Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Vanity: The ultimate harm of betraying traditional American Judeo-Christian values

Posted on 02/05/2007 4:55:12 PM PST by Jim Robinson

When the members of the Republican party betray the sound conservative principles of its founders and its own longstanding party platform and then vote in a leader whose personal beliefs and public record are more in line with those of the degenerate socialist Democrat party, then obviously the Republican party is sliding to the left. When large numbers of the members of a conservative party enthusiastically (you might even say overzealously or militantly) campaign for a social liberal and against sound conservative principles and candidates, then they are pushing the conservative principles, conservative candidates and conservative members out the exit doors.

Should the large number of members militantly campaigning for a socialist liberal for the presidency win out, and the only choices presented to the electorate by the two major political parties both share identical immoral socialist liberal ideologies, and the voter is left with voting for a socialist or a socialist, then obviously the resultant elected government will be a socialist government.

When the Republican Party abandons its conservative principles and abandons its fight against encroaching socialism, then obviously it is no longer a conservative party and we no longer have a major party fighting for traditional American values and against socialism.

When the American people abandon their longstanding traditional conservative family values and instead openly embrace socialism and perverted lifestyles, then America has moved left and is obviously no longer a traditional conservative nation.

When and if the American people abandon their traditional Judeo-Christian morality and traditional American conservative values, and instead opt for corrupt godless liberal/socialist immorality and perversion as the norm, then obviously America will have lost its way.

America was founded on Judeo-Christian principles. The Founding Fathers warned us that our style of Republican government would only work for a moral society. When and if we as a nation turn our backs on God and the nation abandons our American traditional Judeo-Christian morals and values, and rampant godless socialism takes over, the America of our Founders ceases to exist.

You can spin it, twist it, deny it, make a million excuses and logical explanations for why electing a social liberal at this time is a good idea, but you cannot deny the simple truth. A social liberal is a liberal and liberals begat liberalism. Liberalism begats socialism. Our nation was founded on the self-evident truth that our unalienable rights come from God. Socialists deny God exists. Socialists say our rights come from men in government robes. What men in government robes give, other men in government robes can take away. Without God we have no unalienable rights. No unalienable rights means no freedom. No freedom means no America.


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: bankcard; fr; ingodwetrust; moralabsolutes; primaries
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 241 next last
To: Jim Robinson

Are you suggesting that FR and FREEPERS endorse a fringe party, now?


61 posted on 02/05/2007 5:43:29 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: voltaires_zit
If you don't like a conservative Republican party you should stay out of it. Find another party to corrupt,

I'll stay and keep working to keep it as conservative as it can possibly be. And that means socially conservative too.
62 posted on 02/05/2007 5:43:40 PM PST by Beagle8U (SNICKERS......Its packed with fudge !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
If we don't get behind a conservative candidate, we get a socialist government!!

Are you actually advocating the Constitution Party!?

63 posted on 02/05/2007 5:43:47 PM PST by Enosh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: HaveHadEnough

That will NOT happen.


64 posted on 02/05/2007 5:44:38 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: OMalley

I don't know what will win the election, but the social in social liberal can be restated as cultural liberal without changing its meaning. And being culturally liberal has precisely nothing to do with being a socialist.


65 posted on 02/05/2007 5:44:47 PM PST by gcruse (http://garycruse.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Why didn't we groom a conservative candidate???

I agree.

And stick him as the head of a bunch of rhinos?,No.

Term limits need to be debated,these goofs on both sides of the aisle are there way to long.

Your elected for 2 years,do your job,then go home.

66 posted on 02/05/2007 5:46:15 PM PST by mdittmar (May God watch over those who serve,and have served, to keep us free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U
I'll stay and keep working to keep it as conservative as it can possibly be. And that means socially conservative too.

If a true conservative somehow wins the GOP primaries, I'd donate my organs to his/her campaign.

67 posted on 02/05/2007 5:49:07 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Forgot your tagline? Click here to have it resent!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

"If a true conservative somehow wins the GOP primaries, I'd donate my organs to his/her campaign."

Great. You can be sure of one thing, It wont be a radical social liberal that wins the nomination.


68 posted on 02/05/2007 5:52:02 PM PST by Beagle8U (SNICKERS......Its packed with fudge !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

I wouldn't donate my organ; I play it too much. Maybe a ukelele..


69 posted on 02/05/2007 5:52:53 PM PST by gcruse (http://garycruse.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
You mean Hillary and/or Rudy won't be nominated? Or that, if they are, not enough votes will be siphoned away from Rudy to let Hillary win?
70 posted on 02/05/2007 5:53:40 PM PST by HaveHadEnough
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Enosh
Spot on!

The Republican Party never was and never has been "THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY", per se.

71 posted on 02/05/2007 5:54:23 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

So how about we start up that Freeper political party now? We've already got an infrastructure in place (the website), are well-known in all conservative circles, and have a history of organization of real-world events. We could start with local elections and work our way up.


72 posted on 02/05/2007 5:55:05 PM PST by fr_freak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nopardons

Obviously not.


73 posted on 02/05/2007 5:55:08 PM PST by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: alicewonders
Hunter is doing nothing to help himself and no, the MSM isn't "shutting him out".
74 posted on 02/05/2007 5:58:26 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: nopardons

That's what I've always objected to about the acronym RINO. Republican is the name of a group whose objective is to gain and hold political power. It's hard to imagine being that in name only. However, conservative means founded on certain principles, and it is certainly possible to adopt those principles solely for the purpose of gaining office, then dropping them. That would be a CINO. And that's what we have an administration and Congress full of. CINO, not RINO.


75 posted on 02/05/2007 5:58:27 PM PST by gcruse (http://garycruse.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: alicewonders

Duncan Hunter: I'm sorry, but Americans (even just conservative Republicans) are not going to nominate someone to lead the party who has no executive experience. Let the Dems do that: Hitlery, Edwards, Kerry, Dodd, Obama, etc. etc. Far and away the best president in our lifetime was the former Governor of California. Please: no senators or representatives or trial lawyers need apply.

And while perfect conservative pro-life, pro-second amendment, pro-traditional marriage credentials would be nice, there aren't many of those with any kind of executive or leadership experience around. I remember in the 1970's wondering if Republicans would allow Reagan to be their nominee -- after all, he was divorced... he was part of the Hollywood elite... his kids were a bit wacky. Some people even wondered about his commitment to the pro-life movement.

What I'm suggesting is focus on the first principles: this country needs a proven experienced leader. One who is prepared to fight the war on terror at home and abroad. One who believes in limited government and "republican" principles: states rights; strict constructionist; low tax rates; personal responsibility; eliminating pork in the budget; focusing on top priorities and seeing that they are accomplished.

Rudy.


76 posted on 02/05/2007 5:59:08 PM PST by ReleaseTheHounds (“The demagogue is one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U
"If you don't like a conservative Republican party you should stay out of it. Find another party to corrupt,"

Amen! None of these moderates will answer my question of: If you don't believe that conservative ideas can win then why are you in the republican party?

Actually there is a party that supports their beliefs of low taxes and unencumbered immoral behavior: The Libertarians.

Moderate republicans are nothing more than liberals who don't like high taxes. A pox on the lot of them!
77 posted on 02/05/2007 5:59:51 PM PST by samm1148 (Pennsylvania-They haven't taxed air--yet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: ReleaseTheHounds

That sounds like Newt to me, Rudy. And the socons will submarine him in an instant.


78 posted on 02/05/2007 6:01:55 PM PST by gcruse (http://garycruse.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: samm1148

> Actually there is a party that supports their beliefs of
> low taxes and unencumbered immoral behavior: The
> Libertarians.

Once upon a time, there was a libertarian wing of the Republican party.

Maybe driving out the people you agree with 60% of the time wasn't the greatest tactical move?


79 posted on 02/05/2007 6:01:58 PM PST by voltaires_zit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Enosh

LOL. No. I'm suggesting we stick to the pro-life, pro-marriage, pro-gun, pro-individual freedom, small government, low tax, strong national defense principles and shun the liberal candidates. You know. Kinda like we would expect from conservative REPUBLICANS.


80 posted on 02/05/2007 6:02:08 PM PST by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 241 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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