I don't think we're ever going to best them at their own game, though. It's like thinking that the "saving graces of western materialism" are going to change the hearts or minds of militant atheists.
I just don't see how you rationalize compromising the truth so as to deliver it in incremental portions. It seems the most utterly self-defeating tack I could possibly imagine taking.
I also wish to avoid anything resembling an apology or shame over my acceptance of the Scientifically Proven Fact that every human life begins at conception or the moral truth that taking an innocent human life is always evil.
When the left elects their representatives based on the stated Personal Convictions of the man or woman regarding abortion, the environment, gay rights, nuclear power, etc. etc. they rightfully expect and consistently receive votes that comport perfectly as promised.
It's the right who elects "pro-lifers" who perpetually cite "political realities", their need to appeal to women in order to get re-elected or the fact that -- horrors! -- Gore might get some good press coverage from the liberal media to EXCUSE their perpetual failure to vote in accordance with the personal convictions by which we decided to vote for them.
Something's not quite right here.
Until we get that much straightened out ... until we have a leadership willing to emulate the Left's Litmus Tests and lockstep voting and CONSISTENCY, I see no reason to dumb down the rank and file.
I don't want to best them at their own game. I want to make them play MY game.
I just don't see how you rationalize compromising the truth so as to deliver it in incremental portions
You're putting words in my mouth that don't belong there. I will never compromise the truth. If I don't want the truth heard being said by me I will say nothing, although I can't think of a situation where I WOULDN'T want the truth heard.
I also wish to avoid anything resembling an apology or shame over my acceptance of the Scientifically Proven Fact that every human life begins at conception or the moral truth that taking an innocent human life is always evil.
I agree with you and will NOT debate those topics on this thread. If you want to debate the tactics and strategies of DEBATING this topic I have no problems. I won't debate the TOPIC on this thread.
When the left elects their representatives based on the stated Personal Convictions of the man or woman regarding abortion, the environment, gay rights, nuclear power, etc. etc. they rightfully expect and consistently receive votes that comport perfectly as promised.
I'm not sure that I understand this statement.
It seems that you are saying that the left gets votes and elects reps because they say that it's perfectly all right to have your own opinion on subjects. Those that agree with those opinions vote for that representative.
If that is the case, it seems to me that all we have to do is get the conservative opinion out there being heard with all the clamor that the liberals use and the people that agree with the conservative point of view will vote the conservatives in. That could be a part of the problem. Conservatives, many times, will not vote for a candidate unless they are in 100% agreement with EVERYTHING that candidate says. Not just the larger issues but EVERYTHING.
That is just one point of what should be a multi pronged attack. What was being deciminated at the FRiva conference were some ways to get the other tines on the pitchfork to move in concert with that one prong.