Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Social issues come first. You can't be a legitimate "fiscal conservative" or "small government conservative" while ignoring social issues.
A moral society of strong marriages, extended families, and flourishing churches needs a much smaller safety net than an amoral society of self-directed individuals pursuing their "dreams" or private interests. That's how our grandparents survived the Great Depression. This generation wouldn't last a month.
Spending is out of control because our society is crumbling. Regulations are out of control because people can't be trusted. The growth of government is out of control because Americans no longer promote the common good in their own communities. Etc.
All politics is morality, and for most people, morality is derived from religious faith or at least strengthened by it. America's government problem is at heart a religious problem.
In the end, government either supports family, faith and community or it works against it. A pretended "neutrality" always ends in hostility. Government always has been and always will be involved in the social issues. The only question is: on whose side?
Social issues come first. You can't be a legitimate "fiscal conservative" or "small government conservative" while ignoring social issues.
A moral society of strong marriages, extended families, and flourishing churches needs a much smaller safety net than an amoral society of self-directed individuals pursuing their "dreams" or private interests. That's how our grandparents survived the Great Depression. This generation wouldn't last a month.
Maybe you should have watched Ken Burns' "Dust Bowl" last week. You had people from the most Conservative parts of the country in Kansas, Nebraska and Oklahoma literally begging the government to help them out.
For a lot of people a WPA job was the difference between survival and starvation.
Social issues come first. You can't be a legitimate "fiscal conservative" or "small government conservative" while ignoring social issues.
A moral society of strong marriages, extended families, and flourishing churches needs a much smaller safety net than an amoral society of self-directed individuals pursuing their "dreams" or private interests. That's how our grandparents survived the Great Depression. This generation wouldn't last a month.
Spending is out of control because our society is crumbling. Regulations are out of control because people can't be trusted. The growth of government is out of control because Americans no longer promote the common good in their own communities. Etc.
All politics is morality, and for most people, morality is derived from religious faith or at least strengthened by it. America's government problem is at heart a religious problem.
In the end, government either supports family, faith and community or it works against it. A pretended "neutrality" always ends in hostility. Government always has been and always will be involved in the social issues. The only question is: on whose side?
That is why Progressive attempt to destroy our great social instutions, bit by bit, witness "same-sex marriage" attempts, and a whole host of other subversion.
Progressivism is to a nation, and a cancer tumor is to a lung.
I'd agree that the problems we face are caused mostly by lack of morals. Religion itself is irrelevant, you can be a moral and ethical person while not believing in any god or higher power.
The main problem facing the country is people believe they can take what others produce by force and spend it on themselves. Along with believing they can get free lunches. (bailouts/excessive welfare/ ect)
A moral society of strong marriages, extended families, and flourishing churches needs a much smaller safety net than an amoral society of self-directed individuals pursuing their "dreams" or private interests. That's how our grandparents survived the Great Depression.
You know you can go to the poorest areas of the country, rural and urban and for every liquor store there's at least 2 churches where every sunday folks in their Sunday best just keep walking past the poor and out of the area as fast as they can.
As for the Great Depression, I wish you had put your book of fables down long enough to have watched Ken Burn's the Dust Bowl. The Church didn't get folks through it because the minister's family died of the dust just like everybody else or got the hell out of dodge when he had a chance. No Western in was that damn blasted guvment(sic) that stepped in, gave people jobs, paid them for their starving cattle, retaught them how to farm so that they could save the top soil and fed them until the dust died down. God did not provide!
I agree that subsidizing bastards is a bad idea. I do not believe encouraging homosexual monogomy is a bad idea. Not sure why encouraging monogamy among heterosexuals is good but encouraging monogamy among homosexuals is bad.
Maybe you should have watched Ken Burns' "Dust Bowl" last week. You had people from the most Conservative parts of the country in Kansas, Nebraska and Oklahoma literally begging the government to help them out.
For a lot of people a WPA job was the difference between survival and starvation.
Maybe you should show me where I said that government has no legitimate role in providing a safety net.
You know you can go to the poorest areas of the country, rural and urban and for every liquor store there's at least 2 churches where every sunday folks in their Sunday best just keep walking past the poor and out of the area as fast as they can.
As for the Great Depression, I wish you had put your book of fables down long enough to have watched Ken Burn's the Dust Bowl. The Church didn't get folks through it because the minister's family died of the dust just like everybody else or got the hell out of dodge when he had a chance. No Western in was that damn blasted guvment(sic) that stepped in, gave people jobs, paid them for their starving cattle, retaught them how to farm so that they could save the top soil and fed them until the dust died down. God did not provide!
Maybe you should talk to some people who actually lived through it. People of that era depended heavily on families, communities, and churches to get them through. Government couldn't possibly do it all and didn't do it all. God DID provide, and in some cases, He provided through government - but your post is a threadjack and misses the point of the OP entirely.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
