Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-18-2014, 05:37 AM
 
Location: Just over the horizon
18,461 posts, read 7,092,496 times
Reputation: 11707

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Annie53 View Post
Which means "I would like to overturn Roe v Wade."

Playing word games is not good enough.
No, a true Constitutional Conservative believes in the concept of limited Federal government and states rights to govern themselves as they see fit on most issues.
This, along with fiscal responsability and the economy are what the GOP needs to focus on.
Leave social issues to the states as it should be.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-18-2014, 05:51 AM
 
Location: Just over the horizon
18,461 posts, read 7,092,496 times
Reputation: 11707
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ringo1 View Post
People making $200 or more are NOT the majority of workers or voters.
Irrelevant

The notion that all Conservatives are rich is a myth perpetuated by the left who want to use class warefare and envy as a political tool.

True conservatives are that way because of their beliefs, values and work ethic, not because of how much money they make.
I don't make even close to 200k and I've been a Constitutional Conservative (with some moderate and Libertarian leanings) since my mid 20's.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2014, 06:05 AM
 
Location: Florida
76,971 posts, read 47,640,534 times
Reputation: 14806
Quote:
Originally Posted by OpinionInOcala View Post
Most Libertarians that I know (and including myself) support abortion up until the point of viability, or to save the life of the mother thereafter. That of course doesn't mean that most of us personally agree with it, because we don't; but it's not our business to decide that for everyone else and that's the point. As far as I'm concerned, if somebody wants to peer -- or climb -- into my wife's womb for any reason other than those she has authorized, they had better have their affairs in order.
Libertarians are typically social liberals, so your pro-abortion stance does not surprise me. I am talking about the trend where former social conservatives are moving towards social liberalism. In the past social conservatism was more politically profitable because of the large Christian base in US, but now they are abandoning that base in pursuit of the younger voters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2014, 06:06 AM
 
Location: 500 miles from home
33,942 posts, read 22,532,112 times
Reputation: 25816
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dooleys1300 View Post
Irrelevant

The notion that all Conservatives are rich is a myth perpetuated by the left who want to use class warefare and envy as a political tool.

True conservatives are that way because of their beliefs, values and work ethic, not because of how much money they make.
I don't make even close to 200k and I've been a Constitutional Conservative (with some moderate and Libertarian leanings) since my mid 20's.
Funny. I don't have the notion that all Conservatives are rich. No more than I have the notion that all Democrats are rich - OR poor - depending on which RW blog one reads.

Nothing you have said here negated what I said. People making $200,000 or more are NOT the majority of voters - Republican OR Democrat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2014, 06:11 AM
 
Location: Florida
76,971 posts, read 47,640,534 times
Reputation: 14806
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dooleys1300 View Post
Irrelevant

The notion that all Conservatives are rich is a myth perpetuated by the left who want to use class warefare and envy as a political tool.
No one argues all conservatives are rich. Everyone knows it is not true. I think the argument (true or not) is that they are tools of the rich.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2014, 06:15 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,863 posts, read 46,634,918 times
Reputation: 18521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
Who said it needs a party? Liberalism and conservatism are not parties, and neither view own "freedom". Both claim to be lovers of freedom. However, when it comes to issues like drug legalization, which some people think is "freedom", then there should be a debate, because such "freedoms" may give the freedom of the individual to consume narcotics, but such freedom ALWAYS invites crime, so their freedom will erode the freedoms of others. We need to be careful how far you want to take the "freedom" march. Same with legalized prostitution. Some argue people should be able to sell their bodies, but again, this ALWAYS invites human trafficking and other organized crime, which erodes the freedoms of others.

Individual freedom is a great thing as long as it does not:

1. Infringe on freedoms of others
2. Disrupt domestic tranquility
3. Erode the welfare of the nation as whole

I think you are confused.

The Constitution chains the government, not the people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2014, 06:18 AM
 
Location: Florida
76,971 posts, read 47,640,534 times
Reputation: 14806
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
I think you are confused. The Constitution chains the government, not the people.
Obviously it is not me who is confused, because I did not argue the constitution chains the people.

Do you agree, or disagree with this:

Individual freedoms should always be allowed as long as it does not:

1. Infringe on freedoms of others
2. Disrupt domestic tranquility
3. Erode the welfare of the nation as whole
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2014, 06:26 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,863 posts, read 46,634,918 times
Reputation: 18521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
No one argues all conservatives are rich. Everyone knows it is not true. I think the argument (true or not) is that they are tools of the rich.

You forget Obamas administration is full of Goldman Sacs execs.
Andrew Jackson warned us about evil bankers.....
They laughed at him by placing his face on a counterfeit paper currency.

The President is a puppet for the federal reserve.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2014, 06:37 AM
 
Location: Florida
76,971 posts, read 47,640,534 times
Reputation: 14806
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
You forget Obamas administration is full of Goldman Sacs execs.
Andrew Jackson warned us about evil bankers.....They laughed at him by placing his face on a counterfeit paper currency. The President is a puppet for the federal reserve.
That's a bit of a deflection, don't you think? Yes, there are many politicans from both parties who support the banking cartels etc, but I was actually talking about the voters. Many Dem voters don't even realize how their politicians support the elite, but the conservatives rarely talk about anything else but supporting the elite, which is why they are called the "tools of the rich" (right or wrong).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2014, 06:38 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,863 posts, read 46,634,918 times
Reputation: 18521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
Obviously it is not me who is confused, because I did not argue the constitution chains the people.

Do you agree, or disagree with this:

Individual freedoms should always be allowed as long as it does not:

1. Infringe on freedoms of others
2. Disrupt domestic tranquility
3. Erode the welfare of the nation as whole
Common Law or Statutory law, wise?

If I take someone elses freedom(even if I'm law enforcement), they have a right to defend against it.
Common law.
Statutory law says intervention before it gets to that point.

Domestic tranquility is subjective to those parties involved. Define domestic tranquility for us, when individual freedom is concerned.
Common law says we are all free to do as we wish, as long as no one is harmed, not including yourself.
Statutory law says you will not even try it, especially if you might get harmed.

Welfare has been redefined as public assistance.
Common law says that the welfare of the people is up to the people
Statutory law says, the welfare of the people is up to the government.

Public assistance was labelled welfare, to set the same words as used in the Constitution, to make it seem Constitutional.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:28 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top