Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
While it was nice to be right that wasn't the win. I already knew I was right. The win was in not letting the attacks drive me off or silence me. The win was in gaining some respect from those who started off as enemies. The win was in coming through it and out the other side with my dignity and pride intact despite those that tried to take it. I might think of some more later but that covers the big things I think.
![[scooter]](/data/avatars/m/22/22287.jpg?1659477690){kind=avatar}
Do you have specifics? I'd be very embarrassed if I was even remotely ugly to you. I apologize if I was. What I remember most with my take on involvement with the War in Iraq was how proud I was of our congressman John Duncan. Duncan was one of the more powerful Republicans in the House for years and he opposed the war. I agreed with him.
By Region:
That's fascinating as I don't remember it that way at all. I also fully admit I don't have great recall for everything. As I said, my big influence was our local congressman being one of the most respected Republicans in Washington being opposed to the War. He got some pushback as you'd expect with a prominent leader in the party not going along with the president of the same party. But by and large, it was civil and honorable. My recollection was way more people thought the WMD intel was a laughingstock. That's super interesting you remember it as you being vilified and hounded by everyone. And make sure to understand - I believe what you say. I just find it interesting we have such different recollections of it.
That's interesting. It's pretty much the opposite of what I thought the demographics were.
Just seemed to me like most were from Northeast or Midwest. Maybe it's the preponderance of Patriots and Celtics fans that plague grace the various NFL/NBA threads.
They're just louder.
Joe it was pretty ugly. Nothing that I've seen here in recent years comes close. People were enraged that I wasn't supporting the war. I try not to be a drama queen but yeah people were not shy about their displeasure. And it went on for a long time. People stalked me to anything I posted subject wasn't importsnt. Pretty sure others had roughly the same experience.
Thank you. I'd hate to think I was uncool to you. I do think it's fascinating how we remember it differently. But I also have a hard time remembering what I had for breakfast. So there's that.
To be honest Joe our interactions have always been fine. You asked me one time to stop pushing the filter and that's the closest I've ever gotten to a warning or anything.
Yes I laughed.
Yeah this is a thing. I've put out some comments occasionally that don't line up with the majority here. You'll respond to one post specifically and you come back an hour later and your inbox has 6 notifications in it from a bunch of different people. Some snarky comments, some asking other loosely related questions.....(rarely) you'll get an intelligent response back to continue a dialogue, but at that point you're engrossed and drowning in 6 different conversations from 1 post you responded to. At that point, I'm not even bothering trying to keep up with all these conversations, and I just leave. Like Joe said, it's just easier that way.
100%.Yankee23Fan said:
I think MT's data makes it pretty clear -- when 65% of responders say they are agnostic/atheist, it becomes pretty obvious that the forum population is skewed away from social conservationism.
Many religious folks see marriage in religious terms as between a man and a women. You can respect their relationship and even provide them with all the rights, but it still is not a marriage just by how the term is defined.
The Bible wasn’t written in English. It has absolutely nothing to say about how English words should be defined.
Traditionally marriages are a religious ceremony even today. Rightly or wrongly, many people associate marriage with religion and the traditional concept of what it is.
Not all of them are. Do you think non-religious marriages between one man and one woman should be legally recognized?
I am just explaining why religious people view marriage like they do. The state is free to define it and accept whatever forms of marriage they wish.
Perhaps FFA progressives are simply the point of the sword. Newly eligible voters are increasingly secular, even those few who are registering Republican. And the growth rate (of secularism) is pretty eye-opening.prefontaine said:
Eh. both you and jon seemed to have latched on to that, so I clearly didn't express myself well. (btw, I totally agree with you, just not what I was trying to say)
I seem to recall a lot of libertarians in the old days. The poll still has us at 20%. One has to consider them whenever thinking about the conservative/liberal split and why any poll result is what it is.
Yep. This IMO strongly correlates to secular conservatives as well.
Bingo
I am someone who would have identified much further to the right in 2010. I have no interest in having anything to do with the current version of the Republican party. Some of my principal conservative beliefs are not only dismissed by the current version of the Republican party, but openly mocked.
