Obviously I've been thinking a lot about this lately. Do you believe in the idea that some things 'happen for a reason'? And I don't necessarily mean little day to day things. I'm talking about important, life-changing events. I honestly believe that people control much of their own fate. They do things to effect their own lives. However, some things are just meant to be. There are things that are out of your control, almost completely, and if they happen then perhaps there was a reason. Ever have anything like this? Something that really changed your life, and you didn't understand it at the time, but looking back you think maybe you can see why it happened?
More than fate, I believe that everything in our lives happens for a reason. I'm going to be a total geek here and pull out a Star Trek TNG episode that I feel is particularly apt. In it, Captain Picard is given a chance to go back to his youth and undo some of the foolish things he had done. When he returned to the present, he was no longer a captain, but a low-ranking science officer in a dead-end job. He comes to realize that everything he had done in his youth had made him the man he was. Eventually, he went back and righted the situation. He explained to his first officer, "I found that when I pulled at the loose threads, I found the entire tapestry of my life came unwoven." I believe there's greater forces at work in our lives than we are capable of seeing.
Mrs. JB, this is off-topic, but I have to say I find your signature alternately offensive and absurd. I don't know where you get the idea that conservatives oppose change, but I think the Republican Party's position on school vouchers, reforming the tax code, privatizing Social Security, and transforming our country's approach to homeland security is indicative of a definite fondness for change. And the idea that liberals are free from authoritarian attitudes, dogmas, and bigotry is wishful thinking at best. Socialism, dialectics, speech codes, and bell hooks are easy examples refuting those ideas. The implication that conservatives are prone to bigotry from which liberals are naturally free insults me personally very much.
Brian, sorry you're bothered by those definitions. They're from the American Heritage Dictionary. Here's their web address if you'd like to take it up with the authors: http://www.bartleby.com/61/
I'm a believer that "fate" brings you opportunties and options, but it's still up to you to take advantage of them. Of course, it could all be blind luck, but at least in my experience, it seems some of the things are too strange to be purely coincidental.
Darrel Royal said, "Luck is when preparation meets opportunity." I think fate is kinda the same way. When you are ready, you see opportunities created by where you've been, what you've thought and what you've done. If your eyes are open to the opportunity at the right time, you don't need luck or fate.
The context of what those definitions say the words mean, and how well the words apply to those of us who are conservative and liberal. As I very clearly pointed out, those definitions are completely worthless when applied politically to conservatives and liberals. Am I missing something? Because you seem to be tacitly saying that a pair of definitions painting conservatives as bigots are correct. And given that I'm conservative, that would mean you think I'm accurately characterized as a bigot.
Am I missing something? Because you seem to be tacitly saying that a pair of definitions painting conservatives as bigots are correct. And given that I'm conservative, that would mean you think I'm accurately characterized as a bigot. I'm not sure where you're getting this conservatives = bigots thing. I assume you're saying that because it expressly states that liberals tend to free from bigotry. I don't think this is a logical conclusion. It also says conservatives tend to favor traditional values. I don't think that this means that liberals are against traditional values, just that conservatives are more closely identified with this. Similarly, historically, liberals have been more actively associated with fighting bigotry (civil rights movement). That doesn't mean that conservatives *support* bigotry, though.
The future is not set. There is no fate but what we make for ourselves. - John Connor, as a message to his mother via Kyle Reese
Yet, it's the definition of "liberal" that includes the remark, "free from bigotry". The implication is that other political persuasions are not free from bigotry. If all of them were, it wouldn't be necessary to include that remark in just one of the definitions. I apologize for highjacking this thread. The particular topic of "conservative bigotry" is a sore spot for me.
Aw C'mon... you recently changed that signature, didn't you? Right after the conclusion of a hotly debated thread about politics if I'm not mistaken. Those are lame definitions. If you agree with BK about that, you shouldn't promote them....
Yet, it's the definition of "liberal" that includes the remark, "free from bigotry". The implication is that other political persuasions are not free from bigotry. If all of them were, it wouldn't be necessary to include that remark in just one of the definitions. Favors traditional values is included in the definition of conversative as well. Again, that doesn't mean liberals are anti-traditional-values. The definitions just list some of the traits most commonly associated with a given "party". Regardless, as you said, The implication is that other political persuasions are not free from bigotry. I still don't see how you conclude that this means ALL conservatives are bigots, unless you think all conservatives share the same values. ("And given that I'm conservative, that would mean you think I'm accurately characterized as a bigot.")
Actually, I had no problem with those definitions. But since many others seem to find the dictionary offensive, I've changed my signature. Cheers!
