Difference between revisions of "Talk:Conservative parables"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(The Drowning Man)
(The Drowning Man)
Line 166: Line 166:
:::::Really? Care to explain the point of Andy not helping a fellow citizen out by giving him a dime? Or the point of any of the other parables? The last two added are jokes, and nothing more. [[User:DannyRedful|DannyRedful]] 16:43, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
:::::Really? Care to explain the point of Andy not helping a fellow citizen out by giving him a dime? Or the point of any of the other parables? The last two added are jokes, and nothing more. [[User:DannyRedful|DannyRedful]] 16:43, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
::::::''not helping a fellow citizen out by giving him a dime?'' It is quite obvious that the point is to encourage self-reliance. And on the same basis I decline to write a step-by-step guide to understanding parables for you. Read, then think. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 16:46, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
::::::''not helping a fellow citizen out by giving him a dime?'' It is quite obvious that the point is to encourage self-reliance. And on the same basis I decline to write a step-by-step guide to understanding parables for you. Read, then think. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 16:46, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
:::::::Self reliance? Sweet baby Jesus, it was a dime! He had the rest of the money. Hell, he probably had money at home as well. All he asked Andy for was a DIME. [[User:DannyRedful|DannyRedful]] 16:47, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

Revision as of 15:47, 13 June 2008

Could there be a section for the moral of the parable? I don't understand it.--TrTran 23:09, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

Uhhhhh this doesnt really make any sense. How is this a conservative-centric story? Hmmmmmm, did the smoker have breast cancer? AdenJ 07:12, 9 May 2008 (EDT)

If he'd had a gun then he wouldn't have needed the 10¢. Lobachevsky 08:30, 9 May 2008 (EDT)

Parable #3

Andrew, does this relate to Jeanne Assam? 10px Fox (talk|contribs) 09:55, 10 May 2008 (EDT)

I only ask because, with a linked news ref, it does make a great story, especially Assam's quote "“I give credit to G-d. G-d was with me." 10px Fox (talk|contribs) 09:57, 10 May 2008 (EDT)
Yes, you're sharp! The quote would make a great addition!--Aschlafly 10:06, 10 May 2008 (EDT)
It is one of those events that stays in the memory! Spine tingling, even for Believers. 10px Fox (talk|contribs) 10:18, 10 May 2008 (EDT)
Right, it was spine tingling to write that account here! I see much potential for writing and reading conservative parables. I wonder what will be next!--Aschlafly 10:20, 10 May 2008 (EDT)


I suppose the conservative insight of this story is never give money to those in need. (Indeed judging from the republicans, this does seem to be the case.) BTW, great reference "This actually happened", I'm tempted to add a fact citation to it.

How are any of these "Conservative" parables? (well the last one...)---user:DLerner--- 08:25, 11 May 2008 (EDT)

I think the links with the parable I added justify it very well; paleos (for I am one) are very concerned with the small, human, familiar and social dimensions and less with the chiselled-in-stone politics that some politicians and all Liberals insist we adhere to. You're a nice Jewish young man, you can see the small-c conservatism I tried to put across, surely? 10px Fox (talk|contribs) 10:39, 10 May 2008 (EDT)
It's the first one that got me worked up, I'm at the end of my 6th day of my most recent quitting, and I know more then any non-smoker how bad it is to fiend for a smoke, I don't see the "human" dimension of the first story, I'm sorry. If it was me I'd probably sit buy him the pack of smokes, take him out for coffee and share the pack with him...
By "Paleo", do you mean a Ron Paul-esque conservative?
If you gave him a dime, then you'd obviously be hurting him. "Sharing" his hurtful experience wouldn't undo the harm.--Aschlafly 09:34, 11 May 2008 (EDT)
By the way, conservative values are superb in helping one conquer addictions (to which all of us are vulnerable). Conservatives include many ex-smokers who were able to defeat that difficult addiction.--Aschlafly 10:34, 11 May 2008 (EDT)
I guess the point of the story is a "free market" type of lesson. All he had to do was go to another store where tobacco was sold at a lower price. Maybe he'd even find some more change on the street. Thats the only point I can find.
No, he would have gone to the cheapest place first.--Aschlafly 20:13, 1 June 2008 (EDT)

The Storm

Doesn't this prove that prayer doesn't work? That the Protestant ship could've been a crew of atheists who also immediately jumped into action, and would've saved themselves, too?

It proves that God helps those who help themselves. HStrobell 11:36, 10 May 2008 (EDT)
Your nonsense has been removed.--Aschlafly 12:43, 10 May 2008 (EDT)

Liberal parables

Is it okay if I make this page? Liberal values, while not generally embraced by those here, might still have something to offer if you have an open mind.--ThomasE 18:16, 10 May 2008 (EDT)

OK, let's see what have you have in mind. We have an open mind here and welcome the truth. But misleading, made-up stuff, like drug addicts who succeed, won't last, of course.--Aschlafly 20:35, 10 May 2008 (EDT)
Drug addicts never succeed Andy? I can think of at least one. DanielB 23:00, 10 May 2008 (EDT)
Thanks for illustrating my point, DanielB. An entry that claims that Paul Erdos was a drug addict will likely result in deletion of the entry.--Aschlafly 23:23, 10 May 2008 (EDT)
He did take large quantities of drugs. What else would you call him? Acutally I would call him a user rather than an addict he did give up cold turkey for a month on a bet. He went back on them claiming it clouded his thinking not taking them. DanielB 01:50, 11 May 2008 (EDT)

What is good for the goose aint good for the gander, eh Aschlalfy. Besides, liberals have no morals hence any Liberal Parable would only show that following Liberal Values cause depression, drug addiction and the like. AdenJ 20:46, 10 May 2008 (EDT)

==Double Standard?==--DinsdaleP 14:56, 25 May 2008 (EDT) Hardly a double standard. There are stories in the paper or whatever all the time about drug dealers commiting crimes like armed robbery but how often is a churchgoer likely to do the same? Hence when it happens it would definatly be headline news. That section should be removed pronto. AdenJ 05:37, 19 May 2008 (EDT)

I'll second this - when habitual criminals commit another crime, even a serious one, it's not exactly remarkable, but when a supposedly upstanding member of the church commits a crime, that's newsworthy. That's why anti-homosexual pastor Ted Haggard's outing and more recently, conservative congressman Vito Fosella's DUI arrest and admission of fatherng a love-child are newsworthy - because the behavior is so out of line with their professed values. As a "conservative parable" this one really needs to be reconsidered. --DinsdaleP 18:42, 20 May 2008 (EDT)

How is this gem a "parable". What's the moral of the story? Also, who has the double standard? From the way I see it, it's the churchgoer. ---user:DLerner--- 07:23, 19 May 2008 (EDT)

The three comments above illustrate that the double standard is defended and even supported by liberal editors here. The above comments reinforce the point.--Aschlafly 21:53, 20 May 2008 (EDT)

I have a serious, respectful question - what is the truth, religious principle, or moral lesson that is being presented through this story? Is it a commentary that all people should be held to the same standard of behavior, regardless of their role in society, and all lapses and misdeeds be regarded equally? --DinsdaleP 14:56, 25 May 2008 (EDT)

What Double Standard? News begins with the word NEW, when junkies rob a store for a fix, it's (unfortunately) nothing new. The only one with the double standard was the churchgoer. Please see Conservapedia:Avoid personal remarks. ---user:DLerner--- 00:46, 21 May 2008 (EDT)

Furthermore, I fail to see how this is a "short allegorical story designed to illustrate or teach some truth, religious principle, or moral lesson." What is the point of this parable? That the media sensationalizes stories? (Another thing that isn't news...) ---user:DLerner--- 00:49, 21 May 2008 (EDT)


Where does one begin! By this parable I presume the guy didnt work at all during the period of his life that this reports? On would think he did and find the $40 that following week! Also, why didnt he use a wallet? This is a silly one, it should be removed (like the double standard AdenJ 22:14, 24 May 2008 (EDT)

AdenJ, he lost the $40 and it doesn't really matter how he lost it. We've all lost money, of course. I doubt there is any adult who hasn't. The point is obviously that money is nothing more than time, and that time is better spent in self-help than in self-worry.--Aschlafly 22:36, 24 May 2008 (EDT)

Which I exclusive to the realm of the conservative I imagine. AdenJ 22:39, 24 May 2008 (EDT)

Your statement makes no sense.--Aschlafly 23:25, 24 May 2008 (EDT)

Which is exclusive to the realm of the conservative I imagine. AdenJ 23:27, 24 May 2008 (EDT)

A little better, but still incomprehensible. Conservative values are freely available to all, for the benefit of them, their families, friends and students. Spread the value to others.--Aschlafly 23:34, 24 May 2008 (EDT)

Not a Math Error

Income Tax: 10%

Amount wanted after tax: $40

Amount needed to be earned: 10/9 * $40 = $44.44 (.44444444444...)

Check: 10% of $44.44 = $4.44, $44.44 - $4.44 = $40

Time needed to earn $44.44 = $44.44 / $8 = 5.6 hours

Not an error StatsMsn 07:13, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

based on the prevailing wage for teenagers of $8 per hour, that $40 was worth no more than about 6 hours of his time (after taxes).

You seem to have overlooked the word "about". And given your username's implied claim to have some statistics expertise, I've blocked your account. When you come back, I expect an apology and a retraction.

Then you can construct a better example based on an actual example of gross pay and taxes. (You might, for example, ask the manager of your local McDonald's what percent taxes are withheld for his part-time workers.)

But worst of all, you have argued about the details of the example in a way that draws attention away from the point of it. This does not help the project. It's like the response to Expelled wherein a write-in campaign complained about the use of an Imagine sample - not out of any financial concern for a poor suffering widow, but because they wanted to undermine the ability of the producers to articulate their point.

Next time you undermine the project, you are out. Permanently. --Ed Poor Talk 08:01, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

Seems like a serious overreaction to a dispute over math. StatsMsn wasn't being disrespectful, and the number being 6 or 5.6 doesn't change the point of the story in any significant way. Can you cut the guy a break and unblock him since he was being constructive? --DinsdaleP 21:17, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
When someone insists on "correcting" someone else, as in StatsMsn's case, then he should have a good justification. Otherwise, he's just harming the site, and the site is better off by blocking him.--Aschlafly 21:35, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

I don't see the error in his math, just throwing that out there.

Fasting woman

Wouldn't the killer have been stopped in advance by not having easy access to a gun to begin with? This seems like a logical flaw to me....JPohl 08:59, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

It's only a 'logical flaw' to anyone who is 100% unfamiliar with the real world. In the real world law-abiding people obey the law, but - and let's pay attention here - CRIMINALS DON'T. That's why it is important that a legal system should accord proper rights of self defence to decent people. And fortunate for those church-goers that the legal system of the USA does, despite the aims of Liberal do-gooders to undermine democratic freedoms. Bugler 10:53, 10 June 2008 (EDT)
I'd discuss this further if you weren't a clear parody account.JPohl 10:59, 10 June 2008 (EDT)
I'll treat that remark with the contempt it deserves. Bugler 11:05, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

Tax edit on Welfare parable

Daniel's tax edit on the Welfare parable was incorrect, because a charitable donation is tax-deductible and (if done properly) the $5 earned need not be adjusted if all is donated.--Aschlafly 21:52, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

If a homeless person came to your house looking for work, how many people would welcome him onto your property? CraigC 22:08, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

How would the owner know that he is homeless? Even if was known to be homeless, many would welcome an offer to do the work described in the parable.--Aschlafly 23:06, 12 June 2008 (EDT)
I disagree. If some random person came up to your front door and said "I'd like to clean up the dog poop in your yard for $5", but looked like they'd been living on the streets for years, I can almost guarantee that a majority of people would turn the potential worker away. An interesting anecdote, when I was working at a seminar for staff working for the AWANA program (google it if you don't know what it is, but basically it is a program where children memorize bible verses and learn about the bible), the director dressed up like a homeless person during lunch and wandered around the entrances to the church where the seminar was being held. Not one person talked to him or offered him anything to eat from the nearly unlimited food supplies the caterers brought. -- Aaronp
I removed this parable because I'm fairly certain it's actually a satire of Republican values (oversimplified scenario, forcing the less-fortunate into demeaning labor that nobody else wants to do in exchange for a pittance...)JPohl 08:31, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
Well, looks like I've been reverted. I didn't expect anyone to listen anyway.JPohl 08:32, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
I listened, but your argument is absurd. The parable is powerful and persuasive, and that may be the real reason you don't like it. Regardless, let the readers decide for themselves rather than censoring it.--Aschlafly 08:33, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
I find it very hard to consider a parable about a little girl discussing dog poop to be persuasive.JPohl 08:46, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
Parables are often set forth in, shall we say, in "down to earth" terms. I doubt you can improve this parable, but constructive suggestions or edits are always welcome!--Aschlafly 08:48, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
I'd suggest that these stories not be in the first person, from a style point. --DinsdaleP 09:42, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
While it's right to encourage people to earn things instead of being given them, the metaphor of the homeless man in this story is uncomfortable. Many people are homeless because they have mental problems that keep them from functioning in jobs and society overall, not because they just don't want to work. The direction of this story also seems to look down on the homeless in terms of the work that's suitable for them. If the girl was asked to do something clean and fun to earn money, like sell lemonade, would she be as likely to have suggested the homeless man do it instead? By choosing something distasteful to push the girl into not wanting to do it herself, it seems like she missed the true point of self-enablement, and made her suggestion for selfish reasons.
Like I said, self-enablement is a virtue, so a better story would be about the establishment of Habitat for Humanity. I've volunteered for them in NJ often because I know exactly where my time and energy is going, and the beneficiaries of the homes are working just as hard as I am to earn them, not receive them.--DinsdaleP 10:12, 13 June 2008 (EDT)


Shouldn't this be moved to Essay:Conservative parables? I don't think it belongs in an encyclopedia entry. --Tim (CPAdmin1)talk Vote in my NEW polls 10:59, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

The Drowning Man

No personal offense to the author, but I'd suggest removing this story completely because it doesn't convey anything positive despite the attempt at teaching about helping people to help themselves. When a person is drowning it's because they can't swim or tread water, and the reactions in the story are just awful. Can you imagine a lifeguard throwing a short line and expecting the victim to close the gap, or throwing a line and letting it go? All this story does is make the conservative look unbelievably callous and the liberal unbelievably stupid, so if the intention is to make a point in a meaningful, believable way then this needs a fresh start.--DinsdaleP 16:15, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

Take it out of you wish, but the point of a parable is that it uses a story to demonstrate a lesson, not necessarily a story that could really happen. Jesus talked about people attempting to remove specks of dust from other's eyes wile walking about with logs in their own eyes. He didn't mean that literally. The point of this parable was that liberals tend to throw money (the rope) at problems, even if money won't solve anything; and that coservatives often expect people to help themselves, even when they're not entirely able. For what it's worth, a minister told me this parable. CraigC 16:26, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

(delayed by edit clash) : What it conveys is this: the conservative only had a limited amount of rope but threw it anyway. The drowning man might not havebeen able to swim to shore but might under his own steam have been able to swim to the rope and be saved. Thus he is helped to save himselfoose: liberals throw money at issues, with no oversight of how wisely it is spent or or how effective it is. Thus, despite huge resources being throown at a problem - resources taken in tax from the hard-working - nothing is achieved. It is simple and easy to understand, very much to the point, and a telling metaphor for rival political and social attitudes. Bugler 16:27, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
It just says he threw 50 feet of rope, not that he only had fifty feet of rope. Aside from that, you're reading way too far into a light-hearted story in an attempt to spin it to make the Republicans look like a guild of Jesii. DannyRedful 16:29, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
Do you think this is a shaggy dog story, then? It's a parable, it is there to make a point.Bugler 16:32, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
Really? Care to explain the point of Andy not helping a fellow citizen out by giving him a dime? Or the point of any of the other parables? The last two added are jokes, and nothing more. DannyRedful 16:43, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
not helping a fellow citizen out by giving him a dime? It is quite obvious that the point is to encourage self-reliance. And on the same basis I decline to write a step-by-step guide to understanding parables for you. Read, then think. Bugler 16:46, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
Self reliance? Sweet baby Jesus, it was a dime! He had the rest of the money. Hell, he probably had money at home as well. All he asked Andy for was a DIME. DannyRedful 16:47, 13 June 2008 (EDT)