3 ms·

You'll notice the post you're responding to never mentioned anything close to "standing on the sidelines". A common tactic used by evangelist partisans is to p

• AlexandrB 5y ago
  > You'll notice the post your responding to never mentioned anything close to "standing on the sidelines". That's a fair criticism. I suppose I was responding to the attitude I perceived from the comment rather than the words themselves. I'll admit that what I said may not apply to the GP at all.
• AnimalMuppet 5y ago
  Let's say I care about people more than politics. And let's say it plays out this way in my thinking: I'm pro-life, because I see a fetus as a person, or at least a person-in-the-making. And I'm pro-law-enforcement, because I see crime hurting people. And I'm pro-welfare and pro-raising-minimum-wage, because I see poverty hurting people. And I'm anti-death-penalty, because I see that as killing a person. And I'm anti-gun-rights, because I see guns killing people. (Note well: Not all of these are my positions, so let's skip debates about the specifics.) In the great Red-vs-Blue battle, I'm on the sidelines, because I'm on Team People, not Team Red or Team Blue. Both sides have positions that I agree with, and both have positions that I disagree with. I can't be fully on either team, because neither is fully on my team. But I'll get involved on individual issues. I'm not "undecided" on individual issues. Why is that a problem? (I mean, I see that it's a problem for someone who's wholly sold out to Team Red or Team Blue, but why should the rest of us care?)