Posted on 10/01/2013 12:06:37 PM PDT by shego
For better or for worse, libertarianism is on the upswing in the Republican Party....
...."68% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents agree with the statement that 'individuals should be free to do as they like as long as they don't hurt others, and that the government should keep out of people's day-to-day lives.'....
"Some fundamentalist Christians are very libertarian in their beliefs," explained Dave Nalle, Chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus, to The Washington Times Communities earlier this year....
"They understand that the governmental restraint which is central to libertarianism works to their benefit in protecting them from government interference in their religious life," he continued. "Like Ron Paul, who is very religious, they value the independence of their churches and want to keep government from promoting any ideology through the schools or its other programs. While they do not support social libertarianism they understand that if government can dictate lifestyle decisions it's a knife which cuts both ways."
During the same interview, Nalle mentioned that "(w)here we do run into problems with the religious right is with those small but influential groups which believe that they should promote their beliefs by using government as an instrument to impose them on other people.
"They don't understand that this is a terrible practice which can be turned against them and they use tactics which are essentially the same as the secular humanists from the left who are their greatest enemies. Ultimately I don't see much future for this element in the Republican Party or even in mainstream politics.
"When they are fanatical about forcing their beliefs on everyone through legislation they make themselves so unpopular that they become a political liability which no party can afford to get involved with...
(Excerpt) Read more at communities.washingtontimes.com ...
....ZACKLY!!!!......
I guess “rank and file” doesn’t mean Temple Mormons, those aspiring to the Temple, and those the religion kicks out for being not devoted enough?
I think the best opposition to feel good anointed liberal control freaks is to focus on Gd given freedom and forget which religions or denominations each member comes from. However, the libs will just keep trying to put us down even for believing in Gd, although they can’t get far with that because many Dems do at least give lip service to their faiths.
Conservative Constitutionalism doesn’t need to be attached to any religion. The rights all come from the Almighty.
I am also a well rounded conservative, as are most conservatives here.
This effort to create a myth that freepers challenging the social liberalism of libertarianism are not really conservatives at all but some kind of “social only conservatives”, is nonsense and is something like an anti-conservative media figure would try to create.
Incredible, you actually ping someone to come to a thread to make personal attacks, and sure enough look at that persons first post, pure personal attack.
Reading comprehension is not your strong suit, but projection and paranoia is. I didn’t create any such myth. I didn’t lump all Freepers together ,and in fact, I was not even talking about what goes on here at FR other than FR being one example of where there is this libertarian/social clash.
I also said the clash goes both ways, and I never said the clash was necessarily a bad thing. All I said was that it happens a lot of places, inclduding on FR.
You really are a paranoid little man and an infantile would-be teachers’ pet. Teeny tiny smallness.
Sometimes accuracy can be seen as personal. I just say it’s accuracy.....
I think most probably are -- so this begs the question: why are you assuming I was referring to you? I never said MOST and I never said YOU (ruh roh - you stepped right into that one.....)
He didn’t ping me or ask me to make personal attacks, but I did relate a history of YOU making personal attacks on me. Like I said to anyone who can read, you’ve made multiple personal attacks, ones that weren’t even true. And here you are whining to the mods........
My cousin’s description of Utah state GOP nominating conventions was that people who normally fall into line with the church leadership became political insurgents after being riled by too much manipulation. Mike Lee winning a Senate seat from an incumbent was one fruit of that effort.
You were not put here to judge my religion. That job belongs to God.
Social conservatism can not be achieved through governmental force. Those who believe it can be done that way, or just want to take a stab at doing it because it feels right, deserve to be mocked and ridiculed because their stance is totally illogical. Furthermore it throws the entire concept of limited government and our Bill of Rights into the crapper; another valid reason to mock your stance, as if another were needed.
Of course, you know God’s will better than I do because you think morality enforced at the muzzle of a gun or the point of a sword is good. You sound like a Sharia Law Muslim!
You spend so much time and effort here attacking people that you confuse your targets. I promote small government, personal liberty and personal responsibility. I promote strong borders and the right to life. You say I’m a Libertarian, a party to which I have never belonged, and ascribe the worst of their policies onto me for no reason at all except your convenience and intellectual dishonesty.
I just don’t know what all this posting about Romney and Mormons is supposed to be about, it sure seems off topic.
Of course he pinged you, in post 113 and you came on the thread to bring in personal baggage and make a personal attack in your first post, 119.
Even in this post, your second on this thread it is a pure personal attack and you are trying to drag in a personal grudge “”I did relate a history of YOU making personal attacks on me.””.
This is stalking.
Judge your religion? It is you doing the preaching and God talk and mocking as you promote the libertarian agenda, which is anti-God by the way.
You promote libertarianism, mock social conservatism, and then go into sounding like a preacher talking about God’s will and how the left/libertarians homosexualizing the military and creating gay marriage could be God’s will for us.
Social conservatives vote and politic for social conservative law and culture, just as we have for centuries.
Social liberals, libertarians are fighting to defeat traditional America, and make us a lefty social liberal, Sodom and Gomorrah culture.
I suppose you support our centuries old position on homosexuality in the military and gay marriage, or do you support the libertarian changes in those laws?
This is stalking.
No, but that, sir, is a laughable comment........
That is not only a sound position, it is the basic logic of the political pro-life movement.
So far as "choice lite", I wonder if it's like "Bud Lite"....all the flavor, half the calories. As in Fat Bastard saying, "I aate the bbehby".
Only killing half of the full amount, so to speak.
(We only sucked out half his brain, Doc, since you're choice lite.)
If they do, it is a dim one.
Sound. Logical. Wise. "Rooted in the Founder's belief that free people, whose God-given rights are protected by a government that allows the individual to pursue their dreams and reap the fruits of their labor, would build the most just and prosperous society in the history of man."
Here is how it is articulated by the "Sweater Vest Guy" [irony!] drawing upon the philosophy of Os Guinness (and Edmund Burke) ....
That freedom requires virtue was explained by the political philosopher Edmund Burke, who wrote: "Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites ... Society cannot exist, unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere; and the less of it there is within, the more there must be without. It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters."
Virtue requires faith because faith is the primary teacher of morality. That is not to say that one cannot be virtuous without faith, but for society as a whole faith is the indispensable agent of virtue. Faith requires freedom. Why has America remained a deeply religious country averting the road to secularism traveled by our European brothers and sisters? Again Madison's "true remedy," the combination of "free exercise" and no religious state supported monopoly, has created a vibrant marketplace of religions extolling everywhere the word of God to inspire people to fulfill His special plan for each of us. Our founders' inspired brilliance created a paradigm that has given America the best chance of any civilization in the history of man to endure the test of time. Time, this time now in American history is putting that to the test.
John Adams echoes this ... "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
There is a reason that Social Conservatism is an indispensible leg of a "three-legged stool" that Ronald Reagan often spoke about that undergirds "complete conservatism."
I think you referred to Romney as the nominee as indicating that Christian conservatives were without a future in the GOP.
To: Rockingham
Is there room for libertarians in the GOP? Of course there is, but they seem unlikely to ever be numerous enough to command that the GOP cannot oppose abortion and otherwise support traditional values.
They are gaining, in 2012 they ran a pro-abortion, pro gay military candidate who opposed the GOP pro-life platform and ran pro-choice ads in at least two states, one being Ohio (which the GOP lost).
42 posted on 10/1/2013 1:09:49 PM by ansel12
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.