Quote:
Originally Posted by rubecube
I'm guessing you're a white, straight male. That might be a big reason why social issues are less of a concern to you than economic ones.
|
I am; however, social issues a huge concern to me, especially gay rights. Attitudes like Esk's actually make me viscerally angry. If I'm honest my first reaction to the thread title was that I want HIM executed along with everyone who agrees with him, though that's not a productive reaction, so I tempered it in my post a bit to "I hope all these guys die off and their views made extinct demographically".
I just try to be practical when it's time to vote, and ask what the actual real-world impact of X candidate being elected will be. If I'm convinced that in spite of their holding social views I don't agree with, none of those will actually be put into practice, the impact of the candidate's economic policy massively outweighs any antiquated social perspectives.
Maintaining a litmus test on social issues has caused and continues to cause a lot of problems as far as I'm concerned in the political discourse because it allows these things to be used as wedge issues on which elections are decided when they have a much smaller overall impact than other, less emotionally charged issues. In my opinion it's important not to fall into all or nothing thinking.
For example, if I like everything a staunchly pro-life, abortion is murder candidate has to say on other issues, and he's clear that in spite of his views the law is settled and he will not support anti-abortion legislation, I won't let our different perspectives prevent me from voting for him.