When He Talks Abortion, President Obama Pretends to Be a Libertarian

The Atlantic ^ | Apr 29 2013 | Conor Friedersdorf

[presidio9]

Addressing Planned Parenthood last week, President Obama made what must be one of the least self-aware statements of his tenure. "Forty years after the Supreme Court affirmed a woman's constitutional right to privacy, including the right to choose, we shouldn't have to remind people that when it comes to a woman's health, no politician should get to decide what's best for you," he said. "No insurer should get to decide what kind of care that you get. The only person who should get to make decisions about your health is you."

It's no secret that

[TArcher]

Homosexual amorality is a symptom of cultural self-destruction.

Regardless of what your cadre of homosexual friends believe - cultural desensitization, demoralization, and self-destruction is not conservative.

[presidio9]

Regardless of what your cadre of homosexual friends believe - cultural desensitization, demoralization, and self-destruction is not conservative.

Who do you think ever said it was? Certainly not me. It seems to me that you came into this thread with with a referrence to another thread from another thread from six years ago. You should read that thread. Particularly what I posted there. You may find it enlightening. Probably not, but maybe.

[Viennacon]

Presidio9, while you make a very logical comparison of amnesty to homosexual marriage, you have to understand the motivations behind opposing either one.
Opposition to amnesty usually stems from very practical reasons (assimilation, identity, jobs, benefits, or justice)
Opposition to homosexual marriage stems primarily from religious belief, and so is much more of a core conviction than opposing amnesty.

Ronald Reagan was perhaps the most conservative president we have had, bearing in mind American conservatism is actually a relatively recent concept, a reaction to growing moral downturns (although I’m not familiar enough with the records of figures like Coolidge, who might have been more ‘conservative’ than Reagan).
The fact that he may have been the best doesn’t make him a god. I admire Reagan. He got almost everything right, stumbled occasionally. His vote for abortion he later called a mistake that was exploited by doctors, and took a hardline anti-abortion stance while running for president. While I would class him as a solid conservative, he took anti-conservative positions from time to time.

Let me present you with a much more applicable situation closer to today. Marco Rubio and Rob Portman.
Both have reasonable records, but I have deep disagreements with positions they both took. Rubio has been pushing for a bill that would give amnesty. Portman has voiced support for state recognition of homosexual marriage.
Both are bad, but you have to look deeper to see the motivations in order to understand why people might feel more strongly about one over the other.

Rubio has a lot of total detractors on FreeRepublic, so I am risking getting hammered for saying this, but I don’t think he is a traitor in the classical sense. He’s just a moron. An immature senator getting ahead of himself, perhaps a little over-inflated, naive to the machinations of professional liars like Chuck Schumer. I believe he genuinely thinks the promises he wants kept will be kept, and that the DHS will perform its duty free from the influence of the Democrat party. As I said, moron.

Now, Portman is a different story. Portman is a straight up self-obsessed dirtbag. His opinion on marriage (which I am guessing is grounded in religious faith) was altered when his son decided to become a proud homosexual. What does this say about Rob Portman? I mean, if a man can’t even have convictions to his God, how can we expect him to have convictions on anything, least of all us?

I personally could not vote for a candidate who supported homosexual marriage. I believe it violates natural law, it affirms a medically lethal practice, it shows a callous disregard for 2000+ years of human history, and in every society where it has been instituted at the national level, fascist anti-discrimination laws have followed, strangling private industry and religious institutions. Need I mention the fact that nations that embrace homosexual marriage see collapsing civil societies and social structures?

I would encourage you to respect that people draw the lines on who is a conservative at different points in the sand, and someone else may not see it in the same way you do.

[presidio9]

I personally could not vote for a candidate who supported homosexual marriage. I believe it violates natural law, it affirms a medically lethal practice, it shows a callous disregard for 2000+ years of human history, and in every society where it has been instituted at the national level, fascist anti-discrimination laws have followed, strangling private industry and religious institutions. Need I mention the fact that nations that embrace homosexual marriage see collapsing civil societies and social structures?

I would encourage you to respect that people draw the lines on who is a conservative at different points in the sand, and someone else may not see it in the same way you do.

I think you are having a bit of trouble reading. I never said someone else couldn't have a different point of veiw on this topic. I am dealing with a crazy person who is obsessed with making an issue of my position that it is indeed possible for someone to be a conservative without accepting EVERY conservative position. For you gay marriage is a deal breaker. I respect that. I even told this other person I respect his position. Overwhelming documentary evidence of 14 years of posting to FR indicates that I generally believe in your viewpoint. And his.

I am not aware of any pro-gay marriage conservatives that I would consider voting for at this time. But the last two primaries in this party have taught me to reject litmus tests as something that ends up handing the nomination to least desirable candidate moderates. So, again, I can't imagine at this time someone who favored gay marriage agreeing with me on much else, particularly abortion. But if he did, I can not say that I would rule him out as a conservative.

I recognize that you're trying to help, but I'm afraid you're only making things worse. Have a good evening.

[presidio9]

While I would class him as a solid conservative, he took anti-conservative positions from time to time.

Which was the only reason I brought his name up in the first place. OF COURSE RONALD REAGAN WAS A CONSERVATIVE.

[TArcher]

You may find it enlightening.

 

 

Said the serpent in the Garden?

Rom 1:21-25

21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie...
NIV

 

The friends I've chosen are individuals of moral character I can trust not to corrupt my children, or my children's future.   (Tsk Tsk, yes yes, those bigoted litmus tests you abhor again)  TOUGH.

 

Seems to me the admission that you've chosen homosexuals as friends speaks much louder than your 8000+ posts and the associated bloviated, pretentious, comments you typically prop your weak "conservative" facade upon, within.

 

FAIL. NO SALE.

[Viennacon]

I see from posts you made on an abortion discussion that you have some disdain for libertarians, so I’ll guess your are not a libertarian, but just a conservative who thinks candidates who support homosexual marriage can be passable. Are you a fan of Rob Portman?

[Viennacon]

I’m not sure why intelligent libertarians and conservatives need have these wars on FreeRepublic. This thread swings from abortion to homosexual marriage as if its a Reddit topic.

[presidio9]

I think you are confused about what is going on here. You may want to go back and read this entire thread from the beginning if it helps, but allow me to fill you in. This strange person follwed me here from another thread with an unrelated posted by me thread from several years ago about Dick Cheney changing his own stance on gay marriage. Since that time he has been trying desperately to get me to admit that I advocate for the "homosexual agenda."

There's a problem with that unfortunately. A review of my posting history shows exactly the opposite. For that matter, a review of the thread in question shows me doing the exact opposite. In other words, this person in question is a moron. That being said, I always try to be as honest as I can on this website. So, when asked specifically if I think a cadidate advocating for gay marriage definitively disqualifies him or her from being a conservative, my answer is "not necessarily." To answer your question, I was never a big fan of Rob Portman, but I simply refuse to believe in litmus tests. Again, I sincerely doubt that such a candidate exists who can be both a conservative and a true advocate of the "homosexual agenda. But I prefer to take each man on a case-by-case basis, weighing flaws and virtues to get the true measure. Of course Ronald Reagan was a conservative. And nobody is right 100% of the time.

[presidio9]

The friends I've chosen are individuals of moral character I can trust not to corrupt my children, or my children's future.

Good for you. So you reject the principles and actions of Jesus Christ.

Hope that works out for you.

It usually doesn't.

At least we finally know that you haven't got a clue what true conservatism is.

[Viennacon]

That seems fair enough. I assume the poster in question will provide evidence of your support for the homosexual agenda, if that is the case he’s trying to make.

You should take it easy on the libertarians though. I dislike Paultards as much as the next conservative, but honest, God-fearing libertarians can offer good, constructive debate on important issues. I have even been brought around to a couple of libertarian ideas in the past by Freerepublic libertarians. They’re not all bad.

[TArcher]

>>So you reject the principles and actions of Jesus Christ.

It’s called discernment, ya flatulent progressive gas bag.

When Jesus confronted the fiscal conthervatives on the temple steps, he didn’t confuse their abomination of nature for being joyful and “gay”.

Now run along drink hemlock with your homosexual disciples, Socrates.

[TArcher]

>>evidence of your support for the homosexual agenda

It’s self-evident in the friends he’s chosen and his religiously perverse assertion that allowing unrepentant wolves to roam among the sheep is somehow Christ-like.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3015104/posts?page=170#170

NO SALE

[TArcher]

This thread swings from abortion to homosexual marriage as if its a Reddit topic.

Abortion and homosexual "normalization" are both symptoms of the progressive demoralizaion of a culture that's circling the toilet bowl. 

 

 

Dn't need n Weatherman t see which waybama's wind

blws.

 

"Behind the Violence, Says Jane Alpert, Was Sex"

--November 09, 1981--
"The leaders of the Weather Underground, she believes, followed a similar pattern of constantly shifting sexual alliances..."

http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20080637,00.html

"He [Bill Ayers] also writes about the Weathermen's sexual experimentation as they tried to 'smash monogamy.' The Weathermen were 'an army of lovers,' he says, and describes having had different sexual partners, including his best male friend."

Source: New York Times, September 11, 2001: "No Regrets for a Love Of Explosives; In a Memoir of Sorts, a War Protester Talks of Life With the Weathermen"
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F02E1DE1438F932A2575AC0A9679C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1

"...the Weathermen, when not engaged in group sex, committed such revolutionary acts as parading with a Viet Cong flag through a local park on Independence Day and spray-painting the walls of a high school with the slogans, "Off the Pigs," "Viet Cong Will Win," and "F#$k U.S. Imperialism."..."

Campus Wars: The Peace Movement At American State Universities in the Vietnam Era

 

"What happens next bears watching closely, as does the response of the president, ex-Speaker Pelosi, and others on the left.  Encouraged by leftists in the Democratic Party and funded by left-leaning nonprofit organizations and celebrity contributors, Occupy Wall Street may in time morph into something resembling the radical factions of the late 1960s and 1970s."

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/10/predicting_the_weatherman.html

The Osawatomie Coincidence

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2818309/posts

[RedStateRocker]

Give us someone who has their act together on respect for the Constitution, the balance of trade, the budget, and how to deal with enemies foreign and domestic and the culture will survive just fine no matter who or what they are sleeping with. :-)

[presidio9]

When Jesus confronted the fiscal conthervatives on the temple steps, he didn’t confuse their abomination of nature for being joyful and “gay”.

Wow. So in YOUR world fiscal conservatism is an abomination of nature.

Any I'm the "flatulent progressive gas bag?"

[presidio9]

That seems fair enough. I assume the poster in question will provide evidence of your support for the homosexual agenda, if that is the case he’s trying to make.

Don't hold your breath.

You should take it easy on the libertarians though. I dislike Paultards as much as the next conservative, but honest, God-fearing libertarians can offer good, constructive debate on important issues. I have even been brought around to a couple of libertarian ideas in the past by Freerepublic libertarians. They’re not all bad.

There are some conservative issues that are less important to me than others. But you would never find me advocating for a non-conservative issue on this conservative website. "The enemy of my enemy..." and so forth. If Rand Paul were to win the Republican nomination, I would have few reservations about voting for him. I generally agree with his politics, but I am smart enough to recognize him for the stealth libertarian that he is. What I take issue with is the far too numerous libertarians who have nothing better to do than to hang around this website and advocate for libertarian positions as "true conservative viewpoints." Libertarians and conservatives agree about many things, but they typically reach their conclusions by different philosophical means.

[little jeremiah]

I don’t know why you are attacking presidio9’s credentials as a conservative. I presonally do not use, nor advocate the use of, the word “gay” as that is newspeak designed to make homosexuality look happy and normal. But that aside, I know that presidio9 is not in favor of any aspect of the homo agenda. You, OTOH, are a rather recent addition to FR and maybe you do not know his history. Perhaps if you read his comments more carefully, you’d see what I mean.

There can indeed be homosexuals who are conservative in their views, but unfortunately they are few and far between. There are homosexuals who do not buy into the homo agenda and some of them seek help and change, and become cured of their mental illness.

As far as a homo president, we have one right now. And no homosexual is fit to be president, just as they are not fit to be in the military or to foster or adopt children. Homosexuality is a character flaw, a bad habit, a sin, unhealthy, and a type of mental illness. But - people can and do change, and there are countless numbers of former homosexuals.

I don’t think presidio9 would disagree with me on these points, and he is free to voice his opinion and correct me and/or you in any of them.

After reading much of your exchange with presidio9 on this thread, I am wondering if you had another screen name.... Your way over the edge personal attacks on him are senseless and irrational.

[TArcher]

There’s nothing conservative about golden-calf worshiping money changers on the temple steps who believe a homosexual can be a “conservative” POTUS.

Maybe the Rainbowfied McSheeple in the ELCA will buy what you’re selling - but I won’t.

NO SALE

[TArcher]

Name the cultures in history that normalized homosexual behavior and are still surviving, let alone thriving?