[–] AnarchyChad 2 points 5 points 7 points (+7|-2) ago
I would say I'm socially 'don't ask don't tell.' If gays want to have their own little community, that's fine - but don't bother the rest of us for money and sympathy when you die of aids.
Basically, minorities of every type can exist, but don't expect for a minute that we'll bend over to accommodate for you. You follow our rules and you better act right, or else.
[–] SelfReferenceParadox 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Exactly, people can't care that you're gay or whatever if they never know.
[–] AnarchyChad 1 point 1 point 2 points (+2|-1) ago
Nice. When do we ship them off to live there?
[–] Aaaron 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
I'm very socially liberal, I'm okay with gay marriage, trans people, polygamy/polyamory, drug use, etc.
However I am also conservative in ways like I believe in strong gun rights and small government.
As far as federal government vs states, I think that the federal government should be mostly limited to what's outlined in the constitution, and the rest should be left up to the states.
The weird thing is, these particular views are getting more and more popular but I do not believe there is any movement or party to describe this stance.
[–] BullsOnCharade 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
I'm confused. What do you mean there isn't a movement? Isn't this basically Libertarianism?
[–] Aaaron 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
You know what, I may have exaggerated how much "small government" I actually want. I'm not a libertarian because I don't believe in things like private prisons, and I actually do believe in national healthcare (obviously nothing like what we have now) and safety regulations for things like cars and food.
[–] vonHugenbuben 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
We should make one! You said it better than I could have, agree with you 100%.
[–] Doomking_Grimlock 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
I'm socially "Don't Give a Fuck" so long as everyone involved is a consenting adult and no one is being raped or maimed without their permission, and I'm not being expected to foot the bill for it.
[–] pacman2000 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
I'd say moderately socially liberal and extremely economically liberal. Probably extreme socially liberal compared to most of voat, though.
[–] decompyler 1 point 1 point 2 points (+2|-1) ago
Can I ask why you think you are entitled to other people's money?
[–] musicalbaboon 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
I personally argue for welfare as everyone benefits. Business owners are better when everyone can afford to purchase their products (we know that for the rich, after a point you stop spending money on consumables and put it into investments and shit). Everyone is better off if we don't have homeless everywhere, if we don't have people turning to crime to get a meal. I currently get welfare whilst I'm studying. The numbers show that, when I get a job out of my degree (it's not in gender studies), I will pay back more in tax over my lifetime than I would if I'd simply stayed on the career path my lack of degree would lead to.
It also seems to be the case that, for those in long term poverty, it's a fuck load harder to get back into the workforce. Just imagine going to job interviews in an ill fitting goodwill suit, shoes that can no longer be cleaned up... Most jobs also require having your own transport. Selling the car to pay for heat makes you unemployable. It's also expected that you would have a phone and internet access. Having the money to be able to afford these sorts of things means people can get back into the workforce.
You just have to make sure welfare puts people above poverty, but not comfortable. You also need to make sure it comes with some enforceable efforts to get back into the work force.
Similar arguments exist for universal health care. You want people to go to their GP at the first sign of trouble, when an issue can be fixed with one prescription, not show up in the ER 3 months later when the cost of intervention goes up exponentially.
[–] [deleted] 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
[–] greycloud 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
i am socially freedom. not sure what that is called anymore. so long as what you are doing isn't infringing on the rights and liberties of others than you should be able to do it. the term "social liberal" has nothing to do with freedom and is more about banning this and that so that everyone is equal. i am not about people being the same, i am about them being different, about being unequal, and being free to pursue what they want to pursue so long as that pursuit doesn't screw other people over.
[–] Smited 0 points 19 points 19 points (+19|-0) ago
I won't stop you from being gay, trans or whatever but I think that the nuclear family is superior and that most if not everyone would be better of living that way. But I think it's counterproductive to make laws against such. 100% secular, I don't think that any religion should get state fund etc. I'm pro choice. I'm for strict immigration control. I don't like identity politics, and this include "right wing" identity politics such as racial identity, though I recognize that there is more trust in communities that are homogeneous.
I'm from Sweden
[–] NonsenseAbounds 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago
In regards to the nuclear family: video about biological predisposition