Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Page / 6
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 10:15:58 AM EDT
Sit on our hands too much. Listen to talk radio too much.

Not enough doing.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 10:16:56 AM EDT
My biggest criticism of conservatives?

Religion. They're so close to being full-blown libertarians! They've already got the fiscal responsibility and low taxes part down. They're half way there! If only they could shake that pesky religiosity of theirs and make it all the way home.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 10:20:53 AM EDT

Originally Posted By samsong:
For me, it seems to be that conservatives seem to be totally intolerant of anybody that disagrees with them - most especially, people who are also conservative, *but not conservative enough.*

Yours?

QFT. This was my answer before I even opened the thread.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 10:24:39 AM EDT
Originally Posted By VooDoo3dfx:
'No compassion'


Via what? Not voting money out of my neighbor's pocket to give to someone who hasn't earned it? If that's the basis for criticism, I'm an uncaring motherfucker and proud of it.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 10:33:12 AM EDT


Link Posted: 3/18/2010 10:33:44 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Fender57:
Originally Posted By samsong:
For me, it seems to be that conservatives seem to be totally intolerant of anybody that disagrees with them - most especially, people who are also conservative, *but not conservative enough.*

Yours?


YOu've been brainwashed into thinking there are only "two" types of political personalities based on our bullshit two party system.
Our system made sense 200 years ago when the voting was between "White male land owner #1" and "White male land owner #2".
but now that everyone can vote and have totally disparate interests YET the two party system remains and you end up with "alliances" that in reality make no sense. What does the political philosophy of Ayn Rand or William Buckley jr. have to do with Oral Roberts? Nuttin, that's what.


You're over simplifying it by a large margin––-STATES controlled who voted and some were pretty open on who got to vote.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 10:35:21 AM EDT
After reading it seems that most of the hate for conservatives is their religiousness...

I myself am a Christian and a very radical libertarian. I have my own personal beliefs and yes I think some of the 'socially free' things like drugs, unwed sex, smoking, drinking, ect are things that can bring a person down and hinder their ability to succeed in life.......BUT I love freedom and want freedom for everyone even if I don't particularly agree with some things. I think many conservatives actually are closer to libertarian, they just don't know it or they need to be shown the light. I have lots of 'conservative' friends and they don't have a problem with 'socially free' things that others do even though they may not agree morally with it. I showed them what libertarian means and introduced them to Milton Friedman, they all have seen the light...

Libertarianism is pretty much an extreme form of right wing 'ism'
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 10:38:01 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Regency:
After reading it seems that most of the hate for conservatives is their religiousness...

I myself am a Christian and a very radical libertarian. I have my own personal beliefs and yes I think some of the 'socially free' things like drugs, unwed sex, smoking, drinking, ect are things that can bring a person down and hinder their ability to succeed in life.......BUT I love freedom and want freedom for everyone even if I don't particularly agree with some things. I think many conservatives actually are closer to libertarian, they just don't know it or they need to be shown the light. I have lots of 'conservative' friends and they don't have a problem with 'socially free' things that others do even though they may not agree morally with it. I showed them what libertarian means and introduced them to Milton Friedman, they all have seen the light...

Libertarianism is pretty much an extreme form of right wing 'ism'


But you don't want to have to pay for any of it right?
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 10:40:34 AM EDT
Originally Posted By machinisttx:
Originally Posted By Regency:
After reading it seems that most of the hate for conservatives is their religiousness...

I myself am a Christian and a very radical libertarian. I have my own personal beliefs and yes I think some of the 'socially free' things like drugs, unwed sex, smoking, drinking, ect are things that can bring a person down and hinder their ability to succeed in life.......BUT I love freedom and want freedom for everyone even if I don't particularly agree with some things. I think many conservatives actually are closer to libertarian, they just don't know it or they need to be shown the light. I have lots of 'conservative' friends and they don't have a problem with 'socially free' things that others do even though they may not agree morally with it. I showed them what libertarian means and introduced them to Milton Friedman, they all have seen the light...

Libertarianism is pretty much an extreme form of right wing 'ism'


But you don't want to have to pay for any of it right?


Pay for what?
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 10:44:57 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/18/2010 11:10:24 AM EDT by mnvwguy02]
Too many so called Conservatives are Progressive Statists just as willing to use the state to usurp liberty as any so called Liberal, they just have different preferences for selecting winners and losers than the Liberal.

Liberty first!
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 10:45:42 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/18/2010 10:46:13 AM EDT by Chris0013]
Originally Posted By Regency:
After reading it seems that most of the hate for conservatives is their religiousness...

I myself am a Christian and a very radical libertarian. I have my own personal beliefs and yes I think some of the 'socially free' things like drugs, unwed sex, smoking, drinking, ect are things that can bring a person down and hinder their ability to succeed in life.......BUT I love freedom and want freedom for everyone even if I don't particularly agree with some things. I think many conservatives actually are closer to libertarian, they just don't know it or they need to be shown the light. I have lots of 'conservative' friends and they don't have a problem with 'socially free' things that others do even though they may not agree morally with it. I showed them what libertarian means and introduced them to Milton Friedman, they all have seen the light...

Libertarianism is pretty much an extreme form of right wing 'ism'


I would not say their religiousness so much as it is there desire to legislate morality....I have no problem with people's personal beliefs, but they are just that. They should not be forced on others thru legislation or course curriculum in public schools.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 10:48:07 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Regency:
After reading it seems that most of the hate for conservatives is their religiousness...

I myself am a Christian and a very radical libertarian. I have my own personal beliefs and yes I think some of the 'socially free' things like drugs, unwed sex, smoking, drinking, ect are things that can bring a person down and hinder their ability to succeed in life.......BUT I love freedom and want freedom for everyone even if I don't particularly agree with some things. I think many conservatives actually are closer to libertarian, they just don't know it or they need to be shown the light. I have lots of 'conservative' friends and they don't have a problem with 'socially free' things that others do even though they may not agree morally with it. I showed them what libertarian means and introduced them to Milton Friedman, they all have seen the light...

Libertarianism is pretty much an extreme form of right wing 'ism'


This man rocks. Christians of the world, take heed from this man, for he is a saint among you. Build grand statues in his honour and praise his name. Learn from his writings and, if possible, subscribe to his newsletter.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 10:48:38 AM EDT
Originally Posted By nukldragr:
Originally Posted By Duggan:
Originally Posted By nukldragr:
Originally Posted By Duggan:
They won't shut the fuck up about Jesus and what is "morally right".


Sooo shut them up


If only it was that easy.


Free speech is inconvenient isn't it?


It is, for sure, when it comes to getting people to agree with you. By definition the right to spout off whatever opinion you want opens the door for disagreement.

But that's the whole point of free speech (protection from oppression and all that) and wasn't my point at all.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 10:52:23 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Rocksarge:
that is why they are conservatives and not liberals. i believe you wish they were libertarians.


True,

One thing liberals and conservatives have in common is the belief in soceity living by rules set forth by the government and to a lesser degree taxes. They differ on which rules or laws people should live by and they disagree on the amount of taxes and how those should be spent of course. Both seem a little over-intrusive into personal lives at times for different things, liberals more so (for the issues I feel strongly about) or I would be hanging out at Kos Daily, Huffington Post or DU.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 10:57:56 AM EDT
Dog eat dog, every man for himself attitude.

I am also upset when a conservative preaches the harm in having entitlement programs, but then gets a government type job because of the awesome retirement plan it offers...living off the tax revenue of the citizens of that community until death. Seems sorta hypocritical to me...
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 11:00:43 AM EDT
Originally Posted By femgungirl:
Originally Posted By Rocksarge:
that is why they are conservatives and not liberals. i believe you wish they were libertarians.


True,

One thing liberals and conservatives have in common is the belief in soceity living by rules set forth by the government and to a lesser degree taxes. They differ on which rules or laws people should live by and they disagree on the amount of taxes and how those should be spent of course. Both seem a little over-intrusive into personal lives at times for different things, liberals more so (for the issues I feel strongly about) or I would be hanging out at Kos Daily, Huffington Post or DU.


The problem with Libertarianism is that it is well suited to small, dispersed populations but not well suited to large populations. In larger populations libertarianism creates its own inefficiencies.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 11:01:27 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Rocksarge:
that is why they are conservatives and not liberals. i believe you wish they were libertarians.


Libertarians play the "I'm the most Libertarian game". You don't agree with me . . . you are a statist.


Link Posted: 3/18/2010 11:04:00 AM EDT
Originally Posted By samsong:
For me, it seems to be that conservatives seem to be totally intolerant of anybody that disagrees with them - most especially, people who are also conservative, *but not conservative enough.*

Yours?


You are confused, this is not in any way specific to conservatives. This is human nature. Leftists are intolerant, so are libertarians, so are people who think they are "reasonable moderates".

Anti-religious types are as intolerant as the religious right.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 11:08:34 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Shane333:
Originally Posted By femgungirl:
Originally Posted By Rocksarge:
that is why they are conservatives and not liberals. i believe you wish they were libertarians.


True,

One thing liberals and conservatives have in common is the belief in soceity living by rules set forth by the government and to a lesser degree taxes. They differ on which rules or laws people should live by and they disagree on the amount of taxes and how those should be spent of course. Both seem a little over-intrusive into personal lives at times for different things, liberals more so (for the issues I feel strongly about) or I would be hanging out at Kos Daily, Huffington Post or DU.


The problem with Libertarianism is that it is well suited to small, dispersed populations but not well suited to large populations. In larger populations libertarianism creates its own inefficiencies.


I've looked over some of the statements of Dave_A and others in this regard and I'm sure you're right, otherwise conservatives and liberals wouldn't be such a large proportion of the population and libertarians only 2-3% of the population. But I think those 2 groups, get lost in group think and lose perspective at times, again liberals more so. I think the self-reliance of conservatives acts as a counter-weight to group think, whereas liberals have no such characteristic that I'm aware of.

Theoretically, would libertarianism work in Alaska, Montana and New Hampshire but not in California, Florida and Texas?

I realize and understand that my viewpoints are unique because my personal background is unusual. Having lived under countries that top the list on repressiveness, my natural inclination is to rebel to anything I perceive as intrusive. Most of the time, my insticts are right, sometimes, emotions get the better of me. I try to maintain a balance of open mindedness, realistic perspective and idealism.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 11:09:12 AM EDT
Originally Posted By VooDoo3dfx:
Originally Posted By Amontgomery:
Stupid question really, but does everyone consider Islamic Terrorists to be liberal or conservative?

And how does this relate to our meaning of the terms?

ETA; FFFUUU!!! Wasted post 762 on this!!!


Conservative has a couple sub-categories.

One of them being religion... the argument could be made that Muslims could fit into the 'religious conservative' group.


It can also be argued that in America, there are no conservatives. American tradition goes back to classical liberals. Modern "liberals" are really leftists.

The only sense in which American conservatives are conservative is in a Burkean sense, that major changes should not be done without good reason, and that we should not chase utopian goals.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 11:15:50 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Chairborne:
Too much bible thumping. Conservative doesn't equate to "the religious right", though many liberals lump them together.
The world would be so much better off if we just got rid of those pesky Christians.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 11:17:45 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Shane333:
The problem with Libertarianism is that it is well suited to small, dispersed populations but not well suited to large populations. In larger populations libertarianism creates its own inefficiencies.


That depends upon what you mean by "libertarianism".

If you mean the Libertarian Party, it seems to be more about "who's most libertarian", and its approach seems doomed to the sidelines. I'm sorry, but candidate who's primary issue is medical weed or ferrit "rights" are a walking joke.

There is also the libertarian philosophy of men like Milton Freedman, Hyack, Von Mises, et al., which forms the intellectual basis of much of the modern "conservative" movement.

And there are also those pushing into archo-capitalism, which most closely fits your argument. But there are many libertarians who are not archo-capitalists.



Link Posted: 3/18/2010 11:19:58 AM EDT
My 2 biggest gripes are that:

1. Conservatives talk a good game and then do the same thing as Liberals by growing government. Libs
want to ban guns and institute marxism. Conservatives want to ban gays and institute a Constitutional
Theocracy of sorts.

2. Religious extremism. You make an enemy of me and many others the second you start spouting
nonsense about me going to hell for not believing in God. They also lose me big time when they try and
justify laws and regulations using God and the Bible. If I want religion, I'll go find it.


I am politically a Libertarian. With 1 very big distinction. I hate, hate, hate ABORTION! Most Libertarians
I've spoken to support it in some form though. That is my 1 real hangup with the LP.

For the record, I despise Liberals (Commie bastards). Conservatives are far better, but still not even close to
representing me truly. Really the lesser of 2 evils in my mind.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 11:25:14 AM EDT
They spend too much damn money. Other people's money.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 11:31:04 AM EDT
Originally Posted By femgungirl:
[I've looked over some of the statements of Dave_A and others in this regard and I'm sure you're right, otherwise conservatives and liberals wouldn't be such a large proportion of the population and libertarians only 2-3% of the population. But I think those 2 groups, get lost in group think and lose perspective at times, again liberals more so. I think the self-reliance of conservatives acts as a counter-weight to group think, whereas liberals have no such characteristic that I'm aware of.

Theoretically, would libertarianism work in Alaska, Montana and New Hampshire but not in California, Florida and Texas?

I realize and understand that my viewpoints are unique because my personal background is unusual. Having lived under countries that top the list on repressiveness, my natural inclination is to rebel to anything I perceive as intrusive. Most of the time, my insticts are right, sometimes, emotions get the better of me. I try to maintain a balance of open mindedness, realistic perspective and idealism.


American conservatives and libertarians are closely linked, and both trace their ideas back to the English Enlightenment and classical liberalism. It is hard to seperate them out.

Liberals are not really liberals, they are leftists, and trace their ideas back to the French Enlightenment and Revolution.

Libertarian ideas should work fine, since at heart they are free market ideas. Even the more provocative libertarian ideas, like legal prostitution and drugs would work out (I'll leave it to another day what the right answer is on these issues, but they wouldn't end society if we did it the libertarian way).

If you mean full blown archno-captitalism, I don't see it working for long; sooner or later someone would decide to organize a force to gain control, and the whole archno thing would fail. But this is only an extreem version of libertarianism.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 11:33:30 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/18/2010 11:37:23 AM EDT by Shane333]
Originally Posted By femgungirl:
Originally Posted By Shane333:

The problem with Libertarianism is that it is well suited to small, dispersed populations but not well suited to large populations. In larger populations libertarianism creates its own inefficiencies.


I've looked over some of the statements of Dave_A and others in this regard and I'm sure you're right, otherwise conservatives and liberals wouldn't be such a large proportion of the population and libertarians only 2-3% of the population. But I think those 2 groups, get lost in group think and lose perspective at times, again liberals more so. I think the self-reliance of conservatives acts as a counter-weight to group think, whereas liberals have no such characteristic that I'm aware of.

Theoretically, would libertarianism work in Alaska, Montana and New Hampshire but not in California, Florida and Texas?

I realize and understand that my viewpoints are unique because my personal background is unusual. Having lived under countries that top the list on repressiveness, my natural inclination is to rebel to anything I perceive as intrusive. Most of the time, my insticts are right, sometimes, emotions get the better of me. I try to maintain a balance of open mindedness, realistic perspective and idealism.


Well, let me back up a step and explain my "inefficiencies" remark.

One of the core parts of libertarianism is the idea that people should be generally left to themselves and the government only gets involved if needed as an arbitrator when disagreeing parties are unable to resolve their own differences. This model of government tends to serve well in small communities where people don't live close together and have limited contact with eachother. Small populations with limited contact means fewer opportunities for toes to be stepped on, and subsequently less need for arbitration.

Now consider a communities with a large population living in close proximity to eachother. Lots of interactions, lots of disagreements, and lots of demands for arbitration. Here is where the libertarian model of government begins to be strained until it falls apart. The drastic increase in demand for arbitration will require an ever increasing number of arbitrators = increased government bureacracy. What more, a significant number of the disagreements will be repeats of the same issue, meaning that arbitrators will be issuing the same ruling over and over and over again. That isn't very efficient. Worse, one arbitrator might issue a different ruling on the same conflict than another arbitrator. So the rulings themselves are "arbitrary". That can easily result in a decreased sense of justice.

So what happens? As the same issue comes up over and over and over again, a policy is made presenting guidelines for everyone in the community to abide. This is less arbitrary, providing consistancy in government and reduces the amount of man-hours that arbitrators have to spend deliberating the matter the next time it comes up.

How many times does an arbitrator have to hear arguments over loose, aggressive dogs or dog poop on people's lawns within a community before a leash policy is passed?

Consider laws regarding the discharge of firearms in city limits. If the community is a town in Montana with miles of country between homes and lots of hillsides to shoot into, there aren't going to be as many incidents of people finding holes in their walls from the neighbor's afternoon target practice in his back yard. Now consider Los Angeles. How many times will your neighbor go target practicing in her back yard before a bullet ends up in a neighbor's yard or neighbor's house? How many times does a bullet have to tear through a neighbor's house before a policy about discharging a firearm in city limits gets passed?
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 11:33:44 AM EDT
Originally Posted By samsong:
For me, it seems to be that conservatives seem to be totally intolerant of anybody that disagrees with them - most especially, people who are also conservative, *but not conservative enough.*

Yours?

Got you red handed!
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 11:44:22 AM EDT
Originally Posted By DonS:
Originally Posted By samsong:
For me, it seems to be that conservatives seem to be totally intolerant of anybody that disagrees with them - most especially, people who are also conservative, *but not conservative enough.*

Yours?


You are confused, this is not in any way specific to conservatives. This is human nature. Leftists are intolerant, so are libertarians, so are people who think they are "reasonable moderates".

Anti-religious types are as intolerant as the religious right.


I disagree that the anti-religious are as intolerant as the religious. Religion teaches people to be intolerant. It teaches people that it has the answers and that it is the only true way. It teaches to judge and condemn those outside of a particular faith.

Atheists have no such teachings.

Now, personally, I am anti-religion because I find religion to be both foolish and harmful, but I'll be the last person to forbid anyone the right to their silly beliefs. I'll mock them enthusiastically, but I'll also defend their right to religion as furiously as any true believer of any faith.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 11:50:44 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Apostrophe:
Originally Posted By DonS:
Originally Posted By samsong:
For me, it seems to be that conservatives seem to be totally intolerant of anybody that disagrees with them - most especially, people who are also conservative, *but not conservative enough.*

Yours?


You are confused, this is not in any way specific to conservatives. This is human nature. Leftists are intolerant, so are libertarians, so are people who think they are "reasonable moderates".

Anti-religious types are as intolerant as the religious right.


I disagree that the anti-religious are as intolerant as the religious. Religion teaches people to be intolerant. It teaches people that it has the answers and that it is the only true way. It teaches to judge and condemn those outside of a particular faith.

Atheists have no such teachings.

Now, personally, I am anti-religion because I find religion to be both foolish and harmful, but I'll be the last person to forbid anyone the right to their silly beliefs. I'll mock them enthusiastically, but I'll also defend their right to religion as furiously as any true believer of any faith.


What about the believer's right to vote according to their "silly beliefs"?
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 12:04:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/18/2010 12:05:25 PM EDT by Apostrophe]
Originally Posted By Shane333:
Originally Posted By Apostrophe:
Originally Posted By DonS:
Originally Posted By samsong:
For me, it seems to be that conservatives seem to be totally intolerant of anybody that disagrees with them - most especially, people who are also conservative, *but not conservative enough.*

Yours?


You are confused, this is not in any way specific to conservatives. This is human nature. Leftists are intolerant, so are libertarians, so are people who think they are "reasonable moderates".

Anti-religious types are as intolerant as the religious right.


I disagree that the anti-religious are as intolerant as the religious. Religion teaches people to be intolerant. It teaches people that it has the answers and that it is the only true way. It teaches to judge and condemn those outside of a particular faith.

Atheists have no such teachings.

Now, personally, I am anti-religion because I find religion to be both foolish and harmful, but I'll be the last person to forbid anyone the right to their silly beliefs. I'll mock them enthusiastically, but I'll also defend their right to religion as furiously as any true believer of any faith.


What about the believer's right to vote according to their "silly beliefs"?


Yes, they also have and should have that right. Will defend it also. Important.

"Freedom means the right to be stupid"
- Penn Gillette
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 12:19:13 PM EDT
Originally Posted By samsong:
For me, it seems to be that conservatives seem to be totally intolerant of anybody that disagrees with them - most especially, people who are also conservative, *but not conservative enough.*

Yours?


Uh, aren't you describing liberals?



I don't like the fact that conservatives, by and large, don't have balls and always insist on taking the "Moral High Road" when they are in power. It sickens me. Our leftist enemies (yes, enemies) here in this country will stop at nothing to get their way. Conservatives need to learn––-quickly––-how to get in the mud with the pigs. Fuck this mamby-pamby "We're better than that" bullshit. Look where it got us now......

Link Posted: 3/18/2010 1:10:20 PM EDT
Black/white, either/or thinking. Many (if not most) conservatives seem to think of the world in terms of black and white. The real world does not work that way. It is not binary... The real world is full of shades of grey.

There is no grasp of nuance in their thinking...
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 1:30:53 PM EDT
Originally Posted By BR870:
Black/white, either/or thinking. Many (if not most) conservatives seem to think of the world in terms of black and white. The real world does not work that way. It is not binary... The real world is full of shades of grey.

There is no grasp of nuance in their thinking...


You might be overgeneralizing or perhaps misunderstanding.

Principles are often black and white. Application is where I find most of the grey area.

For example: Is the 1st Amendment presented in a black and white manner? Now for application: Is it OK to scream, "fire," as a hoax in a crowded auditorium?


That said, depending on the principle there may not be allowable grey area for a believer. If you agree that murder is wrong, and you believe an unborn child is a living person, where is the grey area when it comes to abortions?
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 1:58:46 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DerekCB:
My 2 biggest gripes are that:

1. Conservatives talk a good game and then do the same thing as Liberals by growing government. Libs
want to ban guns and institute marxism. Conservatives want to ban gays and institute a Constitutional
Theocracy of sorts.

2. Religious extremism. You make an enemy of me and many others the second you start spouting
nonsense about me going to hell for not believing in God. They also lose me big time when they try and
justify laws and regulations using God and the Bible. If I want religion, I'll go find it.
.


Can you point out some examples of attempted (or successfull) legislation attempting to 1- ban gays, 2- institute any sort of theocracy, and 3- use the bible to justify legislation?

I'm particularly curious about 2, as I keep reading posts about the pending theocratic takeover of the US by pesky bible thumping conservatives.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 2:01:26 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/18/2010 2:02:50 PM EDT by Shane333]
Originally Posted By Joe_Pennsy:
Originally Posted By DerekCB:
My 2 biggest gripes are that:

1. Conservatives talk a good game and then do the same thing as Liberals by growing government. Libs
want to ban guns and institute marxism. Conservatives want to ban gays and institute a Constitutional
Theocracy of sorts.

2. Religious extremism. You make an enemy of me and many others the second you start spouting
nonsense about me going to hell for not believing in God. They also lose me big time when they try and
justify laws and regulations using God and the Bible. If I want religion, I'll go find it.
.


Can you point out some examples of attempted (or successfull) legislation attempting to 1- ban gays, 2- institute any sort of theocracy, and 3- use the bible to justify legislation?

I'm particularly curious about 2, as I keep reading posts about the pending theocratic takeover of the US by pesky bible thumping conservatives.


I can't seem to remember all the particulars, but I do seem to remember some report about Huckabee suggesting that the Constitution should be amended to fall more in line with the Bible.

Ah, I believe this is his quote:
"[Some of my opponents] do not want to change the Constitution, but I believe it's a lot easier to change the constitution than it would be to change the word of the living God, and that's what we need to do is to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards,"
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 2:05:44 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Apostrophe:


I disagree that the anti-religious are as intolerant as the religious. Religion teaches people to be intolerant. It teaches people that it has the answers and that it is the only true way. It teaches to judge and condemn those outside of a particular faith.

Atheists have no such teachings.
.


Followers of The Church of Climate Change are as fanatical and intolerant as you can get.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 2:09:01 PM EDT
Originally Posted By BR870:
Black/white, either/or thinking. Many (if not most) conservatives seem to think of the world in terms of black and white. The real world does not work that way. It is not binary... The real world is full of shades of grey.

There is no grasp of nuance in their thinking...



And there is with liberals? You don't see the dichotomy of what you're saying?
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 2:10:05 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Shane333:
Originally Posted By Joe_Pennsy:
Originally Posted By DerekCB:
My 2 biggest gripes are that:

1. Conservatives talk a good game and then do the same thing as Liberals by growing government. Libs
want to ban guns and institute marxism. Conservatives want to ban gays and institute a Constitutional
Theocracy of sorts.

2. Religious extremism. You make an enemy of me and many others the second you start spouting
nonsense about me going to hell for not believing in God. They also lose me big time when they try and
justify laws and regulations using God and the Bible. If I want religion, I'll go find it.
.


Can you point out some examples of attempted (or successfull) legislation attempting to 1- ban gays, 2- institute any sort of theocracy, and 3- use the bible to justify legislation?

I'm particularly curious about 2, as I keep reading posts about the pending theocratic takeover of the US by pesky bible thumping conservatives.


I can't seem to remember all the particulars, but I do seem to remember some report about Huckabee suggesting that the Constitution should be amended to fall more in line with the Bible.

Ah, I believe this is his quote:
"[Some of my opponents] do not want to change the Constitution, but I believe it's a lot easier to change the constitution than it would be to change the word of the living God, and that's what we need to do is to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards,"


And what's he doing now? Playing a guitar on a TV show? I'd like to see some actual legislation introduced by conservatives supporting the BS claim that a theocracy is right around the corner. If I say "Democrats want to ban guns" I can point to a thousand bills introduced over the past 40 years supporting that claim.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 2:13:15 PM EDT
Most "conservatives" are liberals.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 2:17:43 PM EDT
The only problem with conservatives is that they get complacent.

When things are going their way, they decide that it's all good and they stop going out to vote. This lets crazy-ass liberals in the door, and whenever they get in the door they do crazy-ass liberal stuff, which wakes all the conservatives up and we all go vote the liberals out in the next election.

And we do that for a few years and then get complacent again.



As for the original post, I find that to be much more true of liberals than conservatives. Go to a conservative website, post something liberal and get yelled at. Go to a liberal website, post something conservative and get flat out censored.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 2:18:19 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DonS:
Originally Posted By Rocksarge:
that is why they are conservatives and not liberals. i believe you wish they were libertarians.


Libertarians play the "I'm the most Libertarian game". You don't agree with me . . . you are a statist.



Is that before or after they take a bong hit and demand the legalization of pot?
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 2:21:05 PM EDT
P.S.

"conservative" and "religious conservative" are not the same things. Biggest problem with liberals is they don't realize that conservatives and religious conservatives are two different groups of people.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 3:12:14 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Joe_Pennsy:
Originally Posted By DerekCB:
My 2 biggest gripes are that:

1. Conservatives talk a good game and then do the same thing as Liberals by growing government. Libs
want to ban guns and institute marxism. Conservatives want to ban gays and institute a Constitutional
Theocracy of sorts.

2. Religious extremism. You make an enemy of me and many others the second you start spouting
nonsense about me going to hell for not believing in God. They also lose me big time when they try and
justify laws and regulations using God and the Bible. If I want religion, I'll go find it.
.


Can you point out some examples of attempted (or successfull) legislation attempting to 1- ban gays, 2- institute any sort of theocracy, and 3- use the bible to justify legislation?

I'm particularly curious about 2, as I keep reading posts about the pending theocratic takeover of the US by pesky bible thumping conservatives.



# 2 first
-Florida lawmakers advance school prayer bill
Lawmakers in Florida have voted to advance legislation to allow organized prayer at school-sponsored events.

-Cloning, Conservative position: "Cloning, even so-called therapeutic or experimental cloning, creates a new life without a father, and reduces a mother to the provider of an almost emptied egg. Nonetheless, it is a new human life and the determination to destroy it and limit its use to scientific research for therapeutic ends compound further the moral issues rather than protect mankind. As such, cloning embryonic human life under any circumstance crosses an ethical line, takes an irrevocable step, from which science can never turn back.
Daniel Reilly, "Statement on human cloning," The Diocese of Worcester, (Roman Catholic), 2001-NOV-26

- A group of conservative religious leaders have issued the Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience. This declaration says “they oppose laws that would compel them to recognize gay unions or marriages, among other social issues.”


The document says, “We will not comply with any edict that purports to compel our institutions to participate in abortions, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide and euthanasia, or any other antilife act; nor will we bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent.”

The document’s language also takes aim at other gay rights laws, including a recently approved law that adds sexual orientation and gender identity to the list of federally recognized hate crimes and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, a bill that would ban workplace discrimination against gay men, lesbians and transgender people.

Social conservatives have argued that such measures would have a chilling effect on religious liberties.
(The bolded parts are things I agree with conservatives on)

-All of the anti-GLBT legislation, and remarks are driven purely by Christian ideology. That is a fact.
-No polygamy.... Christian ideology again.
-No legal prostitution...... Yep Christians again.
-No nude television, attempts to censor printed media, attempts to censor adult movies, banning sex toy sales (recent thread on this), various sex acts banned between consenting adults....... Yep religious right again.
-Condemning musicians as demonic, or instruments of satan.

I can say with authority that the religious faction of the conservative movement does all of those things and their rationale is the Bible and Christianity.

I still like them better than communist liberals though!
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 3:34:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DerekCB:
-All of the anti-GLBT legislation, and remarks are driven purely by Christian ideology. That is a fact.
-No polygamy.... Christian ideology again.
-No legal prostitution...... Yep Christians again.
-No nude television, attempts to censor printed media, attempts to censor adult movies, banning sex toy sales (recent thread on this), various sex acts banned between consenting adults....... Yep religious right again.

I can say with authority that the religious faction of the conservative movement does all of those things and their rationale is the Bible and Christianity.

Let me get this straight. You support stripping people of human dignity by encouraging nakedness. You like the idea of people becoming pieces of meat who get used for sex by people who don't give a shit about them. You want people to be gay even though it's self-destructive.

Yeah, lets go hating on those evil Christians who care about people and human dignity. Just admit it, you're a liberal who agrees with Christians and conservatives on only a few issues.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 3:52:44 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Tekka:

Originally Posted By DerekCB:
-All of the anti-GLBT legislation, and remarks are driven purely by Christian ideology. That is a fact.
-No polygamy.... Christian ideology again.
-No legal prostitution...... Yep Christians again.
-No nude television, attempts to censor printed media, attempts to censor adult movies, banning sex toy sales (recent thread on this), various sex acts banned between consenting adults....... Yep religious right again.

I can say with authority that the religious faction of the conservative movement does all of those things and their rationale is the Bible and Christianity.

Let me get this straight. You support stripping people of human dignity by encouraging nakedness. You like the idea of people becoming pieces of meat who get used for sex by people who don't give a shit about them. You want people to be gay even though it's self-destructive.

Yeah, lets go hating on those evil Christians who care about people and human dignity. Just admit it, you're a liberal who agrees with Christians and conservatives on only a few issues.


Why do you care so much about who someone else wants to fuck?
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 4:05:52 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Tekka:

Originally Posted By DonS:
Originally Posted By Rocksarge:
that is why they are conservatives and not liberals. i believe you wish they were libertarians.


Libertarians play the "I'm the most Libertarian game". You don't agree with me . . . you are a statist.



Is that before or after they take a bong hit and demand the legalization of pot?

It's during the time that the anti-drug crowd is getting shit-faced-and fucked up using alcohol instead.

Part of the problem is the hypocrisy, and the other part of the problem is the inability to distinguish reality and the justification of a law with one's own personal convictions...
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 4:21:43 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Apostrophe:
[I disagree that the anti-religious are as intolerant as the religious. Religion teaches people to be intolerant. It teaches people that it has the answers and that it is the only true way. It teaches to judge and condemn those outside of a particular faith.

Atheists have no such teachings.

Now, personally, I am anti-religion because I find religion to be both foolish and harmful, but I'll be the last person to forbid anyone the right to their silly beliefs. I'll mock them enthusiastically, but I'll also defend their right to religion as furiously as any true believer of any faith.


I don't know any religious people who want to forbid anyone the right to their beliefs. On the flip side I know quite a few intolerant atheists. People seem to have a tendency to think their way is the right way, and look down on others who do not agree. Radical environmentalists are some of the worst, and I know of some working in state environmental programs who use the power of the state to shut down home construction based upon their "don't hurt the fucking bushes" world view.

Based upon what you have said, you are as intolerant as any religious person I know.

Now, I'm not religious myself, either. So I'm not defending my beliefs.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 4:31:19 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Cathan91:
One of the most blatantly hypocritical things about self-described conservatives is how fiscal conservatism flies out the window when it comes to the Pentagon. I don't see anything conservative about crusading around the world, building nations. That's a Wilsonian Democrat ideology. The first half of the Second Amendment was a very poorly worded attempt to limit standing armies––-funny how conservatives completely ignore that half, about as much as liberals ignore the part about the individual right to keep and bear arms. Never made sense to me why we're building nations in the Middle East, protecting South Korea and Germany's borders, etc., all while our own southern border is a fucking sieve.

The blind loyalty to the GOP gets irritating. When the Dems do something, they're a bunch of fucking commies. When the GOP does the exact same thing, they're just implementing conservative values. The last 8 years of Bush is a good example (drunken spending spree, allowing millions of illegals to cross our border, bailing out the mega-banks, etc.).

Mostly I think the liberal-conservative binary is false. Putting a box around your brain like that is not conducive to rational thought.


First point: we need a strong military. Particularly the navy/air force. The prosperity we enjoy is based upon over 200 years on Anglo Saxon control of the oceans, and this must continue. The constitution was written to enable a standing army.

Second point: GOP is the only game in town, despite its faults. Political reaality.

Point three: the "liberal-conservative binary" is about as good as it is gonna get in simple terms. What you need to do is base your ideas on a firm moral foundation, and use logic to draw conclusions. The foundations are simple: freedom or equality. Freedom leads to conservative views, equality to leftist views.
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 4:35:51 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/18/2010 4:46:04 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DonS:
Originally Posted By Cathan91:
One of the most blatantly hypocritical things about self-described conservatives is how fiscal conservatism flies out the window when it comes to the Pentagon. I don't see anything conservative about crusading around the world, building nations. That's a Wilsonian Democrat ideology. The first half of the Second Amendment was a very poorly worded attempt to limit standing armies––-funny how conservatives completely ignore that half, about as much as liberals ignore the part about the individual right to keep and bear arms. Never made sense to me why we're building nations in the Middle East, protecting South Korea and Germany's borders, etc., all while our own southern border is a fucking sieve.

The blind loyalty to the GOP gets irritating. When the Dems do something, they're a bunch of fucking commies. When the GOP does the exact same thing, they're just implementing conservative values. The last 8 years of Bush is a good example (drunken spending spree, allowing millions of illegals to cross our border, bailing out the mega-banks, etc.).

Mostly I think the liberal-conservative binary is false. Putting a box around your brain like that is not conducive to rational thought.


First point: we need a strong military. Particularly the navy/air force. The prosperity we enjoy is based upon over 200 years on Anglo Saxon control of the oceans, and this must continue. The constitution was written to enable a standing army.

Second point: GOP is the only game in town, despite its faults. Political reaality.

Point three: the "liberal-conservative binary" is about as good as it is gonna get in simple terms. What you need to do is base your ideas on a firm moral foundation, and use logic to draw conclusions. The foundations are simple: freedom or equality. Freedom leads to conservative views, equality to leftist views.

I figured we would base our ideas off of the Constitution, myself. That way one persons moral idea doesn't differ from another persons morals... the Constitution is the SAME for everybody.

Leave morals out of it - stick to the Constitution and Individual Rights, and everything will be fine.
Page / 6
Top Top