this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2024

28 points (71.9% liked)

Ask Lemmy

27223 readers

1245 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Rules: (interactive)

1) Be nice and; have fun

Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them

2) All posts must end with a '?'

This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?

3) No spam

Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.

4) NSFW is okay, within reason

Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].

5) This is not a support community.

It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.

6) No US Politics.

Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]

Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

What would your political compromise be? (self.asklemmy)

submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by Lauchs to c/asklemmy

84 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Almost everyone agrees there should be more compromises in politics. So I'm curious, how would that play out?

While I love the policy debates and the nuances, most people go for the big issues. So, according to the party platforms/my gut, here's what I'd put as the 3 for each party:

Democrats: Abortion rights, gun control, climate change.

Republicans: Immigration, culture war (say, critical race theory in schools or gender affirming care for minors) , trump gets to be president. (Sorry but it really seems like a cult of personality at this point.)

Anyway, here's the exercise: say the other side was willing to give up on all three of their issues but you had to give up on one of your side's. OR, you can have two of your side's but have to give up on the third.

Just curious to see how this plays out. (You are of course free to name other priorities you think better represent the parties but obviously if you write "making Joe Pesci day a national holiday" as a priority and give it up, that doesn't really count.)

Edit: The consensus seems to be a big no to compromise. Which, fair, I imagine those on the Right feel just as strongly about what they would call baby murdering and replacing American workers etc.

Just kind of sad to see it in action.

But thanks/congrats to those who did try and work through a compromise!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] FourPacketsOfPeanuts 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You are being perfectly reasonable and coherent by the way. Whoever is downvoting you doesn't seem to understand the point of discussion.

[–] flicker 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

They go on to argue that abortion is murder in a different comment. They're using careful language but it's obvious this isn't a person who is simply "arguing the other side," this is a conversation done in bad faith.

[–] FourPacketsOfPeanuts 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Are you referring to this?

But yet again, for the pro-lifers, murdering babies, no matter how good the results etc might be is fundamentally wrong.

Because that's very obviously referring to the matter in the way that "pro lifers" would.

And you are ignoring the preceding:

I tend to agree with you that abortion should be available to all who want one because it's not my damned decision to make.

I would read comments more carefully if you're going to cast aspersions..

[–] flicker 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Neither.

I'm talking about this:

The reason why it’s worse if she’s pregnant is because you took away her choice and opportunity to have that baby

To each their own I guess. I personally would feel horrible about killing a child not just removing a temporary opportunity or something. I'm not saying it's the same as an abortion, just that we on a fundamental level do understand that the fetus isn't just a clump of cells.

Go and find the context, see that they used lots of "I'm pro choice" language, but then went on to argue that an embryo is a child. This is someone using lots of careful language, but is making a specific argument.