Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Look, a Liberal at Free Republic!

Posted on 08/29/2003 12:56:26 PM PDT by FreeRepublicLoginName

Hi. Most people would consider me a "Liberal".

I'm not posting here to argue or incite a flame war. I am not posting to change anyone's mind about anything. I am posting here because I want to understand the Conservative viewpoint. I'm here to listen, but I have some questions.

I've read the Conservative FAQ at

http://www.conservatism.com/CustomPage.asp?WEBSVCID=1155&SID={8D0C2C23-7287-400D-ADB9-0EF7C5A3056A}&MID=118

I don't know if that document truly represents conservatism or not, but it seemed consistent with what I've seen in popular media (and on the web). But it raised some questions for me. I was hoping visitors of Free Republic would be willing to give their personal viewpoints on a few questions.

Here are my questions. The word "you" here refers to any conservative willing to post their opinion. (I got most of these questions by reading what others have said about conservatives, so that's why some of my questions sound like a test.)

1. Do you believe in God?

2. Do you believe Reason has limitations? If so, what are those limitations?

3. Did your father use corporal punishment to enforce discipline? (Were you whipped, beaten, or spanked when you misbehaved?) If so, how frequently? (Once per year? Once per day?)

4. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: "To be morally strong, you must be self-disciplined and self-denying. Otherwise, you are self-indulgent and such moral flabbiness ultimately helps the forces of evil."

5. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: "Punishment is nurturing in that it teaches discipline, self-reliance and respect for authority."

6. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: "Your poverty or your drug habit or your illegitimate children can be explained only as moral weakness and any discussion of social causes cannot be relevant."

7. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: "The highest moral good is nurturance, including empathy, fairness and protection, but not painful punishment."

8. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: "Obedience comes out of love and respect for the parent, not out of fear, and strength is in the service of nurturance."

9. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: "'Conservative tolerance for inequality' [as described by liberals], should, in fact, read intolerance for forced equality, and acceptance of the natural order of things in which inequality is generally the rule. "

10. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: "The modern North American liberal is 'a keen advocate of change mainly to fulfill his/her ego needs -- needs for power, influence, self-advertisement, self-promotion and excitement.'"

11. Is it possible for a Liberal to be a good person? Is it possible for a Conservative to be a bad person?

12. Is morality (by which I mean right and wrong) absolute, as described in the bible, or is it relative?

13. On a scale of 1 to 10, are you happy in life (generally speaking)?

14. Which statement do you agree with more: "people are generally good and trustworthy" or "people are generally bad and will try to harm you"?

15. Is corporal punishment (discipline through whipping, beating, or spanking) an acceptable practice?

16. On a scale of 1 to 10, do have anxiety (or fear) in your life (on a day-to-day basis)?


TOPICS: Books/Literature; Business/Economy; Chit/Chat; Computers/Internet; Education; History; Military/Veterans; Miscellaneous; Reference; Religion; Science; Society
KEYWORDS: liberalquestions
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-196 next last
To: FreeRepublicLoginName
I'll address the meat of your post tomorrow. But, reminder: I'm Jewish, which means the Bible is meaningless to me. Also we don't believe in hell, so there is no threat of 'frying'. I really need to educate you about Judaism. A lot of the stuff you have objections to are addressed in my religion. Perhaps you oughta check it out.
161 posted on 09/01/2003 8:57:21 PM PDT by Lazamataz (I am the extended middle finger in the fist of life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: Dianna
"What makes you think that religious people are not happy?"

Because of all the people I've met, the free thinkers are, without exception, happier (and more interesting) than the religious people. Also, because at one time (as a child) I was open to the idea of God, and ever since I gave up on the idea of mystical, magical mythology as being true I myself have been much happier.

There are some parts of religion that I would love to see replicated in secular society; the strength of community, regular (weekly) meetings, and unity. But the parts of religion that offend me are the most ancient, darkest parts of our humanity. To see what I'm talking about, read the bible quotes at:

http://nobeliefs.com/worst-quotes.htm


"Because we aren't out screwing everyone in sight? Or is it because we aren't ingesting as many chemical substances as we can?"

"Happiness" means neither promiscuous sex nor drug addiction. This seems to be a common misperception conservatives have about liberals.

Do not confuse "happiness" with "instant gratification". I'm talking about the important things in life.


"Maybe we should just give it all up, go on welfare and spend our days soaking up the FUN! Party at my section eight housing residence!! Whoo Hoo! "

If the world really worked that way, I'd be all for it. :)
162 posted on 09/01/2003 9:43:27 PM PDT by FreeRepublicLoginName
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: FreeRepublicLoginName
Because of all the people I've met, the free thinkers are, without exception, happier (and more interesting) than the religious people. Also, because at one time (as a child) I was open to the idea of God, and ever since I gave up on the idea of mystical, magical mythology as being true I myself have been much happier.

Yes, well I am sure that your particular experience speaks for the whole universe. And you tell US to open our minds...

163 posted on 09/01/2003 9:50:40 PM PDT by Dianna
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
"I'll address the meat of your post tomorrow."

Great, I look forward to it. (Thank you.)

"I'm Jewish, which means the Bible is meaningless to me."

I look forward to my education in Judaism. For example, I was absolutely sure that Jews believed in the "Old Testament", with Moses's exodus, the great flood, etc. Isn't the "Old Testament" what makes Jews the "chosen people"? (And so on...)

164 posted on 09/01/2003 9:51:43 PM PDT by FreeRepublicLoginName
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: Dianna
"Yes, well I am sure that your particular experience speaks for the whole universe."

Of course not. My particular experience speaks for nobody but me. But you did ask why I thought what I thought.

"And you tell US to open our minds... "

I'm completely open to the idea that religion can make people happier than they would be if they were a free thinker. I've just never met such a person.

165 posted on 09/01/2003 9:55:14 PM PDT by FreeRepublicLoginName
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: FreeRepublicLoginName
So why are you here asking questions if you've already made up your mind on the answers? Are you evangelizing? If so, you're going to have to address people's questions more methodically if you hope to have any success.
166 posted on 09/02/2003 6:52:01 AM PDT by ellery
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: honeygrl
I'll have to answer this later, a proper answer could take up a whole essay. Generally, I'm against it, but it's complicated.
167 posted on 09/02/2003 8:43:19 AM PDT by Argh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz; WhyisaTexasgirlinPA; honeygrl
squeakysqueakysqueakysqueakysqueakysqueakysqueakysqueaky

You wouldn't have this problem if you dated something younger than Whyisa, someone young enough that her joints don't creak.

168 posted on 09/02/2003 8:45:58 AM PDT by Argh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: WhyisaTexasgirlinPA
just not as loud and/or obnoxious as the ones on either end of the spectrum.........


And, we spell better, usually.
169 posted on 09/02/2003 8:54:11 AM PDT by My back yard (Where now the horse and the rider? Where is the horn that was blowing?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: FreeRepublicLoginName
Because of all the people I've met, the free thinkers are, without exception, happier (and more interesting) than the religious people.

Is it possible that you experience with Mormons has adversely colored your entire view of "religous people"?

SD

170 posted on 09/02/2003 11:19:37 AM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: FreeRepublicLoginName
This is not actually true. War never "has to be" fought. It is your personal anxiety and aggression at the world that makes you have this view, and if you could get over it the world would be a much safer place.

While you are holding hands and singing about buying the world a Coke, some miscreant will invade and enslave you.

That's the ultimate reality of the universe. Self-defense, and the defense of innocents, is a necessity. Franklin may have said that war is not a good thing, but that is not the same as saying war should always be avoided. The only way to avoid war at all times is to surrender.

SD

171 posted on 09/02/2003 11:22:28 AM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Dianna
Better safe than sorry....

Freeperloginname has not responded to any of my posts. I was under the impression that he came here to learn, but it seems to me that he is very busy just trying to justify his beliefs....which are no beliefs. I would have responded in more detail over the weekend, but I was busy having a good time & seem to have developed a right hand injury that is impairing my ability to type. So, I am attempting to cut way back on my postings.
172 posted on 09/02/2003 11:41:19 AM PDT by Feiny (Courtesy is not a sign of weakness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
" While you are holding hands and singing about buying the world a Coke, some miscreant will invade and enslave you."

No, they won't. Nobody wants to invade the U.S. Nobody. Not Saddam Hussein, not Fidel Castro, not Kim Jong Ding Dong, not the Communists, not the Muslims, nobody. Nobody wants to enslave you.

This fear of others seems to be a repeating theme in the conservative view. It reminds me of something said at the Nuremburg trials:

"Why, of course the people don't want war... but, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament or a communist dictatorship... voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.

-Hermann Goering, Nazi Commander, April 18, 1946 (Nuremberg Diary, by Gustave Gilbert)"


This is exactly what I see happening in the United States today.
173 posted on 09/02/2003 11:45:58 AM PDT by FreeRepublicLoginName
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: FreeRepublicLoginName
No, they won't. Nobody wants to invade the U.S. Nobody. Not Saddam Hussein, not Fidel Castro, not Kim Jong Ding Dong, not the Communists, not the Muslims, nobody. Nobody wants to enslave you.

That's what the Kuwaiti's thought in 1990.

If there's an annoying tendency among liberals (besides the desire to associate conservatives with Hitler) it is the simple unwillingness to address reality as it is, and not as they wish it to be.

The world is a dangerous place. There are bad people out there. Anyone who announces that he is unwilling to defend himself and is just going to sit around and think happy thoughts is targeting himself.

Do you really, honestly think that a global utopia of non-violence and peace is possible?

SD

174 posted on 09/02/2003 12:00:43 PM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
'Is it possible that you experience with Mormons has adversely colored your entire view of "religous people"?'

Excellent question, thank you for asking.

My view of religion and religious people stems from my entire lifetime of experiences, but started most strongly when I was 10 years old. I went to a "non-denominational" Christian private school for one year, in Florida. My mother put me there because she feared the public schools (she's conservative).

Living as a teenager in Utah was hell, and I've met several others who felt the same way, but it's quite cleanly attached to the Mormon church and society. When I first got out of Utah, I was delighted to meet Catholics, Muslims, Buddhists, etc., for the joyous opportunity to speak with someone who was just not Mormon. Next to a Utah Mormon, most anybody qualifies as a "free thinker".

I've read a few religious texts (the Bible included), a few historical texts (ancient Greek writings), a few political texts (our Constitution and much Ben Franklin included), and several philosophical classics to come to my conclusions about religion.

My opinion is by no means "formed". I'm open to the existence of a God, or several gods, or spirits, or UFOs, or the power of magic crystals. But I've spent a good portion of my free time trying to find proof, evidence, or a reason to consider those extraordinary things as real, and I have not found it. Therefor, I do not expect to find such evidence in the future.
175 posted on 09/02/2003 12:10:26 PM PDT by FreeRepublicLoginName
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
"That's what the Kuwaiti's thought in 1990."

I was talking about the U.S., not Kuwait. If Canada suddenly lined up 40,000 armed troops at the northern border (the way Saddam did in 1990), I would change my mind.

"...the simple unwillingness to address reality as it is, and not as they wish it to be."

This is another one of those statements I've seen on Liberal discussion forums (except it was targeted at Conservatives).

"The world is a dangerous place."

Let go of your fear.

"There are bad people out there."

Let go of your fear.

"Anyone who announces that he is unwilling to defend himself ..."

I am willing to defend myself. I support a strong military. I support the right to bear arms. But as I look around at the global political picture and count the number of threats to the U.S., it comes to... let's see... zero.

" Do you really, honestly think that a global utopia of non-violence and peace is possible?"

Yes, I do, as do millions of others around the world.

176 posted on 09/02/2003 12:22:22 PM PDT by FreeRepublicLoginName
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: FreeRepublicLoginName
My view of religion and religious people stems from my entire lifetime of experiences, but started most strongly when I was 10 years old. I went to a "non-denominational" Christian private school for one year, in Florida. My mother put me there because she feared the public schools (she's conservative).

In what way do you describe her as "conservative"?

When I first got out of Utah, I was delighted to meet Catholics, Muslims, Buddhists, etc., for the joyous opportunity to speak with someone who was just not Mormon. Next to a Utah Mormon, most anybody qualifies as a "free thinker".

Yes, that was my point, that other faith traditions are not as restrictive or clannish as the Mormons might be. The present Pope, for example, has published an encyclical outlining the relationship between faith and reason (fides et ratio), and no Catholic is expected to have to choose between the two of them. They are not regarded as opponents, but rather partners in the pursuit of truth.

But I've spent a good portion of my free time trying to find proof, evidence, or a reason to consider those extraordinary things as real, and I have not found it. Therefor, I do not expect to find such evidence in the future.

But you should not logically rule out such a thing. If an intense experience with God (conversion experience) can be likened to a bolt from the blue, then past experience is no more predictive than it is for lightning. That I have spent 34 years without getting hit by lightning does not mean that I am immune.

Just something to think about.

Are you aware of the "intelligent design" theories that argue the existence of a Creator from the evidence found in creation?

SD

177 posted on 09/02/2003 12:26:57 PM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: FreeRepublicLoginName
I was talking about the U.S., not Kuwait. If Canada suddenly lined up 40,000 armed troops at the northern border (the way Saddam did in 1990), I would change my mind.

I was talking about the belief you seem to have that the desire for peace can bring it about. This is uwarranted by any study of history.

It is good that you recognize that facts do indeed change your assessment of the situation.

This is another one of those statements I've seen on Liberal discussion forums (except it was targeted at Conservatives).

That doesn't begin to address the substance. If I call you blue and you call me blue, it really doesn't address which one of us is blue, does it?

"The world is a dangerous place."

Let go of your fear.

"There are bad people out there."

Let go of your fear.

I am not expressing "fear" or any other emotion. I am stating a fact of life. Do you deny the fact? Do you think that if I change my attitude it will make other people behave like angels?

That's irrational.

I am willing to defend myself. I support a strong military. I support the right to bear arms. But as I look around at the global political picture and count the number of threats to the U.S., it comes to... let's see... zero.

Well, do you think the military and the private firearm ownership have anything to do with the fact that we are not threatened with invasion?

" Do you really, honestly think that a global utopia of non-violence and peace is possible?"

Yes, I do, as do millions of others around the world.

Sorry, but that is simply unrealistic. It will never happen. What in history leads you to think it would be possible? Given the history of human treachery and cruelty and such?

This is the fundamental difference between the left and right -- the acceptance of human nature as flawed. The left thinks that given the proper environment and stimulation and control that man can build a utopia here on earth. See the Soviet Union.

The only problem with the idea is that it won't work. Human nature can not be "perfected" in this manner without external coercion.

That is the history of the world. To think that all man will come together in peace, love, and understanding is fantasy.

It is this fantasy that motivates the left.

SD

178 posted on 09/02/2003 12:39:22 PM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
"In what way do you describe her as "conservative"?"

She likes Rush Limbaugh. She hates Clinton. She likes living in Utah (although she's not Mormon). She expresses fear of minorities by talking about "them" coming to take our (insert whatever here).


"Yes, that was my point, that other faith traditions are not as restrictive or clannish as the Mormons might be."

Indeed, I agree 100%. In fact, some of the best research into Theology, Reason, and other such philosophical topics has been done by the Catholics. If I recall correctly, the term "Free Thinker" was coined by a Catholic, along with "Deist".

"The present Pope, for example, has published an encyclical outlining the relationship between faith and reason (fides et ratio), and no Catholic is expected to have to choose between the two of them. They are not regarded as opponents, but rather partners in the pursuit of truth."

That is where I (quite clearly, I think) disagree. Faith and reason are not partners in anything, in my experience. In fact, in my experience, faith could (on some level) be defined as the abandonment of reason.

"Where knowledge ends, religion begins."
-Benjamin Disraeli

179 posted on 09/02/2003 12:51:27 PM PDT by FreeRepublicLoginName
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: FreeRepublicLoginName
That is where I (quite clearly, I think) disagree. Faith and reason are not partners in anything, in my experience. In fact, in my experience, faith could (on some level) be defined as the abandonment of reason.

It can be, and for some is. But a proper faith need not require the abandoment of reason. Nothing that I believe as true is unreasonable. We might not be able to deduce it ourselves, and benefit from Revelation. But what is revealed is a reasonable set of facts.

Reason can lead us to the point where we recognize that there is something greater than ourselves and our existence. At this point a "leap of faith" is required to accept what has been revealed. From this point, reason serves to help us make sense of our faith and of revelation.

Reason can bring us to the point of accepting faith, and then reason can help us to understand and grow in faith. They are not enemies.

SD

180 posted on 09/02/2003 12:59:35 PM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-196 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

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