In response to:

Why Won't Conservatives Just Drop Social Issues?

Curtis104 Wrote: Oct 23, 2012 12:52 PM
I was told once that you can't vote on morals or your conscience! I replied that, Yea, that's what the German people thought too!
John1921 Wrote: Oct 23, 2012 2:44 PM
Don't compare the German voters of the '30s to Americans today. Whatever the ultimate consequences of their policies, the 'Nation' that National Socialsm aimed to make the dominant nation on earth was the German nation (Germany, Austria, Holland, Scandinavia, Volga-Deutsch, northern Sw4iss, etc.). The Left today aimes to destroy every aspect of Western/Christian/European society and culture. Consider: why does the US Left devote so much effort to drive the Christian religion underground? What is the connection between economic socialism and the anti-Christian/anti-white ACLU? The connection is a fact. Only a Rightist can connect the dots -- conservatives/moderates have zero clues.
MoreFreedom Wrote: Oct 23, 2012 2:44 PM
The place to draw the line regarding where/when government should get involved, is simply when people or their property are harmed by others. That would apply to Nazis harming Jews.

It doesn't apply to people's private consensual sexual acts, one's choice of TV shows, one's choice of using curse words or not, burning an American flag one owns, or other immoral acts that don't harm others or their property. Speech can be disgusting, but I support free speech because the alternative is worse and involves physical force.
SpaceVegetable Wrote: Oct 23, 2012 5:50 PM
I agree. I'm often puzzled by the "persecution complex" I see coming from a lot of religious folks. They honestly seem to believe that every policy they disagree with is meant as an insult or assault on their religion. Maybe I'm just not seeing it, but I know no one who really gives a rat's patootie about who worships who and how, why, where, when, or anything else. I don't get why so many people are so interested in what other people do. If two consenting adults want to get down and dirty, regardless of what gender they are, so what? If your religion says they're going to hell, again, so what. It's not like they're taking you with them. Restricting freedom because you disapprove is a slippery slope toward totalitarianism. Might be nice...
SpaceVegetable Wrote: Oct 23, 2012 5:53 PM
... when it works in your favor, but such things can easily have unintended consequences. The old maxim of "be careful what you wish for" seems to apply here. Think about what would happen if radical Islamists came to power and started implementing their favored moral code. It's the same thing as what you're proposing.

I'm not agreeing with liberals, since many of them do go too far in their fervor, but both sides really need to get a grip.

Good question, and one that was asked of me by a conservative veterinarian friend of mine last week. He is completely on board with conservative fiscal principles, (when applied), but he doesn’t understand WHY we on the “Religious Right” are still concerned about abortion, gay marriage, etc. “You need to drop it”, he said.

Let me try to explain why we don’t and why we shouldn’t. Those of us on the Religious Right, contrary to popular belief, are not interested in taking away rights from those who disagree with us. We’re just trying to maintain what rights we have left....

Related Tags: Conservatives