Posted on 04/08/2008 7:02:06 AM PDT by njweave
Hi, I'm Nick and I am from Illinois. I'm writing on this page because I have been brought up to be very liberal on every issue dominating the upcoming presidential election. I feel like I kind of been brain washed into thinking this way and have this image of every right-winged supporter to be a redneck, gun crazy racist. Now I know that this is sure as hell not the truth, but the real truth for me is that I really do find it hard to agree with a lot of Republican ideals especially when dealing with illegal immigration and abortion. What I'm asking is for somebody to give me some things that you feel are very positive contributions the GOP makes for our govt. I hate the idea that I'm prejidice against right-winged ideals but I would like to have some direct input from somebody who is conservative and why they choose to be.
Or the other option is just to tear me apart for being a northern liberal...either one i guess is gonna happen haha
Nick
Do yourself a big favor and don't get hung up on the irrelevant posts. There are some people here trying to explain things to you, so stay focused. You're here to learn, so learn from those who are actually trying to teach you something.
Possibly because the Mexican population is one of the biggest minorities in the country and the main immigration complaints are against the Mexican-American population
If individuals (i.e. the possessors of liberty)are the individual threads of a society, nation and culture, families, villages, towns, cities, etc., are the fabric into which they are organized. Some towns and cities are well-governed, organized and provide generally healthy and safe environs for their members, and others are simply dysfunctional. The same can be said for families. Families, by virtue of being the lowest level of social organization hold a special place as the basic building block for larger societies. Certainly there are examples of exceptionally dysfunctional heterosexual families, and we as a society have increasingly redefined the conventional family (largely owing to the no fault divorce concept which was largely pushed by trial lawyers for their own benefit, but that's another discussion for another day). Simply because we have begun to expand the definition of a traditional family does not mean that doing so is healthy. I concur that divorce is sometimes a necessary process, especially in cases of the classic three "A's" (Adultery, Addiction, Abuse). However, the no fault concept as employed in an increasingly secular society has undermined the sanctity of the simple oath/vow. If those terms are felt to be somehow too 'religious,' think of it as the failure to honor a contract. Back to the fabric analogy, think of it as a warped, flawed, or less than ideal piece of fabric because the individual threads have not been properly woven together, misaligned, twisted, etc., undermining the strength of the whole. Homosexual marriage is simply an effort to further expand, redefine, and otherwise make a less than ideal situation acceptable or even a cause celebre. Likewise, the logic behind "consenting adults", when taken to its extreme, would mandate the inclusion of group marriages and other distortions of the traditional family that would indeed undermine the strength of society. I do think sodomy laws are overbearing, and likewise, if people want to have their orgies or swinger parties, I personally don't think they should fear arrest for doing so...but by that same token, their relationships should not be honored by the state. Indeed, one of the most vocal proponents of gay marriage are divorce lawyers...not because they expect gay marriages to flourish and thrive, but because they expect them to be unstable and fall apart.
...just teaching the idea of evolution is immoral..."
You're talking about an extreme, small group of nut jobs (admit you've got them on the left, too). Most conservatives I know do not oppose the teaching of evolutionary theory, they are just intellectually honest enough to insist that it be taught as just that....theory, and not established, observable fact. Likewise, most Intelligent Design folks simply ask that their views be taught in the same light. If nothing else, this is just one small aspect of a much greater issue, and that is government funding of schools...Get government influence out of the schools and let parents pick (i.e. exercise freedom) to send their children to the kind of school they choose. Indeed, the strict, atheistic, pure Darwinian theorists have been the ones guilty of blind faith and have pushed dissenters to the fringes. You may wish to see the soon to be released Ben Stein documentary. I've heard some interviews with the parties. I think you'll find it eye opening.
"...and its wrong for women to be feminists?"
Early feminists had some valid arguments, but they have long outlived their usefulness. I would certainly have no problem voting for a woman for president, given the right woman (Hillary's not her). Radical egalitarianism was extremely well satirized in Kurt Vonnegut's Harrison Bergeron, which points out the absurdity of leveling the playing field for every person. Conservatism recognizes individual merit, and rewards achievement...it truly is the philosophical bent for any person who believes that all people should have an equal opportunity, but not by taking away from, or holding back those who succeed, but to the contrary, inspiring and demanding the best from those who aren't there yet. By requiring quotas and special favors for women or races or other minority groups du jour, liberalism is actually far more sexist and racist for labeling people in these groups as incapable of achieving anything without special help from the anointed few in big government.
"You can go ahead and keep bashing me or you can honestly help me with understanding the more conservative side of politics and help me out."
I hope that wasn't directed at me personally, as I really don't see anything I've written that would constitute "bashing." In fact, I salute your intellectual curiosity and would welcome any further discussion.
Your response" Possibly because the Mexican population is one of the biggest minorities in the country and the main immigration complaints are against the Mexican-American population
Please be clear, they are not immigration complaints but illegal immigration complaints. Do not allow the media and liberal thinkers to cloud the difference because there is one.
There are very large numbers of legal Mexican immigrants, they obey the immigration laws every other immigrant is forced to obey. Liberals want to cloud the subject by dismissing those against illegal immigration as racists.
If what you stated is true then liberals simply allow Mexicans (that is what people from Mexico are called, its not a racist term referring to Hispanics) to break immigration laws for votes. Would you agree to that?
ok, i think im about as beaten and bruised as i can take for one day. Thanks to all of u that actually gave me advice and acknowledging that I really do care about being well informed on both sides. To those who enjoyed ridiculing me the entire time I hope you had fun too. over 200 posts? who would of thought. I’m going to read more in depth with the constitution and the other major documents. If I made anyone angry please realize that I am surrounded by liberal people all the time and I have never had a fair look into the conservative side. Knowing both sides of the argument and why they argue the way they do is something that everybody needs to know. Now I do and thanks. Maybe I’ll put up another post and let you guys really tear me apart haha.
You know, "Nick," you could cut out a lot of the fencing if you would explain, in decent English, why you supported Huckabee. I think you're playing a troll game for extra credit for SOC101. How about it?
See, this is why I don't think you're on a serious quest for knowledge or understanding. You've been told again and again that it's the illegal part we have trouble with. We're not happy about illegal immigrants, no matter what race. Today, in 2008, it happens to be Mexicans (not "Mexican-Americans." They aren't here legally, therefore not "American").
I personally work with many legal immigrants, few of them European, and I have no problem with them, but since I live in AZ, I have major problems with illegal immigrants, the kind that nurdered my wife's brother-in-law.
If we have to explain to you why it's the illegal part that's wrong, then you are not prepared for this, and that brings me back to my belief you're just messing with us. I hope you get lots of points and an "A" from your pony-tailed professor.
Next time, don’t put up a stupid vanity thread. Reply to somebody else’s thread so you can demonstrate the ability to read.
Let me try to quickly boil down to a few points what I see as the reasons for conservative opposition to unchecked illegal immigration (jotted out quickly, so forgive me if it sounds sloppy):
-Weak enforcement of immigration laws, such as what McCain tried to get through last year, sends a message to future waves of potential illegal immigrants that they will also be able to get away with their crime. So long as the penalty is not so ‘severe’ that it doesn’t outweigh the benefits of being here, this will always be true.
-The difference between US and Latin American culture does present future problems, in terms of potential political balkanization. It cannot be assumed that just because an immigrant comes here, that they either have the intention of assimilating or even the best interests of this nation in mind - and much of the flow over our southern border has been detritus whose home nations were almost certainly glad to have gotten rid of.
It’s a good bet to make that many of those who come here illegally don’t have the best intentions simply because of the shortcut they chose to take, and since we can’t read hearts, it would be impossible to sort out the illegals that even liberals would agree are rotten, until after they’ve already proved it through more crime.
Add to that the fact that there is an outright desire by a lot of people in the hispanic community to see America carved up and its borders re-drawn.
-Further, the people coming here illegally are virtually always either “low-skill” workers with little to no formal education, or people who intend on becoming welfare recipients, busting an already overwhelmed entitlement system.
He did made good target practice. I still detect a layer of ozone over the thread.
It has nothing to do with the fact that they are mostly from Mexico, it is the fact they are breaking the law to get here. If they were from Denmark, Australia, or Canada, the thought would be exactly the same. One cannot, however, ignore the statistics of where a majority of illegal immigration stems when one focuses on where to face the issue. Why is it that many, many legal Mexican-American immigrants stand with those who protect the border? It is the crime, not the country of origin.
one more thing...Am i still a troll?
Ann Coulter is a complete retard.
There has been a lot of stupid people in the conservative movement. We have had a lot of brainpower too — Karl Popper, Friedrich Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, Thomas Sowell, Allan Bloom, Roger Scruton, Milton Friedman, Leo Strauss, et cetera.
You don’t have to agree with conservatives, but at least realize it is more than oafs like Bill O’Reilly and Rush Limbaugh.
Probably. But we love you, man....
~placemarker~ for wealth of knowledge on this thread - Troll or no troll
There are a few liberals on FR and more than a few libertarians. Stay reasonably polite, watch your language and have fun.
And no matter what Darksheare tells you; there is no FReeper initiation involving melted chocolate, blind folds and a “Twister” game.
There is little tolerance for foul language on FR. There's plenty over on DU, KOS and HuffingtonPost if that's your thing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.