Are you conservative or progressive?

[Rothbardian]

I'm not really sure if I meant it myself, to be honest. If it's a flaw, like I said, it's a very minor one, on a level of my own flaws.

I am starting to think that, in a more positive way, my beliefs are better expressed as a love for Western culture and a preference toward my own ilk, so to speak. I'm starting to doubt some of the negativity toward others I have expressed here, so for that I can apologize. I'm still a traditionalist, but you're making me rethink the framework for some of my traditionalism, which I greatly appreciate. Some of these more genetic things I probably will stop looking at as flaws, while the more "human choice"  things (e.g., alcohol or hard drugs), I will contine to look at as flaws.

Oh, and I appreciate you've refrained from being too aggressive with me. I've tried at least to be the same way about your beliefs.

[Freya]

I'm not really sure if I meant it myself, to be honest. If it's a flaw, like I said, it's a very minor one, on a level of my own flaws.

I am starting to think that, in a more positive way, my beliefs are better expressed as a love for Western culture and a preference toward my own ilk, so to speak. I'm starting to doubt some of the negativity toward others I have expressed here, so for that I can apologize. I'm still a traditionalist, but you're making me rethink the framework for some of my traditionalism, which I greatly appreciate. Some of these more genetic things I probably will stop looking at as flaws, while the more "human choice"  things (e.g., alcohol or hard drugs), I will contine to look at as flaws.

Oh, and I appreciate you've refrained from being too aggressive with me. I've tried at least to be the same way about your beliefs.

Oh I agree on alcohol and drugs. I wouldn't be promoting them. I would also not be against people warning against the risks that come with them. But I won't socially ostracize someone using drugs.

I'm glad you understand that transgendrism and sexual orientation is not a choice. There is plenty of scientific studies that support this fact as well.

[Rothbardian]

Yeah, the analogy inside my head right now would relate to race. I do think there is something wrong with disliking - or finding flaw in - other people solely based on race. On the other hand, I do believe that it is OK to prefer your own race (which I probably do myself to a very, very small extent). So the basis for traditionalism needs to be the same way, I believe. Unfortunately, this is probably still an offensive view to people. I hope, at least, that you're no longer taking offence in what I'm saying.

[bastiat]

I place little value in tradition rather the following are my moral beliefs regardless of what traditions say, within reason. Also, toleration to avoidance means it depend how visible it is and if you talk about it around me. If not much, even if it is clear that you do it ,I would consider you a friend.
•Feminism: acceptance
•Free love tolerance to avoidance my objection to most of the following spring from this 
•Homo and bi-sexuality acceptance who you are attracted to is not an action. Only actions can be moral or immoral
•Gender bending: tolerance to avoidance
•Transgenderism: acceptance
•Prostitution money changing hands is irelavent all that matters is if the people are married 
•Atheism and religious diversity: Most of my friends are atheists, Jews, or Muslims, I try to convert them, what am I?
•Sexual fetishism: tolerance to avoidance
•Bestiality: avoidance
•Pre "age of consent" sex:  avoidance
•Pedophilia: resistance
•Abortion resistance to acceptance
•Polyamory: tolerance to avoidance
•Pornography tolerance to avoidance
•Euthanesia/Suicide tolerance to avoidance
•Gene modification/Transhumanism: Particpatance to the extent tech allows
•Body Modification: I tend to find less modified people more aesthetically pleasing and I like being around good looking people
•Recreational use of soft drugs: acceptance
•Recreational use of hard drugs: I am less likely to befriend some one who will die quickly
•Consensual incest: tolerance to avoidance

[AgoristTeen1994]

For the EddyK vs. Rothbardian debates I can sympathize with both sides. On Rothbardian's side of things from the ages of 10 to 12 I very much believed in the minarchist variation of what he is espousing.....but from the age of about 14 up until about 6 months ago, I dealt with issues pretty much identical to what EddyK has dealt with and is currently dealing with. While I have resolved those and am now completely happy with being a male physically, and see myself as the "traditional" male in many ways, for those three and a half years I VERY much wanted to be socially accepted as a woman, and in fact wanted to be a woman, and have all the associated things....the only reason I didn't consider SRS and hormone therapy was I figured the results wouldn't be too great since I"m masculine. Now of course I don't want to be a woman either physically or socially but for a while I did. Many of my fantasies in fact included me doing 'certain" things as a woman though almost always with another woman. But anyway my point is I can sympathize with both sides in this debate though as of now I lean more toward sympathizing with Rothbardian. I think the main issues here are that 1. Rothbardian made the unintentional mistake of calling EddyK's orientation a "flaw". 2. EddyK took offense to that. 3. Rothbardian couldn't appropriately describe what he meant without using the term "flaw" personally I would have chosen "trait" and added the modifier that "some may consider a flaw" though that WOULD be admittedly more lengthy than simply calling it a "flaw" albeit more accurate. To summarize, there was a miscommunication which caused offense on one side and confusion on the other and perhaps both. There. Now stop butting heads. Though you may have already done so.

[bastiat]

I would agree with AgoristTeen.