It is wise not to stereotype any group, for that is the worst form of prejudice. Remember this: Generalizations are helpful. Stereotypes are hurtful. I have spoken out against a******n here. There is a thread. But you take it for granted that I am for a******n because you have stereotyped liberals.

Some V**er ID laws can suppress the v**e. In North Dakota, v**es by the Native population helped win an e******n. The GOP legislature then made having a residential address part of v**er ID. Most on the reservations do not have a residential address, they use the Post Office for mail. Is that fair or right? Each situation demands attention to the particulars.

Same sex marriage is none of my business, nor should it be yours. How does it effect you? If it is your religious belief or personal value not to have a same sex marriage, then don't do it.

I disagree with unisex locker rooms. But you take it for granted that I do because you have stereotyped liberals.

As far as c*****e c****e goes, I have another thread on OPP about not making the topic a political football defining party affiliation. There does appear to be evidence suggesting man-made c*****e c****e from numerous sources yet we must remain open to new and growing research on the matter. Our future and that of our family and planet may be at risk. Why be against it just because most liberals back it? It could be true.

"You disagree with them, you get a derogatory label." No, the opposite is true. The reason for the disagreement is the bigotry and homophobia. Big difference.

You must be having a bad day, Rumi. First you criticize my spelling and now you're calling me for stereotyping a group when I should be generalizing. Actually, liberals are, by definition, believers in that small sample of beliefs that I listed, generally. That is what a generalization is. You may note that I did say most liberals. Some people are liberal about some things and not so liberal about others, hence the term most liberals. Now we could fill several pages discussing g****l w*****g and v**er suppression in N Dakota but that's not really the issue here. If you would like to open a discussion on any subject I will be happy to participate. I submit that most liberals (generalization here, not hurtful) apply the term bigot to anyone who holds the belief that homosexuality isn't normal. Is that really a bigot? Looks as if we have plenty of fodder for additional discussions. I've got to get back to the ball game. Have a good weekend.

Political Correctness, defined: "the avoidance, often considered as taken to extremes, of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against."

Yes, as the definition says, it can be taken to extremes, but that is not the rule. Citing the absurdities does a disservice to being more sensitive and civil to certain groups.

How a subject is framed determines if it is r****t or not. We can discuss issues about poverty and its causes and how to remedy the situation, yet stereotypical r****t characterizations, such as "welfare queens," is an attack and should be politically incorrect.

We could say this about most liberals, Son, but you have to remember, their views is why we call them liberal. That is simply what they believe. I am acquainted with several liberals and it is so frustrating to talk with them about issues. I can tell what they believe by asking myself what is the opposite of what I believe. A******n, V**er ID laws, same sex marriage, unisex locker rooms, g****l w*****g, you name it. To us, what is crazy, is normal to them. The reason they come up with names like bigots and homophobes is that is what they do. You disagree with them, you get a derogatory label. I consider it a badge of honor. It isn't going to change, I fear.