Conservatives, what is your most liberal aspect(s)? & vice versa

[ShapeShifter]

My most conservative aspect are

1. small government

2. states right

3. anti- government depending - like being on welfare for a long period of time

[classical liberal]

I am pro-death: including murder, suicide, euthanasia, and abortion (if you count them as separate).  It is a state of greater entropy than life, and therefore inevitable.

Anti-voucher but also anti-public education.  I think it's the parent's responsibility to educate the child.  If the parent can't do so, then it is the parent's responsibility to secure funding for the child's education by others, not the government's.

Pro-gay but anti-gay marriage.  The more f****ts there are, the more women for the rest of us.  But marriage is for child-bearing; if two individuals can't conceive a child, then they should not be married.  As humans reproduce sexully, two individuals of the same gender can't conceive.  Ergo they shouldn't be married.

Anti-medicine-  I don't know if this is conservative or liberal but I think that if you're sick than that sucks for you, either die or get over it.

Pro-drugs-  If you wanna f**ck yourself up then it's your responsibility not mine.

Pro-prostitution- It's her body, she can rent it to me whenever she damn well pleases; I pay fair market rent on anything I lease, be it for hours (whores) or years (houses, cars, etc).

Pro-immigration-  If you want to come here and make something of yourself, then I like you more than I like some of the bums born and bred here.

Pro-fiscal responsibility-  How this became liberal I'll never know, but the Republican Congressional Caucus is a bunch of drunken sailors when it comes to weilding the "power of the purse".  I think they got rid of the purse strings when Bush was elected.

Thinking about it I guess fiscal resonsibility is conservative, and the GOP Congressional Caucus is to my left there.  On government involement in education I think that I'm so far to the right I've come full circle and ended up seeming to be on the left.  Since I'm not of the Christian Right, I'm probably so far right that I seem left.  So that leaves pro-Immigration as my only liberal opinion.  Other than the blatant Christianity and anti-Immigration stance, I agree almost entirely with the Constitution Party

[MarkDel]

Angus,

I think BOTH parties are guilty of major infractions when it comes to censorship and related abuses of freedom. The big difference is that the Republican threat to freedom is so flagrant, that the American people can easily detect it, and just as easily reject it. Hence the "intolerant right wing" is at best a minor threat to our liberties.

On the other hand, the "politically correct left wing" is a VASTLY greater threat to our freedom because their attacks on our basic rights are far more sublte and not as overt in terms of rapid detection. The left also uses paternalistic issues to mask their oppression...pretending that they are "looking out" for people's safety...things like cigarette lawsuits, hate crime legislation, environmental extremism, smoking bans, hunting bans, etc, etc....

The far right is too overt, so they are rarely successful in their attempts to control your life, but the left is much more clever, and they seek to control your mind rather than your body.

[angus]

Well said.  (I'm sure we can quibble over the meaning of the phrase 'environmental extremism' later.)

[classical liberal]

Political correctness is not all-encompassing.  The hunting bans, environmental extremism, etc are separate.  The political correctness is just one of many liberal assault on liberty.

[angus]

Anti-medicine-  I don't know if this is conservative or liberal but I think that if you're sick than that sucks for you, either die or get over it.

I thought about something else.  We are the self-ordained most highly evolved species, no doubt.  And certainly a moon-reaching mammal is millions of years beyond any reptile whose closest living relative is probably the cayman crocodile.  Yet, I must submit the following evidence for your consideration.  Many species are known to have engaged in community caregiving.  It has been suggested, for example, that many of the hadrosaurids exploited the extended family for this purpose.  For example, the fossil record shows evidence of simultaneous multiple bone fractures healing!  This cannot happen when disadvantaged organisms within a specific community are left to fend completely for themselves.  Bear in mind that many of these species, such as the Mamentiosaur, evolved in the early triassic period and therefore scant genetic evidence still exists.  That this species survived for at least 30 million years is testament to their successful management.  But we have enough evidence for other species, and in fact, various sects within our own over the millenia, from which a similar argument might be constructed.  (I have a personal preference for the arcane, but you can imagine examples closer to home, both in space and in time.)  Yours is a position which may not lend itself to the orthodox convention of arbitrarily labelling as liberal or conservative a given philosophy.  I respectfully submit that there are many lines of evidence that the rejection of medicine, whether holistic, pharmaceutical, or preventative, may be misguided.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

I'm a very Conservative Democrat.  Two of my most Conservative aspects are that
1. I am staunchly pro-life, and
2. I am staunchly pro-school vouchers.
Anyone else?

Conservative aspects:
1. I am staunchly pro-life
2. I am for school vouchers (competition improves quality)
3. I believe in freedom of religious expression in public places.
4. I am against redefinition of marriage to include same-sex couples.
5. I am against "reverse discrimination" affirmative action.
6. I am pro-Israel.
7. I am against extensive bilinigual education (get students learning in English as quickly as possible).
8. I am for unilateral US military action - IF our national security is at risk, and IF all diplomatic channels have been exhausted.
9. I am for increased globalism to stimulate economic growth in the developing world.
Liberal aspects:
1. I am for responsible environmental management.
2. I am for reducing the tax burden on the working class and poor.
3. I am for a two-state solution to Israel-Palestine.
4. I am for globally reduced military buildup.
5. I believe our government should extensively fund research into alternative energy sources, electric cars, etc.  We should do everything possible to eliminate our reliance on fossil fuels, and build a long-term sustainable society.
6. I am for strong anti-trust protection, and the encouragement of competition over monopolies.
7. I am for strong securities regulations to prevent stock fraud and restore investor confidence in our markets.
8. I believe in encouraging immigration, especially of skilled labor - we should actively encourage a "reverse brain drain."

[angus]

Anti-medicine-  I don't know if this is conservative or liberal but I think that if you're sick than that sucks for you, either die or get over it.

What the hell was I thinking?  It occurs to me that the use of prescription lenses weaken our species.  600 years ago, only about 2% of the population or less had poor eyesight.  It remained an occassional aberation because if you had bad eyes, you stumbled off a cliff before you passed on your genes.  So humans could see very well.  But since the invention of glasses, nearly-blind people can live long enough to have children, to pass on the bad-eyesight gene.  By now, the portion of the population having bad eyesight will be around one-fifth.  And that's only going to get bigger!

I guess we're figuring out the difference between 'compassionate' and 'conservative' eh, rightwingnut?  No need to let any of that compassion get in our way.

[Gustaf]

Anti-medicine-  I don't know if this is conservative or liberal but I think that if you're sick than that sucks for you, either die or get over it.

What the hell was I thinking?  It occurs to me that the use of prescription lenses weaken our species.  600 years ago, only about 2% of the population or less had poor eyesight.  It remained an occassional aberation because if you had bad eyes, you stumbled off a cliff before you passed on your genes.  So humans could see very well.  But since the invention of glasses, nearly-blind people can live long enough to have children, to pass on the bad-eyesight gene.  By now, the portion of the population having bad eyesight will be around one-fifth.  And that's only going to get bigger!

I guess we're figuring out the difference between 'compassionate' and 'conservative' eh, rightwingnut?  No need to let any of that compassion get in our way.

One of the reasons for it being so nice with a red avatar, you know...

[angus]

But Saudia Arabia, an otherwise very rightist state has one of the best systems of socialized medicine in the world.  Keep the peasants happy and silent if you give them free drugs and bandages, right?  So it's not quite that simple gustaf.  Sorry, you know I like to take a big dump on the easy questions just to make 'em think harder, because, unlike Ross Perot used to say, it is not "just that simple people."

Okay, no more demagoguery for me.  I must contribute to the GDP today.

[Gustaf]

But Saudia Arabia, an otherwise very rightist state has one of the best systems of socialized medicine in the world.  Keep the peasants happy and silent if you give them free drugs and bandages, right?  So it's not quite that simple gustaf.  Sorry, you know I like to take a big dump on the simple questions just to make 'em think harder, because, unlike Ross Perot used to say, it is not "just that simple people."

Well, I don't see it affecting my point, since it's rightist, as you say. Now, i guess if you'd brought up Cuba it would've been different...

Seriously, I value civil liberties much higher than medicine, at least in theory.

[angus]

As do I young swede.  That's why mine is blue.  

[Gustaf]

As do I young swede.  That's why mine is blue.  

Ah, and why mine is red.

[Nation]

My most liberal stance on an issue is...... ::drum roll::


I'm against the death penalty.

Way to go, GWBfan!

[classical liberal]

Anti-medicine-  I don't know if this is conservative or liberal but I think that if you're sick than that sucks for you, either die or get over it.

What the hell was I thinking?  It occurs to me that the use of prescription lenses weaken our species.  600 years ago, only about 2% of the population or less had poor eyesight.  It remained an occassional aberation because if you had bad eyes, you stumbled off a cliff before you passed on your genes.  So humans could see very well.  But since the invention of glasses, nearly-blind people can live long enough to have children, to pass on the bad-eyesight gene.  By now, the portion of the population having bad eyesight will be around one-fifth.  And that's only going to get bigger!

I guess we're figuring out the difference between 'compassionate' and 'conservative' eh, rightwingnut?  No need to let any of that compassion get in our way.

We're ing up the natural evolution towards a more fit gene pool.  Unless we stop, it will be our downfall as a specie.

[Gustaf]

Anti-medicine-  I don't know if this is conservative or liberal but I think that if you're sick than that sucks for you, either die or get over it.

What the hell was I thinking?  It occurs to me that the use of prescription lenses weaken our species.  600 years ago, only about 2% of the population or less had poor eyesight.  It remained an occassional aberation because if you had bad eyes, you stumbled off a cliff before you passed on your genes.  So humans could see very well.  But since the invention of glasses, nearly-blind people can live long enough to have children, to pass on the bad-eyesight gene.  By now, the portion of the population having bad eyesight will be around one-fifth.  And that's only going to get bigger!

I guess we're figuring out the difference between 'compassionate' and 'conservative' eh, rightwingnut?  No need to let any of that compassion get in our way.

We're g up the natural evolution towards a more fit gene pool.  Unless we stop, it will be our downfall as a specie.

That's almost Opebo-like...I'm a humanist myself, so I obivously don't agree with your sentiment.

[Nation]

This has been an extremely interesting thread. As for natural selection, guys, it's too late to try and reverse a lot of the things we've brought onto ourselves. Like bad eyesight. If somoene has bad eyesight nowadays, they're going to get glasses. Oh well.

I find one thing very amusing, and that's how in such short periods of time, the idea of a "liberal" idea and a "conservative" idea have been twisted around. Fiscal responsibility could actually be taken away from the Republicans, if the Democrats play their cards right. Humanitarian Aid used to be a liberal idea, now it's the driving force for why we went into Iraq, since the first argument about WMDs threatening us didn't pan out.

I'm pretty moderate. I vote for Democrats and Republicans alike. I may vote for Nader in 2004, since MD isn't exactly a "swing state."

1. I'm for free trade, but in order to fix problems that NAFTA creates, you can't REPEAL it, that just makes the problem worse. Help make NAFTA better, that should be a concern for anyone who doesn't like it.

2. I'd support a Balanced Budget Amendment.

3. With the deficit rising, social security funding needs to be slightly cut (as does defense spending, though), and social programs need to be analyzed. Those which truly aren't benefiting anyone need to be scrapped. Lower taxes is great, but I'll pay them if it helps the majority of my generation.

4. Race-based affirmative action should be scrapped. I would probably support a class-based affirmative action.

5. Against gay marriage in name, but give the queers their civil unions, that has EVERY benefit of heterosexual marriage. Social security, hospital visits, etc.

6. Less stringent enviornmental regulations. Keep the necessary ones in place, but states like Oregon and Washington take a big hit with stupid-!@#$ enviornmental laws. There are a lot of things that happent to the earth (most of them are NATURAL). In a billion years the sun will collapse anyway, so there.

7. I'm not staunchly against faith-based charity programs, but before you use these, make sure the non-faith based ones are receiving adequate attention.

8. I'm against imperialism masqueading as "humanitarian aid." If you're going to help out crappy countries, there are ones in more dire straits than Iraq.

9. The secularism in America is becoming ridiculous. Teachers can't say the word God or wear a cross around their neck, and the !@#$ing Christmas Vacation, the week off from school that kids love, has become the "Non-Denominational Winter Holiday Break".


On the flip side, I'm very much pro-choice, pro-welfare (true, honest reform is extremely difficult without hurting those who are legitimately using it), anti-capital punishment, pro-immigration, and a strong supporter of public schools (and making them better).

[angus]

The secularism in America is becoming ridiculous. Teachers can't say the word God or wear a cross around their neck, and the !@#$ing Christmas Vacation, the week off from school that kids love, has become the "Non-Denominational Winter Holiday Break".

In my country a teacher can always wear a cross, a star, a veil, an ankh, a wheel, a yin-yang symbol, or whatever they like.  I hope.  This is not USSR (or France).  Nor will you ever hear the word secularism pass my lips, except in reference to the statements of others.  It is a silly word describing an artificial concept for people with narrow minds who disdain religion.  In fact, it is a replacement for religion.  Since I am not religious and have no need for religion, I have no need for any replacement thereof.  

With the exception of welfare, I agree with everything you posit "on the flip side."

[Gustaf]

The secularism in America is becoming ridiculous. Teachers can't say the word God or wear a cross around their neck, and the !@#$ing Christmas Vacation, the week off from school that kids love, has become the "Non-Denominational Winter Holiday Break".

In my country a teacher can always wear a cross, a star, a veil, an ankh, a wheel, a yin-yang symbol, or whatever they like.  I hope.  This is not USSR (or France).  Nor will you ever hear the word secularism pass my lips, except in reference to the statements of others.  It is a silly word describing an artificial concept for people with narrow minds who disdain religion.  In fact, it is a replacement for religion.  Since I am not religious and have no need for religion, I have no need for any replacement thereof.  

With the exception of welfare, I agree with everything you posit "on the flip side."

Secularism is about separating church from state. People's private religious beliefs are all fine by me. Religious traditions that has become national, popular traditions, such as Christmas break is different and shouldn't be messed up by PC, liberal idiots...

[Nation]

Ooh, ooh, another thing. Political Correctness is getting rather ridiculous, but that's only because blowhards like Bill O'Reilly mention the most EXTREME cases in their shows that happen in some messed up part of town.

Legitimate political correctness is actually a good thing, whether you like it or not. There are old stereotypes and slurs that truly do offend people, and truly are mean-spirited (I don't like how "retarded" and "gay" have become names used to degrade others). But that's the liberal side of me kicking in.

[angus]

No, separation of church and state is about separation of church and state.  I'm all for that.  Secularism is a form of mental masturbation.  You're making me use that nasty word secularism again, but it's important to make this point.  Of all the myths spawned by the Enlightenment, the idea of secularism is the most absurd.  Throughout much of the world, religion is thriving with undiminished vitality. Where believers are in the minority, as they are in your country today, traditional faiths have been replaced by liberal humanism, which is now established as the unthinking creed of conventional people. Yet liberal humanism is itself very obviously a religion -- a shoddy derivative of Christian faith notably more irrational than the original article, and in recent times more harmful.

If you have no religion, I have no problem with that.  If you do, I have no problem with that.  If you feel the need to invent new words to describe your condition because no such word previously existed, I have no problem with that.  But secularism is a false concept.  I need to get to work, but this subject needs its due, so I'll think about it a bit more to see if I can explain more clearly.

[Nation]

No, separation of church and state is about separation of church and state.  I'm all for that.  Secularism is a form of mental masturbation.  You're making me use that nasty word secularism again, but it's important to make this point.  Of all the myths spawned by the Enlightenment, the idea of secularism is the most absurd.  Throughout much of the world, religion is thriving with undiminished vitality. Where believers are in the minority, as they are in your country today, traditional faiths have been replaced by liberal humanism, which is now established as the unthinking creed of conventional people. Yet liberal humanism is itself very obviously a religion -- a shoddy derivative of Christian faith notably more irrational than the original article, and in recent times more harmful.

If you have no religion, I have no problem with that.  If you do, I have no problem with that.  If you feel the need to invent new words to describe your condition because no such word previously existed, I have no problem with that.  But secularism is a false concept.  I need to get to work, but this subject needs its due, so I'll think about it a bit more to see if I can explain more clearly.

Preach it, brother.

[classical liberal]

Ooh, ooh, another thing. Political Correctness is getting rather ridiculous, but that's only because blowhards like Bill O'Reilly mention the most EXTREME cases in their shows that happen in some messed up part of town.

Legitimate political correctness is actually a good thing, whether you like it or not. There are old stereotypes and slurs that truly do offend people, and truly are mean-spirited (I don't like how "retarded" and "gay" have become names used to degrade others). But that's the liberal side of me kicking in.

I know some homosexuals who use gay as a derogatory term.

[Nation]

Ooh, ooh, another thing. Political Correctness is getting rather ridiculous, but that's only because blowhards like Bill O'Reilly mention the most EXTREME cases in their shows that happen in some messed up part of town.

Legitimate political correctness is actually a good thing, whether you like it or not. There are old stereotypes and slurs that truly do offend people, and truly are mean-spirited (I don't like how "retarded" and "gay" have become names used to degrade others). But that's the liberal side of me kicking in.

I know some homosexuals who use gay as a derogatory term.

That's different, and you know it. Not the same as some obnoxious ten year-old running around calling another kid a f****t.

[classical liberal]

For the most part, Political Correctness belongs only in official documents and statements that should be correct in every manner not just politically.

However, when refering to a Native American, one shouldn't call him/her an Indian; the two are different groups.  That's more of avoiding stupidity than being Politically Correct though, getting the wrong hemisphere and all.  Similar cases of stupidity should be avoided not for Political Correctness but more in the name of a concious effort to not sound like you couldn't find and name more than 5 geographical or political features on a globe.

Calling someone a n, a gook, a wetback, or any other similarly intoned term is probably not the best way to avoid conflict.  Unless you're picking a fight it would be wise to avoid such terminology, if you don't and get shot then you earned your death.  Of course if you are picking a fight, then go right ahead.