Weekend question I
The Washington Times reported June 6:
Liberals and conservatives are often disgusted with one another. No surprise there.
But conservatives are literally the more easily disgusted of the 2 when it comes to such squeamish things as maggots, questionable toilet seats and the prospect of eating monkey meat. Such sensitivity, it seems, plays a role in their ideology and moral values.
Two joint studies released Friday from psychologists at Cornell, Harvard and Yale universities determined that conservatives are more fastidious about the creepier, smellier side of life….
The chicken or egg theories why:
Moral values are driven by emotion. Emotion is driven by moral values.
In other words, either people who are more squeamish lean toward conservatism, or conservatism leads to a greater awareness of the potentially unhealthy or unsafe.
Questions: Which do you think came first? What does this say about liberalism?
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Well, their results fit in with my theory of civilization vs barbarianism!
Actually, on a more serious note, during the hearing on the Women’s Right to Know bill, and the Ultrasound Bill last Thursday night, when the subject of photographs and physical evidence of aborted children – videos etc. came up, there was a groan of disgust that came from the opposition (Abortion-choicers, Planned Parenthood, Medical Students for Choice, ACLU and NOW representatives).
Apparently, the abortionists, who actually create the carnage within these photos, find such photos appalling, but continue to create it every Wednesday and Saturday… apparently it’s not disgusting enough, and this research backs that.
However, I reject this study – the study leader has some rather unscientific assumptions:
Disgust evolved?
Origins?
I think where he’s going with this is disgusting.
These statistics are extremely dubious, and
highly tendentious. I doubt that reacting squeamishly to things has anything to do with whether you’re liberal or conservatice.
I’m a liberal, but I certainly wouldn’t want to eat monkey meat or other yucky foods.
And to mix this with abortion shows a real ax to grind. As far as I am concerned, an aborted fetus is not nearly as horrible as a desperately poor,starving child . I’d rather be aborted than live the life of a starving, malnourished child in some destitute country, or grow up in Amnerica surrounded by drugs, violence, abuse,
and lack of decent education and opportunities.
Reminder, no anonymous comments allowed.
Yes, especially not from already banned individuals…
Robert, what the studies suggest is that conservatives are more likely to base their judgements on emotion. If something disgusts them, they will say it’s wrong or immoral. This could apply to anythibg from eating monkey meat, abortion or gay sex. Liberals on the other hand, are more likely to base their judgements on reason.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 6, 2009 9:58 AM
That is not true at all. When we are born in sin, disgust etc we learn . Identifying what is disgusting is learned. The baby according to freud likes to play with their poo. Are you saying that it is a conservative? Because the baby has no reasoN?
Also anonomous when I become born again, are you saying my capacity to reason is diminished? If you do, it tells me you have a capacity to be dishinest. In china they eat snake. Are they more or less into reason? are they divided into conservitive or liberal? They abort so the must be liberal. They eat raw chicken blood and get avian flue. Because they are liberal and do NOT reason. They eat reptile because it is loaded with salmonella and they are not able to reason.
A liberal is unable to get to the lowest level or reasoning and figure out that the baby is human and a human from conception. They are surprised that it was a human baby in there.
I’d say that conservativism has less to do with emotions and more to do with logic and realism. Conservatives judge (for the most part) based on consequences to actions = being realistic = logical conclusion of events through observation and deduction after taking all parts of a situation into consideration.
Amen XPP! RJ
I too am very skeptical of the value of such research at all. The assumptions of the researcher mentioned above are cause for concern.
However, for what it’s worth, I’ll point out the following: Left-wing commentators and activists are quick to use vulgarity on the internet. They seem to have little inner sense of the lack of respect for themselves that resorting so easily to gutter language indicates. I’m sure there are right-of-center folks who swear on the internet, but on balance they do not make a general habit of it like many left-wing people seem to do.
How is this related? Perhaps it isn’t. I do find it curious that it seems to be the case that when it comes to vulgarity, conservatives have more of a sense of decorum and self-control than liberals seem to have. Perhaps a sense of decorum translates across-the-board to other areas of life than just what comes out of one’s mouth (or is written by one’s hands)? Perhaps it is related to an overall respect for the body (or lack thereof)?
“Questions: Which do you think came first? What does this say about liberalism?”
SG: CON-servatives ‘came first’ …. and Liberals evolved from there …
Or … CON-servatives ‘came first’ populating the Ole Testament. Liberals were created with the birth of Christ, and populate the New testament … And the same remains true today
Snerd
Overall, I doubt that there’s that much difference as these “studies” suggest. My guess is that there was bias introduced into the question, or in it’s presentation, by those taking the surveys.
Of course, the very definition of “conservative” tells you that they are mostly more cautious and safety minded than “liberals” in general, but beyond that I doubt there’s really a lot of difference when it comes to “their ideology and moral values.”
Liberals are quite ideological and moral in many, many ways….. with one noteable exception. They have one enormous moral blind spot, which they cultivate and protect with great zeal.
Let’s face it, much of our society operates on the “herd of lemmings” principle. When the leaders of our crowd heads for the cliff, most of us just go right along. Both liberals and conservatives have been stereotyping themselves for years and years.
And their devotion to the slaughter of babies is a result of that self-stereotyping, IMO. Most of them are willing to compromise their own moral principles in order to “fit in” with their crowd. And of course, many conservatives do the same thing on other issues, and I suspect that many of thme also do that on the abortion issue. That, IMO, is why we have so many “half hearted prolifers” and proaborts among conservatives.
If Barrak Obama and Bill Clinton jumped off the Empire State Building at the same time, who would hit the ground first?
Who cares. The result would be a combination of maggots, monkey meat and toilet seats?
The ‘conservatives’ would be revolted by the mess.
The ‘liberals’ would be revolted by the loss.
One man’s treasure is another man’s gunk.
yor bro ken
Jaspers ‘quote of the dat’ indicates the employment category at highest risk for dying a violent death were garage or service station attendants (40).
These are better understood as employees of what I refer to as a ‘stop and rob’. Some people know them as ‘convienence stores’.
Auto mechanics (23) [see service station attendant], waiters or waitresses (22) were next, followed closely by janitors (21), hairdressers and lawyers were tied at (10).
Wuzup wit da cosmetolgists?
Who is doing the killing….and why?
Customers, co-workers, or ‘partners’?
Hair will grow back and you can make it any color you want.
Wigs. Even celebrities like Dolly Parton wear wigs.
Maybe fur really does kill.
yor bro ken
mr. berger,
I am surprised you are still showing evidences of life. With all the suffering and misery that surrounds you I would have thought you would have already surrendered to despair and recycled yourself.
I guess you really do love keeping ‘misery’ [aka Soomerman] company.
Have you met Soonerman yet?
You two could be identical twin brothers that were separated soon after your conception in a test tube and then implanted in different uteri.
If ever there were two ‘ox’ that should be equally yoked it is you two.
I recomend Iowa or Vermont are the two venues of ‘choice’ for gender challenged partners who desire to be lawfully ‘yoked’.
mazletov!
yor bro ken
Hi all!
Fascinating question, Jill. I need to ponder.
ken,
You are hilarious.
Don’t Harvard, Yale, and Cornell have better things to ponder?
Gee, I wonder if the government funded this study.
Asolutely ludicrous.
Wow, they use the word scumbag a lot! LOL! Stupid article.
HisMan,
I think the comments at The WT are actually interesting; some are pretty clever.
Whoa- Phil. I checked out your website. You have anger issues, my friend.
You had a picture of a woman and, for some reason, kept the word “woman” in quotations. And you may not like Operation Rescue but they have never supported terrorism, and, furthermore, they expressed extreme grief over Tiller’s death at the hands of a man who is not supported by the vast majority (we’re talking well over ninety-nine percent, here) of pro-lifers.
Phil, listen, we’re all upset over this tragedy. But please, make your website a testament to non-violence and not a medium to use Tiller’s death as a reason to speak of hatred. That won’t improve anything.
We can all improve something in this situation, so bleak and upsetting. We can try to remember why hateful words breed hateful actions, and even the hateful words of a pro-choicer can lead to this. Let’s stop with the name-calling, please. We can work together to end violence.
“Whoa- Phil. I checked out your website. You have anger issues, my
Phil’s post was deleted. Thanks Mods!
“Dear God, get heaven ready, because Mr. Enthusiasm is coming. Heaven will never be the same. It will be a better, better place with George in it.”
~ Late-term abortionist George Tiller’s long-time friend Larry Borcherding, eulogizing Tiller at his June 6 funeral in Wichita, KS….
—————————————————
Larry,
I cannot speak for heaven or hell (never been to either place or met anyone [other than Jesus] who been to either place and returned to talk about it), but I can say that mr. Tiller’s departure has made ‘earth’ a better place, or at least a safer place, for prenatal human beings.
“When the roll is called up/down (?) yonder will mr. Tiller be there?”
George never aborted a pre-natal child that he liked.
mr. Tiller was a devoted devourer of inoncents and innocence.
‘Tiller the killer’ never turned away a woman in need who had cash in hand or a cashiers check for the full amount.
I do not know if George has arrived at his final destination, whatever that is, but he will not be hard to spot in the crowd.
Tiller will be the one with the size ‘XXXL’ millstone around his dearly departed neck in the company of goats somewhere to the left of the LORD.
The LORD may not recognize Tiller as a son of God, but HE will know him by his works that preceded and succeded him.
I wonder if Tiller or his descendents ever adopted any children?
LORD, I pray that you will be merciful and show the household of Tiller the curse that now rests upon them and their descendents and that you grant them repentance and instruct them in the way to break the curse and inherit the blessing you have prepared for them before the foundations of the univese.
You said the children would not eat the bitter fruit of the fathers, but that You would judge them by what they have of have not done with Your Son Jesus.
The ‘curse’ may be broken, but Your blessing is from everlasting to everlasting to a thousand generations.
The blood of Jesus overcomes the power of darkness. I pray that the household of Tiller will inherit every blessing that you have intended for him and them, that none shall go missing, that every purpose you intended for their lives will be fulfilled and if there be any unfulfilled purposes from George Tiller’s life you will allow one of his descendents to comlete everyone of them.
yor bro ken
Questions: Which do you think came first,
moral values driven by emotion,
or
emotion driven by moral values?
What does this say about liberalism?
———————————————————-
I am not sure the premise of the question is valid.
Both conditions are not healthy.
‘Law’ absent the spirit of love is a unreliable servant and a merciless master.
If you think liberal humanists are tyrants in wating just wait til you are sujected to the morals of a conservative humanist and woe be to you if that tyrant is a conservative ‘sectarian’ humanists. (Think Spanish Inquisistion here.)
God did not give us the ‘law’ to keep us from having fun or make us righteous.
HE gave us the ‘law’ to keep us from injuring ourselves and others. It is not the ‘law that is impotent, but humans.
Humans are ‘stupid’.
But the ‘Good News’ is that the condition is not irreversible.
The bad news is that humans learn slow and forget quick and tend to default to ‘stupid’ when confronted with problems that are difficult to solve with human understanding, because,
humans
are
‘stupid’.
I do not know of any vaccine or innoculation or gene therapy that protects against ‘stupid’.
‘Stupid’ is a condition that is common to all humans everywhere.
‘Stupid’ is both an acute and a chronic condition.
I know of only one effective therapy for ‘stupid’.
HIS NAME is JESUS.
HE does not discriminate with regard to class, ethnicity, gender, nationality, economic condition, religious affiliation or lack thereof or sexual orientation.
This Physisician welcomes all who are in need.
HE does resist the proud, prideful, arrogant self righteousness, ‘religious’ hypocrits, etc,.
But when we are in those aforementioned categories, if we just move HIS way a little bit, HE will come close to us.
HE rewards those who simply believe HE is the I AM.
yor bro ken
It’s obvious that such stooopid “studies” are undertaken by liberals. Also it’s difficult to imagine that anything current in the field of psychology could be done with sufficient rigor to warrant the name “study”.
Liberals (*the term designates leftists here*) will waste money to “study” the obvious, and, using their hallmark bad judgment, draw inappropriate conclusions.
Avoidance behavior or fastidiousness concerning obvious sources of infection has more to do with awareness and desire for self preservation than emotion.
Most of what is under the umbrella of moral values involves behavior which enhances personal and societal survival.
The conservative personality will express the survival instinct by sticking with the tried and true – that which is known to permit or enhance survival, rather than trying the first, new, untested thing which is encountered.
Conservatives have less propensity to quickly undertake risk. It has to be analyzed and evaluated first.
Conservatives exhibit much more ability to do the math for this purpose.
Liberals should give thanks to the Creator that Conservatives generally exhibit an ETHICAL aversion towards killing members of the same species.
In all aspects, the collective survival of liberals is contingent upon the presence of conservatives. If only they had enough sense to understand this.