Talk:Conservative parables
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)
- 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)
#1
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?
- 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)
$40
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.
