Should be titled " Bret Finally Understands Conservatism and Pragmatism". Why it take so long is a real mystery.

Often is

And your desire to destroy what exists is primarily driven by resentment.

Well said 👍👍

I might disagree with the idea of something that already worked or was fine. It could be something bad and not working in society, but that it evokes a positive emotional response. I think the temperance movement and prohibition of alcohol could be an example where there are issues but doing away with alcohol didn't solve root issues of perhaps depression, anger issues, personality disorders which can lead to consumption of alcohol outside of limited and moderate consumption. Prohibition kicks in, problems still there and people seek alternative means to deal with issues and/or seek a new high or feeling.

Respectable viewpoints are not built on generalizations. There are numerous values you support today that were fought for by progressives. Every right you enjoy as a worker, progressives fought and sometimes literally died for. It helps nobody to either villify progress or support progress at all costs. Lets decide what we want society to look like and move in whatever direction takes us there. That will look like progress in some places, and going back to what worked in others. Blindly supporting either progress or regress won't get us there.

The Democratic party was taken over by Neo-Marxists, ushered in with Obama.

In your rambling diatribe, you didn’t make one single salient cogent point, about how “progressive” or “liberal” policy initiatives and enactments have been an existential“threat” to America. All you did was selectively name some historical occurrences and the protest responses to them. You don’t appear to be a serious “liberal” thinker and active voter in pursuit of a summum bonum.

@@readynowforever3676 Most people know what he is talking about. Don't feel bad.

@@readynowforever3676

@@ib3691 Same here. This topic is huge and would take anyone who has been paying attention at all a long time to unpack.

It's a good one.

This. This right here. This should be the top comment. The simplest, perfect answer.

I agree. Slow walking them into realising is killing us. They're too full of flatulence to see they aint all that

It’s common sense truly to me

Eisenhower is known for coining the term “military industrial complex “ in his famous farewell speech. It’s not very long. Everyone should read it. A few sentences after “military industrial complex” Ike warned against & elaborated on the growing managerial class, the experts, the credentialed. We have seen this much more clearly since the 90s. It became chillingly clear with climate change, Covid, and Trans ideology. Suddenly science was no longer about evidence, data, or proof, but science via consensus. Naturally, the problem with that is the vast, overwhelming majority of research is paid for by the government or large corporations. At the college and nonprofit level it’s nearly 100% funded by the government. When you no longer have to prove anything, but simply given opinion, and pull enough experts, whose funding is directly from the government , how do you think they’re going to voice their opinion? Naturally in favor of the people paying them. Academics and scientists have been pointing out this problem for the last 20 to 30 years. And now it has been growing especially under the Clinton administration and Obama. Look at Covid. Suddenly, large multivariable peer reviewed studies became the gold standard despite the fact that until very recently, that was not the case. And of course, those types of studies are extremely expensive. The only people that are going to fund those type of studies because I have big they are how long they take and how expensive they are is the government or pharmaceutical companies. But why would they fund the study? That’s going to backfire on them when they have consensus in their favor? They wouldn’t. And that’s what people don’t understand about the left versus the right debate. The right believes in reality, science, data, common sense, history, the fact that the real world doesn’t operate like a computer model or I think tank in a vacuum. The world is much more complex. There will always be trade-offs. This is where Thomas Sowell comes in. There will always be trade-off. There are no optimal solutions in a large diverse society. Only trade-offs. And of course, for anyone with common sense there will be unintended consequences. And, of course, the right believes rightly so that the government doesn’t fix problems the government doesn’t solve problems. They almost always make them worse. And the right understand that money doesn’t typically solve problems. And of course the core belief on the rightfreedom for the individual. Whereas on the left, they believe in not the individual, but the collective. It’s why they love consensus. They think the government can solve problems, especially big problems. They think money, solves problems. But of course, when you look at celebrities and high profile on the left, they don’t donate their money they want the government to take our money And use it. The tax code is completely written to benefit the wealthy, the elites and big corporations. It’s one of the reasons we should have a flat tax. Everyone would then be treated fairly, and you would eliminate so much of the power and authority of the IRS you would eliminate, millions of tax attorneys and CPAs would have more tax revenues than ever but businesses and individuals alike would greatly benefit because of all the other savings and synergies, and it would be one of the greatest economic stimulus in American history. And of course, the left loves identity politics. Divide and conquer. Put people into little categories and brainwash them into believing they’re victims and make capitalism and democracy and white Christian men, the source of all of their problems. Never mind the fact that they’re telling one group of people, one thing and another group of people something that completely contradicts what they just told the other group of people, because truth doesn’t matter. and when you get people depended on the government and you get people that scared, they don’t think rationally. And of course they’re going after people that are easily manipulated by way of their emotions to begin with. I tell people all the time a great example of this is the movie, the Godfather part two. The scene where Michael realizes Fredo was the one that betrayed him. What’s happening in that scene? The students rush into the casino and start tearing the place apart. That’s what communism does very well in Latin and Asian cultures. They take young people and students and old people and cripples and women and children and other minorities and they convinced them that they are victims. They convinced them that the reason they are poor, and disadvantaged is because of the capitalists And democracy. They whip them up into a frenzy, and that is their army, because the true progressives the Marxist are so small in number they don’t have any real power. They need to brainwash the masses and use them as their army. Their foot soldiers. But of course, as soon as they overthrow the government, most of those people are either executed or put in concentration camps. We saw it in Cuba. We saw it in Russia. We saw it in China. We saw it in Vietnam and Cambodia and Laos. This is how Marxism works. The movie, the red violin when the violin is in China during the cultural revolution is a great lesson in this as well. Communism, Marxism, authoritarianism, that is the goal that is the objective. Identity politics is the propaganda machine to create their army. Saul Alinsky‘s book rules for radicals is the road map. It’s the battle plan the game plan. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton literally worshiped the ground Saul Alinsky walked on. if you’ve never read rules for radicals, it’s a must read also. Very short little book. Much like the communist manifesto. If you understand, the objective of the left of Marxism of communism of fascism is authoritarianism. If you understand, they do it by way of identity politics. If you read rules for radicals and understand the game plan the roadmap in conjunction with identity politics. Then you will understand everything you need to know about the left.

That's because "experts" are merely tools of the corrupt, used to delay response to their machinations.

It’s because they only speak when there’s enough data and beans on a graph to support what they say and that takes years to do. So no duh they are slow and always behind.

Agreed. A few thoughts I'll add to enhance your post, I hope. One of the major challenges I see in today's political arena is the rise of thinking that people are inherently good. While there are some people who might be gentler or humbler than others, I disagree that humans are generally good. Rather, we're inherently selfish, and only through life experience do we come to realize that cooperation creates a better ways for humans to interact. I offer as evidence a human baby, which as any parent knows is the most selfish creature ever to roam the planet. For 9 months it does nothing but take sustenance, sleep, and comfort from its mom so it can grow, and after birth it does the same to both parents for about 18 more years. Only through careful training, socialization, and teaching do kids learn skills like sharing, duty, responsibility, etc. Sadly, though, some people never mature past the child stage, or it takes until they are middle aged to start "getting it". Could be they have bad parents. Could be their personality. Could be a multitude of factors. But the bottom line is society, cooperation, "doing the right thing" all take a lot of training and practice before it becomes comfortable for us and we have a tendency to revert back to our old ways of "me first" when scarcity or stress hit. There is no perfect system, because no humans are perfect. There are some systems like capitalism and free markets that work best because they rely on cooperation, which most people like, rather the coercion, which no one likes.

@@sidwhiting665 I would expand on your missive here by adding that in my life-long experience (of 60+ yrs.) most people are terrible, greedy, selfish, and many are hopelessly narcissistic.. But basically terrible. A really big problem in our society is that sadly and tragically many of these people have kids, and the kids are taught by example to be just as bad/awful/selfish/greedy, etc.. as their parents are, since those are their role models. Don't get me wrong, not EVERY single person is absolutely terrible, but sadly most are. And further, the indoctrination many kids are getting from somewhat well-meaning parents sending their kids to today's higher education system just reinforces the terrible traits/behaviors and makes them even worse. If this all sounds pessimistic, well it is. The truth is brutal, and often savage.. Just my take on all this. FWIW.

@@sidwhiting665Cooperation does not require abandonment of the very human trait of concern for one’s values (“selfishness”). Rather, cooperation requires identification of your values and those of the other person and coming to agreement on how both people can advance their values by working together. This is how partnerships form. Partnerships are not formed when one person, through deception or coercion, forces the other person to sacrifice his values to the other person.

@@deanlawson6880 this is where faith comes in, we have to see ourselves as individuals, and responsible for our own failures and held accountable by a perfect force of good to where we see our role in the world not our role with the world revolving around us. The Judeo Christian philosophy is truth, and learning from mistakes and trying to address them as a flawed human, where we view God as the true good one to ascribe to. The problem with progressivism is that it makes people their own gods, which is fatal and a recipe for disaster, and this explains why western civilization is circling the drain. Even for people who don't believe in God or Christ, we have always organized society in truth, accountability of actions, law and order, and biological basics, and progressivism is usurping all of that. It is a cancer to a free society because it's built on lies.

I agree, progressivism is NOT what the West and the America and the West helped "get here" - meaning with the good things that were achieved starting with Renaissance. Rather natural evolution and a lot of brave and SELFISH and RAPACIOUS EXPLORATION and EXPLOITATION of global resources and a lot of FIGHTING and a huge number of WARS and MASS MURDER and GENOCIDE and SLAVERY and INDENTURED LABOR guided by the political religion including the Church and employment of the Gospel of Christ for world domination is what "rewarded" the West with its "success". Progressivism is but one of the inevitable "FRUIT"s of such "success"!!

Very well said. Thanks.

Amen!

Indeed, people do not change, the wisdom of how people behave is as valid 100,000 years ago is still as valid today.

@@MizrahiChick - I first heard this from Thomas Sowell, so I want to give him credit for that.

@@HarryF-tz5fo Democrats and RINOs want war. MAGA voters want isolation from foreign conflicts.

Unacceptable truth!

This exactly. 5 out of 9 Supreme Court judges redefined marriage. It was sick then and continues to be sick today as the US tries to spread this disease around the world. This is the fundamental principle that will kill this country and cause many wars as the US tries to shove this down the throats of Russia, China, and Muslim countries!

@@HarryF-tz5fo winning the gay marriage debate via a linguistic fiat normalized the approach and confirmed it as an effective tactic. Spending a lot of time and effort on winning the hearts and minds of voters, as all previous Civil Rights movements had to do, becomes no longer necessary if all one has to do is to pressure judges to replace the dictionary while maintaining the vocabulary. So, yes, of course, the next logical step is to apply the same tactic to redefining "man" and "woman".

Rubin and Andrew Sullivan are in the same boat. You equated sexual desire with racial civil rights, gay marriage as an equivalent and extension of MLK. It never entered your mind that some people would take that any further.

​@@HarryF-tz5foisn't he in a homosexual marriage?

College-aged people tend to be nihilist and if something happened before their time - it doesn't count. By their nature they want to redo everything, and why bother to study it first - they want the credit to rebuild it "the right" way, whatever that is. Stupid boomer.

But does he really think he's going to get progressives to slow down and do things one at a time, then sit back for 50-100 years to see the impact of that one thing?

​@@meb280I don't think he thinks that. He articulated something I have discerned in a different way: The leftist mind is a poisoned one: it needs to keep radicalizing in pursuit of "dismantling oppression" and "perfectible humanity". But in the end we'll get blood and ashes, instead.

@@meb280 Short answer, no but progressives are self-immolating right now and hopefully won't be the Left/Liberal side in a 100 years.

Sadly, it's impossible to avoid that problem - human society is constantly shifting in too many ways to fully evaluate.

The problem is with complex systems it is extremely difficult to predict with any accuracy the outcomes of messing with a system. Feedback loops, negative and positive, attractors etc, we just cannot fathom the landscape of possibility of changing a complex system, especially one in which we ourselves inhabit, you have interaction effects.

One of the problems w feminism.

Exactly. Virtually every ill in society is attributed to the mismanagement of that fact. It is to a point where Münchausen by proxy is a social contagion.

@@HarryF-tz5fo essentially it's not a conversation. It's an acceptance of, or a denial of reality, the law of nature. It is literally mass-psychosis, mass-delusion. Yes, Modern society is well beyond healthy.

I think that's from the book the righteous mind is it not?

@@gravitatemortuus1080 yes. By Jonathan Haidt

Progressivism was originally founded on the psuedoscience of eugenics

There’s a great series of videos on here called great moments in unintended consequences.

Sounds like someone never heard of Pareto optimization.

@@WinstonSmithGPT Sounds like someone is a know it all dooshbag!

They think society can be perfected. Unfortunately, that's never going to happen. But they can move in the right direction by getting a large enough group of people to voluntarily give of their OWN time, talents and resources to help directionally solve the problems of society. They'll never do it, though, because the tendency is always to use OTHER people's time, talents and resources.

I remember I was at my kids school and there was a poster that change is good or something along those lines. I so wanted to write the word climate in there.

@@jjkrayenhagen Change is a philosophy that is self-defeating. Once you change, someone else is obligated to change it once again! Because change is good, don't you know. So there is no real objective for change except TO change because you can never reach a destination that lasts.

@@meb280 Except climate change. That's the only change that's bad. Never mind the fact that the climate is in a constant state of change beyond the control of man.

Even AFTER he was canceled he doubled down thinking he wouldn't get fired. LOL

Nobody claimed smart people can’t be duped.

harder to see when you are in the thick of it

@@desertrose0601I would have hoped it was a given

Spot on comment. His rationalization failed him, but he's still trying to rationalize that we need progressives.

They want change, pretty much for the sake of change. Let's see what happens, let's give it a try. But it is always others that have to face the consequences of such folly.

it's because they are miserable people, and since they are self worshipping atheists, they want to try to dictate their version of morality in a very narcissistic way. It's why they are at odds with the religious community, because they can't fathom something bigger and better than themselves holds them accountable and wants them to be better by playing by his rules. Progressivism is at war with God, and then you realize the nature of which Lucifer was kicked out of Heaven=he was full of pride and arrogance. And so the same battle wages today, and thankfully we know God's side will win in the end.

@@meb280 They want change to prove to themselves that they're good people, unintended consequences be damned.

Hmmm! That's a good one.

@@CleverGirlAAH I do not want to live a life of whims, I do not want to govern, I do not want to be governed, I want the state to be as small as possible, hopefully non-existent, I want them to let me live peacefully, without interference and above all without arguing each and every time. all of the aspects of my life. Miguel Anxo Bastos. Welcome to anarchocapitalism.

At the very least paying attention to what goes on around you😅

They all knew what they were doing. They created these monsters then the monsters turned on them. That's why they're like "holy shit" now.

I find Bret, Dave, and Jordan Peterson to be more convincing in their arguments than pretty much any other progressive, as the others are not convincing at all.

@@jrstf It's not a bad thing they're coming around. But, we shouldn't give them more credit than they actually deserve. We need someone bolder and holier than them.

Is that the interview where he talks about seeing conservatives as seal clubbers. That’s where I saw his true view of me. It didn’t matter that I never supported that industry or had any comment or argument in that debate. To Bret, I was just as evil as those men beating baby seals to death so rich people can wear their skins. Conservatives think liberals are people with bad ideas. Liberals think conservatives are bad people with ideas.

Yes -he helped create the monster and then the monster came for him. Seems like he’d still vote blue -SMH

Good point. I think we are past the point of trying to win cultural battles. Real battles are just ahead.

And that is why we lose. Conservatives only cooperate with allies that are perfect. And there aren't any.

Jordan Peterson is not in that category. He was always warning about this stuff in his lectures. He was at one point a liberal, but never a reckless progressive. He didn’t FAFO in 2016 like Bret. Not even saying Bret is a bad or dangerous guy, he’s not. He just had to get dragged to this point. He has some decent insights, because human behaviour is his area of study. His brother Eric, I’m afraid, is exactly what you claim him to be. An anti-wise, high IQ intellectual fool. He still thinks that scientists should be allowed to run the world, FFS. He is Icarus embodied.

Well, at least they are open to looking at the consequences of their ideas. Many revolutionaries never look back. Like the Castos. they keep on doing the same old stuff even as the house falls around them.

I agree. There are too many people getting paid too much money to come up with policies that impact the people that actually make a positive difference in the lives of others - such as growing food, making clothes, caring for those with disabilities, building houses etc.

But that model of society is the thing that is cancerous. That ruling elites think they live in a different world from the rest of us. Our system has gone wrong because that view of society is wrong. An informed intelligent society will understand how they need to behave in a pandemic. As in Sweden. The fact that these people think directing the populace with a cattle prod is the way to go, and we still have a disaster, shows their way is deeply wrong.

Maybe that is the reason Biden and his administration have thrown open the southern border to allow ten million illegal immigrants to invade the US.

I agree. They get lost in studies and minutiae, and somehow miss things that are glaringly obvious. They seem to be unable to comprehend reality by themselves, and can only interpret reality if they read about it in a book someone else wrote.

It's also basically a rewording/expounding on Proverbs 22:28. But heaven forbid we should bring in a faith narrative.

I dont understand how people can operate computers without knowing that you shouldn't try to change things unless you're prepared for the whole thing to crash.

Progressive is short for feudalism in its end form.

Force change by any means necessary.

He didn't see it because he didn't want too

@@kittybrowneye3163 that’s the cats ass 👌

@@dougjohnson435 Larry Fink agrees with you.

Most rational people are in agreement with your comment. I feel that the pendulum is going to swing back hard in the right direction soon. They are going to hate it, which is a good thing.

I think we forgot how truly destructive Progressives were because they were generally lumped in with Liberals from 1950-2000. Now we've got corrosive Progressive policies and the old-school Liberals are just running away from it instead of challenging it. Progress sounds good, marxist/socialist/redistributive Progressives are bad and the DNC has to be punished for embracing them.

Revolution eats its children, right?

Not just loss of family, but the deliberate destruction of relationships between children and men that began in the late 1970s and really hit full stride in the 1980s and is still going strong today. I had my first job delivering newspapers when I was 9, and I am very glad that I was able to get to know several old men (and to a lesser extent women) on my newspaper route. I learned so much from them, and then I consider that relationships of this sort would be virtually impossible for children to develop today. That makes it virtually impossible to pass on received wisdom and culture.

They won't listen to the Church, the bible tells us how it's all going to end and a one world government is it. We just have to keep our eyes on Him who will make it all right one day.

It was also despite its failures a progressive force. The colleges and universities were after all, almost all created by the Church. Even those who opposed Galileo were Aristotelians who noticed he had failed to make his case. Even Newton’s science was not clearly expressed in solid math until the 18th century.

Especially since woman only vote on abortion because they don’t get drafted to war, that needs to change women vote they sign up for the draft for that real equality they demand, or give up their vote? That’s fair

You’re not wrong.

You solved it! It's the damn women! (sarcasm and mockery)

@@undefinedtygerpath4096 Well, it's true. Our taxes, our gun control laws, basically every liberal and leftist policy in America today would not be here without women voting.

@@StupidAnon-gn8ih so you want a dictatorship

I wonder if it's too late. Any rationality from the older generations is fast dwindling, leaving nothing but starry-eyed naive voters.

About Evolution. The fact is speciation is a very long and conditional process. Revolution is the notion that the ideas that come from a single brain or a handful of like minded persons be imposed without due respect to the way things actually work in existing society. In other words, by force.

Apparently he has a podcast

I don't think Bret apologized to them at all. I watched all the footage.

@@ribbrascalWhy would Brett apologize? The president did because....woke, white privilege.

@@stevemahoney1733 Bret didn't apologize.

@@ribbrascal please show me where I said he did. the College president being taken hostage....& then apologizing to the very students who held him captive.

I would just add one thing to Sowell's list: Who pays the cost?

@@meb280 I have that in my list....it's number 2....at what cost?

@@carmine2262 It's related but it helps to enumerate it as well. WHO is going to pay? Turns out, they want YOU to pay, not themselves.

Yes, us lowly peasants here to serve the elites and "experts" because they know what's best for us. Not accumulated knowledge through the centuries, no, the "experts" know best

words like he, him, they, them, her, she, and "is" (Bill Clinton)? Justice has never meant retribution. It's "fair" for someone who has wronged others to face "justice". Justice is imposing a socially agreed upon, acceptable and reasonable punishment for a crime, not retribution, as with "an eye for an eye."

It's not so much that they don't agree on the meaning of words. The Left uses the words but gives them new meanings unknown to the uninitiated. The Left uses the same words but not the same dictionary. They invent new meanings to confuse people such as when they complain that someone is "destroying democracy." "Democracy" to the Left means all people having the same resources and position. Therefore, they claim that anything not expressly and completely egalitarian in result "anti-democratic." That is why so many Communist countries label themselves "The Democratic Republic of" wherever.

Interesting insight!

This is true. Progressivism must have equality for everyone, which is a fantasy and ends up being government forcing it by taking from this person to give to that person.

@@PGHEngineer Of course I believe in progress, but "Progressives" change things that don't need to change. e.g. allowing stupid people to vote.

Eh. You are taking the worst of one and comparing it to the best of the other. A more fair quote would read: A true progressive finds a fence in a field and wonders if changing the fence would be beneficial. A true conservative finds that fence and wonders if keeping it intact is beneficial. The two meet and have a spirited debate on the issue.

And looks to see if there is a gate.

@@XJWill1 Well, by your comparison there's hardly any difference between the two, so going to disagree. A fence is fence is a fence, not like we're talking a new coat of paint. If you'd like to be more accurate, we can say the progressive looks at the fence and considers if 𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘨 it is beneficial. And, traditionally, in the United States, if both sides were operating in good faith, all we'd be talking about are two varities of classical liberal, squabbling over Federalism vs Anti-Federalism. But, throughout the West, unfortunately, progressivism has been infiltrated by leftism, and universities have become activist indoctrination centers training today's youth to tear down any fence they see at the "speed of social media" - which has a way of reframing every issue, so anyone defending a fence is now somehow "far right."

@@jjeKKell I'm surprised you think there is no difference between one's first thought being to change something and one's first thought being to keep something the same. That is the essential difference between a true progressive and a true conservative. I am also surprised you think all fences are the same. Even if we ignore the fact that it is just a metaphor, there are hundreds of variations on fences. And if we stop ignoring the metaphor, then we see that there are nearly an infinite number of variations on policies and laws.

@@XJWill1 No need for surprise, since that isn't what I said. You said the progressive considers 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘨 the fence. I disagreed, and said, to be more accurate, what the progressive actually considers is 𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘨 it, and that that is the "essential difference between a true progressive and a true conservative." Meanwhile, our "metaphor" in this case is a limiting principle, one considers removing it the other considers leaving it in place. Sure, the world can have many limiting principles. But, as each acts as a manner of restriction, they are in this sense, efectively the same.

I completely agree with your comment but he did forget one thing. The Left ("progressives") also ruthlessly attacks, criticizes and insults all those who differ with them or point out flaws in their thinking and marginalizes and deplatforms them. He apparently didn't see this aspect of "progressivism" either which has resulted in the intolerance and division in society we are currently experiencing.

I agree with your assessment.@@Rogerholberg

In fact, wait a minute... whose garden is this? Who owns and controls what I'm typing on right now? You see and hear X, on Y, and therefore "adults" are still present. What advantage is there for you to make this assumption? Whose garden is this? Why are you allowed to be perceived in it? ... Duck Dynasty anyone? ............................................................ (See: CableTV/Internet Capture)

You might ask yourself, why did it take him so long?

I would but I think I know. I understand that there is an old Russian saying: "You'll know it's true when it happens to you." And it happened to him at Everygreen State. Before that, he was on their side and excused a lot. I don't think that means he's bad but that he dealt with the cognitive dissonance caused by believing that his side were the "good guys" but seeing that a lot of his fellow "good guys" were simply vile by ignoring the latter.

It's easy to be right about something. You just have to be intelligent and well read. it's much, much harder to convince masses of people that you are right. Intelligence, wisdom, knowledge and foresight are no longer sufficient when the goal is to affect minds of others.

@@privacyfig then what's the excuse of academia? They're intelligent and well read, yet they've been wrong for sixty years.

@@smashtoad It's a different question, though, but I'll answer it. I think it's the disease of complacency brought on by lives that are too easy, too safe, too predictable. This disease had started in academia, but as people's living conditions and the standard of living had improved, the same disease started to infect people outside of academia. A kind of a societal auto-immune disorder where healthy cells are attacked and destroyed when there is no other real infection to fight.

the anti-christian bigotry seems impossible to wash out.

It sure was weird watching all those things they said could never ever ever happen, start happening one after another, in a cascading fashion.

Traditional marriage has turned out to be good anthropology. Hard to train children to maintain a well ordered society without it.

I think we are, unfortunately, subject to people who have a god complex who fancy themselves as the end-all, be-all of everything. They want to come up with ideas so that others will recognize their brilliance. Rather than humbling themselves before our Creator, they wish to take that place and have people honor them.

I just wish he'd give examples to help clarify his points. He almost never does.

But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise... (those who are wise in their OWN eyes). I Cor 1:27

Well said. Liberals love to change the definition of terms and then complain about the results. Christians were screaming from the rooftops about what would happen and here we are.

Truth is, American government didn't even get into the marriage regulating game until well into the 1800s. It's not even clear that this is an area where government should weigh in.

@@alanlight7740 - I think "this is an area where government should weigh in" if the bulk of the people want there to be laws regarding "this area", like pretty much any other. You know "government of, by, and for the people"? My point was that many did "see this coming". And though I have no problem at all with gays having legal protections for their committed relationships, I think a sort of "pandoras box" was opened, which those who wanted to reduce our non-governmental powers/institutions were anxious to get open.

@@johnknight3529 - well, it all depends on whether you want a constitutional republic where liberty is protected, or mob rule with tyranny of the misguided majority.

@@alanlight7740 - I worry most about government by what we used to call "Big Brother", and don't believe a misguided majority is behind much of anything that is currently fragmenting our society. ("Divide and conquer" squared ; )

Yes. Striving to move forward ia human nature. Progressivism doesn't allow for a pause to evaluate the changes being made. It's like progressives get power drunk & 1,000 changes isn't enough. Evaluation is key, More typically isn't better with respect to social engineering.

It’s a balance though. I’m more conservative but we do need the tension and yin/ yang with progressive ideas to keep a balance in society. What’s happened in recent decades is everything got off-balance and unchecked.

Within the US context, @@desertrose0601, the Yang to your conservative Ying would be Liberals - Not Progressives who view you both as hate-filled supporters of the White Supremacist Patriarchy.

Simp is short for simpering, not simple minded. The kind of man that demeans himself to try and win a woman's affection.

So you’re not for grace and forgiveness. Got it. 😑

@@desertrose0601 The poster you responded to addressed "respect". No, I dont need to respect Bret.

Literally 200 years ago