+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 47

Thread: Should evidenly delusional people be able to vote, or run for office?

  1. #1

    Default Should evidenly delusional people be able to vote, or run for office?

    What is a 'delusion'. It is a fixed or firm belief, that is resistant to needing to provide any evidence, while at the same time, been resistant to any facts which may counter the delusion.

    One may have a delusion that they are a messianic figure, and they believe it, with all of their heart, even when there is a lack of any evidence.

    One may have a delusion that, through telepathy, they can communicate with intelligent life forms, in far off planets.

    One may have the delusion that guardian angels can play a large part in improving your life.

    The list goes on.

    Some of the delusions are harmless, and one need not technically be mentally ill to suffer from a delusion, although delusions are a symtom of some mental illnesses.

    People whose delusion is very consumptive, and begins to play a more central and pivotal role, in their every day life, are at risk of becoming detatched from reality, and will gravitate towards others who share their delusion, so that in their bubble, they can validate one another's false claims, and never behave objectively about them.

    If someone has a delusion, such as talking to angels that they feel can help society, and it plays a pivotal part in their life, it may not be that this person is dangerous, or bad, not at all.

    But is it really the best idea to let them vote, or worse, run for office?

    Surely if their delusion is that central to them, then there is a very serious risk, whether they set out to or not, of the delusion being brought into their decision making processs, on the most serious of issues.

    Issues which do not require a delusional, that puts their faith in angels, which is not rational or the actions of a reasoned and rational thinker.

    Serious issues require minds that are rational, reasoned, not cluttered up or shaped by made up self delusions, surely?

    You can talk about 'rights' if you like, but in the end, if giving delusionals the keys to your country, damages it, or there is a risk that the delusion will be pervasive into the conduct of the man, then is it not more responsible not to risk it?

    Would you hand the keys of a Ferrari to a kid that had just past their test, or whose mind was altered, by drugs, and consider that a good use of liberty, or just plain asking for trouble?

    Take Romney. Now before anyone says anything, I don't have time for either him or Obama, so let's not go over nuance.

    But you just cannot detach yourself from the small matter that the next President of the United States, could be a man who thinks that Joe Smith is the half brother of Jesus, and that in NYC one day, he was visited by a magic angel, who gave him some magic plates, to read some magic tablets.

    Which all then magically vanished.

    I mean, come on, in any other context, if someone said they were into that, you may smile, and walk away slowly, facing them at all times!

    You cannot seperate the two things, believe what you wish imo, or have whatever delusions you like, but it is just not sane or responsible, to let a plainly deluded person possibly be into one of the highest chairs in the World.

    Would you be okay if Rael was a candidate?

    Or Jim Sparks, or Billy Meir, or George Adamski?

    If not, aren't you being a hypocite, if you are okay with one delusion, and not another?

  2. Likes Sadanie liked this post
  3. #2

    Default

    Would all the delusional people who voted for obama believing that he was the messiah be allowed to vote, ever?
    If you want to anger a liberal, tell him the truth.
    If you want to anger a Conservative, tell him a lie.

  4. Likes bitterweed liked this post
  5. Default

    I think no, but only in serious cases. Just like children, there are some people who must have a legal caretaker due to their mental illness, because they are incapable of informed decisions. There should not be a double standard, so if children cannot vote, the same should apply to these people.
    "Billions for equal chances, not a penny for equal results."

    Charles Murray

  6. Likes Jack Napier liked this post
  7. #4
    usa
    Location: Santa Monica California
    Posts: 17,004
    Blog Entries: 9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blasphemer View Post
    I think no, but only in serious cases. Just like children, there are some people who must have a legal caretaker due to their mental illness, because they are incapable of informed decisions. There should not be a double standard, so if children cannot vote, the same should apply to these people.
    You probably do not realize that Conscience talks to some people, as if that Freudian archetype is have a personal relationship withthe individual so inclined. You don't notice because the person does not credit Conscience with the thoughts that are motivating his actions and/or behavior.

    We often get upset when a religious person does give credit to Jesus, for instance.
    But we forget that it usually makes sense when we ask, even in jest, "What would Jesus do?"

    The funny thing, about asking that, is that we actually pretty much know the answer.
    Jesus is rather symbolic with do the right thing, the truthful and morally correct thing.

    Then we have people like Rev Martin Luther King who believed they were the messiah of Civil Rights, but had to prove it by sacrifice.
    We see a 14 year old muslim girl possessed in the same way, hearing the Truth in spite of centuries of propaganda, that she has right to throw off male domination.

    But these people are hearing Fruedian voices which when examined, are not a sign of madness.

    There are others, truly going mad, Schizoid insanity over taking them.
    Nevertheless, even in their mental illnes, not everything they would do politically is crazy.

    Jesse Jackson's son is a congressman who became mentally sick but nevertheless held a Congressional Seat, the one vacated by Obama.
    In his madness he was sane enough to remember the promise of Obama to raise the Minumim Wage.
    He also saw that this ine thing can save a crazy economy in America that is about to disintegrate.


    Mad as the idea seems at first, Jackson saw outside the "Box," and realized that the working people are the ONLY people who can actually BUY stuff.

    The economy is standing still, so no more members into it are permitted until it expands and needs more helpers.
    But the working people are stuck.
    They are cash poor, trying to pay off debt and save for a possible job loss themselves.

    Jackson saw that a raise for Minimum Wage workers would also force raise to Tickle Up.
    That would give working people more money so that they would buy Stuff.
    That would force companies to make more stuf, which would force hiring of more workers.

    This expansion of the Economy would solve all our problems immediately.

    Crazy?
    Crazy but true!





  8. #5

    Default

    Is it a form of delusion to not realize, or be so indifferent as to begin a topic sentence with a primary word that is misspelled? Is it a form of lazyass syndrome to not review the sentence typed, before posting it?

    Perhaps obsessive compulsive behavior on my part, contributes to this observation, therefore, the slight error can be forgiven, but not necessarily forgotten.

    The proposition, is still valid, nonetheless, and with the corrected word "evidently" preceding the word "dillusional" becomes a "self evident" truth, namely, that yes, it is quite apparent that Mitt Romney is dillusional, and is a pathological liar.

    Therefore, it is incumbent upon the citizens of the USA, to decide if the form of dillusion exhibited by Romney, relative to the consensus of what is an appropriate level of this type of dillusion, rises to a level that would make it inappropriate for him to be given such a powerful position in society.
    Last edited by SkullKrusher; Oct 21 2012 at 09:41 AM.

  9. #6

    Default

    Should evidenly delusional people be able to vote, or run for office?
    Be careful what you wish for. You might get it.

    Headline: Jack Napier declared delusional, blocked from voting. Details at 9.
    "Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something" - Plato

    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" - Aristotle

    "A creative man is motivated by the desire to achieve, not by the desire to beat others" - Ayn Rand

  10. Likes Jack Napier, Bluespade liked this post
  11. #7
    usa
    Location: Santa Monica California
    Posts: 17,004
    Blog Entries: 9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SkullKrusher View Post
    Is it a form of delusion to not realize, or be so indifferent as to begin a topic sentence with a primary word that is misspelled? Is it a form of lazyass syndrome to not review the sentence typed, before posting it?

    Perhaps obsessive compulsive behavior on my part, contributes to this observation, therefore, the slight error can be forgiven, but not necessarily forgotten.

    The proposition, is still valid, nonetheless, and with the corrected word "evidently" preceding the word "dillusional" becomes a "self evident" truth, namely, that yes, it is quite apparent that Mitt Romney is dillusional, and is a pathological liar.

    Therefore, it is incumbent upon the citizens of the USA, to decide if the form of dillusion exhibited by Romney, relative to the consensus of what is an appropriate level of this type of dillusion, rises to a level that would make it inappropriate for him to be given such a powerful position in society.
    Romney seemed to be accusing Obama of being delusional and behaving as the economic messiah who would simply "enact" a whole new culture of green energy by spending $90 Billion dollars with his supporters and associates.

    He spent Billions at GM, (who would build Electric Cars), and billions more at a brand new company that would just simply invent a practical battery to run them.
    He was crazy enough to think people would just buy them and the world would change.

    He forgot that Demand is the first thing entrepreneur's look for, and then they meet it.
    Nobody wants to spend more of a vehicle that can catch fire, will travel only a short distance, takes hours to recharge, and costs double.

    He also wants to spend billions for Railroad passenger lines, while Amtrak is unable to attract riders and pay its bills.
    He subsidized Green Energy for windmills that created few jobs, while ignoring millions of Coal workers and ways to clean up that product.

    Sitting in a college classroom and brainstorming how nice it would be if the world ran the way he imagined has not worked out practically, but he is undaunted as are his faithful followers.

  12. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SkullKrusher View Post
    Is it a form of delusion to not realize, or be so indifferent as to begin a topic sentence with a primary word that is misspelled? .
    Did the question touch a nerve?

    Do you harbour an invisible friend delusion, of some sort, and my question made you feel attacking?

  13. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Object227 View Post
    Be careful what you wish for. You might get it.

    Headline: Jack Napier declared delusional, blocked from voting. Details at 9.


    I have never cast a vote in my life.

    Why would I endorse a rigged race?

  14. Default

    I suppose you could place certain limits on voting and running for office based on mental stability.

    This is a very tricky thing to navigate, however.
    "Chaos... isn't a pit. Chaos is a ladder. Many who try to climb it fail and never get to try again. The fall breaks them.
    And some are given a chance to climb, but they refuse. They cling to the realm, or the gods, or love. Illusions.
    Only the ladder is real. The climb is all there is."

+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Should convicted felons be able to vote.
    By TaraAnne in forum Civil Liberties
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: Nov 13 2015, 10:38 AM
  2. Should we trust people who use Stormfront as a source?
    By Jebediah in forum Opinion POLLS
    Replies: 233
    Last Post: Apr 30 2012, 06:35 AM
  3. Should legal non-citizens be allowed to vote?
    By Daggdag in forum Political Opinions & Beliefs
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: Jan 23 2012, 02:28 PM
  4. It should be fairly obvious that Sarah Palin is not running for President
    By jmpet in forum Political Opinions & Beliefs
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Sep 06 2011, 06:14 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks