I Am Politically Apathetic

[Socrates]

[quote name='Revprodeji' post='1393424' date='Sep 26 2007, 11:30 AM']'Socrates'
apathy can come from a lack of faith in the process. I have an extreme lack of faith for the process of deciding who runs, the way they "promote" and "attack" the other person, the celebrity the people have and then the way that not only does your vote not matter because political ads are focused on idiots, but also the person voted often times does not have the power you would imagine they have to do what you voted them to do in the first place.[/quote]
Politics smells of elderberries. Welcome to reality.

"Politically apathetic" is a vague enough term that it wasn't quite clear what you're talking about. Literally, it simply means one doesn't care about politics.

[quote]I have made the argument that if the issue is adoption being restricted towards one world view, it would be restricted towards others. ala christians. But I have never made the argument you are making above.[/quote]
This is completely fallacious reasoning. The"world view" of the adoptive parents isn't the issue here. It's not like proposing making it illegal for, say, atheist or liberal or monarchist or whatever married couples to adopt children.
The issue is that, objectively, a sodomistic homosexual "relationship" does [b]not[/b] in fact constitute a family (whatever their "worldview" may be), and should not be legally treated as one and should not adopt children.
Homosexual couples were never in the past allowed to adopt, and there is no reason to change this in order to cater to the p.c. homo agenda.

The Pope has said we must work politically to defend "Protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death; [b]recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family, as a union between a man and a woman based on marriage, and its defense from attempts to make it juridically equivalent to radically different forms of union which in reality harm it and contribute to its destabilization, obscuring its particular character and its irreplaceable social role[/b]; and the protection of the right of parents to educate their children.”
(Source article from CNA: [url="http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=6368"]Catholics must be engaged in political debate, says Pope[/url])

This is not about criminalizing worldviews, but about keeping sodomy from being legally recognized as equal to marriage. The Pope and even the Bishops are concerned about this, and we should be too.

[quote]My issue is whether or not the state allows benefits will not change the people and their lifestyle. The issue isnt if homosexuality is legal, it is whether they are able to partake in the civic benefits of marriage. If the civic party wants to grant civic paperwork I could really give a jack. The state represents the needs of the people, it is not its duty as a secular thing to regulate our morality. A sacramental marriage is not something the state has the power to grant, so the issue is mute to me.[/quote]
Again, this is not about "regulating our morality," but about not legally declaring what is not in fact and never can be a family to be a family, and treating same-sex sodomy the same as a marital union.

You're talking Budge-talk here. The idea that law must somehow have absolutely nothing whatever to do with morality is false and nonsensical anyway. Law by its very nature "legislates morality" in some way.
Secular laws can either be in accord with natural law or opposed to it. Legally rewarding sodomistic "unions" and treating them the same as marriage is contrary to natural law, and should be opposed.

[The Joey-O]

[quote name='Revprodeji' post='1393424' date='Sep 26 2007, 12:30 PM']Joey

Why would you align yourself with a party? The party system is one of the biggest if not the biggest problem with our political process.

Also, you cite it is important to "know" the candidates. But I would argue that we can not really know the person based on what is available in the media. We know the created persona that they have to appeal to people. Politics is nothing more than a popularity contest most of the time.[/quote]

I did not "align myself" with a political party. As if registering with the Republican Party forces me to obey everything the party says and does. I just tend to agree with the Republican Party more than the Democratic one. Not absolutely, just mostly. When I imagine my "ideal candidate", he is a lot closer to a moderate Republican than a moderate Democrat. Additionally, I get to vote in the primaries. I figure this increases my chances (even if in a very miniscule way) that I could get a candidate that I want. I actually think that everyone should register with one of the 2 parties, so they can have slightly more sway, too. Maybe a lot of like-minded people who sympathize with one party, but not perfectly, could influence the direction of the party.

One of the things I'm trying to do with my blog is find out what the media doesn't pick up. I'm starting with everything that's out in the open, but I'm also looking for professors that influenced a candidate, people who influenced a candidate and the staff of a candidate. Additionally, seeing how well candidates performed a follow-through on their promises is very useful and rarely well evaluated.

It is possible that everything out there about every politician is so full of lies that all my work will be useless, but I'm willing to take that risk after a couple of years, it will be shown more clearly if what I'm doing is useful or not.

[The Joey-O]

[quote name='SarahB' post='1393478' date='Sep 26 2007, 01:53 PM']I know you were talking to Joey, but I thought I'd chime in. I was a registered Republican for a long time because they were the lesser of the two evils. As a Christian, I realized that voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil, and I couldn't do that. And then I started to get disgusted with them and I was set to register as an Independant and try to find someone decent to vote for. And then a friend of mine introducted me to the Constitution Party. They have a platform that I could get behind and canidates I can believe in. At least on the state level, I personally know the candidates that we've put up in the last few elections, and I feel comfortable voting for them because I know their character, etc.

And you're right, the [b]TWO[/b] Party system is the biggest problem in our political system. It's darn near impossible for anyone with any actualy ideas to get on the ballot, especially on the nation level.

And it is hard to get through the media persona of the major candidates. But there is also their record to look at, which can give us a lot of insight into the things they actually believe. Most people don't look at the record though. They just go on what the person is saying and measure it up against what the others are saying.[/quote]

What a coincidence!! In my state, you can be registered with 1 major party and 1 minor party. I am both registered as a Republican and a member of the Constitution Party!! I agree with the Constitution Party 80-90% of the time. Whereas I agree with Republicans 50-60% I didn't think I'd meet another member of the Constitution Party in my life (Other than the one guy who showed up at my old Bible College)! This rules!

[zdog042]

You people and your politics, making me get back onto the boards. I was happy with my low double-digit postings until this showed up. hehe.

So, I do have to agree with an above statement - this entire thread is nothing but a straw man argument. You can't hold it up one way or the other - it is an impasse because it is entirely opinion based. That said, I can add my $.02 USD, which I am glad is now worth $.0200870 CAD.

First of all, we have a chicken and the egg discussion. Or an art and life discussion, whichever you prefer. Which affects whom? Does society affect gov't or the other way? If you pick a uni-directional mode, you have chosen wrong. They affect each other, at the same time. A change in one causes a change in the other, which changes the initial change. They magnify and subtract from one another, much like sound waves at odd distances from each other.

So, let's go for why people need to/take the time to learn the political system. I think we will all agree that the system, if not broken, is not perfect and could stand to be fixed. With that, broken things always take more time and energy than things that work perfectly. It is harder to fight against entropy than to let it take its course. So, if you don't take enough time to learn the issues, you are only contributing to the problem. With that said, the amount of time is different for each person.

Bringing me to another point, the "50 points of energy" analogy. Rev, I agree with you that you shouldn't put your 50 pts into it. But, I don't think it is wrong for Joey to put his 50 pts into politics. And, it isn't wrong for me to put 20 into politics, 20 into changing society, and 10 into working at my tech support job. Again, I am coming back to my first "real" paragraph, about the chicken and the egg question. If you leave one alone, it will still impact the other. So, you either need to have a radical change in one (which would take away the need for the other when it is changed far enough), or you need to work on both fronts. I am all for people putting their energy into what their passions are. If you can't get excited about politics, don't do it! However, we need those who are passionate about politics to keep fighting on that front. I could go longer on this, but I would start to digress. So....

Onto the two party system. Firstly, I don't think it is any more evil than a multi-party system. If we introduced multiple parties, why would I think it would work any differently than in other countries? There would be just as many stalemates, and it could make things harder. For instance, if an anti-abortion bill came up, and my party didn't have the votes needed to get it to pass, do I form an official partnership with the "Hate, Lust, and Corruption" party to pass the bill? So, two parties isn't evil, it is just inefficient. Just like every other form of parlimentary/congressional/senatorial government.

And finally, gay marriage. This is what it comes down to - are we going to recognize marriages done by the state? As Christians, if the only marriages that matter are the ones that are sanctioned by the Church and blessed by God, then any marriage done outside of the bounds of the Church don't matter and are merely done for emotional and financial reasons. If we can discount marriages done by Justices of the Peace, then who cares about homosexual marriage, because it wouldn't matter to us anyway! However, if they do matter in our thoughts of who is married and who is not, then gay marriage becomes an issue.

So, that's the next hijack of this thread. I actually would prefer if it ended up not being a hijack, but I know how it seems to work.

With all of this said, I am all for people being politically apathetic. However, if everyone was like that, then I would have a problem with it, and probably would become more politically active myself.

One last thing. Somebody needs to teach me how to say things in less words. Seriously, if I were to see a post like mine, I would get scared just looking at it, especially in page 4 of the discussion.

[SarahB]

[quote name='The Joey-O' post='1393888' date='Sep 26 2007, 11:18 PM']What a coincidence!! In my state, you can be registered with 1 major party and 1 minor party. I am both registered as a Republican and a member of the Constitution Party!! I agree with the Constitution Party 80-90% of the time. Whereas I agree with Republicans 50-60% I didn't think I'd meet another member of the Constitution Party in my life (Other than the one guy who showed up at my old Bible College)! This rules![/quote]


Haha, no way. I'm actually the Secreatary of our Allegheny Co chapter and for the southwest region of PA. And we just had our State meeting and the Secreaary was sick so the State Chariman asked me to step in. It's pretty cool being so young and being able to be that involved.

I've never heard of being able to be registered with two parties. Will you be voting for Ron Paul in the primary?

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote]You're talking Budge-talk here.[/quote]

funny that budge has created a whole new lexicon here at PM.
words referring to character and reasoning flaws...

[N/A Gone]

We cant swear. So when we want to dig it deep we just make a reference to Budge. Thats great.

I do not see my argument as straw man. This discussion has helped me flesh out some things, but it still leaves me with the sick sense with politics and with people who debate the show. It is almost as if politics has become our "circus" to distract us from everything else.

So the straw-man, or the contridiction accusations are nice. But if I am still apathetic to the process and the system what does it matter? This is not something where we are seeking an absolute truth so there is no standard to judge it by. I extremly dislike politics, and even more so the process of it. Ok...what does it matter? Why should I ever get excited about it?

[Maggyie]

[quote]So the straw-man, or the contridiction accusations are nice. But if I am still apathetic to the process and the system what does it matter? This is not something where we are seeking an absolute truth so there is no standard to judge it by. I extremly dislike politics, and even more so the process of it. Ok...what does it matter? Why should I ever get excited about it?[/quote]

One doesn't have to be "excited" about it per se... For me it is one big snore. But it is important to be involved in the system, at least to the extent of trying to find someone to vote for, because the "system" is how we obtain justice for ourselves and others. If we truly love our neighbor we will want him to live under a good and just government.

[Aloysius]

One cannot be politically apathetic.

One can be politically cynical, though. I'm politically cynical.

But you shouldn't be politically apathetic. Just cynical (anyone who's honest with themself in a modern democracy has to become cynical eventually).

The difference between being apathetic and just cynical: the apathetic fellow says his vote won't make a difference and so he stops caring about the direction of the country, and doesn't vote. the cynic says his vote won't make a difference but he cares a lot about the direction of his country and probably throws his vote away on an unwinnable third party candidate. As a Christian, you're pretty much required to be a hopeless one man army for lost causes

You just gotta remember the Ballad of the White Horse:

The men of the East may spell the stars,
And times and triumphs mark,
But the men signed of the cross of Christ
Go gaily in the dark.

The men of the East may search the scrolls,
For sure fates and fame,
But the men that drink the blood of God
Go singing to their shame.

...

But you and all the kind of Christ
Are ignorant and brave,
And you shall have wars you hardly win
And souls you hardly save.

I tell you naught for your comfort
Yea, naught for your desire,
Save that the sky grows darker yet
And the sea rises higher.

Night shall be thrice night over you,
And heaven an iron cope.
Do you have joy without a cause,
Yea, faith without a hope?

-G.K. Chesterton

[zdog042]

[quote name='Revprodeji' post='1394067' date='Sep 27 2007, 10:45 AM']So the straw-man, or the contridiction accusations are nice. But if I am still apathetic to the process and the system what does it matter? This is not something where we are seeking an absolute truth so there is no standard to judge it by. I extremly dislike politics, and even more so the process of it. Ok...what does it matter? Why should I ever get excited about it?[/quote]

There is only one reason that [u]you [/u]should get excited about it:

1) If you can use the political process to change society.

I firmly believe that the polical process can be used to change and mold society into a better way. I also firmly believe that it is not the only way to do so, nor do I believe that it the most effective way to change people's minds.

This is my thought on law and legislation. Much like a lock on a door, it keeps honest people honest. The people that will break in will find a way to do it, but it is a stopping point. A speed bump, if you will. I don't know how many people on this board know my background, but if homosexual marriages (and probably the lifestyle as well) would have been accepted by many people, I doubt that I would be posting on these boards today, or that I would have met my wife. The fact that it was looked down upon by so many people, and the fact that I had no legal rights, kept me from seeking out any gay relationships.

The only problem is that you need to continually escalate the speed bump or the lock on the door if you are only using that to keep people out. And then we end up legislating what people wear when they go to bed. It's the problem with only using one route to try and help out people and influence them for the better.

So, my big question is, why do you want people to convince you to stop being apathetic? Why does that question even matter? I can't see any reason why I should try to stop you from being apathetic about politics. Can anybody else answer that question?

[N/A Gone]

I worded it that way because a friend was very angry at me being apathetic. I wanted reasons not to be apathetic. So far, I dont see anything. Just reaffirms our dependancy on the gov't and the childish arguments about celebrities running.


Why dont you post on other threads besides this one B?

Like this one

[url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=72987"]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=72987[/url]

[N/A Gone]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1394108' date='Sep 27 2007, 12:02 PM']One cannot be politically apathetic.

One can be politically cynical, though. I'm politically cynical.

But you shouldn't be politically apathetic. Just cynical (anyone who's honest with themself in a modern democracy has to become cynical eventually).

The difference between being apathetic and just cynical: the apathetic fellow says his vote won't make a difference and so he stops caring about the direction of the country, and doesn't vote. the cynic says his vote won't make a difference but he cares a lot about the direction of his country and probably throws his vote away on an unwinnable third party candidate. As a Christian, you're pretty much required to be a hopeless one man army for lost causes[/quote]

YES!!!!

ok, this makes sense.

Politically cynical. Wouldnt extreme cynicalness be an apathy? A giving up?

[Aloysius]

what you cannot do is go from being cynical to being apathetic; you can be extremely cynical and really know for a fact that nothing you do in the system is ever really going to change anything (unless you vote for Ron Paul ), it turns into apathy when you stop caring and/or give up completely. you have to care about the direction of the country, even if your cause is hopeless you still have to hopelessly have hope. personally, I'm awaiting the [url="http://www.maisonroyale.org/"]restoration of the French Monarchy[/url], [url="http://sean1925.tripod.com/"]the resurgence of the Irish Language, even the restoration of the High Kingship of Ireland somehow[/url], [url="http://www.ronpaul2008.com/"]the victory of Ron Paul for president[/url] and along with that, [url="http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/debt-and-taxes/"]the end of the IRS[/url], and the victory of the Latin Mass over all liturgical deformations. So yeah, you tell me which of those causes I have a chance in heck (haha trying not to be crude) of affecting. You still have to shake a stick at them though

[N/A Gone]

The only fantasy I am waiting for is for you to do the Filioque diagram you promised.

[Aloysius]

oh yeah... haha... hmm... let me get back to that

I started getting frustrated trying to draw things on the computer to look all neat and stuff and then never got back around to it... must've become apathetic.