Replies

I'm a Brit and therefore (by geography only) a European.

I understand what the founder of FreeRepublic set up this site for, but I'm sure, as a champion of freedom of expression, he would be in favour (note favOUr - :) ) of a certain amount of lattitude amongst the views expressed, otherwise we would merely be parroting a party line (an accusation commonly made here against liberals).

For example, I am most certainly pro-God, pro-life and pro-family. I can't really comment on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as I am not a US citizen and don't live under their auspices. Personally I think all attempts to codify "rights" are flawed and doomed to fall short. I am anti-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense and pro-freedom. I can't say I am pro America in the sense that the founder meant. I'm pro-Britain (I hope thats an acceptable alternative!). I oppose liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism and wacko environmentalism. I can't say I totally oppose all forms of those things. That's a pretty wide remit. I'm in favour of abortion for medical reasons for example. I don't understand completely what is meant by "judicial activism". If it is what I suspect, it's pretty irrelevent in my own particular situation. I have no time for the UN, and not much for any other pan-national organisation (apart from the Red Cross, which is a most excellent body).

Does that mean I should be booted for lack of polical purity? Or be "demolished" by argument? You can try that last incidentally. I'm proud of my beliefs, but I hope I'm more proud of being honest, and that includes being prepared to modify said beliefs after debate. That is, after all, what democracy is about, is it not?