The Conservative Cave
Current Events => General Discussion => Topic started by: JohnnyReb on May 17, 2011, 08:20:02 AM
-
Yep, Arnold was a RINO of the highest order, right next to John Edwards, Bill Clinton and Vast Teddy.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_schwarzenegger_shriver_separation
-
I'm surprised he was up to it after all the steroids that boy shot in his younger days.
-
I'm surprised he was up to it after all the steroids that boy shot in his younger days.
I'm just guessing but he must have still been taking them. Local weightlifter killed his bat and ball with steriods and taking more was the only way he could function. It finally killed him.
-
Yep, Arnold was a RINO of the highest order, right next to John Edwards, Bill Clinton and Vast Teddy.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_schwarzenegger_shriver_separation
Boy, this forum is confusing to me.
People here have ragged on me when I have brought up Christian ethics because they say not everyone here is Christian, some are atheists, and so forth.
Then I see a thread like this that frowns on adultery (which I do too, for the record).
I am having trouble trying to keep track of the members and where they stand on what.
-
Boy, this forum is confusing to me.
People here have ragged on me when I have brought up Christian ethics because they say not everyone here is Christian, some are atheists, and so forth.
Then I see a thread like this that frowns on adultery (which I do too, for the record).
I am having trouble trying to keep track of the members and where they stand on what.
And therein lies the beauty of this forum. Groupthink it is not. :cheersmate:
-
And therein lies the beauty of this forum. Groupthink it is not. :cheersmate:
But isn't it fair to say that Conservatism needs some sort of underlying moral ethic to make it cohesive? I mean, with the Lefties, anything goes with them, so you can be anything and still be in that tent of freaks.
But Conservatives tend to promote traditional family, traditional values, etc., and it seems to me that is hard to do that when some Conservatives themselves are starting to discard those things. Isn't that a fair observation?
-
But isn't it fair to say that Conservatism needs some sort of underlying moral ethic to make it cohesive? I mean, with the Lefties, anything goes with them, so you can be anything and still be in that tent of freaks.
But Conservatives tend to promote traditional family, traditional values, etc., and it seems to me that is hard to do that when some Conservatives themselves are starting to discard those things. Isn't that a fair observation?
The definition of political Conservatism is:
b : a political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions, and preferring gradual development to abrupt change; specifically : such a philosophy calling for lower taxes, limited government regulation of business and investing, a strong national defense, and individual financial responsibility for personal needs (as retirement income or health-care coverage)
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conservatism
And, for the most part all of the people participating on this forum share this mindset as it relates to our political policy. Where we vary would be in our social agenda. Some more than others. I am a Political Conservative.
Edited to fix quote box.
-
Okay, let me put it another way then:
Conservatives (Republicans) depend on the Christian Conservative vote. If you start to get Conservatives who discard those Christian ethics or morals or whatever you want to call them, the key constituency of the GOP evaporates. Yes?
Lets say a "political" Conservative who is an atheist should somehow get the nomination in the future. The Evangelicals and traditional Christians will never vote for him, may vote third party, and.... ...well, we know what happens then.
-
Okay, let me put it another way then:
Conservatives (Republicans) depend on the Christian Conservative vote. If you start to get Conservatives who discard those Christian ethics or morals or whatever you want to call them, the key constituency of the GOP evaporates. Yes?
Lets say a "political" Conservative who is an atheist should somehow get the nomination in the future. The Evangelicals and traditional Christians will never vote for him, may vote third party, and.... ...well, we know what happens then.
More stereotyping. :whatever:
Getting hard to pigeonhole us, ain't it t....NM. I'll save my thoughts on that for later.
-
More stereotyping.
Sterotyping who?
Can you say one thing to me that even resembles making some sort of sense?
-
Okay, let me put it another way then:
Conservatives (Republicans) depend on the Christian Conservative vote. If you start to get Conservatives who discard those Christian ethics or morals or whatever you want to call them, the key constituency of the GOP evaporates. Yes?
Lets say a "political" Conservative who is an atheist should somehow get the nomination in the future. The Evangelicals and traditional Christians will never vote for him, may vote third party, and.... ...well, we know what happens then.
I was addressing your questioning about this forum and it's conservative stance.
-
Sterotyping who?
Can you say one thing to me that even resembles making some sort of sense?
Lets say a "political" Conservative who is an atheist should somehow get the nomination in the future. The Evangelicals and traditional Christians will never vote for him, may vote third party, and.... ...well, we know what happens then.
THAT'S stereotyping, shortbus. My wife's very evangelical Baptist grandfather voted for Romney, a Mormon. It had not a damn thing to do with his religion, or lack thereof.
-
Okay, let me put it another way then:
Conservatives (Republicans) depend on the Christian Conservative vote. If you start to get Conservatives who discard those Christian ethics or morals or whatever you want to call them, the key constituency of the GOP evaporates. Yes?
Lets say a "political" Conservative who is an atheist should somehow get the nomination in the future. The Evangelicals and traditional Christians will never vote for him, may vote third party, and.... ...well, we know what happens then.
Fortunately, this country was designed so that no one religious group can hold sway. There is a freedom for all religious types. Of those, it does not require one to be Christian to vote conservative. In fact, I would argue, it is that stereotype of Republicans pandering to the hardcore Christian minority that has done more damage than good in recent years.
Christianity is not a bad thing, certainly, it just has a very limited place in political discourse.
-
CC, welcome (again).
Maybe the problem you're having is coming to this forum with pre-conceived notions. It's the equal of going to a party and forcing yourself to be the center of attention.
You've been here--what--three days? And your post count is already well over a hundred. Maybe you'd be better served listening, er, reading more than you post.
A quick review of the threads here will give you a pretty good idea that we're all over the board as far as social conservatism goes.
Listen more. We value your opinion, but please reamember you're the new guy. YOU should get used to US a little bit.
Just my two cents, offered with nothing but respect. You can take it or leave it.
-
Now it's rumored that there's a second illegitimate child out there.
Damn Arnold, get that thing fixxed are at least put a raincoat on it.....and don't trust, "Don't worry, I'm on the pill." They may be after money afterall.
-
I'm just wondering how many decades I could **** Maria Shriver until I got tired of it.
She used to be a looker.
-
You play, you pay.
Most married people I know value counting on a long life together. He jacked that up, didn't he? Tough.
-
He fits right in with the Kennedy clan...
-
Now it's rumored that there's a second illegitimate child out there.
....and I'm sure more. I remember when my co-worker told me, after the two girls came out about Tiger, there would be at least 30. I said, "no way, he ain't THAT f'n stupid". Yeah, I turned out to be the idiot in that case.