Replies

If you spend as much time and exertion on demanding fiscal conservatism as we spend on demanding social conservatism, we’d be getting somewhere. Everyone has priorities.

I don’t like paying high taxes, and I don’t like government seeping into every facet of daily life. History shows that this will lead to religious persecution, and we’re beginning to get more than just an inkling that history is about to repeat itself. This is where our interests coincide. It’s the basis of our political coalition.

To be a conservative, as the term is understood in the United States, it’s nearly impossible to be so while also being hostile to those who believe in God.

While that may be true, it seems as if those who believe in God have no problem bashing each other and non-believers at this forum every day.

Even this thread is changing into a Protestant/Catholic foodfight for reasons totally unrelated to the original post. There's hostility in the conservative movement, but just think about where it is.

To be a conservative, as the term is understood in the United States, it’s nearly impossible to be so while also being hostile to those who believe in God. “Real” Republicans support the party “planks” that are socially conservative. They’re there for a reason, because a large number demand it.

If you spend as much time and exertion on demanding fiscal conservatism as we spend on demanding social conservatism, we’d be getting somewhere. Everyone has priorities.

I am not hostile to those who believe in God, I just don't think that rational arguments can be conducted on religious grounds. Arguing on religious grounds is an emotional argument, not a rational one.

And here is my problem with your statement that "“Real” Republicans support the party “planks” that are socially conservative. They’re there for a reason, because a large number demand it.' I support the "socially conservative" parts of the Republican platform, as I stated before, as long as the "social conservatives" do not try and use the power of government to force those beliefs on other people.

As I said before: If you want to teach your kids creationism, fine by me. Get vouchers passed so you can send your kids to schools that teach creationism. I will help you in that effort, as I want to send my kids to a school that actually teaches kids about economics, although I will reject any school that teaches creationism. What I will not help you with is getting creationism taught in public schools, where every child will be subjected to the obviously religious viewpoint of creationism.

My beef with "social conservatives" is not with what they want, but with how they want to go about implementing it. Again as I said before, if you want abortion outlawed then get it overturned on Constitutional grounds by advocating for originalist judges. Advocating for a federal law to outlaw abortion nationwide is just not going to happen in the foreseeable future. Again, I will back you up 100% on that issue if you would just focus on something that can be accomplished instead of letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Bottom line is that as long as "social conservatives" keep trying to inject their religious beliefs into government, they will turn away many more people from the Republican Party than you bring in, no matter how "large" the "number" of people who "demand it."

There is a reason the founding fathers did not want a state religion. They wanted government itself to be secular, even as they thought the people in government would be religious and even as they based the secular laws on religious precepts. So take a cue from the founding fathers and find secular, not religious arguments to get the "social conservative" agenda passed. Do that and your odds of actually accomplishing something will increase dramatically.