Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: Dominic Harr
"So the 'Socials' are very liberal, by that definition. They want govt intrusion into personal areas."

You run into problems with that with social issues if those are defined as God, Guns, and Gays, because Conservatives tend to be Christian and want Gov out of that. They don't see abortion as a personal issue because it disregards the child ( and often the father ), and on guns we don't think there should be more restrictions than was intended in the 2nd Amendment.
995 posted on 02/01/2007 2:27:53 PM PST by Beagle8U (Thompson / Hunter 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 982 | View Replies ]


To: Beagle8U
You run into problems with that with social issues if those are defined as God, Guns, and Gays, because Conservatives tend to be Christian and want Gov out of that.

I wouldn't say 'problems', just that it does make many Christians 'liberals' -- in that they want govt solutions to what others consider personal issues.

Gays, I don't get ya'lls problem with.

The one sticky issue is, I do understand the idea that ya'll want to defend the unborn child. I fully understand that abortion *is* the killing of a human being. In fact, premeditated killing, hence by definition it's murder.

But I personally don't think that killing a human is always a bad thing. I think really bad people should be killed. I have no problem with assisted suicide. And I feel that an unborn child is at such an incomplete state of development that aborting it in the first few months is no big deal.

The issue becomes 'personal' because of the woman carrying the baby. She has a right to decide what she wants to do with her body, and in one sense that baby is infringing on her rights, so to speak (in my, and many others', opinion, of course).

So by my thinking, some Christians who would ban abortion for others are 'liberals', in that they want a liberal use of govt power to control what that woman can do with her body.

997 posted on 02/01/2007 2:50:41 PM PST by Dominic Harr (Conservative: The "ant", to a liberal's "grasshopper".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 995 | View Replies ]

To: Beagle8U

I think it all comes down to the 2nd Amendment. It is the only right that we have that actually protects us from the left.

Once the left gets our guns, next comes anarchy and then a police state is created to protect us from ourselves. The left already controls the infrastructure of our government and are unionized. With that they have the courts up to SCOTUS level. They will continue to diminish our individual rights until there is nothing left.

It is human nature to rule. Our founding fathers knew this and created a document to protect us from this ever happening. And look who is treading on that document? The same people that want to tell us what to eat, what to smoke, what to learn..... nanny.

If it is between a Democrat that is willing to protect the Constitution vs a Republican who won't, the Democrat will get my vote. On the other hand, if it between a Republican that may not protect us and a RAT who definitely won't protect us, I'll take my chance on the Republican.

Rudy might be my last choice, but he will always come before Hillary.


998 posted on 02/01/2007 2:55:40 PM PST by EQAndyBuzz (The Clintons: A Malignant Malfeasance of the Most Morbid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 995 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson