Is Free Republic becoming increasingly hostile towards Social Conservatives?

self ^ | self

[watsonfellow]

In the past few months I have noticed that the posters on Free Republic have become more and more hostile towards social conservatism.

And I do not mean indifference (less pro life threads etc) but an outright hostility at pro life and other social conservative causes.

Am I alone in thinking this?

In particular, notice the responses to the thread concerning the recent request by social conservative groups to the FCC to reign in Fox's racey primetime programs.

I wonder if this is becoming only a haven for hedonists and libertarians, and if so, perhaps it would be better for social conservatives to find their own site.

[Bella_Bru]

I just posted that in response to Ol Sparky's call to JimRob to "clean up FR".

Speaking for myself, the drug war has not succeeded. I have never had a tough time finding the green when I wanted it.

[WIMom]

I would, but I don't bother posting too much lately. It's, palie vs Israel, liberal vs conservative, this thread; liberitarian vs republican, and each one of these threads, the disruptors appear. It doesn't matter really what the topic is, it's just another tool the liberals are efffectively using to force a wedge between the conservative movement. I believe it is their hidden agenda, and it's working. This site was created to fight for conservative values and ideals and it is slowing eroding. It's a shame that folks here can't see what is really going on.

[breakem]

Now I understand you. You are a "conservative" who opposes personal freedom and wants the goivernment to outlaw what you consider sin or to protect people from harming their marriage or offending God. And you link liberals to libertarians! Your're the closest thing to a big governmenmt liberal I've seen around here. What's next? Two-way tvs with government monitors to prevent sin in the home?

[Ol' Sparky]

No kidding. Nixon wasn't a principled man. But, he knew opposing drugs was a winning issue and he knew those that favored legalizing drugs were the far-left wing hippie culture that turned off a majority of voters.

[toupsie]

I wonder if this is becoming only a haven for hedonists and libertarians, and if so, perhaps it would be better for social conservatives to find their own site.

Excuse me, Mother Theresa! I guess not following your lifestyle makes me an evil hedonists.

Gripping about what's on TV and then wanting to pack up your toys and leave when people tell you "Change the channel" is childish. No one is forcing you to watch Fox -- except maybe the devil.

Here are some suggested domains for your new website:
www.CantControlMyUrgesBecauseOfFox.tv
www.MorallySuperiorToEveryoneElse.com
www.CensoredRepublic.com
www.TheTVWontStopControllingMyLife.com
www.HolierThanThou.com
www.DontAgreeWithMeGoToHell.com
www.GodLovesOnlyUs.com
www.eTinFoilHatsDirect.com

[Dan from Michigan]

LOL.

[Cogadh na Sith]

Good post Big B:

Y'know, maybe we ought to thank ol' watsonfellow for this whiney thread. I think there may actually be something that the Social Conservatives, Libertarians and Neo Cons may actually agree upon:

"Let the will of the people be expressed through their duly elected representatives and their own individual examples, not through regulatory fiat backed by government weapons."

Ya think?

[breakem]

Since some of us can't see what's going on, we would ask you again to enlighten us. What better was that to list the liberals so the rest of us can be on the alert?

[Bella_Bru]

I'm more into Jell-O.

[rbmillerjr]

So Methodist churches dont fit into your particular schema for the "right" belief in God? How about Catholics? Lutherans? Assembly of God? Brethern or Pentacosts?

Which specific Church does have the absolute truth on all things related to God?

[breakem]

www.uralibertarianliberal.org, www.jailthesinners.com

[OWK]

Legalizing drugs would be a disaster for our nation. It's been tried in several states in the 1970s with marijuana and the public demanded tougher drug laws. The idea of drug legalization will tar the conservative movement and pave the way for Democrats to regain power.

I hate to break it to you Sparky... but drugs weren't even criminalized until the past century...

And we managed to survive and prosper while controlling our own behavior, instead of having government kick down our doors and do it for us.

[Dan from Michigan]

I know the majority of people support the drug war. They are still wrong. Ever hear of Tyranny of the Majority?

[toupsie]

Legalizing drugs would be a disaster for our nation.

I agree. The 30 year War on Drugs has been so effective you rarely hear about teens using drugs these days.

[dead]

It's time Jim Robinson cleaned up this mess. It's embarrassing for conservative web site to filled with idiots wanting to legalize drugs. That will destroy the conservative movement.

You’re the one Mr. Robinson disagrees with on this issue.

Why not save him the trouble and “clean up the mess” yourself by removing "idiot" numero uno? Your presence is becoming "embarrassing" on this conservative website.

[kidd]

Libertarians will be the first to admit that they do not like the Libertarian Party. They have admitted to me that they are a political philosophy that does not have an adequate method of placing their philosophy into action. They like to think of themselves as a sort of free-reigning think tank.

Which is precisely why they come here to complain. They have nowhere else to go.

Yes, they're utopian, insulting and completely humorless. But sometimes they ask the right questions. If you can ignore their solutions, you will find them thought provoking. For example: Is the WOD unconstitutional? (Good question) Lets surrender - make drug legal! (Stupid solution).

[WIMom]

You're idea, you can list them, I don't want to waste my time with them. ;-)

[Ol' Sparky]

Conservatisim about rejecting left-wing professors peddling theories that have absolutely NO foundation in fact. That applies to global warming and evolution, which influenced Hitler, Marx and Stalin.

Evolution is absurd. There is NO fossil record (evidence) and prominent evolutionists like Stephe J. Gould admit there is legitimate evidence for Darwin's theory. So, he came up with an equally absurd and unproveable concept caleld puntucated equilibria to explain away the lack of evidence (evolution happened so fast there is no fossil record). Further, evolution is based on the idea mutations are massive and beneficial while human history shows mutations are almost always detrimential. There are species far too complex with too many interdependent organs and functions to have evolved. Evolution violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics. It's pseudo-science pushed by left-wing scientists.

[TheBigB]

Hey, I agree with you it would be a bad idea. That's why I (and a majority of the nation, I believe) is against it. Every issue has folks on both sides convinced they're correct. If we really wanted to get down to Consitutional issues, then maybe it would be up to each individual state to decide whether or not to legalize. You could make the same argument for abortion. Lots of us take our positions with no thought of what "label" we will wear--Liberal, Conservative, Libertarian, Constitutionalist, etc etc. If we thought about it, I bet most of us could come up with one or two issues wherein we disagree with would be the normal "Conservative" or "Libertarian" or "Constitutionalist" line, regardless of what we consider ourselves. But positions shouldn't be taken based on what others think anyway. If you believe in it, never apologize for it.