Posted on 02/07/2002 8:02:41 AM PST by 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.
We would prefer that people keep their problem lifestyles to themselves, but the facts are in. Freepers are sociopaths. They don't make it to church on Sundays because they're out freeping all saturday night, and if they had healthy lives they wouldn't need the freerepublic, now would we?.
Freepers are the pariah class political activists. Most of them smoke, have mental disorders, many just stay home and collect social security insurance. Freepers don't work. They aren't college students, they don't study. Freepers are the Subversive element of society.
The freerepublic was invented by a post war Nazi Scientist working for the u.s. in order to control an potentially dangerous revolutionary subculture. Notice the sign in front says "Addictive!" Their goal was to get you addicted to this forum, and then use it to brainwash you into submission to the rules of the state. If it weren't for this forum, you would probably be forming small liberal militias and planning to overthrow the U.S. Government.
If your addicted to freerepublic I garuntee it is because you have a social problem, and a political subversive. True conservatives would rather read the Bible to their kids, and real politicians don't give a flying f*$k about your comments. They don't read this stuff, but they know they are being effective. Silently swept in patriotic nationalism, slurring at each other while you type. Freepers are hedonist snots.!
Who reads this trash anyway?
I agree 100%. I think we would be wise to be more aware. FR has been so effective and has received so much press lately that we would be naive to think that the liberal "A" team hasn't been called in to plant seeds of division here. My guard is up, and I am glad yours is.
It would decrease Federal employment by over 10,000 and reduce the Fed. budget by at least 50 Billion, not million, billion, per year. I think both of these better society. Also, I think there would be less lying in society: lying by narcs, the innumerable gov't propaganda lies, and (ab)users lying about their habits. Is this going to make society worse?
And in a perfect world.....
I agree with you, returning power to the states and devolving power from the federal governemnt is very important. However, much of what you said, will never come to pass. The game of politics is ever present in our nation today, but politics was just as present during the early days of the Founding Fathers too. If you can't get elected to office, you have no chance of getting your agenda working. If you win elections, you then have the power and influence to effect change. The losers of elections are left out in the cold.
While Reagan believed in our constitutional republic, he also understood that government was a necessity for a civilized people. We may have strayed somewhat, from the original intent of the Founding Fathers, but I don't believe America is on a course of self destruction, as so many doom and gloomers keep predicting.
It is not my intention to do away with government. It is rather to make it work -- work with us, not over us; stand by our side, not ride on our back. Government can and must provide opportunity, not smother it; foster productivity, not stifle it.
First Inaugural Address, January 20, 1981
I totally agree with and support this statement from Ronald Reagan.
You, obviously. Trying to get the thread pulled, are we?
Suffice it to say, there's a lot of work to done.
Hey guy run for office!
hey dax; I'm a father who has put three kids through college, with two still left @ home (1 hs sr, 1 in jr high). Wife and I have made a point to have frequent drug/alcohol conversations with all of them. From this limited experience I can tell you that drugs are much easier for them to get than alcohol. Pushers don't ask for ID.
Who do trust to not sell drugs to kids? Legitimate business people who have a licence/business to protect or a pusher?
Employees of a corporation enjoy varying degrees of protection from liability. Officers and board members, independent of their level of share holdings, are less protected than ordinary employees, and often have insurance to cover their potential liability. But investors are not liable for debt incurred by the corporation beyond what they pay in. This is in effect a freely entered into bargain between the corporation's creditors and the investors, which, it bears repeating due to Roscoe's confusion, has nothing to do with the liability of officers, board members, and ordinary employees, consultants, etc.
No LAW is ever the WHOLE solution. But take away the law that prohibits murder. See what happens. When it comes to abortion someone is ALWAYS killing an innocent human being. It was a law that made it legal. It will have to be a law that makes it illegal. After they make it illegal, then we can deal with it like we do with other murder cases.
I didn't say that, and I don't believe it. However, telling the truth wouldn't land them in jail like it can now. The official lies bother me a lot more, because they create disrespect for all laws and gov't.
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.