I have found talking to numerous liberals that they are more in agreement with me when I say that I am against gay marriage but for civil unions. Even some of my gay friends are glad to hear that I am for some sort of union and not completely shutting it out. That is a common ground.
Some, not all, liberals are also in agreement with me when I say that I am against abortion except for the reasons I mentioned previously. That is a common ground.
The main point of a moderate, and me being an independent is that I see things on both sides that are good, and things on both sides that are bad (like No Child Left Behind by the Repubs). Common ground is to compromise.
It is the same thing when people talk about presidents becoming centrist. They become moderates and work with who they have in congress. I feel if obama would have done that, he would have gotten a lot more done. But he refuses to compromise. It has to be his way or the highway. You will never get anywhere without compromising.
Doesn't the "Why" matter? Or am I the only one that things the why is more important than the "what"? I mean a liberal and a conservative who agree to an issue often do so for different reasons, right?
So even if someone finds themselves agreeing on specific issues falling "in the middle", their rationale for those beliefs, or the "why" as I keep asking, would seem to root them in one type of ideaology or another.
I mean I disagree with the GOP on more things than I agree with, but all for conservative rationale. I have a friend who is a liberal and can agree with me on a lot of things, but its all from liberal rationale...
Thats where I continue to be confused... I mean your talking about issues here but not talking about the "why" behind the issues, and when asking the "why" behind the issues, I'm honestly trying to figure out how a moderate stands... or do they not think about the "why" behind the issues, in which case one of my initial suggestions was that they don't think about the reasons, they just worry about the surface issues.
Thats why I said I don't want to look at this as republican vs. democrat, because I understand being an independent... republican and democrats are parties, not bases for beliefs (although they tend to follow certain ideologies), but what is the beliefs behind a so-called moderate who can swing from one party to the next election-to-election. What is the "why" behind their issues?
There have been a few people in this post which have claimed to be moderates. Thats good. I dont want to change your beliefs or anything, I just want to know the "why" behind the issues.
(for example, I am a constitutional conservative, and due to my christian beliefs I am strongly against abortion, but legally I am not against abortion for the simple fact that currently in the constitution, rights only apply to citizens, and an unborn baby is not yet a citizen, so has no rights. While a socially conservative individual can argue that life is a god-given right, and therefore we have a necessary need to preserve it even for those who are not citizens- and that is a valid argument- a fiscally conservative basis may conflict with it by saying The government shouldn't spend money in ways not explicitly set up in the constitution for necessary government spending, or argue individual rights - both also a valid argument). I know I made this overly simplistic, but the point I'm trying to make is that whether your for or against an issue, there has to be a reason "why" and if the reason "why" isn't what most people believe is right-leaning or left-leaning, then what is it? And if it IS "right leaning" or "left leaning" then what makes them really a moderate?