Sign in to follow this  
NeedleinA

Liberals in the Church

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Scott said:

Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc.

I guess you are using the term conservative assuming there is not something in place to guarantee individual freedoms like we have in the USA. Any form of government with that in place would not be a good place to live in my mind. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, anatess2 said:

You place individual interpretation over the interpretation of the modern prophets.

Wasn't it you (if I'm mistaken I apologize) that had a different understanding of the Plan of Salvation than what is presented in the temple rites?

???

I actually avoid talking about any details of ordinances and such items in that regards typically, so I'm not sure what you are referring to.  I try to actually keep holy the things that should be kept holy rather than discuss information regarding things in the temple in that regards.  There are things that if we wish to discuss about the temple should only be discussed IN the temple.

If it is information about the temple, I HAVE gone to the Church site and taken information directly from it (quoted it) and linked to it in several instances.  I figure that taking quotes and information directly from the Church itself is acceptable in discussing things that occur with the temple, but I find it weird that you would interpret that as presenting something different about the plan of salvation.  Most of the stuff from the church website (off the top of my head) normally doesn't go into the Plan of Salvation in regards to the temple's from what I recall, though it may touch on things that are important about it such as temple ordinances as found here...

Temple ordinances and covenants

If they release information on the Temple, I may go into publically available information, or history regarding it, but in general, I don't talk or reference things (as far as I can I recall at least) pertaining to ideas or other subjects that may concern the temple or what goes on inside of them except with reference to the Church's stuff (What the church says is okay to talk about, which normally is found from their site).

Edited by JohnsonJones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Scott
Just now, laronius said:

I guess you are using the term conservative assuming there is not something in place to guarantee individual freedoms like we have in the USA. Any form of government with that in place would not be a good place to live in my mind. 

Hence the term "too conservative".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Carborendum said:

Gee, I guess I'm liberal.  I believe in all those things too.

I'm not quite as liberal as that I suppose.

I think environmental protection within REASON is a good thing, but going overboard at times causes a lot of trouble and pain for very little gain.  Yes, we should be concerned about our environment and I think it is a VERY REAL concern, but there are times I think that there are people that go WAAAAY overboard with this (nicknamed treehuggers in that they will chain themselves to trees to prevent them from being cut, or those that are against public hunting which is a way that conservationist actually help keep the balance of animals today...etc).

Social equality I support as well as education (obviously, as I like to get paid).

On the otherhand, I'm actually rather opposed to the idea of a strong central government in many instance.  The constitution says that we need to have it for defense (and so defense spending should not be something we are opposed to in my opinion), but there are many areas which I think a weak central government is the better choice.  A prime example today would be what we see in other nations where the censor the freedom of speech (though there are those who are trying to make this a reality in the US as well).  People think that it's a good thing that others cannot spew their hatred freely, and have made laws against it.  However, as we see...who determines what is or is not hate speech.  That same freedom that allows one to burn the flag could be removed just as easily as the freedom to say we do not believe in Gay Marriage being ordained of God (both of which could be viewed as hate speech in some nations today even). 

I support helping the poor, the elderly, and others under our current system, but that is only because we (as a people right now) don't have a better way to provide the same necessities.  I DO think if we were all righteous to the point where we were as the Nephites after the Savior came, there would be no need for government involvement with that either (but I do not think most people are anywhere close to that today..as of yet) as all would work hard and be provided as they needed with no one lacking the necessities of life.

It's a conundrum, but overall, I think at times we hand too much power to the government when we should not be doing so. 

Another example that I've been opposed to since the day they created it (and not just because it prevents family members from seeing me off or greeting me home at the airport gates on my annual trips) is the Patriot Act.  I do not know why BOTH sides keep renewing it, as I think it's a great threat to freedom and liberty.  It's a precursor (in my opinion) of things that could be in the future if we tread down that path.  It gave the government too much power over us.

At the same time though, I think we appreciate the roads, the national parks, the border patrol, and many other elements which derive from our central government today...so...once again, a conundrum in regards to how I feel about a strong central government vs. a weaker central government.

Edited by JohnsonJones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest MormonGator
37 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

I'm not quite as liberal as that I suppose.

You aren’t.

You might seem it because so many members of the church lean heavily towards the right (descriptive, not pejorative) but in reality your posts appear relatively moderate, maybe slightly left leaning by a bit. 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, laronius said:

I guess you are using the term conservative assuming there is not something in place to guarantee individual freedoms like we have in the USA. Any form of government with that in place would not be a good place to live in my mind. 

My take based on just my own observations of nations whose societies and histories I'm familiar with:

Democratic government + Conservative societal norms = freedom.

Religious government + Liberal societal norms = freedom.

Much of the middle east is full Conservative societies under a religious form of government.  That is not very free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Carborendum said:

My take based on just my own observations of nations whose societies and histories I'm familiar with:

Democratic government + Conservative societal norms = freedom.

Religious government + Liberal societal norms = freedom.

Much of the middle east is full Conservative societies under a religious form of government.  That is not very free.

Yeah, the term conservative as used by the average person here in the US is definitely different than the classical sense of the word. Here we associate it with a close adherence to the Constitution while perhaps internationally the freedom aspect really isn't relevant. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/10/2020 at 12:19 PM, Vort said:

My knee-jerk reaction is to agree with this, at least using modern US-based definitions of "liberalism" and "liberals". But I know it is not true. People like you and me tend to think that the opposite to "liberalism" is "honesty", because we see the deep corruption in leftist thought. But the corruption is on all sides, not just "theirs".

For an oversimplified example: Even if you dislike unions and see them as an obstacle to progress and honest work relationships, the fact remains that unions did not arise in a vacuum or because Satan's minions created them. Unions arose because people were being badly used and, in essence, extorted into working under deplorable conditions. In Zion, there will be no unions—because there will be no money-worshiping employers who value profit over human life or health.

If all the leftists went off and formed their own nation (or equivalently, if all the conservatives did so), we conservatives would find plenty of corruption still plaguing us. Our self-congratulations at having finally rid ourselves of those brain-dead leftists would last all of a few months before it became obvious that the profit-taking had begun in earnest. Though it's entirely likely in such a scenario that the leftist "liberal" nation would take a self-destructive path that would ultimately mean their demise, we might be shocked to find out how close on their heels our supposedly "conservative" nation would be.

Politics is not and never will be the permanent answer to the world's woes. Ultimately, repentance is the only answer. Without repentance, all is irretrievably lost, no matter which political affiliation you choose. With true repentance, all is hope, sunshine, and butterflies. Even for Democrats.

Of course there is corruption on both sides, hence the term RINO. But, let’s get real here. Conservatives are not the ones calling for abortion, inciting racial division, taxing everyone into poverty, pushing homosexuality, pedophilia, and transgender ideas as normal, nor are conservatives trying to remove God from society, nor are they trying to strip the free world of its God-given rights. However, liberals,  do support these things. We’re also not talking about what would supposedly happen if they were grouped together on some island together. We are talking about what is happening right here, right now, today. And honestly, you’re going to find corruption among any group of people, but which group would you rather find yourself stuck with on an island? A group of liberals or a group of conservatives?

You are correct, politics has never been an answer to the world’s woes, but it has always been a problem ever since the War in Heaven. The same philosophies spouted by liberals today is basically the same philosophies spouted by Satan and his followers then. The truth is, in this world, you cannot separate politics and religion, as one affects the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Jedi_Nephite said:

Of course there is corruption on both sides, hence the term RINO. But, let’s get real here. Conservatives are not the ones calling for abortion, inciting racial division, taxing everyone into poverty, pushing homosexuality, pedophilia, and transgender ideas as normal, nor are conservatives trying to remove God from society, nor are they trying to strip the free world of its God-given rights. However, liberals,  do support these things. We’re also not talking about what would supposedly happen if they were grouped together on some island together. We are talking about what is happening right here, right now, today. And honestly, you’re going to find corruption among any group of people, but which group would you rather find yourself stuck with on an island? A group of liberals or a group of conservatives?

You are correct, politics has never been an answer to the world’s woes, but it has always been a problem ever since the War in Heaven. The same philosophies spouted by liberals today is basically the same philosophies spouted by Satan and his followers then. The truth is, in this world, you cannot separate politics and religion, as one affects the other.

During his mortal ministry, the Lord would be VERY Liberal in regards to the things of his day.  In fact, many of the things that were pushed by him and his apostles would be considered very liberal today.

We look at conservatives societies today, which I have visited personally.  You are correct in that the laws there are very harsh.  I can actually leave a wallet with a million dollars in front of others and even perhaps broadcast it is there, and they would not touch it.  The only ones would be police who would return it to me.  The laws against adultery, stealing, and many other things are EXTREMELY strict.  Clothing laws can be seen as far stricter.  Even those who are members and dress in an appropriate manner in the US may be considered being morally corrupted as their wear would be seen as skimpy and showing too much skin.

The church is also outlawed.  The gospel is outlawed.  The church is not recognized officially, and in some places, you will be jailed (and in theory could be executed, though it normally does not go to that degree) if you talk about the gospel to those who are not members.  To have a Bible or other holy book (such as the Book of Mormon) could be considered something to arrest one of, though that is HIGHLY dependent on who the security is at the location they apprehend you (and normally, if you have your papers and passports in order it will not happen as long as it is a PERSONAL copy).

To practice any other religion other than Islam in many areas near the Middle East and in the Middle East is to be a Liberal.  To act as one does in the US is to be EXTREMELY liberal.

Similar items hold true in some conservative nations in Africa, though whether it is towards Christianity or Islam differs from nation to nation.  It is the African nations that are fighting some of the more Liberal policies of the US in other evangelical or other churches currently, but what they consider conservative is FAR more conservative than what many in the US would consider conservative.  The actions that even conservative American members take...would be considered liberal.

Then you have an entirely different ball of wax (and I haven't visited this particular nation personally, nor do I have any wish to) in North Korea which also is supposed to be extremely conservative in many of it's laws and ways it does things.  It may be a communist nation, but in regards to things such as adultery, stealing, and other measures...much more conservative than the US.

Now, that could be that it's because, even as members, we are all wicked (and I could buy into that accounting) in comparison.  In that instance, it could be as the Book of Mormon says where those who were opposed to the Nephites were actually the more righteous at times.

However, to account American Conservatives as being more righteous than any liberal in the World...that's a far stretch.

Edited by JohnsonJones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Scott
On 7/12/2020 at 9:42 AM, Jedi_Nephite said:

Conservatives are not the ones calling for abortion, inciting racial division, taxing everyone into poverty, pushing homosexuality, pedophilia, and transgender ideas as normal, nor are conservatives trying to remove God from society, nor are they trying to strip the free world of its God-given rights.

No, but they are the ones calling for loosening pollution restrictions that would kill hundreds of thousands of Americans and cause thousands of forced abortions.   Which is worse;   allowing voluntary abortions (liberals) or forcing people who want children to have abortions (conservatives)?   I'm not saying that one is good and one is bad, but they are both bad.

As far as taxation goes, liberals do support taxes, but most of our tax money hasn't been going to social programs, it has been going for military spending for wars that have nothing to do with American freedom.   Even Trump says that the Iraq War will cost the US $7 trillion.  

Also, I'm not sure where you get that liberals support pedophilia.   What are you referring to?   They don't try and remove God from society either, though they do try and remove it from government.

I'm not sure what rights you are referring to either.   2nd amendment rights?  The most conservative states actually have pretty strict laws.  For example, in Utah there are a lot of laws that close businesses on Sundays.   As LDS members we aren't supposed to work Sunday (which exceptions), but in my opinion, we shouldn't be forcing others not to.

Many conservatives are trying to make sure that it is impossible for anyone who wants to enjoy things like nature to do so.  

You are right that they do support abortion and gay rights, but libertarians even more so.   

I'd look in the mirror before spewing out your (evil) holier than though attitude.  

Edited by Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest MormonGator
On 7/12/2020 at 4:50 PM, JohnsonJones said:

During his mortal ministry, the Lord would be VERY Liberal in regards to the things of his day.  In fact, many of the things that were pushed by him and his apostles would be considered very liberal today.

 

It's really impossible to modern day political labels on Christ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Scott said:

No, but they are the ones calling for loosening pollution restrictions that would kill hundreds of thousands of Americans and cause thousands of forced abortions.   Which is worse;   allowing voluntary abortions (liberals) or forcing people who want children to have abortions (conservatives)?   I'm not saying that one is good and one is bad, but they are both bad.

 

Speculation

5 minutes ago, Scott said:



You are right that they do support abortion and gay rights, but libertarians even more so.   

 

No I don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Scott
42 minutes ago, Grunt said:

Speculation

It is more than speculation.  The exact number of deaths might be speculation, but not that loosening restictions will cause deaths.

Even as the laws stand now, tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of Americans die from pollution every year.  Pick your study, but all of them conclude (rightfully) that many die even without loosening the restrictions.

https://www.newsweek.com/200000-americans-die-every-year-air-pollution-that-meets-epa-standard-1473187

There have also been several studies that shows air pollution causes foreced miscarriages:

https://unews.utah.edu/report-reveals-link-between-air-pollution-and-increased-risk-for-miscarriage/#:~:text=Researchers at University of Utah,exposure to elevated air pollution.

It's more than speculation.

Quote

No I don't.

You may not, but here is the official Libertarian position:

The official position of the United States Libertarian Party is unconditionally pro-choice, admitting no legal restriction on abortion for any reason, by any method, or at any stage of gestation..

Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration

https://www.lp.org/libertarians-abortion-is-a-matter-for-individual-conscience-not-public-decree/

As I said before, you can still be a member of or aligned with a political party and not agree with all of their stances.  I fully respect anyone's choice of not supporting everything their party supports or aligns itself with.  

Edited by Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest MormonGator
3 minutes ago, Scott said:


As I said before, you can still be a member of or aligned with a political party and not agree with all of their stances.

I'm a libertarian and your description of them is correct. Most (not all) libertarians are in favor of gay marriage being legal, even if they might not personally be in favor of it. It's the same with abortion. Most libertarians, not all, but most, are in favor of abortion being legal if they don't support it. I'm not arguing the position, I'm just describing how most libertarians feel. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Scott said:

It is more than speculation.  The exact number of deaths might be speculation, but not that loosening restictions will cause deaths.

Even as the laws stand now, tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of Americans die from pollution every year.  Pick your study, but all of them conclude (rightfully) that many die even without loosening the restrictions.

https://www.newsweek.com/200000-americans-die-every-year-air-pollution-that-meets-epa-standard-1473187

There have also been several studies that shows air pollution causes foreced miscarriages:

https://unews.utah.edu/report-reveals-link-between-air-pollution-and-increased-risk-for-miscarriage/#:~:text=Researchers at University of Utah,exposure to elevated air pollution.

It's more than speculation.

You may not, but here is the official Libertarian position:

The official position of the United States Libertarian Party is unconditionally pro-choice, admitting no legal restriction on abortion for any reason, by any method, or at any stage of gestation..

Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration

https://www.lp.org/libertarians-abortion-is-a-matter-for-individual-conscience-not-public-decree/

As I said before, you can still be a member of or aligned with a political party and not agree with all of their stances.  I fully respect anyone's choice of not supporting everything their party supports or aligns itself with.  

It's speculation.  That people die from pollution is possible, and in some areas probable, but that modern roll backs of EPA rules will lead to more deaths from pollution is speculation.

 

1 hour ago, MormonGator said:

I'm a libertarian and your description of them is correct. Most (not all) libertarians are in favor of gay marriage being legal, even if they might not personally be in favor of it. It's the same with abortion. Most libertarians, not all, but most, are in favor of abortion being legal if they don't support it. I'm not arguing the position, I'm just describing how most libertarians feel. 

Not a single Libertarian that I hang out with supports abortion.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest MormonGator
32 minutes ago, Grunt said:

Not a single Libertarian that I hang out with supports abortion.

Odd than, given that the party platform is exactly how @Scott described.  

You CAN be a pro life libertarian, for the record. And I'm not arguing the issue, just the libertarian policy on it. 

Edited by MormonGator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest MormonGator

Libertarianism is not conservatism on steroids. Libertarians are against the death penalty, in favor of widespread criminal justice reform, legalizing drug use, gay marriage,  prostitution being legal, and massive cuts to the federal budget, including defense. We are often, with some justification, called "Social liberals and fiscal conservatives".  In fact, real conservatives should be insulted if they were called "libertarians".

Now, that does not mean that personally, libertarians approve of those positions, or would, in their personal lives convince someone to get an abortion or attend a gay marriage or solicit a sex worker. We just don't think the government should tell you how to live. Or tell Mike or Stacy how to live. 

We are only called "conservative" because we are in favor of gun rights and shrinking government. Unlike conservatives though, we actually want to shrink government instead of just promising to do that to get elected. (just playing conservatives)

Again, I'm not arguing in favor of these positions, I'm just describing, roughly, the positions of the Libertarian Party. 

Edited by MormonGator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Odd than, given that the party platform is exactly how @Scott described.  

You CAN be a pro life libertarian, for the record. And I'm not arguing the issue, just the libertarian policy on it. 

Sure.  Party platforms aren't always representative of their members.   I'm sure most Libertarians are pro-choice.  I'm just saying those that are pro-life aren't exactly rare.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest MormonGator
Just now, Grunt said:

I'm just saying those that are pro-life aren't exactly rare.

Yup, totally agree. In fact, you can easily make the libertarian case against abortion. Easily. Both Austin Peterson and Ron Paul are pro-life. 

Here's a great summary of the pro-life libertarian argument. 

https://reason.com/2015/08/14/sorry-rand-paul-haters-pro-life-libertar/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Libertarianism is not conservatism on steroids. Libertarians are against the death penalty, in favor of widespread criminal justice reform, legalizing drug use, gay marriage,  prostitution being legal, and massive cuts to the federal budget, including defense. We are often, with some justification, called "Social liberals and fiscal conservatives".  In fact, real conservatives should be insulted if they were called "libertarians".

Now, that does not mean that personally, libertarians approve of those positions, or would, in their personal lives convince someone to get an abortion or attend a gay marriage or solicit a sex worker. We just don't think the government should tell you how to live. Or tell Mike or Stacy how to live. 

We are only called "conservative" because we are in favor of gun rights and shrinking government. Unlike conservatives though, we actually want to shrink government instead of just promising to do that to get elected. (just playing conservatives)

Again, I'm not arguing in favor of these positions, I'm just describing, roughly, the positions of the Libertarian Party. 

There are two strands of libertarians in this camp, though.  

One strand would agree with conservatives in its disapproval of abortion, gay marriage, prostitution, and drug use; but still believes that humans as a whole are virtuous enough that most of them will turn away from these sorts of vices in sufficient numbers that society, as a whole, can solder on (or, as a sub-variant, believes that a government that regulates these activities is more potentially dangerous than a society where these activities are unregulated).

The other strand just doesn’t think that these behaviors are wrong and/or destructive to begin with, and thinks conservatives are rather silly for believing otherwise. 

Edited by Just_A_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest MormonGator
1 minute ago, Just_A_Guy said:

One strand would agree with conservatives in its disapproval of abortion, gay marriage, prostitution, and drug use; but still believes that humans as a whole are virtuous enough that most of them will turn away from these sorts of vices in sufficient numbers that society, as a whole, can solder on (or, as a sub-variant, believes that a government that regulates these activities is more potentially dangerous than a society where these activities are unregulated).

Right, that's why I said this: 
 

48 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Now, that does not mean that personally, libertarians approve of those positions, or would, in their personal lives convince someone to get an abortion or attend a gay marriage or solicit a sex worker. We just don't think the government should tell you how to live. Or tell Mike or Stacy how to live. 

 

2 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

 The other strand just doesn’t think that these behaviors are wrong and/or destructive to begin with, and thinks conservatives are rather silly for believing otherwise. 

A small, but vocal minority. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, MormonGator said:

I'm a libertarian and your description of them is correct. Most (not all) libertarians are in favor of gay marriage being legal, even if they might not personally be in favor of it. It's the same with abortion. Most libertarians, not all, but most, are in favor of abortion being legal if they don't support it. I'm not arguing the position, I'm just describing how most libertarians feel. 

I view that most Libertarians are for less government, or a weaker central government.  They still view government as essential, but it should restrict itself to essential things rather than spread out and be as involved. 

Once one sees it in that manner or similar to that, many of the Libertarian party stances make a lot of sense on why they are that way.  It's not that one is for abortion, but rather against the laws that get the government involved in mandating what one can or cannot do in a pregnancy situation and the ability of the individual to choose rather than the government to choose.

The same would apply to legalized drugs...it's on the individual's ability of choice, not the government, no what should be the choices available.  Etc....etc...etc.

They (Republicans no longer really abide by this idea) are for a weak central government while many U.S. Liberals have generally been for a strong central government.

Edited by JohnsonJones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Scott said:

No, but they are the ones calling for loosening pollution restrictions

Nothing to do with religion or faith.  And there are flaws with linking this to any conservative legislation or agenda.

Quote

As far as taxation goes, liberals do support taxes, but most of our tax money hasn't been going to social programs, it has been going for military spending for wars that have nothing to do with American freedom.   Even Trump says that the Iraq War will cost the US $7 trillion.  

And once you can prove that liberals have gotten us out of wars more often than conservatives, this will matter incrementally. 

Quote

Also, I'm not sure where you get that liberals support pedophilia.   What are you referring to? 

Directly protecting pedophiles from punishment.  California SB-145 (2019).

Quote

They don't try and remove God from society either, though they do try and remove it from government.

This is not so clear a line as you may think.

  • Removing "under God" from the pledge.
  • 9th circuit completely nullified the conviction of a muliple murderer because at the end of the trial, after receiving the death sentence from the jury, the judge declared "May God have mercy on your soul."
  • Freedom From Religion Foundation
  • Can't refuse to bake a cake for a gay wedding due to religious conviction.  But you can refuse to bake a cake because of "artistic license."
  • War on Christmas.
  • Recent destruction of Catholic churches across the country.
  • Handmaid's Tale - cultural phenomenon"

And you may want to look at this article:

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/other-examples-of-attacks-on-religious-conscience-and-free-exercise

Quote

I'm not sure what rights you are referring to either. 

How about political correctness and freedom of speech and freedom of commerce? 

  • People are assaulted and murdered for daring to utter the phrase: "All Lives Matter" and "Blue Lives Matter."
  • People are being fired for wearing a MAGA hat.
  • Fights have broken out because people are wearing a MAGA hat.
  • Lives were ruined because they were wearing a MAGA hat.
  • Students are being kicked out of universities and colleges for expressing their support for a politician or a political position both in public and in private.
  • Can't refuse to bake a cake for a gay wedding due to religious conviction.  But you can refuse to bake a cake because of "artistic license."
  • I can't operate my business without having to purchase abortion & contraceptive insurance coverage for my employees -- until this recent court decision.  But the liberals were still pushing for it -- and will continue to push for it.
  • Insurance no longer functions on free market principles, but on government mandates.
  • The average citizen can get fired or fined or sued for daring to say "Homosexual relations are a sin."
Quote

Many conservatives are trying to make sure that it is impossible for anyone who wants to enjoy things like nature to do so.  

You'll have to explain this one.  I don't know of any conservatives who are saying,"I never want to see another tree for as long as I live!"  Conservation is actually a conservative principle.  That doesn't mean we never do anything to  change our environment.  It simply means we have to control what we do in a measured manner.

Quote

You are right that they do support abortion and gay rights, but libertarians even more so.   

Red Herring.

Quote

I'd look in the mirror before spewing out your (evil) holier than though attitude.  

We could say the same to you.

Edited by Carborendum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this