Have conservatives become more socially liberal than "liberals"?

a reply to: RomeByFire

It's a conversation about liberals and conservatives, not R's and D's.

originally posted by: SBMcG
I cannot tell you what liberals are or are not anymore, because their very ideology is based upon wealth re-distribution (theft), the removal of merit-based advancement in our society (everyone loses), their hatred of traditional America (2nd Amendment rights, nuclear family, Christianity, etc...), and their inexplicable support of everything that is bad for America (which is why they never hold power for long).

But I can tell you how this constitutional conservative feels about individual rights...

I follow the literal interpretation of the Constitution as defined through the Original Intent of the Framers. The document itself was clearly intended to be a strong limiting factor on the size and scope of government going forward, as affirmed over and over again in the writings of the Framers.

I have never seen anything in the Constitution, Bill of Rights, or writings of the Framers that would give government the "right" to think for you, tell you what to think (and say), tell you what to do with your body, or tell you where you can and cannot go. However, neither does it absolve individuals from responsibility and the consequences of their choices and actions.

As an agnostic I don't really have a dog in the religious freedom hunt, but the Constitution clearly states that the Federal government shall play no role in the establishment of any religion. I also acknowledge that America itself was certainly founded by men who overwhelmingly had very strong Judeo-Christian leanings and were not shy about it.

The Federal government has no business intruding in any way into your personal life. The individual should be free to live the way they choose. However, if that lifestyle creates an economic or social impediment to that individual or others, that is 100% their choice and responsibility. One individual cannot be forced to "accept" the personal choices of another if they find them aberrant.

Obviously, there are hundreds of individual social and economic issues we could address here, but as a basic rule-of-thumb from the perspective of constitutional conservatism, if it is not addressed specifically in the Constitution, it's a states rights issue.

Maximum freedom, personal responsibility, minimal government interference. That was the Original Intent of our Framers.

From a fellow agnostic .... simply brilliant.

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: jimmyx

The founding fathers never tried to shut down speech they didn't like.

Well except for speech from a Black man or a woman or a poor person who doesn't own land or well literally anyone except rich land owning white men.

And in the 21st century who is considered to be 3/5's of a person ?

Bankers,gun owners,ceo's and the list goes on.

Liberal can think they are better than the right.

They can delude themselves in to thinking they are just so tolerant.

Everyone knows it's just self delusion.

so the right's more tolerant?.....hahaha.....thanks I needed a laugh today...talk about being delusional

We sure as snip didn't go around destroying property and throwing things, and beating people with bike locks because our guy lost in 2008.

So yeah the right is more tolerant.

And liberals don't go around shooting up abortion clinics and protesting dead servicemen's funerals with signs about "thank God for dead soldiers."

This is fun!

No they blow snip up like Bill Aryes.

That is when they're not rioting in ferguson, and places like Berkeley.

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: jimmyx

The founding fathers never tried to shut down speech they didn't like.

Well except for speech from a Black man or a woman or a poor person who doesn't own land or well literally anyone except rich land owning white men.

And in the 21st century who is considered to be 3/5's of a person ?

Bankers,gun owners,ceo's and the list goes on.

Liberal can think they are better than the right.

They can delude themselves in to thinking they are just so tolerant.

Everyone knows it's just self delusion.

so the right's more tolerant?.....hahaha.....thanks I needed a laugh today...talk about being delusional

We sure as snip didn't go around destroying property and throwing things, and beating people with bike locks because our guy lost in 2008.

So yeah the right is more tolerant.

And liberals don't go around shooting up abortion clinics and protesting dead servicemen's funerals with signs about "thank God for dead soldiers."

This is fun!

No they blow snip up like Bill Aryes.

That is when they're not rioting in ferguson, and places like Berkeley.

So...just gonna deflect and stick to the whole dogmatic response then rather than acknowledge that maybe you right wing nutjobs aren't the picture of tolerance you pretend you are?

a reply to: Shamrock6

Well a real liberal wouldn't care what I say.

So much for tolerance.

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: jimmyx

The founding fathers never tried to shut down speech they didn't like.

Well except for speech from a Black man or a woman or a poor person who doesn't own land or well literally anyone except rich land owning white men.

And in the 21st century who is considered to be 3/5's of a person ?

Bankers,gun owners,ceo's and the list goes on.

Liberal can think they are better than the right.

They can delude themselves in to thinking they are just so tolerant.

Everyone knows it's just self delusion.

so the right's more tolerant?.....hahaha.....thanks I needed a laugh today...talk about being delusional

We sure as snip didn't go around destroying property and throwing things, and beating people with bike locks because our guy lost in 2008.

So yeah the right is more tolerant.

I know you won't look at this site, because it disproves your statement, but here it is anyway
www.dailykos.com...

highlights include...timothy mcvay and Olympic bombing, among many others

a reply to: neo96

You don't care what we say either.

a reply to: jimmyx

So you had to go to the 90s to supposedly prove a point about current events?

That's a fail.

Even bigger the Daily Kos.

Daily Kos /ˈkoʊs/ is an outlet for American political blogging.[2][3][4][5] It functions as a discussion forum and group blog for a variety of netroots activists whose efforts are primarily directed toward influencing and strengthening socially progressive policies and candidates. Additionally, the site features a participatory political encyclopedia ("DKosopedia"), glossaries, and other content

en.wikipedia.org...

Liberal Propaganda.

Or more aptly called FAKE NEWS in the modern vernacular.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Shamrock6

Well a real liberal wouldn't care what I say.

So much for tolerance.

Then again I'm not a liberal. Fake, real, or anywhere in between. Just because I'm not a wingnut such as yourself is no reason to assume that means I'm a liberal.

I know it would be easier on you if you could, but I'm not.

Pointing out your ridiculously rooted grip on rightwing dogma isn't intolerant. You're just intolerant of your own bias and intolerance.

Yea, I can play that game too

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: jimmyx

The founding fathers never tried to shut down speech they didn't like.

Well except for speech from a Black man or a woman or a poor person who doesn't own land or well literally anyone except rich land owning white men.

And in the 21st century who is considered to be 3/5's of a person ?

Bankers,gun owners,ceo's and the list goes on.

Liberal can think they are better than the right.

They can delude themselves in to thinking they are just so tolerant.

Everyone knows it's just self delusion.

so the right's more tolerant?.....hahaha.....thanks I needed a laugh today...talk about being delusional

We sure as snip didn't go around destroying property and throwing things, and beating people with bike locks because our guy lost in 2008.

So yeah the right is more tolerant.

I know you won't look at this site, because it disproves your statement, but here it is anyway
www.dailykos.com...

highlights include...timothy mcvay and Olympic bombing, among many others

Timothy mcveigh was an anarchist thats why he attacked the government. And Eric Rudolph was a religious nut case i wouldnt consider either of these two the right leaning.

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Shamrock6

Well a real liberal wouldn't care what I say.

So much for tolerance.

Then again I'm not a liberal. Fake, real, or anywhere in between. Just because I'm not a wingnut such as yourself is no reason to assume that means I'm a liberal.

I know it would be easier on you if you could, but I'm not.

Pointing out your ridiculously rooted grip on rightwing dogma isn't intolerant. You're just intolerant of your own bias and intolerance.

Yea, I can play that game too

Your right people get so stuck in us against them they dont realize not everyone is like that.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: jimmyx

So you had to go to the 90s to supposedly prove a point about current events?

That's a fail.

Even bigger the Daily Kos.

Daily Kos /ˈkoʊs/ is an outlet for American political blogging.[2][3][4][5] It functions as a discussion forum and group blog for a variety of netroots activists whose efforts are primarily directed toward influencing and strengthening socially progressive policies and candidates. Additionally, the site features a participatory political encyclopedia ("DKosopedia"), glossaries, and other content

en.wikipedia.org...

Liberal Propaganda.

Or more aptly called FAKE NEWS in the modern vernacular.

Well..30 years starting from the 90s would bring us up to current events. I guess math isn't a thing way out there on the far right?

Calling things that actually happened and have been proven to have happened "fake news" doesn't really count as fake news. I mean, when Donnie uses the term he's talking about actual fake news being made up to smear him. He doesn't use the term to describe factual events that y'know...are true.

a reply to: Shamrock6

So Im a wing nut eh ?

Must be a bad one.

Since I don't go around throwing things, beating people up, and trying to erase people that disagree with me from existence.

Everyone knows what the word means. Liberal.

Simple means FREEDOM.

The freedom to do,think,act.

The problem is like everything else in American politics is the word has been bastardized in to something entirely else.

Those that run around calling themselves it should by all rights stop doing so.

a reply to: neo96

if only you had read further down the page, past the 90's section....by the way, wiki also has a "right-wing terrorism" page.....

a reply to: Shamrock6

Well..30 years starting from the 90s would bring us up to current events. I guess math isn't a thing way out there on the far right?

If Bin Laden was a manufacture villain.

Why do people buy the office 'story' about McVeigh?

Lefties and liberals are two entirely different things. Lefties actively fight against much of what liberals stand for, tolerance and free speech being obvious examples.

And it's quite stupid as they've split their own party and forced your average liberal farther to the right. Most liberals I know don't identify with nor understand what's become of their party where the face of it has taken on a far left radical, lefty stance.

Been a member of the GOP since the 80's when I signed up for the Army in Combat Arms (11 Bang Bang).

Funny how I was basically run out of my own party with G W Bush as president because I did not support going into Iraq. I was called unpatriotic among other things during those times.

Then McCain lost and the party purity tests came. I remember getting a questionnaire from the RNC which also was wanting money. I told them to remove me from their lists because the questionnaire was nothing but questions that had multiple choice answers which every single one of those answers were geared toward obstructionism. That is not how I envisioned a Constitutional Republic to function.

So basically I was run out of my own party. There is no place for a liberal republican like myself and I am of a dying breed.

What I see now is both parties are intolerant of the others ideas. Nobody has the high ground. I guess that is what happens when the voting population, which has a variety of ideas being shoved into either the R or the D. By design or not, this country is going down hill because of it.

Oh well... I got a good wife, a paid for home and kids that are supporting themselves marvelously. I guess I shouldn't ask for anything better than that.

Or should I?

a reply to: dragonridr

i wouldnt consider either of these two the right leaning.

The point is lumping liberals and conservatives with extremists.

a reply to: neo96

Of course you don't.

According to you, nobody on the right ever does that so why do you feel the need to affirmatively state it? Projecting, maybe?

Hmm.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Shamrock6

Well..30 years starting from the 90s would bring us up to current events. I guess math isn't a thing way out there on the far right?

If Bin Laden was a manufacture villain.

Why do people buy the office 'story' about McVeigh?

Bin Laden wasn't even mentioned in that article dude. Why don't you stop manufacturing strawman arguments to attack and try sticking to the subject at hand?

You're becoming almost a parody of your old self at this point, amigo.