[Josh Painter]

Man50D wrote: “Below are some other interpretations/examples provided by Wikipedia...”

You DO realize that Wikipedia’s definaitions can be changed by anyone who wants to, don’t you? As such, it is not a reliable reference to anything.

[Man50D]

You DO realize that Wikipedia’s definaitions can be changed by anyone who wants to, don’t you? As such, it is not a reliable reference to anything.

You didn't read my post #1776 thoroughly. I stated: I'm not saying Wikipedia is the sole source of definitions. You would have realized my point is Wikipedia is only one source had you done so. If everyone were in agreement the term "social Conservative" had only one meaning then there would not be multiple definitions for the same term and you would find the same definition in any source! The fact that the definition can be changed,regardless of the source, and has more than one interpretation is the premise of my the term "Social Conservative" is convoluted because it can include one who is a socialist! As such it is not reliable to interpret it only as it is understood in posts #138 and 244. Thank you for for confirming my point!