[eno_]

No, just that you can be against something without calling the police. in some cases, like the Drug War, it's a bad idea to get the police involved in the first place. In other cases, like abortion, you may find that laws are not the whole solution.

Constitutionalism is not libertarianism. A constitutional government may LOOK like a Libertarian's dream, but ask any Libertarian and they will not want to stop there.

Same with hard-line social conservatives. On FR, your causes take a back seat to constitutional government.

[watsonfellow]

Although I expect tons of flaming for this....

[Ratatoskr]

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.

Yes, that would be a splendid idea. Go find your own site, and best of luck to you.

[riley1992]

It does not make you a 'hedonist' to want less government intervention. If you continually want the government to mandate what can be on television and when, you don't sound like a conservative in the first place.

[Ms. AntiFeminazi]

You are not alone.

[tonycavanagh]

re : Is Free Republic becoming increasingly hostile towards Social Conservatives?.

No

This is just an aggressive site which is why I like it, on any thread on any subject you will get flame wars going, all you do is know your facts, stand your ground and beat the other side down.

Cheers Tony

[Cogadh na Sith]

Oh, you sanctimonious pecksniff....

Social conservatism is fine as long as it isn't dispensed from the barrel of a state-owned gun.

This is good social conservatism:

"I don't watch those damned racy Fox shows. I won't let my kids watch them--I'm gonna get my like-minded friends together and we are going to contact the advertisers on those shows..."

This is bad social conservatism:

"No one should watch those damned racy Fox shows. I'm gonna contact the government so that the government can show up and shut them down by force if necessary"

Is that so hard?

[steve50]

Hmm, I thought the place was going the other extreme. Seems like an increase of the "my party is in charge and they can do anything they D@mn well please" types to me. Toe the party line or you get a DU disruptor label.

[Cyber Liberty]

Where can I get a good deal on a wheel of Gouda?

[Cogadh na Sith]

He's baaaaaaack....

[eastsider]

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.

I don't mean to sound rude, but then what? Find our own state? Find our own country? At least we get to engage on this site.

[Phantom Lord]

I don't think that members of FR are flaming or attacking "social conservatives" with increasing regularity.

I will say that I have gotten into it with a few people you would classify as "social conservatives" and I have not held back. Their interests seemed to be more in having a theocracy than a representative republic.

[sinkspur]

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.

How very strange. The social conservatives want to use the power of nanny government to do the job THEY should be doing, which is to monitor and turn off objectionable television.

And a whiny thread like this does you no good either.

[js1138]

There just might be a difference between someone who orders his own life along conservative principles, and someone who wants the government imprisoning people for personal vices.

[breakem]

Based on the continuing homo-bashing threads and yesteraday's pornography thread and the religious threads, I'd say you doest protest too much.

PS: some of us grew up with Buckley and Goldwater, before Falwell and Robertson, and we believe in the freedoms expressed in the declaration and the constitution. We believe government should not stand on the side of the road and point fingers at sinners. This is the traditional meaning of conservative before it became a refuge for some religious who want their idea of sin prohibited by the government.

If you want solace, flag cultural jihad and others of his ilk. They're still here in force.

[Snuffington]

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

If there has been such a trend, I attribute it to this: A lot of social conservatives left FR after the Buchanan Brigade debacle, while most of the socially liberal libertarians stayed around. That skewed the social conservative / social liberal ratio on a lot of threads.

Additionally, a lot of social conservatives on FR still tie their conservatism to causes like opposition to Bush and the Republican Party. That's obviously going to annoy most Freepers, who are largely Republicans and Bush supporters.

[Djarum]

Boohoo, you don't share my belief system, get lost.

No thanks.

[Psalm 73]

Oh, you mean politically active Christians?
The whole world is hostile to us - but then that is what Jesus promised to those who follow Him.
We enter in through the narrow gate, my friend.
(And remember Ephesians 6:10-19). <><

[HairOfTheDog]

The problem is that many are looking for a fight rather than a discussion - Some are here for flame wars as entertainment. There is a not-so-subtle difference between trying to win the hearts and minds of people through ideas, and simply trying to win.

JMHO

[dead]

perhaps it would be better for social conservatives to find their own site.

Kitchen too hot-diddly-ot for you, Ned?