Replies

There is a big problem with the structure. We are supposed to be working together against the socialist Democrats in power, but a small but vocal group is calling me and others socialist brownshirts because we want to ban pornography, or because we want to encourage personal responsibility in others, and advance conservative family values in our society.
How are we supposed to be working for a common goal?
I want to fight socialists and lawlessness outside, not anarchists and cop-haters inside.

772 posted on 8/27/02 12:11 AM Pacific by Cultural Jihad
_________________________________
Here is the problem, in my view:

This site is primarily dedicated to restoration of constitutional values. Right?
Fine, we can fight on how best to achieve that goal. - And do.

But when the goal is turned to single issues, such as fighting porno, wrapped up in a 'conservative family values' flag, the infighting does indeed get vicious. -- Why?

Because the 'fight' then becomes constitutional.
The constitution is written to protect our rights to life, liberty, & property.
Single issue 'family value' crusades are counter-constitutional in their essence. They urge laws AGAINST certain life styles, liberties, & types of property.

Why is this simple point ignored so completely? -- Because it cannot be refuted.

Thus, -- To work for a common constitutional goal, we MUST keep our focus on the main political issues.
Perhaps we should keep the family value morality issues over in the religious forum.

Perhaps we should keep the family value morality issues over in the religious forum.

I dont' know how you can separate things out like that. Everything is connected somehow. It's like little kids wondering why we have to have MATH in science class.

What about atheists and agnostics who care about family values?

Why is this simple point ignored so completely? -- Because it cannot be refuted.

Of course it can be refuted. "Banned in Boston" was not the name of pre-MTV musical group. You may think you have discovered some new Constitutional protection for private acts which are nonetheless harmful to society, but thinking so and saying so doesn't make it so.

Perhaps we should keep the family value morality issues over in the religious forum.

"Family value morality" (sic, but I know what you mean) are the very heart and soul of political conservatism.

Why don't you try leaving your body in one room and your heart, lungs, and brain in another. Drop me a post card and tell me how the experiment turned out.