View Poll Results: How would it affect your vote if the republican party did not oppose SSM?

Voters
36. You may not vote on this poll
  • I would not vote republican if they did not support a ban on SSM

    3 8.33%
  • I would be less likely to vote republican

    3 8.33%
  • I would be more likely to vote republican

    8 22.22%
  • It would have no effect on my vote

    15 41.67%
  • Other, don't know

    7 19.44%
Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 71 to 78 of 78

Thread: For Republicans/Conservatives: Party Support and SSM

  1. #71
    Relentless Thinking Fury
    ChezC3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    9,128

    Re: For Republicans/Conservatives: Party Support and SSM

    [QUOTE]
    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    A bird in the hand is worth two in your sleeve and each are convertible into 5 card tricks.

    Regarding your distinction between America and Americans


    True enough, except that our higher income folks tend to be less likely to invest in personal protection. Gun ownership is disproportionately among the lower income - which might tie a little into a conversation below.
    Ah, but here is the onion, higher income folk rely more on the State for their personal protection. Relinquishing their ability to use force and giving license to a "higher authority". I find this rather....convenient.



    No. I am saying that social conservatives are best suited to survive and adapt to it. It is those who are most dependent upon the state for their sustenance who can least survive loss of the state as a provider.
    I would refer to the above comment as a counter.



    well that is, broadly, very socially conservative of you.
    Yes, well, just trying to help narrow the gap...



    Firstly, this was not what I was referencing. Third Way folks are typically rejecting Socialism and Capitalism in favor of Corporatism.

    Secondly, Orwell was dead wrong on this. There is good reason to worry about the mob, which is why our founders were so rightly suspicious of them. Democracy does not equal Liberal (in its' classic sense) government, and the mob will feel completely justified in stripping away your rights. Mobs are highly emotional things, prone to follow extremist demagogues in perpetuating crimes that no single member of it ever would, given the light of day and time to contemplate his action - but the safety, the security, the ability to corporatise blame that we find in the mob - ah - that allows him to undertake all manner of evil.
    Well, I sure as all get out am not an advocate of Corporatism. I was alluding to change in condition, and the propensity to shun it by conservatives.


    No. Fear of the mob is based on an appreciation of the human psyche and human history.
    I find it more based on fear of loss and attachment, but my view of "mob" in this would better be seen as simply "Others"



    You are conflating two only mildly overlapping groups. Again, I would urge you to pick up Murray. Fascinating, paradoxical creatures, humans.
    Oh, I'll get it, put it on the fast track too, seemed a very interesting read. and thanks again for the recommendation...

  2. #72
    Relentless Thinking Fury
    ChezC3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    9,128

    Re: For Republicans/Conservatives: Party Support and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    No problem, I didn't think you were playing games - in my view, much of what western civilization is based on comes from the common sense morality of religious teachings but those need not be strictly adhered to based on ancient or outdated teachings but must be adjusted to the wealth of newly acquired knowledge and the circumstances of today's society and its many factions. It is why I believe government serves best the further it keeps from the daily lives of its citizens.
    Well, here I'd point out like cpwill did, that many circumstances of today are age old issues. The only new ones I'd dare say would be those found in the realm of ethics as it regards scientific exploration. (stem-cell, cloning, et al. )

    I agree whole-heartedly on having the least amount of government intrusion.

    I find that when people argue about keeping religion out of the public square that they simply don't like to hear the word "No". Which is why I looked for further clarification so as not to go down the wrong trail...

  3. #73
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,107

    Re: For Republicans/Conservatives: Party Support and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    Do you dispute that the religious right does just that?
    Yes. It is a distinction that is commonly overlooked - the religious right is not, for example, arguing for the criminalization of sloth or the use of the state to enforce a 10% tithe. They are arguing that, inasmuch as government shapes society, it should do so with a correct set of values and goals, values and goals which are informed by their faith.

    As an example, we believe that each individual has inherent rights that he receives directly from God. That is (historically) a uniquely Christian construct; it came to us largely from the Church. There is nothing wrong with also arguing that it happens to be correct and that therefore government policy should reflect that truth.

  4. #74
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,107

    Re: For Republicans/Conservatives: Party Support and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    Social conservatism need not be doctinaire and strong social institutions do not and should not rely on government for their existence.
    Social Conservatism is not about having government create strong social institutions. It is mostly about making sure that government does not help destroy important social institutions, and that where it does impact, it does so in a manner as to solve issues of the commons and reinforce them.

    It's a neat rhetorical trick. "Progressives", who by their very name declare that they are interested in leveraging the power of government to change society, accuse conservatives of doing the same simply when they do not fall in line. And folks buy it. It's part of the popular narrative. Oh, you're so enlightened if you realize that social conservatives are really tyrants for worrying about whether or not we should be encouraging single-parenthood.

  5. #75
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,189

    Re: For Republicans/Conservatives: Party Support and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Yes. It is a distinction that is commonly overlooked - the religious right is not, for example, arguing for the criminalization of sloth or the use of the state to enforce a 10% tithe. They are arguing that, inasmuch as government shapes society, it should do so with a correct set of values and goals, values and goals which are informed by their faith.

    As an example, we believe that each individual has inherent rights that he receives directly from God. That is (historically) a uniquely Christian construct; it came to us largely from the Church. There is nothing wrong with also arguing that it happens to be correct and that therefore government policy should reflect that truth.
    I don't disagree with you here, I'm more concerned about those who tend to quote scripture as a rationale for their position on a particular issue without accepting that there are many moral people in the world who aren't the least bit religious or who avoid religion because of the corruption that rules it. Those people may be more accepting of the position otherwise and are turned off by the stridently religious approach to government policy. Even many people of faith dislike their religious leaders and voices being too actively involved in government policy discussions.

  6. #76
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,107

    Re: For Republicans/Conservatives: Party Support and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    I don't disagree with you here, I'm more concerned about those who tend to quote scripture as a rationale for their position on a particular issue without accepting that there are many moral people in the world who aren't the least bit religious or who avoid religion because of the corruption that rules it. Those people may be more accepting of the position otherwise and are turned off by the stridently religious approach to government policy. Even many people of faith dislike their religious leaders and voices being too actively involved in government policy discussions.
    ....so your problem is that people may have different reasons for coming to their conclusions? I see no particularly better reason for you to be worried about my faith informing my views than me being worried about atheism informing anothers'.

  7. #77
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,189

    Re: For Republicans/Conservatives: Party Support and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    ....so your problem is that people may have different reasons for coming to their conclusions? I see no particularly better reason for you to be worried about my faith informing my views than me being worried about atheism informing anothers'.
    I'm not worried about your faith informing your views, you miss my point such as it is.

    I'm cautioning that using the doctrine of your faith as a means of justifying your position in a matter does not advance your position among those less or not religious and my, in fact, harm your position. You should be able to explain and promote your position without reverting to scripture in order to rationalize it. As an example, saying that gay marriage is evil because the bible says men shall not lay down with men is not a strong argument against gay marriage even though you may have a strong argument. People may simply dismiss your argument by referring to the depravity of some in religious hierarchy. However, if you make your argument based on sound, moral reasoning, even if that reasoning is founded in your faith, and that sound moral reasoning speaks to what people also feel themselves, they may be more accepting of your position.

    Basically, people don't like being preached to but they do acknowledge and welcome people when they reason with them.

  8. #78
    Sage
    chromium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    A2
    Last Seen
    06-05-17 @ 10:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    16,968

    Re: For Republicans/Conservatives: Party Support and SSM

    Repubs who decide their vote on this issue would likely stay home at best, which is where they belong on election day anyway.

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •