Conservatives are stupid and prejudiced

What anyone with a brain has known all along.

Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies.....

http://news.yahoo.com/low-iq-conservative-bel...

"Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, the study found. Those ideologies, in turn, stress hierarchy and resistance to change, attitudes that can contribute to prejudice, Hodson wrote in an email to LiveScience."

Like we didn't know this already....

Smart people are more apt to believe this article instead:

"VETERAN PSYCHIATRIST CALLS LIBERALS MENTALLY ILL"
http://www.wnd.com/2008/11/56494/

Boo Hoo Hoo wrote:

Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies.....

So I suppose "smart people" gravitate toward liberal ideologies, eh? Yea, your Occupy parasites demonstrate their superior liberal intelligence on a daily basis. How many of these intellectually superior beings have been arrested in the last year or so? I'm not sure. I quit counting after 6000. Ha-ha!!

In other news, a new study has shown that a high IQ and Liberal beliefs lead to a total lack of common sense and bankruptcy.

Billy Bo wrote:

In other news, a new study has shown that a high IQ and Liberal beliefs lead to a total lack of common sense and bankruptcy.

I haven't seen a whole lot of high IQ's amongst them either.

I suppose all those welfare queens and people with their hand out who get government assistance have higher IQ's? They vote Democrat don't they? The modern liberal movement is no different than the Nazi party in 1933. No difference whatsoever. Liberals are vampires that suck the blood out of life and liberty. But I'll tell you, we're going to give you Marxist pigs something to suck on soon enough. And by the way, who gives a f--k about what some retarded Canuck has to say about intelligence. Pickled hard-boiled eggs is all you need to know.

Gays are perverted and evil

People like Sarah Palin, Joe the unemployed plumber and Michelle Bachmann are their leaders. That's all the proof I need.

reGOPtarded wrote:

People like Sarah Palin, Joe the unemployed plumber and Michelle Bachmann are their leaders. That's all the proof I need.

Your "name" says all we need to know about you. I really hope there are lots and lots of you and Steve and Boo Hoo types to represent the face of the left for this country. Perhaps then the progressives will find themselves totally out of work come November.

The key part of this is that it refers to social conservatives, not fiscal conservatives.

Social conservatives tend to believe in myths (religion) and superstitions and other ideas simply because they are told to, instead of thinking for themselves.

Other studies have shown that myth believers (religious people) have lower IQs than atheists who tend to be more socially liberal.

It should not be a surprise to anyone that people who can think for themselves would score higher on IQ tests than people who blindly believe and do as they are told by other low intelligence people.

http://articles.cnn.com/2010-02-26/health/lib...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_...

Arctic49519 wrote:

The key part of this is that it refers to social conservatives, not fiscal conservatives.
Social conservatives tend to believe in myths (religion) and superstitions and other ideas simply because they are told to, instead of thinking for themselves.
Other studies have shown that myth believers (religious people) have lower IQs than atheists who tend to be more socially liberal.
It should not be a surprise to anyone that people who can think for themselves would score higher on IQ tests than people who blindly believe and do as they are told by other low intelligence people.
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-02-26/health/lib...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_...

Really? Your source is CNN and wikipedia?? Wow! Just wow...I bet the article on Wikipedia is one of your better efforts at writing, isn't it Arctic?

The Real Sandy wrote:

<quoted text>Really? Your source is CNN and wikipedia?? Wow! Just wow...I bet the article on Wikipedia is one of your better efforts at writing, isn't it Arctic?

Look where you get your "information" from. A bronze age book of childish superstitions and fairy tales. A book written by primitives that were so short on creativity they had to steal most of their material from earlier writings.

Arctic49519 wrote:

<quoted text>
Look where you get your "information" from. A bronze age book of childish superstitions and fairy tales. A book written by primitives that were so short on creativity they had to steal most of their material from earlier writings.

Arctic, even colleges won't allow their students to use Wikipedia as a reference because it is unreliable. The fact that you attack where you think I get my information from is proof positive that your sources are truly suspect. You really need to get help for this hatred and anger you have.....

The Real Sandy wrote:

<quoted text>Arctic, even colleges won't allow their students to use Wikipedia as a reference because it is unreliable. The fact that you attack where you think I get my information from is proof positive that your sources are truly suspect. You really need to get help for this hatred and anger you have.....

You posted (as usual) an ignorant comment attacking some studies, and then complain when your myth book is criticized. As usual, you brought nothing meaningful to the conversation.

Since you're too lazy (or more likely just can't accept the truth) to look up the references on the wiki page I'll just post a few:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/211117...

http://www.gallup.com/poll/142727/religiosity...

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/...

And some other sources:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/02/...

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/high_iq_libe...

http://theweek.com/article/index/207591/relig...

http://images.topix.com/gallery/up-GOGM1STQBB...

Good luck with the excuses.

Arctic49519 wrote:

The key part of this is that it refers to social conservatives, not fiscal conservatives.
Social conservatives tend to believe in myths (religion) and superstitions and other ideas simply because they are told to, instead of thinking for themselves.
Other studies have shown that myth believers (religious people) have lower IQs than atheists who tend to be more socially liberal.
It should not be a surprise to anyone that people who can think for themselves would score higher on IQ tests than people who blindly believe and do as they are told by other low intelligence people.
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-02-26/health/lib...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_...

So what you're saying is that people who have faith cannot think for themselves? Dangerous thinking indeed. You should think about moving to North Korea so you no longer have to be bothered by those of us with low IQ's.

Dead By Dawn wrote:

<quoted text>So what you're saying is that people who have faith cannot think for themselves? Dangerous thinking indeed. You should think about moving to North Korea so you no longer have to be bothered by those of us with low IQ's.

No one becomes a christian, muslim, jew, etc. through independent thought. It's because they were told to believe "or else," indoctrination... usually from early childhood.

If you had evidence, reason, and rational thought, you wouldn't need faith. Faith is just telling yourself to believe something you know isn't true.

Arctic49519 wrote:

<quoted text>
No one becomes a christian, muslim, jew, etc. through independent thought. It's because they were told to believe "or else," indoctrination... usually from early childhood.
If you had evidence, reason, and rational thought, you wouldn't need faith. Faith is just telling yourself to believe something you know isn't true.

Well, I'm a Deist so I guess I'm off the utopian hook, right?

Arctic49519 wrote:

<quoted text>
No one becomes a christian, muslim, jew, etc. through independent thought. It's because they were told to believe "or else," indoctrination... usually from early childhood.
If you had evidence, reason, and rational thought, you wouldn't need faith. Faith is just telling yourself to believe something you know isn't true.

You haven't a clue what faith is.

I was watching a show on the 'God particle', where scientists were trying to prove a possible scientific theory of how life began. It was fascinating. Science is amazing. I certainly don't proclaim to understand everything discussed in that study anymore than you evidently can wrap your closed-mind around faith.
The discoveries made through science boggle the mind. Atomic collisions so powerful they actually create elements that could contain life and form entire galaxies?! And no one knows where these atoms came from or how they were created in the first place. The whole subject of creation is so fantastic that the only way to even begin a theory on it is to suspend proof and start with a belief that is so farfetched as to be impossible.

You've probably already figured what my point is (if you read this far)-faith that God exists is no more unbelievable than two atoms or particles or whatever, floating through whatever outer space is (since time, whatever that is, began), just happened to come from nowhere and collide in such a way as to create life. Both require one to believe in the unbelievable.

Dead By Dawn wrote:

<quoted text>Well, I'm a Deist.....

But you are a chickenshit!