It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

POLI: Caveat Emptor: The Selling of The GOP's Soul To The Religious Right.

page: 1
24
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 07:46 PM
link   
"The middle of the road is all of the usable surface. The extremes, right and left, are in the gutters.", Dwight D. Eisenhower
Election 2004 was a stunning victory for the Republican Party, not only securing the Presidency, but further control of the entire legislative branch for at least two more years. With the credit of this victory however being given to the Religious Right (better described as Christian political extremists), long looming fractures just beneath the surface of the GOP are seeing the light of day. The future of the party may be at stake now as an epic battle forms between the conservatives who are beholden to and co-opted by the Religious Right and the moderates of the party.

 


While the views of the religious right wing of the party receive most of the mainstream press, the moderates are an essential part of the Republican Party. The relationship is often tense as evidenced by the harsh rhetoric and rancor over Senator Arlen Specter’s Judiciary committee chairmanship and his pro-choice stance. The fractures have always been there but really came to the surface five years ago.

The Rise of the RINO’s

RINO’s or Republicans in name only was a term coined by right wing elements to describe members of the party who did not tow the religious right’s line. The label has been stuck to people as if branding them lepers. The most notable of the RINO’s was Arizona Senator and 2000 Presidential candidate John McCain. It was no coincidence that RINO’s were featured during the Republican National Convention yet seldom heard from within public party circles since. The ultimate RINO is California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. Arnold represents the ultimate nightmare for the co-opted Conservatives in the GOP. A popular larger than life figure who has risen to power without selling himself out at least to the state or national party machine that is controlled by the co-opted conservatives. Even as rumors swirled that he intended to run, the fundamentalist controlled pundits began to take aim. Rush Limbaugh labeled Arnold (a life long Republican) a middle of the road Democrat. The conservative political journal American Spectator went further citing his support for abortion, gay rights, and some gun control. Despite his victory over a sitting Democratic Governor in the nations most populous state, Arnold remains a target for the co-opted conservatives within the Republican party. 2008 will find the party at a real cross roads as no potential presidential successor is waiting in the Vice Presidents office. With moderates such as former New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani and New York Gov. George Pataki being mentioned by some (both are pro choice) to be potential candidates, the internal struggle to conform to the demands of these fringe religious groups may become more and more confrontational.

The Religious Right Wing Agenda and Conservative Republicans

Part of the well executed strategy of Karl Rove was to make sure that the core religious right voted in record numbers. And vote they did. More than enough to give the President a margin of victory that would stand. Putting aside the persistent allegations of voter fraud, for even if most were true, Bush would have still won the day given the numbers. However, all of this came at a cost. These groups now expect that their message, their values, and their ways of life should now become the dominant force in the Republicans agenda.

Republicans at all levels will have "hell to pay" for cynically using the "pro-Life" movement if they don't "save" Terri Schiavo.

Randall Terry, Founder Operation Rescue and The Society for Truth and Justice

What exactly are the religious right after? There are a multitude of goals and objectives that these groups will profess or even deny striving for. Some of these include: (Taken from the 2004 Texas Republican Party Platform)


  1. An Affirmation that the United States is a Christian nation
  2. Our Party pledges to exert its influence to restore the original intent of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and dispel the myth of the separation of Church and State.
  3. Exclusion from the Americans with Disabilities act “persons with infectious diseases, substance addiction, learning disabilities, behavior disorders, homosexual practices and mental stress."
  4. That it should be a felony to issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple "and for any civil official to perform a marriage ceremony for a same-sex couple."
  5. Defining marriage as a "God-ordained, legal and moral commitment only between a natural man and a natural woman," the platform supports a federal constitutional amendment that bans same-sex marriage and opposes "granting of benefits to people who represent themselves as domestic partners without being legally married."
  6. The platform opposes hate-crime laws (which increase penalties for crimes that target people based on hatred for their religion, race, sexual orientation and other characteristics).
  7. The platform condemns homosexuality, supports criminalizing sexual relations between consenting adults of the same sex and calls on Congress to "withhold jurisdiction from the federal courts from cases involving sodomy"
  8. The state party platform calls for a ban on stem-cell research (which experts believe holds the promise of cures for a variety of diseases like Parkinson's and Alzheimer's).
  9. The party calls for schools to emphasize "Judeo-Christian principles" and for including Bible-based "theories" like "intelligent design" about the origin of humans in science textbooks.

www.texasgop.org...

These are but a few of the many goals expressed and put forth by the Religious Right, not at all in lock stock with moderate conservatives in the Republican Party. Perhaps the biggest concern for moderates is the pervasive nature of these “soldiers of God”. They have begun carefully at the grassroots level and are progressively trying to gain control in every aspect of Republican politics.

The Rise of the Christian Coalition

“How dare you maintain that those who believe in the Judeo-Christian values are better qualified to govern America than Hindus and Muslims?' My simple answer is, "Yes, they are."

Pat Robertson In His Book “The New World Order”

One of the biggest religious based political groups the Christian Coalition has its roots in the failed 1988 presidential run of Pat Robertson. Using his campaign lists, the coalition was organized to be as the website claims a "nonpartisan political advocacy group". Unspoken in its charter is its true to life mission, which is to serve as a financial and theological bulldozer to drive the Republican Party further and further right. It is well known for its voter guides which are distributed to area churches and can make a difference in close elections. However, with the nomination of Ralph Reed who ran the organization from 1989 to 1997, the Coalition underwent a transformation.

"I want to be invisible. I do guerrilla warfare. I paint my face and travel at night. You don't know its over until you're in a body bag. You don't know until election night."

Ralph Reed, speaking to the Norfolk Virginian-Pilot, 11/9/91

By adopting stealth tactics the Christian Coalition as well as other Religious Right organizations have quietly carried out a campaign to take control of the nation's public education systems. It is estimated that over 2250 or 15% of the school boards are now controlled by supporters of these groups. The backlash is beginning to be felt. As reported here on ATSNN, a judge ordered a Georgia School District to remove “Evolution is a theory” stickers from biology textbooks. This is a perfect example of a School Board operating with an higher agenda.

"We are not coming up against just human beings to beat them in elections. We're going to be coming up against spiritual warfare."

Pat Robertson

The "15 Percent" solution is an apt description of the stealth tactics that have been employed and was outlined in a 1993 article by Greg Goldin. Realizing that a frontal assault was doomed to fail, they actively embarked upon a campaign to elect supporters into any and all positions within the cities, counties, states, and state party machines.

"What the Christian right spends a lot of time doing, is going after obscure party posts. They try to control the party apparatus in each county. We have a lot to fear from these people. They want to set up a theocracy in America"

Marc Wolin, former congressional candidate.

Perhaps more important, however, is that the Religious Right controls 2,250 school boards, approximately 15% of the nation's total. Critics charge that such control has come about through "stealth tactics".


In a stealth campaign, groups such as the Christian Coalition target low-turnout local races and promote their candidates, covering up any organizational ties. The voters are thus presented with a seemingly harmless secular candidate. Once placed in office by the combination of conservative Christian support and widespread voter apathy, the candidate then abruptly and vehemently pushes the agenda of the Religious Right. In this manner, the Coalition and its allies fool the voters into electing candidates based on partial truths.
www.digitas.harvard.edu...


The Federal, Supreme Court, and the specter of "Activist Judges"

"Some activist judges and local officials have made an aggressive attempt to redefine marriage."

President George W. Bush

One of the biggest goals of the Religious Right is an orchestrated takeover of the entire federal judiciary system. The key to this is Senate confirmation of nominated candidates that support their agenda. While the U.S. Supreme Court is considered the "brass ring", the control of the appellate court systems also is deemed essential to promoting the Religious Right agenda. To further the assault on the judiciary, the groups have revised a scare tactic from the past. Given their propensity to slap an ugly label on any and all opposition groups, the Judges that ear their ire for supporting gay marriage or the fundamental right to chose, are quickly labeled “activist judges.” Several prominent religious oriented conservatives including the ill fated Supreme Court nominee Robert H. Bork have decried activist judges as staging a coup d’etat of the the American system. These black robed guerrillas they claim are forcing a lifestyle socialism upon the country. Does anybody see the irony in this belief? These same groups who are vilifying judges demand total adherence to their agenda or the label will be slapped on. The Religious Right and their splinter groups have started a broad campaign to both push judges passing a Christian extremist litmus test as well as trying other routs to attain victory. One such measure is the Judicial Accountability Amendment. Promoters of the site proclaim that court decisions like abortion, The Ten Commandments Monument, sodomy, the 2000 Florida Presidential Election, prayer in schools, slavery, gun control, affirmative action, and most of the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, are not constitutional.(www.judicialamendment.com...). The amendment to the Constitution would hold Judges accountable for a set of standards that the Religious Right and their supporters would set. The owner of the site describes himself as a non-profit lobbying organization. However, given the plethora of religious based topics on his site, his intentions are clear.

The Looming War Within

Moderates in the party are rapidly being left behind and while many GOP politicians may appear to play lip service to the religious forces massing at the gates, their agenda is being forwarded despite objections within the party. Should the Democrats nominate a candidate that is middle of the road it may appeal to the liberal and moderate elements of the Republican party. That alone may be enough to doom a candidate favorable to the Religious Right and their supporters. The time has come for the moderates of the party to retake control. This is not what the party of Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt founded. This is no longer the party that talks about welcoming everybody under the Republican umbrella. The only resolution if the moderates fail to steer the party back to its true roots is a break off to a more moderate third party that will have the ability to challenge both parties on its own merits. This party would be much more in line with the progressive and foreword thinking of the moderates of the party. The Religious Right wing conservatives would now command a party free of interference and would be able to fail or prosper on the merits of their value and teachings. However, even the most hardened ultra right winger realizes that if the party loses the moderates, they will look like and be perceived as a John Birch Society clone of sorts.

My own ties to the GOP run far. While my mother was a staunch Democrat, my father was a fierce independent and never voted for a major party. Much like their mixed religious backgrounds, my parents did not preach one group over another and consequently my sister and I were left to decide on the parties own merits. In 1988 I voted for the first time in a presidential election. I soon became involved in the California Collage Republicans. We had a very large chapter and in a quirk of fate, I found myself running for the President of the statewide organization.

It was quite an education. I actually had my own PAC "Friends of Fred" for the run and raised a lot of money to run (5 figures). It's considered a plum for candidates because it represents a huge grass roots force for campaigning. I was considered a throw away candidate by the moderate leadership because the ultra conservative candidate was pretty strong, had YAF's (Young Americans for Freedom) endorsement, and out raised me by about 100K etc.

I had to give a speech in front of 3000 people with 5 minutes notice and since then I've never had an issue with public speaking. About 75 percent of the crowd was openly hostile. It's quite a start to look over a huge crowd and see so many signs that people hate you even if you never have met them. The debate was even more fun and I almost pulled off the impossible with 45% of the vote (Not bad for 90K total ballots). If the moderate elements had supported my campaign from the get go, I may have won.

I developed an insight into the workings of the party and I have managed to maintain many contacts within. It is a fear of this relentless swing right that has me and many other Republicans worried. Now while I have no doubt than many of you respond with a typical “But you voted for Bush" or ‘I told you so” etc., given the choice of candidates, many of us had no choice. But did anyone really?



Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
www.theocracywatch.org...
www.webpan.com...

[edit on 3/25/05 by FredT]

[edit on 3/25/05 by FredT]

[edit on 3/25/05 by FredT]

[edit on 3/5/09 by FredT]




posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 09:09 PM
link   
Ha, i told you so!


Good post.


But seriousely, even if Kerry was voted into government, American foreign policy would not have changed. After all, Clinton sent 2 carrier battlegroups to back up Taiwan.

Yes i agree with you that if the Republican party goes down this path then the Democrats would win with another Clinton-esque (Bill) candidate. The Democrats would be smart not to nominate Hillary but rather a governor of a red state.



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 10:09 PM
link   
A very mature post Fred, I salute you for this.

I've got to agree, The Republican Party has already entered its own civil war and with the currently disorganised democratic base it is largely ignoring its own problems, underestimating those who are helping the problems along.

Bush "sold his soul" to the christian right to win this election, but it's really more about the long term health of the party. The promises he made have brought new groups in but every group has their own agenda and merry hell is raised when they do not get their slice of the pie. Political debts have to be paid, these guys don't mess around, if a Democrat offers them a deal then they'll just as quickly take that.

A civil war in the party will erupt after the 2006 mid-terms. With no more Bush then a whole new set of family values are going to be hammered out and with no clear frontrunner for candidate it could be a bloody and divisive primary season.

The high point will end, it's already starting with the Schiavo case. The nightmare scenario is a clear frontrunner for the Democratic nominee in 2008 and a lack of a significant opposition from the Republican party. There exists no candidate with the religious pull of George Bush and no prospect of one, the Iraq war will be long forgotten and the fear of terrorism will turn to paranoia or apathy.

America will find its centre again.



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
The time has come for the moderates of the party to retake control. This is not what the party of Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt founded. This is no longer the party that talks about welcoming everybody under the Republican umbrella. The only resolution if the moderates fail to steer the party back to its true roots is a break off to a more moderate third party that will have the ability to challenge both parties on its own merits. This party would be much more in line with the progressive and foreword thinking of the moderates of the party. The Religious Right wing conservatives would now command a party free of interference and would be able to fail or prosper on the merits of their value and teachings. However, even the most hardened ultra right winger realizes that if the party loses the moderates, they will look like and be perceived as a John Birch Society clone of sorts.





posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 10:29 PM
link   
Great post FredT...


The only thing i will say, is the next election will be the last chance for a viable third party to exist...

libertarians... embrace your middle road republican brothers and UNITE!

All you non religious Republicans... Red rover red rover...Come right over...



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 06:59 AM
link   
I keep trying to tell the Repubicans and conservatives I know who will at least listen that us on the left are fully aware that there are plenty of good and decent conservatives and good and decent republicans out there, something most of them would be hard pressed to admit about us liberals, but what they don't understand is that their party has been taken over by extremists and that they are being taken for a ride. I presonally have no problem with conservatives, we both see alot of the same problems facing our country but we differ only in the solutions. Only ideas keep us apart.



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 07:17 AM
link   
WOW, a very good post FredT. I am too concerned with the state of the republican party, i think its high time conservatives kick out the christian element that has taken over like a cancer and that has so successfully indoctrinated into the american people that they are the "real americans"

thanks,
drfunk



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 10:04 AM
link   
(I copied this over from a letter I wrote to a friend. That's why the columns are weird)

I am simply blown away by the fact that, apparently,
an innocent american citizen does not have the right
to live. When dozens of judges rule that it's ok to
let someone starve to death because, to quote
directly, they have been given "due process before the
law" our society is clearly in its end stages of
development.

I am also shocked by how readily this nation seems to
accept things like forced euthanasia, the creation of
embryos for research purposes, and the general notion
that a human being does not have value beyond their
mere utility or capacity for having 'the good life'.
Innocent human life has, in western society, clearly
become expendable. We are no longer individuals
created in the image of a higher intelligence or
force... we are cogs... biochemical robots that can be
retired when we no longer function at 100% capacity
(and to those of you who might argue that a human
being only has dignity if they can choose their own
death, let me remind you that there is no proof that
this woman ever wanted to be killed if she fell into a
state of minimal consciousness. Some judges and a
seedy husband... along with talking heads on tv...
decided that).

I also find it disturbing that the same people who
base their entire political platform on rights --
liberals -- have apparently decided that it's ok for
some judges to decide to put a woman to death who has
committed no crime. Apparently their adherence to the
pro-choice side of the abortion debate is so strong
that they cannot bring themselves to defend innocent
life in any form. I wonder if, down the road, they
will realize that the rights they love so much are
based on the notion that human beings have special
value? I wonder if, when it is too late, they will
realize that no human will have rights when all humans
have been reduced to the level of mindless animals or
soul-less machines?

Ultimately, the road from embryo harvesting and forced
euthanasia to eugenics and slavery is not long.
Unfortunately... we're already half way down it.

Call me a "kook" if you want.

and Fred, I hate to break it to you, but.... the GOP rose to ascendance on the backs of the "religious right". You will find that, come election time, there are indeed very few libertarians out there.



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 10:16 AM
link   
I pointed out in another ATS thread some of the activities I believe citizens need to do to empower themselves. The 'religious right' and other influence groups do these on a routine basis. Citizens of any country that don't paricipate in their countries governing process lose out.

Don't bemoan and whine. Quit being a complainer and become a citizen!

When people lose their country to pressure groups they complain and hang out at ATS and other places


Get involved.



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT

I developed an insight into the workings of the party and I have managed to maintain many contacts within. It is a fear of this relentless swing right that has me and many other Republicans worried. Now while I have no doubt than many of you respond with a typical “But you voted for Bush" or ‘I told you so” etc., given the choice of candidates, many of us had no choice. But did anyone really?


Nice thread. I always love hearing all the republicans reaction now that the election is over. Hell you lay with dogs you catch fleas huh?

Yes we all had a choice and still do. I think a regime change is in order here in the USA.

It's exactly what our founding fathers would call for as well.

It's almost as if the American people have forgotten the word revolution even exist'...let alone (gasp) consider it...

[edited due to ineptitude]

[edit on 26-3-2005 by 1wintermute1]



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 10:55 AM
link   
Again,

Are you guys not getting the point of all of this? You're talking about a 'revolution' when it is clear that many of you have gotten what you wanted: A society where human beings are valued based on their 'utility' and 'quality of life' alone. Bush and the 'religious right' lost. The population -- and many on ATS -- seem to think that human beings do not have inherent value. In Florida we have a situation where a woman is being put to death because some people -- other than herself -- have decided that her life is no longer valuable. That, my friends, is a clear triumph for those who hate the religious right. It is a clear triumph for those who think that a human's value is a matter of taste instead of innateness.

So why do you want a 'revolution'? Your side won. The courts, apparently, are filled with people who do not believe in the sanctity of human life. You would only be revolting against them... people whom you apparently agree with. Don't you get it? The american people believe that it's ok to starve someone to death if it is judged that their life is no longer valuable. The american people think that it's ok to create embryos solely for the sake of experimentation. The american people think that anyone who believes in human value is a 'religious nut'.

Don't you get it? Your side won. The sanctity of an innocent human being -- and with it, human rights -- are a matter of debate, now.

And, sorry, you guys are not fighting for rights or freedom. By denigrating human life you are, in the long run, conceding your own rights.

You'll realize that when some doctors gas most of you for being 'mentally deranged' conspiracy nuts.



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by onlyinmydreams


Again,

Are you guys not getting the point of all of this? You're talking about a 'revolution' when it is clear that many of you have gotten what you wanted: A society where human beings are valued based on their 'utility' and 'quality of life' alone. Bush and the 'religious right' lost. The population -- and many on ATS -- seem to think that human beings do not have inherent value. In Florida we have a situation where a woman is being put to death because some people -- other than herself -- have decided that her life is no longer valuable. That, my friends, is a clear triumph for those who hate the religious right. It is a clear triumph for those who think that a human's value is a matter of taste instead of innateness.

So why do you want a 'revolution'? Your side won. The courts, apparently, are filled with people who do not believe in the sanctity of human life. You would only be revolting against them... people whom you apparently agree with. Don't you get it? The american people believe that it's ok to starve someone to death if it is judged that their life is no longer valuable. The american people think that it's ok to create embryos solely for the sake of experimentation. The american people think that anyone who believes in human value is a 'religious nut'.

Don't you get it? Your side won. The sanctity of an innocent human being -- and with it, human rights -- are a matter of debate, now.

And, sorry, you guys are not fighting for rights or freedom. By denigrating human life you are, in the long run, conceding your own rights.

You'll realize that when some doctors gas most of you for being 'mentally deranged' conspiracy nuts.


We haven't won quite yet. We still have the dying gasp of the religious right, which is trying with all their might to stay alive, which is what this thread was about (and one mans reaction to this fact). They are trying to get control back even if it is an excercise in futility.

Conspiracy nuts? LOL! Where are you at? IMHO it is the religious that display all the signs of clinical psychosis, and not the other way around...
[edited due to ineptitude]

[edit on 26-3-2005 by 1wintermute1]



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by onlyinmydreams
(I copied this over from a letter I wrote to a friend. That's why the columns are weird)

I also find it disturbing that the same people who
base their entire political platform on rights --
liberals -- have apparently decided that it's ok for
some judges to decide to put a woman to death who has
committed no crime. Apparently their adherence to the
pro-choice side of the abortion debate is so strong
that they cannot bring themselves to defend innocent
life in any form. I wonder if, down the road, they
will realize that the rights they love so much are
based on the notion that human beings have special
value? I wonder if, when it is too late, they will
realize that no human will have rights when all humans
have been reduced to the level of mindless animals or
soul-less machines?

Ultimately, the road from embryo harvesting and forced
euthanasia to eugenics and slavery is not long.
Unfortunately... we're already half way down it.

Call me a "kook" if you want.



Kook
j/k

I take offense that someone... anyone... would be tacky enough to try to put the blame on Liberals for Terry dieing... that is just insane...
I don't see a liberal letting her die...

I do see the very eugenics based republican administration letting her die...
look up straussian philosphy... it is the rudder stearing the republicans right now... it says that the smart rich should be the rulers and the dumb poor (it actually makes those associations) should be distracted by war and religion so that the rich can do what they want. (sound familiar?)
the straussian elite has taken over washington and we all see the effects...
Lies are routinely sold as truth to the "stupid populace" out of percieved neccessity... straussian philosophy
the result of straussianism today


the ruse that is thrown at us about the Bush family being so concerned is BS (bush might care, but he doesn't make the rules)... it is another lie sold to the populace... the truth is they (the political intellectuals) are instilling a precident that people "with no worth" can be legally killed...
it will be in an invaluable precident to the controllers of our country when the baby boomers are all in nursing homes sucking up medicare and living in much the same situation that Terry is...
t will be so much easier to have a precident to "unplug them" and save all that money...
just my thought...

[edit on 26-3-2005 by LazarusTheLong]



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
it will be in an invaluable precident when the controllers of our country when the baby boomers are all in nursing homes sucking up medicare and living in much the same situation that Terry is...
t will be so much easier to have a precident to "unplug them" and save all that money...
just my thought...


Hail hail!

The baby boomers deserve forced euthenasia! It is that single generation alone that is responsible for the America you see today.



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 11:18 AM
link   
onlyinmydreams, you're right alot of people do not see the value in the Human Species as we have collectively displayed we are a very stupid species. We are not that far removed from our knuckle dragging ancestors. The "Arm Teachers with Guns" Thread shows that perfectly.



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Let me put it this way:

The logic behind starving this woman to death is a logic that says that a human being is only valuable if they can perform some sort of utility or experience pleasure. People who are against this act are those who think that -- no matter the circumstances -- an innocent human being has value and a right to live.

Take Bush, the NWO, the rich, etc, etc out of it for a moment.

So.... do you really want to live in a society where human's have no inherent rights? Where human rights are based on the degree to which authorities value individuals?

You should think about that... because that's what you're getting. If you guys are really afraid of the 'NWO' I suggest that you might want to walk away from this notion that the courts have the right to decide whether some innocent person is valuable or not. If you don't... you will have brought the nightmarish 'NWO' to power, not the religious people.



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by onlyinmydreams
Let me put it this way:

The logic behind starving this woman to death is a logic that says that a human being is only valuable if they can perform some sort of utility or experience pleasure. People who are against this act are those who think that -- no matter the circumstances -- an innocent human being has value and a right to live.

Take Bush, the NWO, the rich, etc, etc out of it for a moment.

So.... do you really want to live in a society where human's have no inherent rights? Where human rights are based on the degree to which authorities value individuals?

You should think about that... because that's what you're getting. If you guys are really afraid of the 'NWO' I suggest that you might want to walk away from this notion that the courts have the right to decide whether some innocent person is valuable or not. If you don't... you will have brought the nightmarish 'NWO' to power, not the religious people.


This was a great thread initially and you have turned it into a debate concerning the medias most recent cause of the day. Jesus Christ it's like listening to FOX news. I am glad that you watch fox consider yourself informed and have rallied behind the most recent distraction. Some of us could'nt care less though.

We ALREADY live in a world where there are no inherent rights? What don't you understand about that? This is a nation that claimed the inherent freedom's of all mankind whilst owning slaves. Save your hypocritical, text-book non-sense for the kids who don't know any better.

I for one pray that the courts are around to kill me if/when one of my wackko relatives wants to keep me alive on machines.

Hell if it were up to god this woman would be dead, it is only human intervention (arrogance) that is keeping her alive. Everyone dies get over it!
[edited due to ineptitude]



[edit on 26-3-2005 by 1wintermute1]



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by onlyinmydreams
Let me put it this way:

The logic behind starving this woman to death is a logic that says that a human being is only valuable if they can perform some sort of utility or experience pleasure. People who are against this act are those who think that -- no matter the circumstances -- an innocent human being has value and a right to live.

Take Bush, the NWO, the rich, etc, etc out of it for a moment.

So.... do you really want to live in a society where human's have no inherent rights? Where human rights are based on the degree to which authorities value individuals?

You should think about that... because that's what you're getting. If you guys are really afraid of the 'NWO' I suggest that you might want to walk away from this notion that the courts have the right to decide whether some innocent person is valuable or not. If you don't... you will have brought the nightmarish 'NWO' to power, not the religious people.


You are so right...

this is a precident setting moment... and people are too distracted to see the parallels. Many of us will be unable to do much besides breath and watch TV at some point in our lives... do we want the goverment to come in and say... time to go... bye bye...
I for one, want to live as long as i can learn, and enjoy a sunrise...

you also said to keep Bush and politics out of it... thats wrong...
that is the core issue... and it brings me around to the thread title...

the Republican party sold out to Strassianism... not religion... it just catered to religion becuase that is what straussians do... they pander for support and lie thru the teeth to get it... now they have it, and are being asked favors by the religious supporters that got them there...
what? asking a strassian for a favor is not in the cards, unless you have money... the religious right is not the rich right, and so therefore, will only have lipservice favoritism... just enough to tick off the populace and distract them with a moral conscience debate as well.

Know your leaders. and know there Philosophy if you want to know what they are up to...



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by onlyinmydreams
and Fred, I hate to break it to you, but.... the GOP rose to ascendance on the backs of the "religious right".


I don't think that's in question. In fact, that's the point. That the fundamental beliefs of certain extremist religious people have been cynically manipulated by the strategy masters of the GOP (and their pulpit mouthpieces) over the past 30 years is the on-going discussion that everyone but those extremists has been having since the election. Welcome to the conversation, and the realization most of us had months ago... you got punked along with the rest of us.

I think FredT was being more than reasonable in suggesting a break since the ideologies of traditional process conservatives and the neo-social "conservatives" are at such fundamental odds.

And no I don't feel sorry for the religious extremists being singled out here and told to move on. They've done that to everyone in their nasty little rise to pretend power by persecuting any group they can label and herd off in their divide America strategy. They did it to gays. Then mainstream conservatives as RINOS. And everyone left of extreme right as being radical anti-American traitors.

Well guess what wedge hounds? You're the new "Jews" in your own fascist little game.

That's certainly going to be the result if this divide and conquer fanatical approach keeps being played out. Mainstream America won't tolerate your fake "constitutional crisis" drama bombs any longer. It doesn't want your theocratic rule. Or when it does, it'll vote for it on it's own merits. Not because we get punked in dog & pony moderate shows, then "stealth" extremists step in to take over. And not because the extremists threaten to "make Republicans pay..." Good! If some politician misled you, he or she should pay. Seats should be lost over Schiavo on both sides.

If you didn't get what you thought you voted for, vote the bums out.

Lots of payback to go around. Everybody get yours.


[edit on 26-3-2005 by RANT]



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by RANT
That the fundamental beliefs of certain extremist religious people have been cynically manipulated by the strategy masters of the GOP (and their pulpit mouthpieces) over the past 30 years is the on-going discussion that everyone but those extremists has been having since the election. Welcome to the conversation, and the realization most of us had months ago... you got punked along with the rest of us.

IIf you didn't get what you thought you voted for, vote the bums out.

Lots of payback to go around. Everybody get yours.


[edit on 26-3-2005 by RANT]


In all fairness there were people having this conversation long before bush was ever elected(let alone re-elected) They were just dismissed as "conspiracy theorist kooks"

The time for voting is long gone! The tea must go in the harbour!!
Here Here!



new topics

top topics



 
24
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join