Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What has happened to Free Republic
Me | Me

Posted on 11/19/2001 2:03:57 PM PST by FF578

Has anyone noticed that the Liberal influence has spread here into Free Republic. I notice that less and less Conservatives seem to post here, and more and more Libertarians seem to be.

I get a letter from someone named NYpeanut who is mad because I posted a discussion based on the Gender Gap in voting.

I didn't make it up, there is really a huge Gender gap with Female Voters tending toward the more liberal candidate. The discussion went well without name calling, but this person seems to have taken issue to the fact that I pointed out women seem to vote more liberally than men.

All those who are newbies here are considered disruptors, and those who hold a more right-winged view than the average libertarian seem to be kicked out.

Why is this? Is this a Libertarian site now?

I have noticed more and more posters standing up for Abortion, Homosexuality, the Porn Industry and Drugs since I first came to this site back before the 2000 Election.

Are Christian Conservatives(Who make up a large part of the Republican core vote) not allowed here anymore?

Just because one holds to a higher power, and wishes to shape society in accordance with the laws of Almighty God, does not make one a Taliban Milita member.


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560 ... 801-820 next last
To: katiebelle
all the new stuff is already said...

say it anyway. truth bears repeating. and if said enough times by enough people it will be regarded as truth.

jesus is lord. with freedom comes responsibility!

521 posted on 11/19/2001 6:57:57 PM PST by mlocher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 505 | View Replies]

To: Gracey
Could you explain how libertarian = conservative when faced with the party platforms that I posted?
522 posted on 11/19/2001 6:58:02 PM PST by FF578
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 512 | View Replies]

To: Cavalry
You're one of the first to actually define "conservative" instead of just loosely using the word. Without a baseline definition, all our talk is just babble.
523 posted on 11/19/2001 6:58:46 PM PST by Gracey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 517 | View Replies]

To: FF578
Our Founding Fathers were not dope smoking pot heads who wanted freedom to do what was right in their own eyes.

No but many of them were heavy drinkers of liquor. Hard Apple Cider was practically a staple drink back then which many of them, including Samuel Adams, regularly drank for breakfast. Another big drink was corn liquor which the farmers found profitable to make. (Ever hear of the Whiskey Rebellion?)

524 posted on 11/19/2001 6:59:18 PM PST by PJ-Comix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 519 | View Replies]

To: FF578
But they also didn't go around making a lot of drug laws.
525 posted on 11/19/2001 6:59:34 PM PST by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 519 | View Replies]

To: FF578; drq
Sorry for getting to the party so late. #1. Your rant is like the sound of nails on a chalkboard and is quite pathetic. It has much in common with the liberal left who constantly bemoan the very existance of things beyond their control.

Whimpering to the masses here is akin to asking for a beating. Do you enjoy pain? Does your intellect require attention and positive feed back to boost your self esteem?

We are all adults here, save myself on occasion with some of the sillyness I post. I once posted an emotional outburst of stupidy similar to yours and got fried for it, hopefully you're taking this well and will grow from the experience.

It ain't all about you and there are way to many people here with something good to say than to let the losers get in the way and ruin it.

Follow the Force Luke.

Do not pass go do not collect $200.

#2 For everyone else, courtesy of drq


526 posted on 11/19/2001 7:00:50 PM PST by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bella_Bru; Gracey
Amazing how some think we should all walk lockstep together, eh?

Good gracious that would be so boring. Why would you wan't everyone to be the same, then we are no better than clones. Dissention, discussion, and the debates of many are what make us unique. If I wanted to walk lock-step, I'd go join DUh.com. ;-)

527 posted on 11/19/2001 7:00:52 PM PST by RikaStrom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: Torie
Did you get the pictures I sent you?
528 posted on 11/19/2001 7:01:00 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 515 | View Replies]

To: FF578
I'm a libertarian that frequently posts here. I am against abortion, homosexuality and the porn industry. I am, however, against the war on drugs, as any well read and sane person would be at this point in time. The drug trade is going to continue whether you like it or not. The only question is whether Juan down on the corner of Main and Sixth is going to control it with his .357 magnum or you and I are going to control it through the democratic process. BTW, the Bible makes no mention of the use of drugs except to warn that one should not be a drunkard, and, of course, the Lord's first miracle was to provide a wedding party more wine after the last had run out. He partook Himself. So there is no Biblical foundation for the war on drugs. Much to the contrary. From the first moment in Eden when Eve added on to God's law in reply to Satan, saying, "Oh, we musn't even touch the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil," Man's greatest sin has been trying to add to God's law what is not there. This is what Jesus condemned the Pharisees for repeatedly, going so far as to call them "vipers."
529 posted on 11/19/2001 7:01:28 PM PST by stryker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FF578
You forgot to metion how Freepers developed a love for law enforcement and respect for ALL bumbling federal agencies.
530 posted on 11/19/2001 7:02:58 PM PST by michaelje
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DouglasKC
Libertarian does not equal conservatism

i would agree.

our founding fathers assumed that all citizens had a faith in god. as such, a government that placed a lot of laws on people was not necessary -- we were all following, or at least trying our best to follow, god's law.

today we have a lot of self proclaimed atheists and others who proclaim a faith but are not practicing it. the government has found it necessary to pass laws to protect us from each other. unfortunately, the government has also passed laws to protect each of us from ourselves.

no laws with out no moral or ethical intentions is a case for anarchy and total chaos.

with freedome comes responsibility.

531 posted on 11/19/2001 7:03:00 PM PST by mlocher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 507 | View Replies]

To: Registered
[sigh], I wish I could write like that...

You have your own special talents...

532 posted on 11/19/2001 7:03:21 PM PST by NY.SS-Bar9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: katiebelle
So what is your POLITICAL philosophy? You mentioned your church/religious beliefs.
533 posted on 11/19/2001 7:03:51 PM PST by Gracey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 505 | View Replies]

To: Gracey
you're not too bright when it comes to judging others. I guess your definition of conservative has been self defined as the baseline for "conservative." We're a group that ranges from the far right on a scale to the middle of the road or in my opinion we cover the range of all people who do not espouse the LIBERAL/Leftist agenda = not easy to define.

I do know that to be conservative not to very long ago meant that you agreed with religious people more than leftists. That you believed freely available pornography was bad for people and society, not a "right" of the people. That drugs were harmful to people and society, not a "right" for the people. That true freedom is the right of society to restrict that which does harm, not encourage it.

534 posted on 11/19/2001 7:04:20 PM PST by DouglasKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 512 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
Yes I did thanks. The triplets are very handsome. I assume the granddad's genes are dominant. In time, science will be able to accomplish that sort of thing. For you, it was just blind luck. :)
535 posted on 11/19/2001 7:04:46 PM PST by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 528 | View Replies]

To: RikaStrom
...I'd go join DUh.com. ;-)

LOL.... Where they have NO political convictions. Ever ask one of those Democrats WHY they're Democrats? Typically they'll tell you all the reasons they're not a Republican. They understand next to 0 about the constitution.

536 posted on 11/19/2001 7:05:58 PM PST by Gracey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 527 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
Sorry but most of them just weren't all that religious. Not Franklin, not Washington, and not Jefferson. They weren't anti-religion but they just weren't too religious for the most part.

I'd like to prove you wrong but I cleared my web cache which contained a wealth of links and facts which were nicely assembled by poster "Manny Festo". He's been banned I guess. Shame... another great resource and good conservative. There were 55 founding fathers. You got 2 of them right, but 2 is NOT a majority nor is it typical of the founding fathers. Washington was profoundly religious yet not vocal (private) about it. A lot of nothing has been made about Washington never publically given witness to Christ in church by contemporaneous sources. His writings and speeches, unlike Jefferson, contradict that.

537 posted on 11/19/2001 7:05:59 PM PST by Rightwing Conspiratr1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 497 | View Replies]

To: mlocher
a government that placed a lot of laws on people was not necessary

Which is exactly the libertarian stance.

538 posted on 11/19/2001 7:06:02 PM PST by eddie willers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 531 | View Replies]

To: katiebelle
I am a newbie and about as right wing conservative christian as you can get. mostly lurking as all the good stuff is usually said by the time I get here!

First of all, welcome to FR. Don't worry about being first to the punch. As you lurk, you will learn. Before you know it, you'll be the one posting articles in Breaking News.
(And it will actually be Breaking News!)

539 posted on 11/19/2001 7:06:30 PM PST by uglybiker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 505 | View Replies]

To: Rightwing Conspirator1
Or if you prefer they were largely landed middle class Burkean-style conservatives. Paleo-conservative and fundamentalist protestant in today's relative terms or paleo-fundies.

Check your history. Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, Adams and most of the others were hardly "fundamentalist." They weren't anti-religion as many of the leaders of the French Revolution were but they weren't particularly religious either. Actually the only two Presidents of the 20th century that could be labeled Fundamentalist would be Woodrow Wilson and Jimmy Carter. In the 19th century, perhaps Rutherford P. Hayes but I can't think of any other.

540 posted on 11/19/2001 7:06:38 PM PST by PJ-Comix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 513 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560 ... 801-820 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson