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 conservatism is very consistent with the message of limited government and personal freedom. Social conservatism is about holding the federal and state governments accountable under their respective constitutions. The federal government was never intended to become a vehicle for social programs. Social programs were to remain under the authority of each State. Social conservatism is about restoring the original intentions of the founding fathers.
The intentions of the Founders was never to have the majority force their religious beliefs on the minority. Social Conservatism is evil as evident by its overwhelming appeal in the Middle East and Africa.
Social Conservatism will never die, only its definition will change. Hell, 300 years ago, many American social conservatives would have been burned at the stake for their views or what they tolerate.
isn't that the truth; heck in the 50s if we did any of the things that are completely accepted today, we would ahve been kicked out of school, almost killed by our parents or maybe even ended up in jail...
Even think about how we dressed for church or for school or work? How about single moms keeping their kids, or couples living together?
The intentions of the Founders was never to have the majority force their religious beliefs on the minority. Social Conservatism is evil as evident by its overwhelming appeal in the Middle East and Africa.
Of course, the Founders never intended for government to be involved in healthcare ,much less birth control.
The intentions of the Founders was never to have the majority force their religious beliefs on the minority. Social Conservatism is evil as evident by its overwhelming appeal in the Middle East and Africa.
"But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." -- Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782
When that religious belief becomes law, then you are talking force, but until that time it is merely rhetoric. It does no harm, nor does it establish a government religion, if a Valedictorian wants to express their religious views during a graduation speech. Just as it does no harm, nor does it establish a government religion, when a politician evokes their religious beliefs in a speech.
As an atheist social/fiscal conservative, I have absolutely no problem with people who want to pray in public schools, or express their religious beliefs. I only have a problem when those religious beliefs are enacted into law, because then it becomes force.
It would appear that the "Takers" outvote the "Makers" and that is not a good sign.
Eventually, there will not be enough "Makers" to be deprived for the benefit of the "Takers".
Then there hasn't been a Conservative candidate for President in a looooooong time.
we just had the most socially conservative President in Modern history from 2000-2008.
We had a born again Jesus Freak occupying the White House who took us to War because God told him to.
Fiscally I agree, there has rarely been a fiscally conservative President. CLinton is the closest I have seen.
What I find humorous about that map is in the area listed as "nothing" you have 3 of the top 10 most populated states in the country with Illinois at 5th, Ohio at 7th, and Michigan at 8th. Not to mention that being the rust belt, believe it or not we still make s*** here! That hardly qualifies as nothing.
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.