I think one of aspects of conservatism that seems to escape you is that it is up to individuals to decide what is “ideal” and then their individual responsibility to make it happen, personally.It's not that simple. Modern conservatism has mutated considerably(you don't see many temperance leagues these days).Remember the “pursuit” of happiness. As long as there is life and liberty, the pursuit of happiness is each person’s kuleana. (responsibility, area etc).
I do not want any “manifesto” whether socialist, communist, fascist, utopian, Fabian or so-called “conservative”, telling me what ideal is.
Social structure founded on strong (aka “natural”) families, with the eternal spiritual values that are universal (note my Thos. Jefferson quote) is what is needed, along with government doing what it is Constitutionally mandated, and NOT A SPECK MORE.
No new manifestos needed or wanted.
What I'm advocating is organizing political conservatism is a positive way as well as a negative one. Conservatism tends to argue that the church is the primary social element outside of the family for maintaining a stable and just society, but that's cold comfort to someone having to survive going past an inner-city "corner" every day.
It boils down to this, conservatism advocates a strong, cohesive society. That society is breaking apart and *modern conservatism* doesn't offer a coherent vision on how to solve those problems. I think it might be interesting to have a coherent *voluntary* view of what sort of activities would make society stronger given modern day problems.
*Modern* conservatism DOES offer a coherent vision of how to solve those problems.
Get back to stable two parent HETEROSEXUAL parent families and absolute moral values.
This modern stuff, which you are simultaneously condemning as a failure and advocating as the answer is going nowhere.
*Modern conservatism* of the kind you are advocating is NOT conservatism, it’s liberalism. And it’s NOT conservative.
Read what metmom has been posting and answer what she says. It’s very simple. Just to re-state, here goes:
Society based on the natural family, already figured out and described.
Check.
Traditional, universal moral principles, as described above various places, and my Thos. Jefferson quote, none of which you acknowledged.
Check.
Local charities, churches, private organizations, etc to help those in need.
Check.
Government doing ONLY what it is Constitutionally mandated to do and NOTHING MORE.
Check.
What more could you possibly want to solve the problem? There is no “new, improved” truth needed.
It seems to me that you are the one advocating for some kind of "Modern Conservatism" as you are the one advocating for gay marriage and gay adoption and acceptance of the gay agenda. That is certainly not a classic conservative position. The classic conservative position is that the Traditional Family is the root of a moral society and it is the liberals who for the last 100 years have been tearing at the fabric of our traditional family advocating such destructive ideas as "no fault divorce" and "domestic partnerships" and gay rights to adoption and child custody. Homosexuality was traditionally considered a mental disorder and was classified as such in the orginal DSM manuals. Now it is considered by liberals to be a valid interpersonal relationship on an equal footing both psychologically and socially as marriage itself.
What kind of society are you promoting anyway? One in which eventually we will have not only gay marriage, but incestuous and polygamous marriages? Don't you think that people who are born with a sexual attraction to a lot of women should have the right to marry them all? If not, they why would you advocate these rights for homosexuals?
BTW you don't have to answer this, because I suspect that if you continue to advocate for the homosexual agenda, you will be Zotted again.
With all due respect, you seem to have absorbed the street-corner mentality that all social problems are the result of governments and/or the church; therefore these institutions and everything they stand for were never any good to begin with and should be discarded or altered for "new" times.
You should read the real history of the civil rights movement, in which communist anarchists deliberately -- and with an inconscionable willingness to lie -- took aim at all the strengths of American society, including religion, family, morality, and traditional common law, starting as early as the post Civil War era, but gaining momentum under FDR and starting to turn the tide their way in the 60s with the proliferation of affluence and mass communications. For you to blame the hapless victims of this assault -- the trusting average citizen who still believes "up" means "up" and "down" means "down" -- is churlish and misinformed.
It will take a social revolution for persons of good conscience to renovate this society and return it to balanced civility; but that has happened in our own country before, and in other countries as well, once enough people caught on to the motivations of the liars in public life. There is simply no public substitute for private morality grounded in faith. Yours needs a check-up.
To paraphrase an old sage, "a forest can only look green if most of the trees are green." You are the one who has to change your opinion of eternal moral values and the imperfect human institutions that labor to uphold them. You are the one who has to stop criticizing and start working to turn things back around. You are the one who has to accept the primacy of God's natural law and stop rejecting it because it has been attacked and victimized.