Olan
Pearl Clutcher
Enter your message here...
Posts: 4,053 
|
Post by Olan on May 30, 2018 18:00:47 GMT
I came across a thread on the College Confidential site a few days ago that I thought was interesting. It was titled: "Would It Hurt to List Republican Club" on college applications. It was nothing I'd thought about, especially since my DS isn't politically involved in anything.
I'd say about half of the responses suggested leaving that information off given the current political climate and the blowback onto republicans/conservatives, etc. Others suggested colleges are open to diversity of thought, etc. and no one in admissions would deny admission because of someone's political beliefs. Others thought it wasn't worth taking the chance because a lot of colleges at least seem to be pretty liberal with their professors, etc. and you'd never know who was making the decisions.
I/we'll never know if political beliefs would actually play a part in acceptance or denial to colleges, but just the fact that this is where we are as a country is pretty sad.
Here's the link to the thread if anyone's interested:
I stumbled across that site about a month ago, and only read, didn't sign up. The thread I linked was locked I'll assume because of politics or nasty comments? I have no clue.
I think we will continue to see this trend because society is realizing there is morally a right and wrong to politics. Not to mention everything the Conservative party was using to "justify" a faulty belief system was thrown out the window with the election of Donald Trump. The term conservative values carries no significant weight and has to stand on the hatefulness that got you guys the victory. The jig is up. |
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on May 30, 2018 18:10:35 GMT
Why does the "conservative thread" feel like an inquisition all the time? Do you believe this? Do you believe that?? Geeze. Essentially, the differences are here: www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs/"Conservatives believe in personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, individual liberty, traditional American values and a strong national defense. Believe the role of government should be to provide people the freedom necessary to pursue their own goals. Conservative policies generally emphasize empowerment of the individual to solve problems. Liberals believe in government action to achieve equal opportunity and equality for all. It is the duty of the government to alleviate social ills and to protect civil liberties and individual and human rights. Believe the role of the government should be to guarantee that no one is in need. Liberal policies generally emphasize the need for the government to solve problems." But people don't always fit into nice and neat into boxes like this. For example, many peas have expressed that they're more financially conservative and socially liberal. And we know the ruckus caused if someone assumes a pea that leans in one direction politically supports all policies by their chosen party. It can't be both ways. Either people's political beliefs are complex and can't be assumed to fit into one specific narrative, or they're not and we are free to make assumptions based on this list. I believe they are complex, so to complain that your beliefs are not being pigeonholed seems silly to me. |
|
Olan
Pearl Clutcher
Enter your message here...
Posts: 4,053
|
Post by Olan on May 30, 2018 18:15:46 GMT
Why does the "conservative thread" feel like an inquisition all the time? Do you believe this? Do you believe that?? Geeze. Essentially, the differences are here: www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs/"Conservatives believe in personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, individual liberty, traditional American values and a strong national defense. Believe the role of government should be to provide people the freedom necessary to pursue their own goals. Conservative policies generally emphasize empowerment of the individual to solve problems. Liberals believe in government action to achieve equal opportunity and equality for all. It is the duty of the government to alleviate social ills and to protect civil liberties and individual and human rights. Believe the role of the government should be to guarantee that no one is in need. Liberal policies generally emphasize the need for the government to solve problems." But people don't always fit into nice and neat into boxes like this. For example, many peas have expressed that they're more financially conservative and socially liberal. And we know the ruckus caused if someone assumes a pea that leans in one direction politically supports all policies by their chosen party. It can't be both ways. Either people's political beliefs are complex and can't be assumed to fit into one specific narrative, or they're not and we are free to make assumptions based on this list. I believe they are complex, so to complain that your beliefs are not being pigeonholed seems silly to me. But now we can assume that even people who are fiscally conservative or have some other socially acceptable "conservative view" couldn't get on board with the current administration's idea of what a loyal Republican is. Politics are complex but hate is hate and the Republican party is quickly becoming the Hate Party. No matter how you slice it or how treasonous Clinton is it's really hard to mask what really went on during the last election. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 14:36:43 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2018 18:18:07 GMT
I came across a thread on the College Confidential site a few days ago that I thought was interesting. It was titled: "Would It Hurt to List Republican Club" on college applications. It was nothing I'd thought about, especially since my DS isn't politically involved in anything.
I'd say about half of the responses suggested leaving that information off given the current political climate and the blowback onto republicans/conservatives, etc. Others suggested colleges are open to diversity of thought, etc. and no one in admissions would deny admission because of someone's political beliefs. Others thought it wasn't worth taking the chance because a lot of colleges at least seem to be pretty liberal with their professors, etc. and you'd never know who was making the decisions.
I/we'll never know if political beliefs would actually play a part in acceptance or denial to colleges, but just the fact that this is where we are as a country is pretty sad.
Here's the link to the thread if anyone's interested:
I stumbled across that site about a month ago, and only read, didn't sign up. The thread I linked was locked I'll assume because of politics or nasty comments? I have no clue.
It IS sad that's where we're at as a country. Hide your beliefs, because while we want diversity, some don't extend that to diversity of thought and who knows what kind of thought process will be applied to the acceptance process. As demonstrated above and repeatedly on college campuses, one particular side believes their views are the ONLY correct views and any other view is just wrong. This also seems to extend to actual facts that don't support their view. |
|
|
|
Post by gmcwife1 on May 30, 2018 19:01:36 GMT
I came across a thread on the College Confidential site a few days ago that I thought was interesting. It was titled: "Would It Hurt to List Republican Club" on college applications. It was nothing I'd thought about, especially since my DS isn't politically involved in anything.
I'd say about half of the responses suggested leaving that information off given the current political climate and the blowback onto republicans/conservatives, etc. Others suggested colleges are open to diversity of thought, etc. and no one in admissions would deny admission because of someone's political beliefs. Others thought it wasn't worth taking the chance because a lot of colleges at least seem to be pretty liberal with their professors, etc. and you'd never know who was making the decisions.
I/we'll never know if political beliefs would actually play a part in acceptance or denial to colleges, but just the fact that this is where we are as a country is pretty sad.
Here's the link to the thread if anyone's interested:
I stumbled across that site about a month ago, and only read, didn't sign up. The thread I linked was locked I'll assume because of politics or nasty comments? I have no clue.
I used to describe myself as a conservative thinker. I like to think things out before acting. Deciding on a new style of furniture, committing to a paint color, things I take a conservative approach to. Due to the change in how the word conservative is viewed and used, I no longer use it. So I can completely understand the choice to not include conservative or republican information. |
|
|
|
Post by katieanna on May 30, 2018 19:51:00 GMT
Well, that's what it is now. In the 1970's, the correct term was Global Cooling. Then the correct term was Global Warming. I just want to know when in the history of the earth has the climate not been globally changing. Well things evolve as scientists learn more. I deleted my last two posts to avoid redundancy, since Fred's post answers my question. From what's been quoted above, it's logical to assume that at one time (in the not-too-distant past), scientists thought the earth was cooling; then not long after that they thought it was warming; now they think climate is simply "changing" because (and I'm assuming this from what I've read) of the results of human technology and the human "footprint." I can understand the need to ban plastic bags, straws, and the like because they are not biodegradable, eventually end up in our oceans, and are a hazard to wildlife. I think most people would understand the need to do away with the plastics, either by better recycling methods or reverting back to paper bags (watch out, trees!). But when it comes to the overall climate of the earth...that's a whole other ballgame. It's hard to believe that in all the millennia that the earth has been in existence, there hasn't been some sort of climate change - or climate fluctuation - going on. And with science constantly "evolving," how will we ever know when the scientists finally know everything there is to know, thereby, coming up with a viable way to advance technology without detriment to the environment, people, and animals? It's just like with medicine...it seems that every new wonder drug eventually has unexpected side effects that result in serious health issues. I think we should do what we can to minimize pollution in the atmosphere, in our waterways, and in how we handle waste. But I question the validity of the whole "global climate change" rhetoric and what it will mean for our future, our children's future, and the future of our nation. |
|
|
|
Post by 950nancy on May 30, 2018 21:12:21 GMT
Well things evolve as scientists learn more. I deleted my last two posts to avoid redundancy, since Fred's post answers my question. From what's been quoted above, it's logical to assume that at one time (in the not-too-distant past), scientists thought the earth was cooling; then not long after that they thought it was warming; now they think climate is simply "changing" because (and I'm assuming this from what I've read) of the results of human technology and the human "footprint." I can understand the need to ban plastic bags, straws, and the like because they are not biodegradable, eventually end up in our oceans, and are a hazard to wildlife. I think most people would understand the need to do away with the plastics, either by better recycling methods or reverting back to paper bags (watch out, trees!). But when it comes to the overall climate of the earth...that's a whole other ballgame. It's hard to believe that in all the millennia that the earth has been in existence, there hasn't been some sort of climate change - or climate fluctuation - going on. And with science constantly "evolving," how will we ever know when the scientists finally know everything there is to know, thereby, coming up with a viable way to advance technology without detriment to the environment, people, and animals? It's just like with medicine...it seems that every new wonder drug eventually has unexpected side effects that result in serious health issues. I think we should do what we can to minimize pollution in the atmosphere, in our waterways, and in how we handle waste. But I question the validity of the whole "global climate change" rhetoric and what it will mean for our future, our children's future, and the future of our nation. Our time as humans on the earth has just been a tiny blip compared to the entire timeline of the planet. We have done a lot of harm in the short time we have been here. We have to be careful with what we have. |
|
PLurker
Prolific Pea
Posts: 9,840
Location: Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Jun 28, 2014 3:48:49 GMT
|
Post by PLurker on May 30, 2018 22:20:36 GMT
I deleted my last two posts to avoid redundancy, since Fred's post answers my question. From what's been quoted above, it's logical to assume that at one time (in the not-too-distant past), scientists thought the earth was cooling; then not long after that they thought it was warming; now they think climate is simply "changing" because (and I'm assuming this from what I've read) of the results of human technology and the human "footprint." I can understand the need to ban plastic bags, straws, and the like because they are not biodegradable, eventually end up in our oceans, and are a hazard to wildlife. I think most people would understand the need to do away with the plastics, either by better recycling methods or reverting back to paper bags (watch out, trees!). But when it comes to the overall climate of the earth...that's a whole other ballgame. It's hard to believe that in all the millennia that the earth has been in existence, there hasn't been some sort of climate change - or climate fluctuation - going on. And with science constantly "evolving," how will we ever know when the scientists finally know everything there is to know, thereby, coming up with a viable way to advance technology without detriment to the environment, people, and animals? It's just like with medicine...it seems that every new wonder drug eventually has unexpected side effects that result in serious health issues. I think we should do what we can to minimize pollution in the atmosphere, in our waterways, and in how we handle waste. But I question the validity of the whole "global climate change" rhetoric and what it will mean for our future, our children's future, and the future of our nation. Our time as humans on the earth has just been a tiny blip compared to the entire timeline of the planet. We have done a lot of harm in the short time we have been here. We have to be careful with what we have. it may be over simplifying it (and possibly incorrect) but I like to think of things as consistent and can be scaled up or down. Laws of science and physics apply in small and large. If we have to keep clean and maintain our homes, cars, bodies and everything else to keep them running smoothly, lasting and surviving, why would the earth be any different? It's larger and may take us longer to trash and break it but I think we better be careful or we will, if we haven't already. Just like everything else that is neglected and/or abused. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 14:36:43 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2018 22:26:15 GMT
Why does the "conservative thread" feel like an inquisition all the time? Do you believe this? Do you believe that?? Geeze. Essentially, the differences are here: www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs/"Conservatives believe in personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, individual liberty, traditional American values and a strong national defense. Believe the role of government should be to provide people the freedom necessary to pursue their own goals. Conservative policies generally emphasize empowerment of the individual to solve problems. Liberals believe in government action to achieve equal opportunity and equality for all. It is the duty of the government to alleviate social ills and to protect civil liberties and individual and human rights. Believe the role of the government should be to guarantee that no one is in need. Liberal policies generally emphasize the need for the government to solve problems." But people don't always fit into nice and neat into boxes like this. For example, many peas have expressed that they're more financially conservative and socially liberal. And we know the ruckus caused if someone assumes a pea that leans in one direction politically supports all policies by their chosen party. It can't be both ways. Either people's political beliefs are complex and can't be assumed to fit into one specific narrative, or they're not and we are free to make assumptions based on this list. I believe they are complex, so to complain that your beliefs are not being pigeonholed seems silly to me.and of course you can believe what you want.  |
|
sassyangel
Drama Llama
Posts: 7,456
|
Post by sassyangel on May 30, 2018 22:33:15 GMT
I came across a thread on the College Confidential site a few days ago that I thought was interesting. It was titled: "Would It Hurt to List Republican Club" on college applications. It was nothing I'd thought about, especially since my DS isn't politically involved in anything.
I'd say about half of the responses suggested leaving that information off given the current political climate and the blowback onto republicans/conservatives, etc. Others suggested colleges are open to diversity of thought, etc. and no one in admissions would deny admission because of someone's political beliefs. Others thought it wasn't worth taking the chance because a lot of colleges at least seem to be pretty liberal with their professors, etc. and you'd never know who was making the decisions.
I/we'll never know if political beliefs would actually play a part in acceptance or denial to colleges, but just the fact that this is where we are as a country is pretty sad.
Here's the link to the thread if anyone's interested:
I stumbled across that site about a month ago, and only read, didn't sign up. The thread I linked was locked I'll assume because of politics or nasty comments? I have no clue.
I have to wonder how much of this feeling of needing to hide ones Republican beliefs, has to do with how much the Republican Party has changed in recent years, though. Whether Republicans like it or not, their party is (for better or worse) forever associated with backing the Trump presidency, an administration with a deeply polarizing man at its forefront. Which is saying something given the it also backed the presidencies of Nixon et al. A man who has cringeworthy moments in that office on a nearly daily basis, thanks to his Twitter account, and who seemingly does not have many in the party willing to stand up to him either, it reflects on the party as a whole. If I was conservative I would be reluctant to associate myself with that, too. I just can't imagine that Republicans going to college felt that as much under previous republican presidencies, to the degree they clearly seem to now. It's seems to be a by-product more of by who and what the Republican Party is represented by now, than actually holding a conservative viewpoint. As is evidenced by more than a few peas on the board, you can identify as conservative, and still not have voted for the man. |
|
twinsmomfla99
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,118
|
Post by twinsmomfla99 on May 30, 2018 22:38:03 GMT
Why does the "conservative thread" feel like an inquisition all the time? Do you believe this? Do you believe that?? Geeze. Essentially, the differences are here: www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs/"Conservatives believe in personal responsibility (except for corporations--Republicans like to limit corporate liability for things like pollution, over-charging low-income people with payday loans, bankruptcies that leave customers and creditors holding the bag, etc.), limited government (only to the extent they can limit governmental oversight of corporate America--they are just fine with imposing all sorts of limitations on individuals), free markets, individual liberty (seriously? they don't believe in individual liberty except when it comes to practicing good old-fashioned Christianity), traditional American values (like marital fidelity? yes, I'm looking at all you government officials caught in sex scandals) and a strong national defense (except when we are selling out to China, Russia, and anyone else who greases Trump family palms). Believe the role of government should be to provide people (corporations) the freedom necessary to pursue their own goals. Conservative policies generally emphasize empowerment of the individual to solve problems (yep, by picking themselves up by their often non-existent bootstraps). (1)Liberals believe in government action to achieve equal opportunity and equality for all. (2)It is the duty of the government to alleviate social ills and to protect civil liberties and individual and human rights. (3)Believe the role of the government should be to guarantee that no one is in need. (4)Liberal policies generally emphasize the need for the government to solve problems." I believe this "definition" is very one-sided in trying to show the conservative point of view in a good light. As for the liberal definition:
1. What exactly is wrong with trying to even the playing field to make things fair? Conservatives are all about the level playing field when it comes to international trade policy. "It's not fair that China makes us give them our technology if we want to do business there! It's not fair that they have an advantage because they can pay lower wages! Let's impose tariffs to make it more fair!" But wow, just try to level the playing field when it comes to minorities and women in the workplace, and THAT is a problem. Or stopping realtors from discriminating against minority or gay homebuyers. Or saying that new construction must comply with codes that allow access to those with mobility impairment.
2. Why yes, it is the government's duty to protect civil liberties and rights. It's kind of written into our Constitution and woven into the functions of our judiciary. And where social ills can be solved by laws, then yes the government should do what it can to stop the problems. When hundreds of thousands of children were being poisoned by lead paint, we ALL suffered, not just those kids. We suffered the loss of "human capital" represented by those kids--those who ended up with well-below average IQs and and physical ailments who might have otherwise been contributing members of society. I have no problem if my government wants to solve those kinds of social ills through regulations such as the ban on lead paint.
3. I don't know of anyone who thinks the government can guarantee that no one is ever in need. But I believe most liberals do believe in the availability of security nets for the most vulnerable among our population, recognizing that not every family has the resources to care for those who cannot care for themselves.
4. Liberals generally recognize that sometimes the government is the only avenue for solving some problems. Before the government tried to solve pollution problems, the Cuyahoga (?) River was on fire in Cleveland due to all the pollution in it. Pittsburgh pollution was so bad that you needed streetlights at noon to see where you were going some days. Left to the "free market" or the persons responsible for the pollution, these problems would never have been solved because there was no economic incentive for those who were making money off of the polluting industries to pay for the clean up. Talk about your free ride--the industrial barons could reap all the benefits of production without paying "all" of the costs involved, i.e. the public cost of pollution. So yes, once the voters spoke loudly enough for the government to act, the government came up with a solution that worked. Google images of the pollution in those two cities, then look at pictures of them now. There may still be some pollution problems, but for the most part, the problem has been resolved. I'm not certain that progress will survive this administration and Scott Pruitt, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on May 30, 2018 23:10:44 GMT
Well things evolve as scientists learn more. I deleted my last two posts to avoid redundancy, since Fred's post answers my question. From what's been quoted above, it's logical to assume that at one time (in the not-too-distant past), scientists thought the earth was cooling; then not long after that they thought it was warming; now they think climate is simply "changing" because (and I'm assuming this from what I've read) of the results of human technology and the human "footprint." I can understand the need to ban plastic bags, straws, and the like because they are not biodegradable, eventually end up in our oceans, and are a hazard to wildlife. I think most people would understand the need to do away with the plastics, either by better recycling methods or reverting back to paper bags (watch out, trees!). But when it comes to the overall climate of the earth...that's a whole other ballgame. It's hard to believe that in all the millennia that the earth has been in existence, there hasn't been some sort of climate change - or climate fluctuation - going on. And with science constantly "evolving," how will we ever know when the scientists finally know everything there is to know, thereby, coming up with a viable way to advance technology without detriment to the environment, people, and animals? It's just like with medicine...it seems that every new wonder drug eventually has unexpected side effects that result in serious health issues. I think we should do what we can to minimize pollution in the atmosphere, in our waterways, and in how we handle waste. But I question the validity of the whole "global climate change" rhetoric and what it will mean for our future, our children's future, and the future of our nation. Of course the earth has experienced climate change before - that is irrefutable, the last ice age only ended 7,000 years ago. The earth has experienced multiple periods of warming and cooling - attributed to minuscule variations in the earth's rotation and the corresponding solar radiation the earth receives. The current discussion is the impact of human activity and specifically the dramatic increase in greenhouse gases contributed to the CURRENT warming trend. |
|
|
|
Post by bazinga on May 30, 2018 23:47:08 GMT
I came across a thread on the College Confidential site a few days ago that I thought was interesting. It was titled: "Would It Hurt to List Republican Club" on college applications. It was nothing I'd thought about, especially since my DS isn't politically involved in anything.
I'd say about half of the responses suggested leaving that information off given the current political climate and the blowback onto republicans/conservatives, etc. Others suggested colleges are open to diversity of thought, etc. and no one in admissions would deny admission because of someone's political beliefs. Others thought it wasn't worth taking the chance because a lot of colleges at least seem to be pretty liberal with their professors, etc. and you'd never know who was making the decisions.
I/we'll never know if political beliefs would actually play a part in acceptance or denial to colleges, but just the fact that this is where we are as a country is pretty sad.
Here's the link to the thread if anyone's interested:
I stumbled across that site about a month ago, and only read, didn't sign up. The thread I linked was locked I'll assume because of politics or nasty comments? I have no clue.
I used to describe myself as a conservative thinker. I like to think things out before acting. Deciding on a new style of furniture, committing to a paint color, things I take a conservative approach to. Due to the change in how the word conservative is viewed and used, I no longer use it. So I can completely understand the choice to not include conservative or republican information. I'm with you. I think all politicians are liars and corrupt so I don't like to align with a party, but I did consider myself to be a moderate conservative. Now I don't know what to call myself as I am not racist, homophobic, or filled with hate which is how some people are currently defining the word "conservative." |
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on May 30, 2018 23:54:15 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by ntsf on May 31, 2018 0:02:30 GMT
the climate is warming.. yes the climate of the earth has been much warmer.. but it is not good for humans to have a rapidly changing climate. crops will no longer grow as they have for several thousand years, more dislocation of people, more conflicts over lack or resources or level of resources.. more deaths from disease.. increased mosquitos and other disease causing bugs..
humans can survive.. but just think about your areas with very different weather.. more flooding, higher sea level...
|
|
sassyangel
Drama Llama
Posts: 7,456
|
Post by sassyangel on May 31, 2018 0:24:01 GMT
Sure, we could if you want. But that wasn't really what I was asking at all. I bet there are questionable/alarming affiliations for all political parties, historically. It doesn't shock me in the least that that is the case. They all have skeletons, I do realize that. I'm sure that there are a lot of Democrats wish that the whole Monica Lewinsky affair (among other things) wasn't part of the legacy of the Clinton presidency, too. The comment I quoted was specifically talking about Republicans feeling fear of showing their political affiliation on entrance to college. Hence, why I specifically addressed Republicans only. I found that interesting and wondered if people thought that fear was more prevalent now, because of the polarizing climate of the current administration, or if there was a historical precedent for it. Did people feel that way under the Nixon, Reagan and Bush (x2) presidencies? Perhaps they did, and that's why I was asking. Admittedly, I'm not a fan of Trump at all, and I don't care much for the current version of the Republican Party of today, so perhaps my dislike of the man and the party came across a bit more strongly in my post and clouded the intent of my question, and I get that. I really do think that the republican party of today is different from the one of old. So I'm not coming asking from an "inquisition" perspective, and needing a justification or a counter from anyone, but genuinely as someone who was wanting to know if I was simply off base with wondering that. I know many people here identify as conservative, but don't care much for Trump either and I might get some insight given that. |
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on May 31, 2018 2:28:18 GMT
Sure, we could if you want. But that wasn't really what I was asking at all. I bet there are questionable/alarming affiliations for all political parties, historically. It doesn't shock me in the least that that is the case. They all have skeletons, I do realize that. I'm sure that there are a lot of Democrats wish that the whole Monica Lewinsky affair (among other things) wasn't part of the legacy of the Clinton presidency, too. The comment I quoted was specifically talking about Republicans feeling fear of showing their political affiliation on entrance to college. Hence, why I specifically addressed Republicans only. I found that interesting and wondered if people thought that fear was more prevalent now, because of the polarizing climate of the current administration, or if there was a historical precedent for it. Did people feel that way under the Nixon, Reagan and Bush (x2) presidencies? Perhaps they did, and that's why I was asking. Admittedly, I'm not a fan of Trump at all, and I don't care much for the current version of the Republican Party of today, so perhaps my dislike of the man and the party came across a bit more strongly in my post and clouded the intent of my question, and I get that. I really do think that the republican party of today is different from the one of old. So I'm not coming asking from an "inquisition" perspective, and needing a justification or a counter from anyone, but genuinely as someone who was wanting to know if I was simply off base with wondering that. I know many people here identify as conservative, but don't care much for Trump either and I might get some insight given that. We didn't have political groups to belong to in school when I was a kid. I was a grown adult before I ever heard of them, and even then, it was only from a sit-com that I learned of their existence. The conservative group wasn't exactly made fun of, but conservative values were spoofed. (Not too badly, if I recall correctly. But still. They were mocked.) At the same time, I realized that even though I was in a lot of groups and activities in high school, I would probably not have been a member of a school political group, nor would I likely list it on applications or resumes if I had. FWIW, it would have been a Democratic group, most likely. I still feel the same uneasiness about listing a political group now, because I do think that this is a personal matter that I prefer to keep private. However, given how there are on-campus groups that are very active, it's only natural that kids would want to pad their college applications with every possible addition that they can. I would caution my own kids and other kids who came to me to be very wary of doing so in today's climate - regardless of party. And if they were conservative, I would flat out tell them not to include it on a college application. An old high school friend of mine is a college professor now, and for some days after the last election, she cried with her students in the classroom (I actually think literally, but at the very least, it was figuratively). She is intolerant of anything anti-anti-Trump. (double negative intended) And, she is in good company at her college. Why poke the puppy when you didn't need to? Leave it off the application. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 14:36:43 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2018 3:01:59 GMT
I came across a thread on the College Confidential site a few days ago that I thought was interesting. It was titled: "Would It Hurt to List Republican Club" on college applications. It was nothing I'd thought about, especially since my DS isn't politically involved in anything.
I'd say about half of the responses suggested leaving that information off given the current political climate and the blowback onto republicans/conservatives, etc. Others suggested colleges are open to diversity of thought, etc. and no one in admissions would deny admission because of someone's political beliefs. Others thought it wasn't worth taking the chance because a lot of colleges at least seem to be pretty liberal with their professors, etc. and you'd never know who was making the decisions.
I/we'll never know if political beliefs would actually play a part in acceptance or denial to colleges, but just the fact that this is where we are as a country is pretty sad.
Here's the link to the thread if anyone's interested:
I stumbled across that site about a month ago, and only read, didn't sign up. The thread I linked was locked I'll assume because of politics or nasty comments? I have no clue.
I have to wonder how much of this feeling of needing to hide ones Republican beliefs, has to do with how much the Republican Party has changed in recent years, though. Whether Republicans like it or not, their party is (for better or worse) forever associated with backing the Trump presidency, an administration with a deeply polarizing man at its forefront. Which is saying something given the it also backed the presidencies of Nixon et al. A man who has cringeworthy moments in that office on a nearly daily basis, thanks to his Twitter account, and who seemingly does not have many in the party willing to stand up to him either, it reflects on the party as a whole. If I was conservative I would be reluctant to associate myself with that, too. I just can't imagine that Republicans going to college felt that as much under previous republican presidencies, to the degree they clearly seem to now. It's seems to be a by-product more of by who and what the Republican Party is represented by now, than actually holding a conservative viewpoint. As is evidenced by more than a few peas on the board, you can identify as conservative, and still not have voted for the man. The behavior from the Left that causes those on the Right to feel the need to hide their beliefs and affiliations has been going on longer than "because Trump" was an excuse for doing so. So I think the "because Trump" is BS, it's a behavior that the Left owns solely, with or without Trump to blame. Earlier threads here (pre-Trump threads) also bare that out. This is an article I linked here long ago (early 2014) when talking about the silencing from the Left. By that time I had already read about a dozenish articles talking about college professors and students shutting down speech. It was long before Trump was even a rumor and Scrappower was still on the board, that's how long ago it was: "The left is entering a new phase of ideological agitation — no longer trying to win the debate but stopping debate altogether, banishing from public discourse any and all opposition," Krauthammer writes in The Washington Post Thursday. <Link |
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on May 31, 2018 15:29:41 GMT
This is an article I linked here long ago (early 2014) But we have evolved since then.  sassyangel - You were asking about college applications. I'll do you one better. My husband died 7 years ago. I filled out some on-line dating profiles afterwards and didn't hesitate to include that I am conservative. I wouldn't dream of doing that today, because now that is somehow supposed to mean that I am uneducated, easily manipulated, of low morals, a scientifically ignorant denier, complicit in misogyny and basically socially unfit for good people. Quite impressive additions to the very tired list of being a homophobic, xenophobic, narrow-minded, gun-toting Bible-thumper. Again, the reality doesn't matter. My narrow vocabulary is all the proof anyone here needs to be convinced of that conservatism is something believed by only the poorly educated. If only I had gone to a better school.... Except, I went to a very good school. If only I had taken some science classes so that I might better understand.... Except I earned a difficult Bachelor of Science degree. You see. The criticisms keeps coming and coming and coming, even on this thread, of who conservatives are, what they believe, what they want... Whether it's true or not doesn't matter. Someone somewhere who is not a liberal posted, tweeted or commented on social media the most disgusting thing never even imagined before and anyone who doesn't immediately denounce it may as well just openly wear that swastika armband instead of keeping it hidden. (This is a general commentary, intended to include the vile comments deliberate trolls leave for whatever reasons trolls leave vile comments. Roseanne could be included as easily as the 13 year old kid on summer vacation sitting alone in his bedroom. The only requirement is that it not be against Trump. Anything against Trump is high-fived and therefore doesn't apply to the required condemnation.) This board is a microcosm of the 4th Estate, that vast array of media that includes newspapers, magazines, online blogs, social media, TV news networks and online news in print and video, loudly and frequently crying about the loss of freedom of speech awaiting them - all done without consequence. No going to jail or losing the continued ability to cry about their terrible loss - because the President of the United States has the gall to tell them they are doing a terrible job. We must uphold the Constitution! We have no nation without the 1st Amendment! This President is as bad as North Korean's Kim Jong-un. No, he's not as bad.. he's worse! He's right up there with Hitler. (I'm wondering where the hundreds of thousands of dead bodies are from the hard labor camps, but I get distracted easily. Another of my faults to add to the list.) The same people, FWIW, point fingers. Because of me and people like me, Donald Trump is going to destroy the world and if I won't criticize every.little.tweet, I do not deserve to have a voice. Huge campaigns to quiet opposing voices on opposing outlets have been met with limited success. People like Alan Dershowitz who have been long-heralded for a lifetime devoted to the protection of people under our Constitution are suddenly considered to have lost their way because they continue to do what they have always done and advocate for the rights of people in the Trump administration under the Constitution. The 1st Amendment is ironclad. Now, that 2nd Amendment. THAT NEEDS TO GO! The Constitution is not something that is unchangeable. (We have a process to amend the Constitution, but hey. That's an inconvenient fact.) What did old white guys know about danger in the 1770's? They didn't understand how much more dangerous it is for the individual to be allowed to defend themselves, their families and their property because.... they didn't have the same weapons. We had these weapons before we had a limited and ineffective 10 year ban. Yet, it was during that ban that Columbine occurred. 17 people died at Parkland and the nation went on a national protest. Just over Memorial Day weekend in Chicago, 9 were killed and 29 more were wounded and the nation goes about its business. We may continue to ignore this difference because Chicago is what? A throwaway? Just what is going on within our society? What has changed? We've been armed to the teeth since the 1770's. Is it really just because some of these weapons have evolved? We're not allowed to consider that the breakdown of our Christian-Judeo beliefs could be somehow at fault, because that would be intolerant. Not to mention ignorant, because what kind of God would have us as his creation! Families do not need a stable home for children to be born into. The rate of unwed motherhood has skyrocketed. Where are the marches demanding men take care of their children? No. The answer is guns. We have too many of them. They are too deadly. Anyone who says anything else needs to also be considered is guilty of murdering innocent children. Do these sound like random ramblings? Ha! You can find them and more like them on any given day right here at this board. I don't need links because you can pretty well find threads where they thrive on page one any time you care to look. The message is clear. Do not have a difference of opinion. You want to get into a good college where the vast majority of openly liberal teachers outweigh those who aren't? Do not include that you have conservative values. Colleges need to protect people from such radicalism. |
|
azredhead
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,755
|
Post by azredhead on May 31, 2018 17:03:41 GMT
I have to wonder how much of this feeling of needing to hide ones Republican beliefs, has to do with how much the Republican Party has changed in recent years, though. Whether Republicans like it or not, their party is (for better or worse) forever associated with backing the Trump presidency, an administration with a deeply polarizing man at its forefront. Which is saying something given the it also backed the presidencies of Nixon et al. A man who has cringeworthy moments in that office on a nearly daily basis, thanks to his Twitter account, and who seemingly does not have many in the party willing to stand up to him either, it reflects on the party as a whole. If I was conservative I would be reluctant to associate myself with that, too. I just can't imagine that Republicans going to college felt that as much under previous republican presidencies, to the degree they clearly seem to now. It's seems to be a by-product more of by who and what the Republican Party is represented by now, than actually holding a conservative viewpoint. As is evidenced by more than a few peas on the board, you can identify as conservative, and still not have voted for the man. The behavior from the Left that causes those on the Right to feel the need to hide their beliefs and affiliations has been going on longer than "because Trump" was an excuse for doing so. So I think the "because Trump" is BS, it's a behavior that the Left owns solely, with or without Trump to blame. Earlier threads here (pre-Trump threads) also bare that out. This is an article I linked here long ago (early 2014) when talking about the silencing from the Left. By that time I had already read about a dozenish articles talking about college professors and students shutting down speech. It was long before Trump was even a rumor and Scrappower was still on the board, that's how long ago it was: "The left is entering a new phase of ideological agitation — no longer trying to win the debate but stopping debate altogether, banishing from public discourse any and all opposition," Krauthammer writes in The Washington Post Thursday. <Link I’m sitting on my hands now. don’t wanna be accused of being programmed or rascist. I agree with about every thing here and leftturnonly. . And then they want open a disc about religion and if and how God speaks to us?!? So it’s ok to make fun of some one but don’t you dare critisize race. (Half kidding) . I’m am great ful to you guys that can keep going with good converstations and be heard. The justification is crazy! I am sorry if I have not put my words out there clearly! I’m just stunned! |
|
azredhead
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,755
|
Post by azredhead on May 31, 2018 17:15:53 GMT
I used to describe myself as a conservative thinker. I like to think things out before acting. Deciding on a new style of furniture, committing to a paint color, things I take a conservative approach to. Due to the change in how the word conservative is viewed and used, I no longer use it. So I can completely understand the choice to not include conservative or republican information. I'm with you. I think all politicians are liars and corrupt so I don't like to align with a party, but I did consider myself to be a moderate conservative. Now I don't know what to call myself as I am not racist, homophobic, or filled with hate which is how some people are currently defining the word "conservative." Yes Yes and Yes!! I feel the same way!! |
|
|
|
Post by missmiss on May 31, 2018 17:27:55 GMT
I’m sitting on my hands now. don’t wanna be accused of being programmed or rascist. I agree with about every thing here and leftturnonly . . And then they want open a disc about religion and if and how God speaks to us?!? So it’s ok to make fun of some one but don’t you dare critisize race. (Half kidding) . I’m am great ful to you guys that can keep going with good converstations and be heard. The justification is crazy! I am sorry if I have not put my words out there clearly! I’m just stunned! So you don't like when people bash you for your religion? I wonder how Muslims feel when government officials do it. You can't have it both ways. If you don't want people to bash you for your religion then the quite a few members of the conservative party needs to check themselves too. A Nebraska state senator, Bill Kintner, proposed that Muslims be required to eat pork if they wished to enter the United States. A state senator in Rhode Island, Elaine Morgan, wrote in an email that “Muslim religion and philosophy is to murder, rape, and decapitate anyone who is a non-Muslim” and recommended that Syrian refugees be housed in camps. She later said she was referring only to “fanatical/extremist” Muslims. In January, Neal Tapio, a South Dakota state senator who is running for the United States House, questioned whether the First Amendment applies to Muslims, asking, “Does our Constitution offer protections and rights to a person who believes in the full implementation of Islamic law, as practiced by 14 Islamic countries” and millions of Muslims “who believe in the deadly political ideology that believes you should be killed for leaving Islam?” Rep. Bennett, the lawmaker who required Muslim constituents to answer questionnaires on whether they beat their wives, said in 2014, “Islam is not even a religion; it is a social, political system that uses a deity to advance its agenda of global conquest.” Jody Hice, a 2014 Republican congressional candidate from Georgia, questioned the compatibility of Islam with the American Constitution and wrote in 2012 that “Islam would not qualify for First Amendment protection since it’s a geopolitical system.” I wonder how Muslims feel when they hear the above speech from GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS! Poor Christians! How many people conservatives who call themselves Christians bash Islam on a daily basis? I am not saying people on this board but in the US? I bet more than you would want to count. I have had to unfriend and unfollow quite a few conservatives for that. I understand why Christians would get upset. It works both ways! www.deseretnews.com/article/900019489/op-ed-what-islamophobic-politicians-can-learn-from-mormons.html |
|
DEX
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,404
|
Post by DEX on May 31, 2018 17:28:47 GMT
I came across a thread on the College Confidential site a few days ago that I thought was interesting. It was titled: "Would It Hurt to List Republican Club" on college applications. It was nothing I'd thought about, especially since my DS isn't politically involved in anything.
I'd say about half of the responses suggested leaving that information off given the current political climate and the blowback onto republicans/conservatives, etc. Others suggested colleges are open to diversity of thought, etc. and no one in admissions would deny admission because of someone's political beliefs. Others thought it wasn't worth taking the chance because a lot of colleges at least seem to be pretty liberal with their professors, etc. and you'd never know who was making the decisions.
I/we'll never know if political beliefs would actually play a part in acceptance or denial to colleges, but just the fact that this is where we are as a country is pretty sad.
Here's the link to the thread if anyone's interested:
I stumbled across that site about a month ago, and only read, didn't sign up. The thread I linked was locked I'll assume because of politics or nasty comments? I have no clue.
I used to describe myself as a conservative thinker. I like to think things out before acting. Deciding on a new style of furniture, committing to a paint color, things I take a conservative approach to. Due to the change in how the word conservative is viewed and used, I no longer use it. So I can completely understand the choice to not include conservative or republican information. The term you are looking for is "Critical Thinker". It is a real thing. I am a critical thinker as I am sure that many conservatives are also. For example, when searching the internet I always attempt to find legitimate sources and will not post bogus information from guru.com (I am joking) because it is not a legitimate site.
If you are interested in learning about critical thinking skills. Here is a reliable source.
Critical thinking components
|
|
azredhead
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,755
|
Post by azredhead on May 31, 2018 17:34:50 GMT
missmiss really!?! No I don't like it when anyone makes fun of ANYONE REGARD RACE, RELIGION or ETHNIC background!! I would be just as upset if they were muslim or Jewish and someone was making awful remarks? Why would i want it both ways?!
|
|
|
|
Post by missmiss on May 31, 2018 18:24:12 GMT
missmiss really!?! No I don't like it when anyone makes fun of ANYONE REGARD RACE, RELIGION or ETHNIC background!! I would be just as upset if they were muslim or Jewish and someone was making awful remarks? Why would i want it both ways?! I didn't say you. I listed government officials and said people that I have blocked or unfollowed on facebook. If Conservatives can do it then why can't others? Two wrongs don't make a right by any means but conservatives are voting for people that do it all the time. |
|
|
|
Post by gmcwife1 on May 31, 2018 18:27:26 GMT
I used to describe myself as a conservative thinker. I like to think things out before acting. Deciding on a new style of furniture, committing to a paint color, things I take a conservative approach to. Due to the change in how the word conservative is viewed and used, I no longer use it. So I can completely understand the choice to not include conservative or republican information. The term you are looking for is "Critical Thinker". It is a real thing. I am a critical thinker as I am sure that many conservatives are also. For example, when searching the internet I always attempt to find legitimate sources and will not post bogus information from guru.com (I am joking) because it is not a legitimate site.
If you are interested in learning about critical thinking skills. Here is a reliable source.
Critical thinking components
Thank you, I teach critical thinking skills to 4-H kids and at work |
|
azredhead
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,755
|
Post by azredhead on May 31, 2018 18:41:45 GMT
missmiss really!?! No I don't like it when anyone makes fun of ANYONE REGARD RACE, RELIGION or ETHNIC background!! I would be just as upset if they were muslim or Jewish and someone was making awful remarks? Why would i want it both ways?! I didn't say you. I listed government officials and said people that I have blocked or unfollowed on facebook. If Conservatives can do it then why can't others? Two wrongs don't make a right by any means but conservatives are voting for people that do it all the time. And so do democrats and liberals. take the Samantha Bee thing.. too.. while they are different offenses it's not ok. |
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on May 31, 2018 18:47:44 GMT
If Conservatives can do it then why can't others? As if the sins of the few apply to the many who consider themselves more conservative, but somehow, the sins of the few do not likewise apply to the many who consider themselves non-conservative. You do realize that for every single repulsive tweet or meme posted here by someone who supposedly shares conservative values, an equally repulsive tweet or meme by someone who supposedly shares liberal values can be posted. Forget the comments that are openly aired on TV without backlash - things that would have incurred tremendous FCC fines not so long ago. The anti-Trump-all-inclusive-party comments have no comparison, but why consider those when OMG! Individual Republicans have said blahblahblah. This worn-out, tit for tat, go-to, obfuscating sleight of hand trick is old. "Look over there while I do something I don't want you to see." We gullible, under-educated fall for it every time. |
|
|
|
Post by missmiss on May 31, 2018 19:07:12 GMT
I didn't say you. I listed government officials and said people that I have blocked or unfollowed on facebook. If Conservatives can do it then why can't others? Two wrongs don't make a right by any means but conservatives are voting for people that do it all the time. And so do democrats and liberals. take the Samantha Bee thing.. too.. while they are different offenses it's not ok.I am Calling some a c*** and telling a group of people they need to eat pork to be an American are not equal. Calling someone a c*** and telling a group of people to answer a questionnaire on beating their wife due to their religion isn't the same. Calling names should never happen I agree. I was just asking how people of the Islam faith feel when it happens to them by government officials. Conservatives vote for these people. These are the government officials Conservatives are putting into office making these statements. If you are complaining about and I bet it would be a safe bet that other Christians are complaining about it. Now are those Christians voting for these government officials? I would say yes. Overall it sucks and it shouldn't be said I do agree with you. I have heard and read Christians saying Muslims should rot in Hell and many other nasty things. I am sure those Christians are not conservatives. How many conservatives speak out against those politicians? Now how many Democrats speak out about the nasty things that are said by all people? There are evil people in the world. A political party does not define who is good or bad. Just a curious question not related at all to this post. Why did you say Democrats and Liberals? What is the difference just curious on that? Generally I hear liberals instead of Democrats. |
|
|
|
Post by missmiss on May 31, 2018 19:18:12 GMT
If Conservatives can do it then why can't others? As if the sins of the few apply to the many who consider themselves more conservative, but somehow, the sins of the few do not likewise apply to the many who consider themselves non-conservative. You do realize that for every single repulsive tweet or meme posted here by someone who supposedly shares conservative values, an equally repulsive tweet or meme by someone who supposedly shares liberal values can be posted. Forget the comments that are openly aired on TV without backlash - things that would have incurred tremendous FCC fines not so long ago. The anti-Trump-all-inclusive-party comments have no comparison, but why consider those when OMG! Individual Republicans have said blahblahblah. This worn-out, tit for tat, go-to, obfuscating sleight of hand trick is old. "Look over there while I do something I don't want you to see." We gullible, under-educated fall for it every time. I am calling out mostly government officials for slamming a religion. The government officials that are doing that are Republicans. Tit for tat? When Democrat and Independent senators and congressmen/women start slamming religions please let me know so I never vote for them. |
|
