Posted on 11/24/2008 1:50:19 PM PST by lewisglad
Ballot initiatives voted by the people is a whole separate thing. I'm talking about Republicans like Huckabee who constantly make their faith the centerpiece of their campaign. There's a reason why Huckabee flamed out gradually and Brownback got completely dismantled. Being solely socon doesn't win you elections. Start talking about the other two legs of the stool, OK?
Being pro-life and pro-traditional marriage is enough to satisfy the socons. When you cut taxes and reduce government, charity groups will return and help those in need. That promotes a stronger community and faith among those who live in it. Just cut my taxes and leave me alone.
I would think Huckabee's tax increases and pardons had more to with it.
But, let's look at the fate of those that rejected social conservatism or had a dubious record on those issues. Rudy Giuliani failed to win a single delegate. Mitt Romney, despite outspending his opponents dramatically, didn't even do as well as Huckabee, someone with limited money that few had heard.
No, I never said that; my position is that it is not the states place to outlaw such things. We each have our own moral views about this things, but they are matters of private not public morality.
but where it crosses the line for many conservatives is having the State putting the moral stamp of approval on it by giving it legal status (gay marriage).
Which I oppose. quit beating a strawman. The difference is those who will outlaw homosexual behavior. That simply is an unwarranted intrusion on people's personal liberty, and its wrong to even attempt to fight that losing battle. Gays are accepted and tolerated and will live their lifestyle whatever those who are morally opposed to it think.
That is the same argument as saying “I believe abortion is wrong, but it should be legal”.
Abortion kills a living human being. The harm envisioned from accepting gays and letting them live as they wish is - what exactly? the only harm, if any, comes from those voluntarily deciding to engage in it. Again, this is not about education or marriage or the other items - but simply about legality of the act itself.
Once it is perceived as legal and therefore moral, then that many more people will choose to participate who might have refrained before, and will continue to agitate for the right to teach children & propagandize in the media about a lifestyle that is repellant to the majority in our society.
And I wil join those in making the case that true tolerance requires a toleration of differences of opinion on this. Which means your opinion and other opinions should be respected, and indoctrination should be avoided.
I think it is pointless and counterproductive however to make that point of view a political position.
Marriage is a religious institution. We need separation of marriage and state.
Surely, you read the posts on FR that allege that the GOP has completely undermined the social conservatives by pushing them "to the back of the bus."
What the heck is the truth? They can't both be the truth.
The Republican party has so many factions, I'm not sure we can put it back together. Everyone is a victim. I'm going to take my ball and go home if I don't get my way. Blah, blah, blah. I'm getting sick of this. We sound like a bunch of Democrats whining.
We have a job to do and that is to stop Democrats and it will take all of us.
If the Republicans were willing to cut taxes and spending half as much as Libertarians are, then after the next election the remaining Democrats could hold their meetings in the Smithsonian, where they could be displayed as rare specimens.
we don’t need separation of religion and state. Just separation of church and state.
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.