Pages: 1 2

 

2009-05-20 22:58:33
LividBovine
The Year of the Cow!
+175|6788|MN
I guess I have a problem with anyone who is willing to go against core values to get votes.  I know it is unrealistic to expect most to not have sex.  How do you handle the issue?  Tell them it is ok for them to have sex, just use this rubber?  Not me.  I have 3 daughters and I always teach them that there are consequences for their actions and I intend on doing everything I can to help them make a good decision when the time comes.

And I don't care if she is frustrated with the religious right.  I am so sick and tired of this moderate conservative viewpoint.  Do you see where all these little concessions have gotten us?
"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)
2009-05-20 23:01:54
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7009|132 and Bush

Flecco wrote:

You can be fisically conservative and socially liberal at the same time.
Thank you. What our founding fathers did warn us about is the cult of political parties. This is why labels suck.




side note.. I was reading her twitter feed: My fucking heart is racing so fast!!!! Waiting in the greenroom!
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-05-20 23:05:56
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7009|132 and Bush

LividBovine wrote:

I guess I have a problem with anyone who is willing to go against core values to get votes.  I know it is unrealistic to expect most to not have sex.  How do you handle the issue?  Tell them it is ok for them to have sex, just use this rubber?  Not me.  I have 3 daughters and I always teach them that there are consequences for their actions and I intend on doing everything I can to help them make a good decision when the time comes.

And I don't care if she is frustrated with the religious right.  I am so sick and tired of this moderate conservative viewpoint.  Do you see where all these little concessions have gotten us?
Concession? Do you think Palin was a concession? Our lack of concessions and the alienation from the majority has gotten the GOP to where it is now.

She isn't going against her core values. She explained in depth why she feels the way she does. I don't think that by educating our young about sex and protection that it means we are denying them the knowledge of consequence. Quite the opposite in fact.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-05-20 23:36:53
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|7083|Canberra, AUS
Really? You seem to be making less concessions, not more.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2009-05-20 23:41:52
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7009|132 and Bush

Spark wrote:

Really? You seem to be making less concessions, not more.
Me? .. that was my point. The fact that the majority of the Party wanted John McCain, a moderate by Republican standards (nominated through the primary process), and yet the party leaders picked Palin as his running mate (selected by the idiots running the party) .. that tells you that the GOP leadership does not understand it's own.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-05-21 00:10:51
LividBovine
The Year of the Cow!
+175|6788|MN
If Meghan McCain is the voice of the new younger version of the party then we are all truely doomed.  I am not talking about votes here.  I am talking about the viability of the nation as a whole.  We have drifted so far from our base that we may not be able to turn things around.  Frankly, if we keep moving in the moderate direction, we will get to the end much faster.  Read the "5000 Year Leap" and you will understand.  You are too smart to not realize that the current goverment, ALL of it, is driving us straight into moral and financial ruin.
"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)
2009-05-21 00:25:52
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7009|132 and Bush

Is Meghan McCain's position driving us to moral and financial ruin because she want's safe sex taught? Unlikely. Is the continued disconnect from the American majority going to be the end of the GOP? Unlikely also. They will adjust for survivability. Party positions have flip flopped a few times in our brief history. I do not subscribe to the idea that because I am for smaller government, tighter border security, and lower taxes-that I must be against gay marriage (or whatever).
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-05-21 01:20:44
LividBovine
The Year of the Cow!
+175|6788|MN

Kmarion wrote:

Is Meghan McCain's position driving us to moral and financial ruin because she want's safe sex taught? Unlikely. Is the continued disconnect from the American majority going to be the end of the GOP? Unlikely also. They will adjust for survivability. Party positions have flip flopped a few times in our brief history. I do not subscribe to the idea that because I am for smaller government, tighter border security, and lower taxes-that I must be against gay marriage (or whatever).
Business as usual is driving us to  moral and financial ruin.  Holding someone like Meghan up as a vision of what the party may look like in a few years is more of the same, just younger and more entrenched in their socially liberal views. 

I am not saying you have to subscribe to that view, but I do ask that you realize the connection between a strong moral base and the history of our country as that moral base eroded.
"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)
2009-05-21 01:46:22
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7009|132 and Bush

I still fail to see how Meghan McCains position is morally corrupt. Abstinence only education is flawed. Open dialogue and being informed is immoral? "Bottom line: Honesty isn’t a liberal or conservative issue. It’s a human one. The sooner we realize that, the better off we’ll be."

More of the same what exactly? The same as I see it is a failure to communicate with the American people. I admire Reagan on many points, but the party will never return to the days of having Jerry Fallwell types in the war room. I consider that a good thing. As a conservative I do not want or need a politician telling me what is morally acceptable. It is counter intuitive to the idea of less government involvement. There are other more appropriate places/people to seek out moral guidance.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-05-21 02:05:06
LividBovine
The Year of the Cow!
+175|6788|MN
I am not asking the government to dictate moral law.  I am asking for our government to be manned by individuals that have a stong moral base.  I consider someone that is pro gay rights and pro sex (can't believe I wrote that) too open morally.  Our country was based on religous fundamentals and I am very set in my beliefs.  I believe that we as a people are too selfish and I want to see a return to a more structured moral code, not through the government though.  I think strong family values are pushed away too easily. 

I guess I am calling for a more drastic change than what miss McCain offers.  Thus more of the same.
"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)
2009-05-21 14:16:03
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6813|North Carolina

LividBovine wrote:

I am not asking the government to dictate moral law.  I am asking for our government to be manned by individuals that have a stong moral base.  I consider someone that is pro gay rights and pro sex (can't believe I wrote that) too open morally.  Our country was based on religous fundamentals and I am very set in my beliefs.  I believe that we as a people are too selfish and I want to see a return to a more structured moral code, not through the government though.  I think strong family values are pushed away too easily. 

I guess I am calling for a more drastic change than what miss McCain offers.  Thus more of the same.
Uh...   I suppose you could always move to an Islamic country.  Iran definitely has a basis on religious fundamentals.

As long as the GOP courts evangelicals, they'll be taken to task by social moderates.  Social conservatism is dying, and for the most part, that's a good thing.

Economic conservatism is the future of the GOP.  If they went back to being Lincoln Republicans (essentially Libertarians), they'd gain a lot more of the moderate vote.
2009-05-21 17:51:14
nickb64
formerly from OC (it's EXACTLY like on tv)[truth]
+77|6019|Greatest Nation on Earth(USA)
The GOP does not need to abandon principles, but rather, actually embrace the principles of the Founders. The Government has gotten too large and has overreached the boundaries of the Constitution. We need to embrace the Founding principles of this nation, and not get the government involved in religious issues or too involved in social issues such as abortion. The government should stick to its Constitutional Powers, and leave the rest to the states or the people.

Constitution wrote:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
2009-05-21 17:58:30
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5994

The GOP; the sexually repressed secret nymphomaniac deviants.
2009-05-21 23:41:38
Diesel_dyk
Object in mirror will feel larger than it appears
+178|6403|Truthistan

Turquoise wrote:

LividBovine wrote:

I am not asking the government to dictate moral law.  I am asking for our government to be manned by individuals that have a stong moral base.  I consider someone that is pro gay rights and pro sex (can't believe I wrote that) too open morally.  Our country was based on religous fundamentals and I am very set in my beliefs.  I believe that we as a people are too selfish and I want to see a return to a more structured moral code, not through the government though.  I think strong family values are pushed away too easily. 

I guess I am calling for a more drastic change than what miss McCain offers.  Thus more of the same.
Uh...   I suppose you could always move to an Islamic country.  Iran definitely has a basis on religious fundamentals.

As long as the GOP courts evangelicals, they'll be taken to task by social moderates.  Social conservatism is dying, and for the most part, that's a good thing.

Economic conservatism is the future of the GOP.  If they went back to being Lincoln Republicans (essentially Libertarians), they'd gain a lot more of the moderate vote.
QFT

Meghan McCain made some very valid points that the GOP should consider very carefully if the GOP is going to survive.

Its pretty tough to marry small govt/free market principles with socialist social conservative principles that require the govt to regulate a cultural morality. I think that's a GOP experiment that's failed and dragged down the party. If the GOP does not excise this cancer it will kill the party. Personally I hope LividBovine gets what he is calling for and that the GOP spins off into a fractious regional party for moral socialists. If that's what happens then there will be room for a new central progressive conservative party to be created to govern from the middle where most of us live.

Just like the economy should be left to the market place, culture and morality should be left to the market place of ideas. If we approach each other as individuals engaged in this market place then we will be embracing the core values of this country.

On the other hand, family values is a code for groups usurping powers not bestowed upon them who have an agenda to make the govt enforce their moral and cultural code on everyone else... in other words these people are socialists. The smallest denominator and arguable the most important that is actually found in the constitution is the individual. The family is never mentioned. If some group comes out and says we're for individual moral values, I would say thanks but no thanks I can speak for myself... but by them saying that they are there to stand for family values, then individuals without families are politically marginalized.  Family values is an artificial construct used to usurp the voice of the individual. The push for the enforcement of a moral and cultural code is a usurption of power from the individual that goes against the basic foundational principle of this country and its the path to socialism.

As for me as an individual and also being the head of my family, I'll say stfu I'll speak for my family, thanks. You worry about you and yours and don't mess with me and mine, and if our paths never cross then that will be just fine.
2009-05-22 00:09:59
Flecco
iPod is broken.
+1,048|7073|NT, like Mick Dundee

nickb64 wrote:

The GOP does not need to abandon principles, but rather, actually embrace the principles of the Founders. The Government has gotten too large and has overreached the boundaries of the Constitution. We need to embrace the Founding principles of this nation, and not get the government involved in religious issues or too involved in social issues such as abortion. The government should stick to its Constitutional Powers, and leave the rest to the states or the people.

Constitution wrote:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Possibly the best post you have ever written on these forums.
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
2009-05-22 00:16:48
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7009|132 and Bush

LividBovine wrote:

I am not asking the government to dictate moral law.  I am asking for our government to be manned by individuals that have a stong moral base.  I consider someone that is pro gay rights and pro sex (can't believe I wrote that) too open morally.  Our country was based on religous fundamentals and I am very set in my beliefs.  I believe that we as a people are too selfish and I want to see a return to a more structured moral code, not through the government though.  I think strong family values are pushed away too easily. 

I guess I am calling for a more drastic change than what miss McCain offers.  Thus more of the same.
The constitution is the supreme charter of the land.. not a bible or any other religious book. Our constitution was setup to address the constantly changing needs and desires of the people it governs. Individual rights like universal suffrage and freedom for all came AFTER our founding fathers. To constantly reference the past, especially with regards to civil liberties, is to ignore the natural path of human progress.

Founding Father wrote:

Thomas Pain: I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church.

All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.

Founding Father wrote:

Thomas Jefferson: In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-05-22 16:39:30
nickb64
formerly from OC (it's EXACTLY like on tv)[truth]
+77|6019|Greatest Nation on Earth(USA)

Kmarion wrote:

LividBovine wrote:

I am not asking the government to dictate moral law.  I am asking for our government to be manned by individuals that have a stong moral base.  I consider someone that is pro gay rights and pro sex (can't believe I wrote that) too open morally.  Our country was based on religous fundamentals and I am very set in my beliefs.  I believe that we as a people are too selfish and I want to see a return to a more structured moral code, not through the government though.  I think strong family values are pushed away too easily. 

I guess I am calling for a more drastic change than what miss McCain offers.  Thus more of the same.
The constitution is the supreme charter of the land.. not a bible or any other religious book. Our constitution was setup to address the constantly changing needs and desires of the people it governs. Individual rights like universal suffrage and freedom for all came AFTER our founding fathers. To constantly reference the past, especially with regards to civil liberties, is to ignore the natural path of human progress.

Founding Father wrote:

Thomas Pain: I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church.

All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.

Founding Father wrote:

Thomas Jefferson: In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
The main reason why the Constitution did not initially abolish slavery is that the Southern States would never have ratified such a Constitution. The Constitution did, however, set up the ability to block slavery after 20 years, which began the process of trying to abolish slavery. The federal government continued to block the abolition, then the Civil War brought it to an end. Slavery could not exist forever in a free civil society built on the premise that: "All men are created equal."

The founders were talking about the state not setting up something like the Church of England.
They built this nation on a moral code derived partly from religious belief, but made it certain in the Constitution that the government should not favor one religious idea over another. State control of religion leads to loss of liberty to worship as we choose, as well as if we choose. The founding documents show that the founders believed that there was a higher being, and as they were mostly Protestant, that was and is God.

Dec. Of Independence wrote:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.

Last edited by nickb64 (2009-05-22 17:21:53)

2009-05-22 19:29:54
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7009|132 and Bush

I would like to believe that our history is that whitewashed but it simply isnt. So long as we are recommending books here let me recommend one for you.

Kmarion wrote:

Recommend:
America's Hidden History: Untold Tales of the First Pilgrims, Fighting Women, and Forgotten Founders Who Shaped a Nation
*  The story of the first real Pilgrims in America, who were wine-making French Huguenots, not dour English Separatists
    * The coming-of-age story of Queen Isabella, who suggested that Columbus pack the moving mess hall of pigs that may have spread disease to many Native Americans
    * The long, bloody relationship between the Pilgrims and Indians that runs counter to the idyllic scene of the Thanksgiving feast
    * The little-known story of George Washington as a headstrong young soldier who committed a war crime, signed a confession, and started a war!
The book takes you up to George Washington's inauguration.
http://www.amazon.com/Americas-Hidden-H … 0061118184
Do not assume that everything would be peachy if we just went back to the way things were in our founding days. Slavery is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to our preceding civil liberty issues. It is true that we have come a long way fast. But it would be silly to presume that our founders came up with all of these ideas on their own. They had a precedent, the Magna Carta.

The Declaration of independence did not establish US law.

"What has been Christianity's fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution." -James Madison

"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason. Lighthouses are more helpful than churches." -Benjamin Franklin

"Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we called it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind." -Thomas Paine

"This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it." -John Adams

"I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike, founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth." -Thomas Jefferson

Yes, even our founding fathers understood the oppressive nature of religion. It is true that many of them were Christian, but they certainly understood the need to keep faith out of the way we govern. Our founders created a secular government based on freethinking political philosophies. If you are going to champion the fact that our constitution was setup to challenge such set in stone moral issues like slavery/womens rights, why is it not setup to address things like gay rights?

Spoiler (highlight to read):
It is.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-05-22 23:17:47
nickb64
formerly from OC (it's EXACTLY like on tv)[truth]
+77|6019|Greatest Nation on Earth(USA)

rdx-fx wrote:

The US Democratic party has drifted too far left, and the Republican party has splattered itself against the right-side wall.

We truly have a place for a 3rd Centrist party now.  Everyone I know IRL is of the general opinion that their respective party (Dem/Rep) is "60% I agree, 40% I disagree", so they side with the party that is the least offensive.

The Center is wide open, and the majority of the population of the USA 'lives' in that political center region.  The first major party to come back to the center, will dominate American politics for the next 20+ years.  If one of the two major parties do not come back to the center within the next 8 years, we most likely will have a 'spontaneous grass-roots' 3rd party surprise come out of somewhere unexpected.
The problem is that 3rd parties tend to be ineffective. The only successful 3rd party in American History was...
Spoiler (highlight to read):
Republican Party w/ Lincoln

Republican Party needs to stand on principle and not try to be a slightly lighter version of the Democratic Party, as that doesn't win elections.
2009-05-23 07:02:34
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6813|North Carolina

nickb64 wrote:

Republican Party needs to stand on principle and not try to be a slightly lighter version of the Democratic Party, as that doesn't win elections.
On social issues, it does.  Not much of the moderate public is willing to go along with the hardliner side of social policy that many Republicans push.

They have more appeal in their economic views.
2009-05-23 07:06:14
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,822|6514|eXtreme to the maX
I think Meghan McCains best option at this point would be to go into the porn industry.
Reckon she'd do less sucking there than in politics.
Fuck Israel

 

Pages: 1 2

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard