Brain differences in political orientation

Status
Not open for further replies.
saywhatkid said:
Me too.

What purpose does keeping him alive do? He still has his followers, he still gets his name out there when he comes up for parole. You telling me that putting this guy in the gas chamber would have cost more that 40 years of prison food, medical treatment, other legal crap, and parole hearings? You ain't being very logical.
Click to expand...

Why do you let him toy with your emotions?
 
sallylou said:
Wirelessly posted (droid)

It's not over with the verdict. Even if the defendant is as guilty as sin, he has an appeal. I studied the system and that's what I base my opinion on. There must be a system with due process that applies to all defendants. The state can't go around killing people without due process. At least, I don't want to live in a government like that.
Click to expand...
Yes, I am aware of this. And glad it is in place. My concern is when they are not trying to be found innocent, when they are obviously guilty, and in some cases, asking to be executed. At some point, it should be time to clean death row of some of these folks. BTW, when did it really become a matter of cost? The cost to defend citizens of repeat offenders that rape and commit other crimes, without remorse, is a cost that should be factored in.
 
Beowulf said:
Why do you let him toy with your emotions?
Click to expand...
Guess that makes me a Conservative? :roll:

He doesn't. I use him as an example. I have never lived in California, so I have not contributed to the Charles Manson health care fund, or the Charles Manson legal defense fund, or the Charles Manson banquet for life fund. I still think there should be some backbone to the laws we have. Oh well.
 
saywhatkid said:
Guess that makes me a Conservative? :roll:

He doesn't. I use him as an example. I have never lived in California, so I have not contributed to the Charles Manson health care fund, or the Charles Manson legal defense fund, or the Charles Manson banquet for life fund. I still think there should be some backbone to the laws we have. Oh well.
Click to expand...

On that we agree.
 
sallylou said:
Wirelessly posted (droid)

I had a professor who said an individual's need for retribution is different than society's need for justice. I thought that was an interesting distinction.
I think that people who consider more variables in the equation tend to be more open to different ideas.
Click to expand...

:hmm: That's something to munch on.
 
rolling7 said:
This junk science needs to go no further than do a study between OWS and the people of Iran/Iraq. On one side you have free thinkers...some violent, some abhor violent...some for free love, some for chastity...etc....but all mixed in one large melting pot. On the other side you have "brainwashed" thinkers....divided by gender....all of the same sexual morals.......all violent to a common cause....etc.

My point would be to discredit this junk science because political alignment due to chemical reaction within the brain is simply at best. The brain allows for many possibilities, just as a computer, and with additional input of knowledge can change course. This gives rise to the expression: People can change.
On the other hand, people can be brainwashed through controlled knowledge input, either willingly or unwillingly, either consciously or sub-consciously.
Therefore, these studies of chemical reaction of the brain are at best left in the labs, they are not applicable to real life.
Click to expand...

If you are going to discredit this scientific study, you are going to have to do better than this post.:cool2: This study does not have anything to do with chemical reactions in the brain. It is about evidence of increased brain volume. You really should try to understand a study before you attempt to discredit it.:laugh2:
 
Reba said:
Which part of the brain causes posters to over react to other posters, again and again with one :laugh2: after another :laugh2::laugh2::laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:
Click to expand...

That would be the part that controls sense of humor. Conservatives generally have a somewhat atophied humor area.
 
Beach girl said:
They would disagree that a Catholic who goes to Mass on a weekly basis is not a fundamental believer in Catholicism? Small "f" "fundamentalist," as in someone who fundamentally, deeply, whole-heartedly, believes in the teachings of his church.
Click to expand...

That is quite different than being a fundamentalist.:roll: Nice attempt at semantic confusion, but still a fail.
 
saywhatkid said:
My leaning has changed over the years. I was far left for my first 30 years, now much closer to center. I think the leaning has as much to do with the candidates of the party you align with, along with where things are in the USA. I prefer a mix of platforms.

Does this mean I am brain dead?
Click to expand...

No. You probably just would not see increased volume in either area.
 
jillio said:
That is quite different than being a fundamentalist.:roll: Nice attempt at semantic confusion, but still a fail.
Click to expand...

My parents were mainline Baptists before they converted to the Presbyterian church.

I remember meeting Fundies and Pentecostals in Staunton. They were a bit ... exotic to me at first when I went to VSDB.
 
rolling7 said:
Your point is well taken but still not without error. Here in America there is a carefree percent that believe in the right to bear arms and willing to fight to death to prevent our country from becoming like Iran/Iraq. We do not live in fear, not like you explain the people of Poland. Where you look at America when you see the protection of the President from protestors on the street, you can be sure those protesting will not be shot, as opposed to the example your Dad gave you.
I will agree with you there are Arab/Muslim freethinkers but they don't live in Iran/Iraq.
Click to expand...

You are contradicting yourself. The attitude described in the bolded is far from care free, and is definitely based in fear.
 
Jiro said:
yes they do.

they're vital source of intel for us
Click to expand...

I daresay the poster knows next to nothing regarding the thinking of citizens of Iraq or Iran. He quite obviously has no experience interacting with either culture.
 
jillio said:
You are contradicting yourself. The attitude described in the bolded is far from care free, and is definitely based in fear.
Click to expand...

A carefree percent willing to fight to the death for the USA against Iran and Iraq?

:shock: That seems a bit oxymoronic to me. I don't think a decision like that should be taken lightly after all it's your (in the generic sense) life and you could lose it!
 
Last edited:
whatdidyousay! said:
Wrong! If there is 100 % certainty a person is guilty of committing a horrible crime I feel they should get the death sentence right away to save the tax payers money! I am sick of seeing people committing crimes that end up costing us all money. What about serial killers they kill again and again.
Click to expand...

That is an emotional response. And the whole rationale is from an emotional perspective, because the numbers do not bear out the myth that it is cheaper to execute a criminal.
 
Reba said:
You are so predictable. :lol:

No, I don't feel threatened in the least.


Please, don't log off on my account. :D
Click to expand...

Trust me, I didn't log off on your account.:cool2: But you still need to take a little time to pull yourself together.
 
Beowulf said:
How is supporting the death penalty a logical response? :shock:
Click to expand...

Exactly. Support of the death penalty is an emotionally based response to crime. And generally, a distorted and disporportionate fear.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top