2008 Democratic Front-Runner is ... John Edwards (yes, he's running)

That the only socially acceptable bias is against Christians.

 

Well, you see, you have it all wrong. I have a strong bias against any people who would force their views on me. There is an intolerant lunatic fringe to many faiths and subcultures whose advances I will actively resist. So I guess you could say my tolerance extends only to the tolerant.

 

How's that martyr complex treating you, Guy?

 

Guy, I've been living in the deep, deep South for awhile now, and you doth protest too much.

 

Um, first, I'm not Christian, so I don't think it's a martyr complex. Second, this was all in response to EStreetJoe's comments, and I stand by that response. Anyway, Cran, I don't know about you but I've had alot more people try to force political leftism on me than christianity. That's actually happened to me once, on a street corner & the guy was pretty easily ignored.

 

I'm sure there are lefty fringe lunatics, too. Extremists come in all shapes, colors and sizes.

 

I'll admit it, I'm guilty of negatively sterotyping the type of religious extremists/fundamentalists (aka the lunatic fringe) that voted for Bush and who are opposed to abortion, gay marriage and civil unions. If stereotyping the extremists who believe that their religion should be the law of the land (or at least their views on abortion and gay marriage should be) and that as a Jew I'm heading to hell for not accepting Jesus as my savior offends anyone, then I'm sorry.

 

I hear a lot more slurs of Jews than Christians in casual conversation.

But maybe that's just me.

 

Your statistics are biased, dammit.
And, of course, there's a vast difference between attributing pejoratives to a specific race or religion and comparing demographic data from several different states.
You're flailing, Guy, and Rudy's not electable.
Move along.

 

I wasn't saying the statistics were biased, just that if someone brought statistics to "prove" a different stereotype, you would all be offended. And no, there's no difference if the point is to identify & target an ethnic or religious group (statistics from Harlem, San Francisco or Boro Park etc.).

And I'm not flailing, because I don't care that much.

And personally, I am very ambivilent about Rudy as a candidate, but you're nuts if you think he has no chance.

 

There's a huge difference. You're just chosing not to see it.
Demographic statistics between the states are value-neutral. They just are. The divorce rate in SC is lower than it is in Massachusetts. Period. (And something of a surprise.) Attempts to do the same as regards "race" -- a completely unscientific concept, by the way -- or ethnic or religious generalization are too often merely vehicles for exercising prejudice.

 

You aren't this dense, so I assume you are willfully pretending not to get this. The reason he brought the stats is because of his assumptions about the religious makeup of them. This would be the equivalent of bringing stats to show that Harlem QBs can't read a defense or that in Boro Park store owners are less likely to tell you to keep the change. You would be rightly outraged by someone bringing those stats trying to prove something about those communities.