "life" but a baby isn't "life" despite being halfway out of the birth canal.

Kind of like people who post snarky anti-vaccine statements claiming it causes "autism" and poo-poo science saying otherwise.

Yeah, it's weird, I'll agree on that.

1. Who is saying that there are 63 genders? That is news to me. But as far as transgender individuals go, there actually is a biological basis for a differentiation between sex and gender given the fact existence of intersex individuals/chromosomal anomalies. Also, most psychiatric information I’m aware of shows promising results from properly supervised transitioning. And, what can I say, I genuinely cannot get thst worked up over what parts a random person has in their underwear.

2. You’re conflating multile meanings of the word “life” to suit your usage here, and it’s pretty nonsensical since it would imply that pro-life individuals would support the charge of genocide for anyone taking antibiotics. No, it’s clear the meaning of the word “life” in “pro-life” refers to the legal rights afforded to a human life, and that is a concept which falls into the weird quasi-legal and quasi-scientific realm of society. That isn’t to say you don’t have a biological argument that a fetus is “living” or “alive”, it’s just that your example is really just terrible.

3. I genuinely could not agree more with you about antivaccers. I seriously question the judgement of anyone who takes that position on that particular subject given the vast amounts of readily available research showing otherwise. Only someone who lacked curiosity, propriety, or the ability to effectively discern fake information would take that position.

The point was that proven science is in the eye of the beholder.

1) There's a difference between psychological issues and science. There's a difference between gender and sexual preference. Do I believe that people can have a genetic disposition to homosexuality? Yes, but there are still only two genders. Everything else is fluff so to speak created by people who over complicate issues.

http://thepbhscloset.weebly.com/a-list-o...tions.html

2) Let's be honest, the cornerstone of abortion isn't a "woman's right", it's whether the fetus is a mass of cells or a life. If we consider it a life, then by definition it would be considered murder to kill that life. You can't claim an amoeba to be life yet dismiss fetus cells as not alive or not a human. I'm not a pro-lifer, but the definition of what is "alive"/when something is considered to be "living" is at the very heart of that debate.

3) Agreeing on 1 of 3 ain't bad. If we hit that in the majors, we'd be worth millions.

"If a Fetus isn't a life then why are you selling it's body parts ?"

-Ben Carson

That genuinely reads like a satirical comment because it makes no sense. Does Ben Carson think body parts are “life”? We also sell all sorts of animal body parts, for all sorts of reasons, including medical uses. Are they human life?
07-19-2018 03:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
olliebaba Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 28,102
Joined: Jul 2007
Reputation: 2151
I Root For: Christ
Location: El Paso
Post: #49
RE: Conservatives are more attractive than liberals, study finds
(07-19-2018 12:50 PM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  
(07-19-2018 10:34 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  The same people eagerly typing snarky responses to how this is now proven are the people poo-pooing tens of thousands of more thorough examples of scientific research which prove climate change is occurring and anthropomorphic. I think it’s because it’s not about actually being accurate or consistent for most conservatives here, it’s about being “right” and belittling your fellow Americans.

Weird.

Since you brought it up.....

It's kind of like the people who poo-poo proven science regarding the genetics and gender snarkily insisting that there are "multiple" (63 at last count) genders and that science is wrong.

Kind of like how people who snarkily post statements about bacteria on a distant moon proves there is "life" but a baby isn't "life" despite being halfway out of the birth canal.

Kind of like people who post snarky anti-vaccine statements claiming it causes "autism" and poo-poo science saying otherwise.

Yeah, it's weird, I'll agree on that.

DANG! POW! BANG! WINNER!

That was...brilliant!

+3 for you my friend.
07-19-2018 06:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
olliebaba Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 28,102
Joined: Jul 2007
Reputation: 2151
I Root For: Christ
Location: El Paso
Post: #50
RE: Conservatives are more attractive than liberals, study finds
(07-19-2018 07:16 AM)miko33 Wrote:  
(07-19-2018 07:07 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  [Image: conservative-women.jpg]

I get it that this thread is a lighthearted zing, but that image you posted...

Reminds me of the before and after pics of beauty or fitness products where the before pics look like mug shots and the after pics are professional glamour shots. Not a fair depiction.

I've seen Oprah, Whatshername Shultz, Rosie the Donut, and other liberal women that look ugly with or without makeup.
07-19-2018 06:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.