Steve_American wrote:I assert that you have no skin in the game about social issues in the US. Why do you care what we do?
With the influence of the United States, what happens there does not just make a difference there.
And frankly I would be a bit disappointed if you do think "an outsider is not entitled to comment on the matters happening in the United States", although I understand that I deserve being unwelcomed
if I (apparently) take a position not in your country's interest (at least if you perceive as such).
Steve_American wrote:I have never seen you talk about the social issues/policies in Saudi Arabia.
Actually yes I had, just that it's such a pariah state that I don't (have to) do much except by referencing it as a negative example.
Steve_American wrote:Can you and I agree that most if not all social issues/policies are just based on preexisting beliefs?
This seems obvious to me. Here in the US we asserted in 1776 that all men (later expanded to humans) are created equal and so are equal under the law. That all are the be treated with respect. Most nations and societies disagree. They think some humans are higher and some lower. Take India as an example.
. . .We asserted equality in 1776, I take it that we meant that, because in Jan. 1863 we freed the slaves, and then amended the Constitution to make them equal under the law to people who had never been slaves, (and then gave women the vote). Most Repuds and Trumpers disagree with me on this point. They think that white people are higher than all other people and the law can and should reflect their belief, am I right (in your opinion)?
My two cents (or even less).
1. The Republican Party would always see itself as the one doing all those anti-slavery and equality stuff, and objectively it's more or less the case until the 1960s when the United States changed their alignment. I did not do research on this matter so I don't know how rapid this change was, but from what I understand I won't say the Republicans in the 2010s are what they were in the 1860s. Same applies to the Democrats.
2. From what I experienced since I was small and till now (I think I am technically middle-aged) I actually agree with Republicans and Trumpists that the Whites are superior, or at least they are more capable in administration than most other races / nations, at least on the Eurasian continent. By extension, I genuinely agree the concept of MAGA. However, they failed to address at least two aspects
a. White superiority comes from non-assertion, and what (as you call) Repuds and Trumpers did the other way round. That makes them closer to CCP supporters than what they should actually be.
b. It's actually the system and the prosperity of the likes of you, @late, Politics_Observer, etc. which make the White, and / or the United States, great. If one thinks
like what a White should then the person is White, if you know what I mean.
3. More about my view on social policies.
a. I generally oppose differential treatment among races, sex, orientation, etc. unless the case can be presented with absolute necessity, and so far I fail to see any, other than (for example) sex crime laws must
"bias" towards females and / or minors since they are by default in a weaker position to defend themselves.
b. On the other hand, I also don't like the over-assertion of more "special" groups of people like, say, LGBTQ+, nowadays. Many think doing something against discrimination against these people are necessary, but to me it creates an atmosphere that even criticizing the movement can be toxic and bring adverse consequences to the said critic. And as things go, more often or not these critics will find themselves siding with or even being useful idiots of ultra-conservative control freaks (i.e. those who lead Repuds and Trumpers).
c. This may be seen as a conspiracy theory, but I admit that I somewhat share Bluto's (paranoid I must say) fear that governments restricting people's rights to, say, arm, would lead to excessive government control, as happened on my side of the world. However, while the likes of Trump called for mental healthcare, in practice they call for nothing to be done, and I had already expressed my disapproval elsewhere by stating something like "they should have a taste of their own medicine".
Steve_American wrote:So, I've said enough to make my position clear. It is up to you to reply. Do you think that social issues/policies are based on something other than preexisting beliefs? Maybe beliefs one learns from their religion?
"Preexisting beliefs" is an all-encompassing term. There has to be someone thinking up something before something is done.
It's, at least to me, logically impossible to argue against that.
But more importantly, what I said had led you to think I have a perception against this statement?