True ,
But Social Conservatives must learn to stop nominating crackpots that give away easy Senate wins like Akin, Mourdock and Angle did, or at least teach them they must not help Dems by saying stupid stuff.
Those give-ways to Dems were mortal sins. We gotta look at Reid’s ugly face everyday attacking Republicans on TV largely thanks to them.
Yet somehow we are asked to think that a bit of twiddling with tax rates is the only thing required to fix all this.
I’m not completely onboard that it is a conservative position for government to be in the business of messing into social issues.
My brand of conservatism thinks the government should provide for the national defense, take care of federal highways and the like.
And if we took care of our fiscal house many of the social ills would cure themselves. It is the inability of one parent to stay home and raise their kids due to high taxes that is at the root of many social problems.
Are fiscal conservatives libertarians? Some are, some aren't. Some want a law.
It is a pity so many conservatives, hyphenated and otherwise, spend so damned much time piddling about how many angels can/should dance on a pinhead, instead of fighting the Communist enemies of the Republic, who pushed this Godless decadence at the US population relentlessly, especially targeting our youth (the morally vulnerable) and the economicaly vulnerable as well (esp. the poor).
We are reaping the benefits of this circular firing squad, just as the Communists hoped we would, and they are marching forward with their agenda even as we prattle.
“...small government and fiscal conservatism will not survive the victory of social leftism.”
This is true. Sorry. The libertarians are wrong. One cannot have small government when the vast majority of citizens are immoral and/or unwilling to restrain the sinful impulses that are a natural part of human life. We are riding on the momentum of morality left from previous generations, but it’s coming to an end. The closest we ever came to a libertarian society was at the founding. It’s not realistic to believe majorities will now vote against their own selfish interests to restrain the federal government. Voting against one’s own interests is also a socially conservative virtue.
I think your wrong. I am a conservative, both Fiscal and Social, but that’s just me... I don’t think their strongly linked.
It is such common sense! You can not take the intellect out of man-—and still have something that resembles normal “man” in his fullness.
You can not remove “emotions” (base instincts) and still have something that resembles normal “man”.
Morality is being Virtuous. Virtue is Excellence-—being the Best you can be—the most Just, most Truthful, the most Courageous, the most Wise, etc.—The idea of Virtue was perfected by Christian Ethics. It is so perfect because the idea of “self-sacrifice” and trust and Love is perfect for civil societies and flourishing children. Social Conservatism is Christian Ethics—no other ethical system works, as well for all human beings and as well in US since both are embedded with Natural Laws and our Rights come from God.
Without morality, base instincts will rule man’s behavior, instead of the intellect. It is immaturity, not conducive to anything positive—especially flourishing economics.
There can be no trust when men lie, cheat and steal, or worse. That will always lead to uncivil societies and need for a police state——where there is always chaos and government interference. No “flourishing” (good economics) will happen when people have no trust and respect for others.
Our Founders (and all geniuses since Socrates—until Marx) stated that all Republics needed to promote Virtue. Without Virtue, there can be no Freedom.
Virtue is habituated in young children. That used to be the purpose of ALL education in Western Civilization from Socrates up until John Dewey, who took out the curricula that promoted Christian Ethics—the McGuffey Readers—all Classical literature-—best of the best and the Bible. Note: John Dewey was a Fabian Socialist who wanted to destroy Christianity-—he forced moral relativism into the curricula. Eventually all mention of “God” was eliminated.
Study the Cultural Marxists. They hated Christianity and devised a way to collapse Western Civilization-—it was to destroy Virtue.
correct.
in fact, in the language of mathematics. i’ll go much farther:
“social conservatism” == conservatism.
“fiscal conservatism” == nothing.
This explains it perfectly for me. I cannot sign onto fully to a Libertarian Party. Sorry, you cannot remove God from the earlier blueprint from our founders. I don't understand their thinking to connect each point. One has to hold the other together. America is becoming a place for endorsing bad behavior/anything goes and the state run media lies. I should say... deliberately lies, that is.
To quote John Adams, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
Akin had a great Fiscal Conservative record. The squishy moderates in the GOP helped kill his campaign by depriving it of money.
Social Conservatives need to wise up and learn how to out wit these leftwing reporters who ask about abortion. One doest have to go into detail just declare that one is pro-life
And when precepts of one conflicts with precepts of the other how is the conflict resolved?
Conservative is a NAME progressives gave/give to non progressives..
Conservative = same old, same old...
Progressive = forward thinking..
When non progressives use “conservative” to identify themselves..
The progressives have ALREADY WON..
They lost MEME-War...
Note: Liberals are proud of being forward-thinking EVEN if they aren’t..
Nothing as regressive as american liberal thinking..
Sad to say most all republicans have been pretty much brain washed by liberals..
Republicans are desperate to morph the word “conservative” into ((NOT MEANING))... “same old, same old”.. If they DO.. they are brain washed..
There are a few significant divisions. The social/fiscal division, even though it gets a lot of attention, isn’t it. One clue is that we talk about it all the time, and one of the easiest ways to know what’s insignificant is to listen to what people babble about the most. Here are the big splits, in my opinion:
1). Traditionalists versus libertarians. Which sounds like social versus fiscal conservatism, but isn’t.
2). Religious versus nonreligious, agnostic, or, less often, atheist.
3). Hawk versus isolationist.
Saying the same thing over and over doesn't make it true. Our problem is big government. Social leftism starts with federal involvement in social issues like the safety net and schools. Can the author truly believe that local school boards and private charity lead to social leftism?
He’s right, but doesn’t really explain why. At least, not in this excerpt.
Moral relativism and cultural marxism are at the root of a morality that calls for big government.
Most younger, Americans no longer believe in a literal, gendered, biblically-documented God, but they are at least ‘spiritual’, if not religious. And that doesn’t place them that far off from Thomas Jefferson’s edited version of the bible.
Mr. Prager argues (beyond this article) that more traditional, religiously adhering and God-fearing people make better free citizens—and I wouldn’t on average disagree with him.
But just because A leads to B doesn’t mean that a majority can simply be made to believe in A in the way that their forebears did. And therein lies the rub.
The national government was intended to be the “government of the States”, and not involve itself in the day-to-day affairs of individual citizens. That makes a national government operating within the original intent of the Constitution effectively libertarian. The “social conservatives” seem either unwilling or unable to recognize and maintain that distinction.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
Anyone whining about narrow minded, fanatical, bigoted etc social conservatives who need to shut up should be handed this article and asked to refute it point by point. Of course they won't be able to.
BTW I haven't seen wagglebee around in a while, so anyone wanting on/off either ping list, freepmail me.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
Anyone whining about narrow minded, fanatical, bigoted etc social conservatives who need to shut up should be handed this article and asked to refute it point by point. Of course they won't be able to.
BTW I haven't seen wagglebee around in a while, so anyone wanting on/off either ping list, freepmail me.