the pretty fucked up website

The Not 100% Complete FAQs for the Pretty Fucked Up Person in a Pretty Fucked Up World

My moral values are different than your moral values and your moral values are insane!

Society/Current Events
Remember to Skip...

Let's start with the buzzphrase du jour 'moral values.' What the hell are conservative voters talking about when they talk about moral values and why does it piss the liberals off so bad?

We'll start by explaining the moral values that go with a liberal temperament because it's easier! And since we here at have a damnably liberal temperament at heart, we like easy.

Liberal moral values are based on the perception of pain, which they're good at. When someone with a liberal temperament does something that hurts someone they perceive the pain it causes the other person and they say "Ouch! I recognize that. That's pain! I don't like pain. Doing things that hurt others is thoroughly unpleasant because it causes pain which I can perceive. I'm not going to do that anymore if I can help it. I don't like it."

Liberals can perceive their own pain and that of others both. They then have the proper human response to pain which is to try to get it to go the hell away. Liberals, left to their own devices, run constantly around the world perceiving pain everywhere. They perceive it as bedeviling the poor, the war-torn, the people with AIDS, the little kiddies on the block who have to work hard at school. They perceive it in their neighbors, in their marriages, in their families, in society, in romance novels, in other races, in the planet earth, in animals, in Native Americans, you name it, a person with a strongly liberal temperament can perceive it there. And they never like it. They always want it to go away, because that's their job.

Pain, for those with a liberal temperament, is the foundation of both action and morality. A reasonable human being, in their opinion, should strive to make him or herself as pain-free as possible, because pain is not good, and should use their spare energy to making everyone else as pain-free as possible, because everyone else's pain affects them. This is an entirely common-sense approach to life from the liberal temperament point of view and really shouldn't need explaining because it's self-evident to anyone who can perceive pain! So they don't explain it, and leave conservatives, who can't perceive pain, to guess and mock at their underlying motivations and call them 'bleeding hearts.' Liberals are bleeding hearts, and this is, in the liberal opinion the natural foundation of all human morality - a bleeding heart.

The perception of pain is, to the liberal temperament, a powerful inhibitor of immoral actions. Immoral actions cause pain to others, which causes pain to the transgressor, which makes the transgressor not want to transgress, which makes everybody moral by nature! Liberals actually believe this! That everyone is moral by nature, endowed by biology or god with a natural impulse to do good and avoid bad because bad hurts and good feels much better.

Liberals are consistently confused and enraged by the conservative willingness to run around causing pain and not even feel bad about it! From the liberal point of view, conservative policies are enacted in deliberate and totally irrational defiance of the Pain Principle and are therefore obviously immoral. Little schoolchildren won't have lunches! That's painful! Therefore it's immoral. Or at the least, morally bankrupt and just plain fucking idiotic. Can't the goddamn morons see their regressive policies are causing massive pain everywhere? Are they fucking blind?

The answer to this age-old liberal question is yes they are blind. Their brains don't light up when poor little schoolchildren eat Cheetos from the sidewalk for lunch because they don't have any money. Doesn't really bother them. Can't feel it. Which makes cutting school lunch funding not seem very immoral to them.

So liberals get confused. They call conservatives morally bankrupt on occasion but they don't really understand what is going on. They think that people with the conservative temperament have the same biology they do and for some unknown reason are ignoring it. They secretly suspect Conservatives will be persuaded if they point out to them the pain caused by cuts in social funding and so on. Conservatives won't. They don't give a fucking crap about pain! It doesn't bother them. Not theirs, not yours, not anyone's. They give a fuck about fear and danger, which are different things. So you fucking moronic liberals can just shut up for all they care because they don't and your liberal arguments are supremely unconvincing.

Meanwhile, liberals are busy constructing, or have accidentally constructed, due to biology, a coherent and self-contained moral system. The equation between pain and morality is so obvious to the liberal temperament that if something doesn't cause pain, they don't see how it can be immoral.

Sexual behavior such as gayness and blow jobs and tits on TV doesn't seem immoral to liberals because where's the fucking pain? If it doesn't hurt anyone, how can it rationally be considered immoral. Liberal temperament brains are more sensitive and reactive to violence than sex anyway. Sex is fun! But not particularly alarming, because their brains don't react to it that strongly.

Meanwhile, drugs are not immoral to the liberal temperament to the extent they don't cause pain. If they do cause pain, the pain should be stopped. Drug addicts should be rehabilitated so their pain will go away because pain is bad. Criminals probably commit crimes because either a) they need assistance in correctly perceiving the pain that will deter their criminal acts or b) they are already in so much pain that their behavior is essentially a reaction to pain and therefore that pain should be eliminated so they will stop acting criminal. For example, poverty can be painful, because to the liberal temperament almost anything can. Therefore, many criminals may be motivated by the desire to alleviate the pain of poverty with desperate criminal acts. Eliminate the poverty that is causing the pain and the aforementioned criminal will undoubtedly stop commiting criminal acts because DUH! people are essentially moral in nature and pain is a primary determinant of their behavior. Only an idiot couldn't figure this out from the liberal temperament point of view and it's really quite tedious that they have to run around advocating for the point of view when any moron with an IQ pushing 35 or more should get it.

Now very few people are exclusively liberal or conservative in temperament, most have at least some ability to perceive both pain and danger and not all liberals are so explicitly pain-focused in their reasoning. But any goddamn liberal worth his or her salt should be able to recognize the underlying reasoning. Pain is a reality in the liberal temperament world and they adjust their opinions, morals, beliefs, and actions accordingly. They know they think this way, what they don't understand is that Conservatives think differently because they are perceiving something entirely different. The truly liberal temperament rejects anything outside the Pain Equation as irrelevant, creating a closed, self-referential and logical system insensible to anything outside its own frame of reference.

Conservatives are completely different in how they derive their moral values. Conservatives do not react particularly strongly to pain, their own or anyone else's. Therefore, logically, pain is not an effective inhibitor of immoral action. It doesn't work. It never has and it ain't gonna. Conservatives, being much more adept at detecting danger, naturally perceive FEAR to be a far more effective inhibitor & motivator of action. You will see the effects of this reasoning throughout the policies they favor. Conservatives understand fear, therefore it makes sense to them to use this god-given gift to mankind to regulate behavior.

Both temperaments recognize the necessity of the social virtues - benevolence, charity, getting alongness, cohesion, not murdering each other willy-nilly, etc. But they recognize the necessity for these things via a different route. People with a strongly liberal temperament recognize an innate kinship with any entity that experiences pain. This is the source of their compassion and emotional orientation to matters of public import. Conservatives, on the other hand, orient their emotions around attachments. They experience attachment to their families, their communities, their sports teams, their nation, perhaps their friends, anything that can be reliably classified as 'mine' as opposed to 'theirs.' Conservatives are naturally oriented around us vs. them because us vs. them is the natural wellspring of the danger perception they're so good at. Attachments are necessary and highly valued for their emotional content because the Conservative temperament correctly perceives that attachments are necessary for protection and defense. And protection is the name of the game when you are good at perceiving danger.

This perception has far-reaching consequences for the Conservative worldview and perception of morality. The natural impulse of mankind, from the Conservative point of view is to protect, defend, and favor oneself and one's attachments by any means necessary no matter how much pain it may cause because how the hell fucking else is anyone to survive? It completely does not make sense to look at it any other way. Fight for your family. Fight for your church. Fight for your homeland. If you don't, jesus if you don't, everyone you know is a goner. Life is dangerous, compete, protect, guard, and if necessary, destroy.

The upshot of this is that the natural human desire to favor one's close attachments at the expense of everyone else is to some degree not so good for getting alongness. Conservatives can tolerate a lot of not getting alongness if it's helpful to their own family and interests, but too much of it is destructive to society. Human beings, by their nature are selfish and destructive. Therefore, logically and obviously, they need some sort of deterrent that will channel their selfish and destructive impulses into a structure and system that will protect the community and nation. That deterrent is morality. Morality, by its very nature, cannot come from human beings, because human beings are by nature selfish and destructive. Therefore, the morality must come from outside oneself. God is therefore a natural source of morality. This is why religion naturally creeps into conservative politics. Unlike liberals, who instinctively believe that morality comes from within, conservatives know it doesn't. Some conservatives have posited that morality can come from the state, the community, an enlightened elite, or anybody fucking else that isn't a regular human being because human beings naturally fucking suck at being moral.

The morality of God, therefore, should not be comprehensible and common-sense from a regular person's point of view, because humans naturally know jack shit about morality, don't like it, aren't supposed to and will never develop it on their own. They can't. The whole point of morality from the Conservative POV is to keep people from doing whatever it is their own impulses would make them want to do. This is, from the Liberal POV completely insane becaue goddammit, it is precisely those impulses to avoid and alleviate pain from which all morality must necessarily spring. Both sides think the other side is completely fucking insane! And, in their own way, each side is. Neither side can perceive with any reliable insight what the reality of the other side's experience is.

We can see from this, that just as the liberals always expected, Conservatives are selfish! Of course they are. Liberals are bleeding hearts and conservatives are selfish. The stereotypes are true - and at a basic biological level.

You can see why, with a Conservative temperament, believing in a God that repeatedly expresses the opinion that the species you belong is inherently wicked, sinful, bad, and rotten, would not only make sense to the you but would be downright comforting. The last thing you would want to do as a person with a Conservative temperament is be left to your own moral devices. That would be terrible! Your life would be an extremely unpleasant chaos of fierce passions to possess, defend, fight, compete, fuck, cause trouble, be selfish. There would be little to your life but constant fear, as your everpresent perception of danger prompted you to take ever more drastic actions in defense, leaving you with nothing to turn to. It would be awful. Occasionally, people with the Conservative temperament write movingly and quite descriptively of exactly what this is like before they had their conversion experience or whatever it was that rescued them. People with a strongly conservative temperament naturally believe that all men are sinners because they themselves are sinners!

Again, the system makes perfect sense from within its own biology. It is logical, coherent, effective, and dismissive of anything outside its own premises. And its premises are powerful because they're backed up by experience, the kind of experience that the biology a Conservative temperament inclines one to have. The fact that Conservatives are 'in touch' with their own sinning nature does not make them inherently worse as human beings than Liberals, although you would have a hard time convincing a die-hard Liberal of this. It simply makes them realistic about the nature and proclivities of approximately half the population at any given time. Where the Conservative temperament falls down is that it is not able to be realistic about the other half of the population. Whom it naturally despises for indulging in a wimpy pain-fest it does not give in to itself.

Conservatives make a choice to endure suffering to alleviate fear. Most conservative branches of religion whether Christian, Muslim, Jewish, and for all I know Buddhist and Hindu, strongly promote the idea that it is not for man to judge, but to submit to a higher authority which knows a hell of a lot more about morality than man does. This submission will entail suffering, pain, denial of desire but in return it offers protection. Eternal life, protection from fear, structure, it tells you how to do things so you do not have to rely on your chaotic passion-driven inner self to fuck things up, and all these aspects of Conservative religion come as a real goddamn relief to a person with a strongly Conservative temperament. Thank God for saving me from myself. It's a win-win situation from the Conservative point of view because suffering is not that big a deal to the Conservative temperament compared to the goddawful vagaries of fear, uncertainty, danger, and lack of structure. All praise Allah, or God, or Jehovah or whoever the hell. God is good. God is very very good.

One of the few things better than God, though, if you have a strongly Conservative temperament is a gun. So let's talk about guns next! It'll be so much fun!

Guns are a Conservative's best friend!


Argue with your girlfriend for fun and profit!!

How Fucked Up Are You Really? Take this handy quiz and find out!

Deep Philosophical Question: Why are people so stupid?

Join us as we delve into the phenomenon of people whose goddamn cell phones going off during a movie.

The ever-popular how to dump your girlfriend series

Shy girls demystsified.

Why Do Asshole Guys Get All The Chicks?!

Your brain....

More FAQs about

How do I get my FAQ to qualify for

Will I get in trouble with my mother if she finds me at this site?

Who the hell is behind this site? Who are you, anyway?


The I am Making This Up Disclaimer

The Scientific Disclaimer

The I Don't Know What I Am Talking About Disclaimer

The This is No Substitute for Professional Help Disclaimer

The Don't Sue Me Unless You Really Really Really Want to Disclaimer

The This Site is Not Endorsed by Anyone Disclaimer

Bonus! Your FAQ here

copyright 2004