JU 88 - I was not offended. Your entitled to your view.

On abortion - what if that is YOUR child - a son or daughter yet unborn, that a woman carries. Yes - its in her body, but its also part of YOU. Funny, its her choice alone, but the moment that child takes its first breath - it becomes YOUR responsibility primarily. 9 months < 18 years. See any "inequality" there? Thats a personal view, but my stance still stands in regards to the US - it should be a states rights issue.

Regarding guns, I have to ask - what makes you feel that legalized firearms represent a danger to the average citizenry? I view it this way - if someone is WILLING to go through the necessary steps to legally own a firearm - ie take any required safety courses, register the weapon, etc - they have shown a level of responsibility much higher than those who would get a firearm ILLEGALLY. Or as is often said in my area of the US - if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have them. And as you noted regarding knife violence - what happens if you have a knife and are attacked by a outlaw with a firearm? Do you have any reasonable chance of self-defense or self-preservation? But again - your entitled to your view. I do need to make clear - in the US the right to own firearms is one that IS protected by our constitution - and thus is NOT a states rights question, but a already established right upon which the government has limited authority to control.

If you have more and 10 options..
 

I give a vote....

Oh man, I GOTTA bite: :O:A couple problems here.

First, is DOES impact everyone to create laws that impact the taxation of ANYONE.

Second, and more poignant, homosexuals and heterosexuals ALREADY HAVE THE SAME FREEDOMS. What most homosexuals want are SPECIAL freedoms recognizing their (extremely) minority position.

To be quite frank, I don't even see this as an issue, but I absolutely HATE how the one side of it presents it as an "equal rights" issue, when it is CLEARLY a "special rights" concern.

But, I *WILL* remain solidly opposed to gay "marriage" as I believe in respecting ones traditions, and in the US marriage is traditionally heterosexual. However, I'm am totally okay with "civil unions" which bestow the EXACT SAME RIGHTS, with the exception of adoption.

Most people would probably be okay with that - the problem is not that so-called "gay rights" activists want special rights recognizing their orientation. Rather, they want to legally ENFORCE a change on the very belief systems that oppose them.

The hell with them. I'll be in their corner when they lose the "bow before me" posture.

I don't want to answer back for JU_88 but here's my point of view:

IMHO, lot of Americans (and the government too) seems to make the promotion of guns/weapons as way to resolve many social problems (even for ''personal security''), the result is inevitably a more violent society.

I consider myself lucky to live in my peaceful part of North America, there are no mass shootings or terrorist threat here.

I used to place myself on the right, but every time I take one of those silly tests I come out either square in the middle or just the tiniest bit to the left.

So I voted CENTER. I always place myself on the side of individual liberty, so I end up on the right of some issues and the left of others.

I'm more than glad to discuss any and all issues, but this was a poll about where you place yourself, not every single reason why. If we're going to start arguing the issues all over again, I vote for creating new threads. Otherwise this is going to bog down real fast.

Depends on the issue, life is not black and white.

Agreed. Depending on the question I go from sometimes far left to far right. So centre would probably be my answer though I usually circle around it without hitting it (most of the time:D).

I wasnt refering to gun owners in the U.S.A, i was refering a hypothetical legilsation of guns here (If it happened) the first people to go out to try to obtain a fire arm would be the criminals and gang members.
....Followed by eveyone else, who would only be do it in order to defend themselves from 'those people' and feel safe.

In my view a good person is someone who really doesnt what to put a bullet in the head of a person who never did them any harm.
A bad person does - or doesnt care.
Back ground checks and training are NOT suffiecent to stop the wrong people from getting a gun. they will just get someone lese to buy it for them - or steal one.
In the UK, guns are outlawed and 99% of criminals do NOT have guns, and I am happy with it staying that way. Gun crime in the Uk has risen in the past few years, but its still uncommon.


As for abortion, I have been in a relationship where my partner had one.
(along time ago)
I am certainly not proud of it, nor do I feel indifference.
But - it was the right thing to do at the time, as we could not have provided a good or stable life for it.
That is very personal and I really dont wish talk about it any further.
Regardless I do not apply the same rights to an unborn feutus as I do to new born baby.
The Man does not go though Physical truma of Birth, so what he wants has to take second place
and thats just too bad.

Like I said, my views are just that, mine. They are what is right by me, but it doesnt mean i expect them to be right by everyone.
So other than the above, i dont wish to discuss or justify them any further.
- sorry.

Such labels are given not by the protagonist, but the audience observing him. I have had threads here wehre I was called a rightwinger, even a Nazi, at the same time somebody else some posts earlier or later called me a lefty or socialist.

It also depends the issue at question, on which I have formed an opinion. The same people that called me left on one issue, may see me as a rightwinger on another.

I personally do not care for how I sh/could label myself, or get seen by others. On issues that interest me, I form an opinion if I feel I have the minimum needed information and education to do so. Where I have not, I refuse to form an opinion, often. that I am able to bring my opinion into line with my conscience and can defend in argument why I am for this and am against that, is much more important, imo.

Conservatism to me means no content and message in itself, but a method, or a strategy: to stick whith something whose value has been shown in the past and has not been put in doubt in the present. chnage for no other reason than chnaging something, I do not like. But to chnage where it is needed and the old habits have turned out to be counterproductive - imo is not contradictory to conservatism.

On some issues I do not think inside the established standards of what goes and what not. Today'S "democracies" I put in doubt. I deny that democracy in all and every circumstance is the best of all possible models. To me it is very much depending on community size.

On controversial measures I often think in terms of "as little as possible but as much as needed". Often this are situations and issues where the acchieving of a defined effect has priority over preferences for or against certain types of measurements. It is a testing of the individual case. Public discussion often sees these things exactly the other way around, and sees needs as subordinate to measures that must be conducted or must be avoided at all cost, no matter what. However, I do not subscribe to a general argument of that the purpose always justifies the means - that is just a generalisation. I tend to think that good intentions alone mean not much if you lack the capability or willingness of bringing them to life. Indeed, the combination of weakness and good intentions often produces more bad than good.

Maybe I qualify for a description of an eclectic. No vote from me, obviously. I cannot identitfy myself with any of the categories.

I try and apply common sense to any political issue. Sometimes that puts me right of center and sometimes it puts me left of center. I think that being on the extreme right or left means that you are likely to be less objective about things in general.

I like the number of posts I'm seeing here wherein people identify themselves as independents. Refusal to identify with a political label is a good indicator of dissatisfaction with established parties and views - something we need badly at the moment. There are few things more harmful than an established and unrestricted power structure.

Speaking of established power structures, I would invite those of you giving Letum crap about this survey to consider the power structures that govern your own thoughts and actions, namely, your own brains. What right do you have to criticize Letum for attempting to collect data? Yeah, the survey isn't the best, but he has already pointed out why, and you should have known that it wasn't going to be a precise survey by virtue of the fact that it's a forum poll. :x:D

To answer your question, Letum, I will say that I hold socially liberal and fiscally conservative views of the American variety. More than anything, I believe that the violation of personal freedoms is both immoral and socially harmful. I recognize the need for a state to enforce protections of freedoms, but I see it as a necessary evil that must be limited as much as possible. I see fiscal and societal controls beyond an near-minimum as harmful. To put it briefly, I believe in free minds and free markets.

For the purposes of you survey, count me as one vote for American right and one vote for American left. If a label would be more helpful, call me a Libertarian.

Well I for one fail to see it's purpose. He said himself that the results wouldn't be useful or accurate so it leaves me wondering why he's doing it at all.

Why should you even care? Letum wants to do a survey for his own reasons, whatever they may be, and that is all there is to it. You can choose to respond or not, as you wish. Is it such a terrible imposition?

I also question the validity of whatever conclusion he arrives at, given the survey method, but since I don't know what that conclusion is really based upon, I can't judge that. Maybe he just wants to hear people's opinions.

When it comes down to it, this is just a guy we know asking a question. What's the harm in answering honestly, or not answering at all, as the case may be?

I've always considered myself as left, but as I've grown up I've drifted more towards center and now even occasionally drift center-right.
Although I suspect that in the real world thought most people would vote for the unwritten catagory which is 'apathetic'.

Who said it was?

No harm at all. But on the other hand is there some kind of harm in asking why he's doing it?