Posted on 06/08/2013 9:00:01 PM PDT by Colofornian
Why... a black Mormon neighborhood; of course!
That's nothing!
A LOT of these threads ALSO end up with GOATS being mentioned.
What's up with THAT?
Actually, the kirpan can be anything from a full-out sword to a dagger to a smallish knife, or even a knife-shaped brooch or pin.
The reason for requirement to wear it is that a Sikh is expected to always be armed to fight in protection of the innocent.
For fairly obvious reason, knives of various sizes are usually carried.
Thanks for more details.
Sherman, if the Republican party continues to move left -- look, for example, how David Axelrod is speaking before Republicans meeting this week in Park City, Utah ... then it won't be long before "political conservatives" will have ANY political "home party" base in the U.S. Were that to happen, it would be an unfair critique to claim there were few-to-none notable "political conservatives"...
Why do I mention that?
Because prior to the creation of the Republican party around the mid-1850s, there really wasn't a "political conservative" home base in the 1830s and 1840s and early 1850s when the abolitionist movement was picking up steam.
So your observation is really unfair. They didn't have a welcome mat among the pro-slavery Democrats; and the Whigs were on the way to their demise.
That is where we are now. The Democrats are pro-same sex marriage, pro-homosexuality, and pro-slavery unto dismemberment of all in the womb. And the Republicans are now like the Whigs -- on their way to their demise. Soon, there won't be a "welcome mat" out for pro-life, pro-marriage Republicans.
Eventually, another party may rise up -- and give a home party base to "political conservatives"...
And even where they are the vast majority in given neighborhoods, ya need to think long-term: Because I'd rather be among a black family reunion in heaven than Joseph Smith's "everlasting burnings" clan somewhere else (Smith boasted twice in the book Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith about living in "everlasting burnings").
Generally agree. Merely contend, with a great deal of evidence behind me, that abolitionists were not considered to be “conservatives” by themselves or anybody else.
I hope we can agree that trying to transfer political labels from one generation to another is fraught with peril, as is even trying to determine line of descent.
I don’t think it is fair to claim abolitionists as conservatives. I’m conservative and I’m an abolitionist, but if I’d been around in 1859 with my present political beliefs I would have been considered a wild-eyed radical fanatic.
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.