GameBanshee Forums

Originally posted by UberJason:
<STRONG>I believe that most people in politics do what they think is right and genuinely want to help people and make a difference, at least in democratic societies. Now what one defines as "good" and "evil" for the sake of these debates is really rather arbitrary.

I truly "evil" leader would be a dictator or demigouge (sp.?) who exploits their citizens for the sake of their own personal gain.(Hitler, Mousillini, Saddam Hussein). While I may disagree with a lot that both Democrats and Republicans say, I wouldn't characterize any number of them as evil.</STRONG>

To say that a person is evil because he/she is in favour of a non-democratic government is proof of a quite narrow perspective. Consider the fact that most political philosophers in history have been rather sceptical to the very idea of letting the people rule without serious limitations. Simply because you do not trust the general public enough to let them rule doesn't make you "evil". Thus, a non-democratic leader can simply have a different opinion as to how things should be run.

However, if your sole purpose of political activity is personal gain, then I believe that calling you an evil person would be correct, no matter whether you label yourself socialist, democrats, republican, fascist or whatever you may come up with. You can even be a nazi, if you believe that nazi politics would be in the best interest of the people - without being EVIL. You may quite accurately be called an idiot, but it doesn't with necessity make you an evil person.

Woah I just got back from a little vacation... Lots of friggen responses. First off this belongs here because I asked you to relate the political preffereces with the ALLIGNMENTS FROM BG2! Second Bush was selected not elected! They did a recount after all that and Bush got his arse kicked, but he was already president so whatcha going to do? Hey if they wanted things to be fair they woulda allowed the recount to be done entirely (and no ILLEGAL ballets for christ sakes). I am really tired I havn't slept in 4 days.... but first don't try to defend the shrub's intelligence, he got awfull grades in college and hes just a MORON!!! Does anybody understand his, "were outa debt so lets squander everything weve saved plan"?

This message has been edited in the hopes that it will straighten out this topic...

-Flagg
GameBanshee

[ 05-14-2001: Message edited by: Flagg ]

Originally posted by TVDinna:
<STRONG>
Demanding for like 50 recounts doesn't seem to be lawful good. Don't even get me started on Clinton... =)
</STRONG>

May i be excused for intervention, but from here the last person seems chaotic good. His greatest fault was he was never able to withstand a pretty women - what rare man could If, of course it isn't a law for him to surrender on any occasion.

As for greens, they never could be lawful because there is anyway no country with green law i know about

L.

For God's sake cheesemage edit your post! The whole second page is fubar because of it! (Or was that your intention?) This entire topic should be deleted. It's only bristling people up. Thorin, contrary to what you may believe, your opinion is not the alpha and omega of the conversation. So please refrain from quotes like: Bush is stupid. That's final. No argument about that. Republicans are hicks. That too is final. Your personal views aren’t universal and acting like they are is very immature. A lot of people are overreacting. EMINEM, White Rabbit, and others need to take a step back and try to be a bit more nonpartisan. UberJason is right about hardly anyone in the U.S. government being evil. Differentiating viewpoints abound, but most are hard working individuals trying to make a difference. The whole election mess has spawned insecure republicans and bitter democrats (and the green party is never in the running so they have nothing to really be upset about). I’m trying to be impartial here, but when people go around saying “my party is holy and right, your party is stupid and evil,” it’s hard to remain unbiased. So how about we just delete this thread and talk about Baldur’s Gate instead of politics.

HAHA, this thread was hilarious. EMINEM, you are definitely too much of a proselyte for my liking. Face it, you follow the Republicans in the same way that I follow the Toronto Maple Leafs. Go Leafs!

Look I am trying as hard as i can to get this into SYM
It just doesnt seem right

Once again, this isn't in SYM because I asked people to relate polititions/polotics to the allignments in BG2!!!!! For gods sakes why do you guys always want my topics deleted, I thought this one was fairly valid!

WTF happened to this thing? oh and BUMP.

Originally posted by EMINEM:
<STRONG>When it comes to politics, I think one's stance on abortion is an accurate litmus test of alignment
</STRONG>

I respectfully have to disagree with you on this one. I am not sure to what extent politics and ethical questions should be interlinked. I am also not a fan of a two party system. I agree that it has certain benefits, but I believe that it has serious drawbacks.

I know that I am not an American, and thus are not fully aware of all the ins and outs, but I am amazed from time to time by American politics.

edit: I just wanted to add one more thing. The American political arena is not the only one that amazes me from time to time.

[ 05-14-2001: Message edited by: Flagg ]

Flagg noted, with extrordinary understatement:
I know that I am not an American, and thus are not fully aware of all the ins and outs, but I am amazed from time to time by American politics.

I'm an American, and it never fails to amaze and disgust me. But then, as the great humorist Robert Benchley once wrote in one of his darker moments, "Nothing can be made of a government where 51% of the people get to tell 49% what they should do."

And this is my first and last post on the subject of politics.

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>, "Nothing can be made of a government where 51% of the people get to tell 49% what they should do."
</STRONG>

Isn't this the core principle of democracy?

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>"Nothing can be made of a government where 51% of the people get to tell 49% what they should do."
</STRONG>

I heard another politician (I think he was European) said, "You need 50% + 1 vote to be the majority". You don't even need 51% in democracy.

Sorry folks, the American system of government is not a Democracy but a Representative Republic. And the two party system seems, IMHO, to be far better than a one party system and far less chaotic than a multiparty system (which prompts 'government by coalition' and that usually results in stalemate). Republicans are really capitalists and also believe that people should be responsible for themselves, which intimates that they should act in a responsible manner, which is an unfortunate failing in most people. Democrats are socialists and feel that redistibution of wealth and the absolute, supposed, benevolence of the central government which in practice also doesn't work.

Now, to relate this to BG alignments, extreme right wing beliefs are the top of the 'good' alignments and extreme left wing is at the bottom of the 'evil' alignments. Most of us fall somewhere in between. That's why I always play 'True Neutral'. From that position I can choose the best of both worlds and be justified in either choice of actions. (Here in the US we call these people 'Moderates'). But in real life .... well that's a different story

Originally posted by Anatres:
<STRONG><snip> Republicans are really capitalists and also believe that people should be responsible for themselves, which intimates that they should act in a responsible manner</STRONG>

Hmmm... Aren't republicans against euthanasia, abortion and that kind of stuff? Doesn't this imply that they feel that people cannot be responsible for themselves?

@Flagg, only the extreme right wing. And their beliefs are no more valid than the extreme left that believe a tree has more worth than a human life.......

@Anatres, That is one of the things that I like about a multi-party system. You normally end up with a coalition, and thus are ensured that extremists don't govern your country.

@Flagg, the extremists don't govern our country but they do influence 'policy'. Although their major influence is usually on a state rather than the Federal level. At least that's where they have the most deletoriuos effect. Witness California's current energy fiasco. This is a direct result of too many years of the extreme left wing environmentalists dictating state energy policy. We have the same effects at the Federal level also. We are coming out of eight years of no national energy policy into a time of high demand that conservation alone won't solve. Unfortunately the most vocal groups are the 'environmentalist wackos' so the current administration is being painted with the 'big oil' brush. Too bad as we (the US) really need a balance of both. It's unfortunate that most people are more easily swayed by the pictures of oil soaked waterfowl and pay no attention to scientific studies that show environmentally sound approachs to drilling are available. The controversy over the Alaskan oil pipeline and the adverse effect it would have on the caribou herds haven't been brought up during the debate over drilling in ANWR (Alaska National Wildlife Refuge) due to it being a totally false assumption. The pipeline actually has had a positive effect on the herds. But you see that's not 'doom-and-gloom' so it's not brought up. Another example is the 'plight' of the Spotted Owl in the American northwest. The federal government set aside hundreds of thousands of acres of forest to protect their habitat. Then it was discovered that the spotted owls were dissapearing at a faster rate than when the forest was managed through selective logging. The reason, more forest more hawks. More hawks less owls (they are the hawks prey).

Uh, oh, I'm rambling again! Need to put up my soapbox!!

By all means, Antares, keep rattling on. I'm learning more from this forum than from the Washington Post.

With regards to the original topic, Political Beliefs vs. Alignment, I stand firmly on my belief that one's views on abortion is a good indication of a person's weal. Call me absolutist, but I will always believe that the practice of abortion is an act of evil, and to insist that taking the life of an unborn child is a right guaranteed by the Constitution violates the Constitution itself as well as the letter and spirit of another famous charter, the Declaration of Independence:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

If I understand Thomas Jefferson correctly,
"endowed by their Creator" means that the right to life is God-given, and what God has given, no one has the right to take away but Him. The problem arises, of course, when the existence of God is questioned, doubted, and finally denied, and when the constitution is subjected to less-than-literal interpretations. This is exactly what has been happening to American culture and jurisprudence for the past hundred years. Is it any wonder, then, that abortion is now legal? Take away the foundation, and the entire building collapses. If God is dead, anything is permissible, even the act of sucking the brains out of unborn baby's head, cracking its skull, pulling it out of its mothers womb, dumping it in the garbage, and calling the whole procedure a "constitutionally protected right."

But M&M, women want abortion because they get abused, and have children that the father won't support the child. What are they supposed to do?
If everyones equal then why are women forced to carry the burden of bringing up child while the father has run off.
M&M if you believe that there is equality in this nation, well there isn't. Read a newspaper. Its obvious that there isn't equality for soe people.
If everyone has the right to life, then shouldn't we ban guns. Guns kill innocent people ending their lives. Abortion kills unborn babies ending their lives too, yet guns are all right but abortioning is not. Guns can be used for protection, but so can abortion. It prevents women from having babies they did not intend on having.