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.
Saudi Arabia is not Conservative it is Authoritarianism visa vi Sharia Law,
Saudi Arabia is extremely conservative embracing almost none of the western progressiveness such as civil rights or women's rights for instance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover
Do you Even know what the Hell American Conservationism even is?
I don't. There are so many definitions that anyone can pick one that suits them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover
Why don`t you learn before you open you mouth.
wo Views of Man's Rights: The Founding Fathers Vs. The Progressives
Look who's talking. Lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover
1. Equality
Founding Fathers – “All men are created equal” (Declaration of Independence).
Got it. Lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover
Men are not created with the same abilities or circumstances and it is not government’s role to attempt to make them the same.
Where does it say that in the constitution?
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover
Progressives – It is the government’s responsibility to correct inequality through redistribution & control.
First of all You're applying XXI century definitions to XVIII century politics? Not to bright. Lol
Second, in the political context of XVIII century our Founding Fathers were on the far left of the political spectrum, and revolted against the entire conservative British ruling class, rejecting not just the monarchy but also all the noble titles and privileges associated with them: a circumstance one is born into.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover
2. Natural Rights
Founding Fathers - “Human beings are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” (Declaration of Independence). Men are free to live their lives the way they desire in order to pursue happiness in the way they choose.
As long as they don't break the law or otherwise harm the society. Constitution allows to put people in prisons, doesn't it?
[quote=gunlover;34448367]
Happiness is not guaranteed. A “right” is something endowed at birth that cannot be taken away. Using the word “among” indicates there are other natural rights.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover
Property rights and economic freedom are an integral and essential part of man’s natural rights.
Where does it say that in the constitution?
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover
Progressives - A “right” is something you are given and not something that you have naturally. Progressives believe that one man’s right to certain things: a home, income, and health care supersede the right of another man to keep the property he has earned.
Does the constitution guarantee that you won't have to pay taxes? I don't think so, so no, you can't keep all the property you have earned. Does the constitution guarantee that you won't be sentenced to death for your crimes? No. So no, even the right to live can be taken away.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover
Government decides which rights to give to people and groups; government can also take those rights away. Property rights are neither sacred nor protected.
Property right were never sacred. First the properties of loyalists were simply confiscated and then the eminent domain principle takes precedent over the "sacred property rights" of any individual. Ever heard about it? Lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover
The right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness listed in the Declaration of Independence are redefined to mean government-guaranteed economic security.
Did you come up with that by yourself? It doesn't make any sense... Nobody redefined anything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover
3. Consent of the Governed
Founding Fathers - “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed” (Declaration of Independence). .
This only refers to the source of the legitimacy of the US governments. The British monarchy authority was conveyed by God, during coronation of a king, performed by a bishop. By contrast, American republic came to life through the will of the people, the will of the people being the sole source of its legitimacy but it does not mean any further consent is necessary so when you're born American your consent is not necessary to make you a subject to American laws. That's automatic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover
Progressives – The uninformed masses need an elite group to lead them because they aren’t capable of doing it themselves. They treat those that disagree with them with contempt and quash alternative views.
Did you come with that all by yourself? We have a democracy and chose our own governmenst. I am sorry if the people spoke and chose a government you don't like. Democracy doesn't mean that everyone has to agree. All we need is a majority.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover
The Progressive's plan is to replace our economic freedom with economic equality (Capitalism vs. Socialism). They do this by:
Redefining rights to be entitlements thereby justifying the redistribution of the private property of some for the benefit of others.
By labeling profit as greed and instituting a planned economy through limits on profits and production to force economic equality.
By redefining charity to be the government taking money through taxes to take care of anyone deemed in need rather than the voluntary giving of one’s own resources.
LOL. How do you know what the progressive plan is? It doesn't make any sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover
The Founding Fathers knew economic freedom cannot be separated from other freedoms.
The moral superiority of economic freedom is proven by the outcome: More people live better under capitalism than any other system. Central control produces shortages, waste, laziness, and a lack of creative entrepreneurism. It does not provide adequately or abundantly for those it claims to help; instead, it decreases the living standard for all. If a man is not guaranteed the freedom to keep the fruits of his labor, he is not free and tyranny with a loss of all rights will follow.
Who ever said that progressives want to replace capitalism with socialism? When? Where? How?
In fact all of the progressive Western European democracies are based on capitalism. Lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover
The Founding Fathers also believed that men need three qualities to remain free:
· People need to be knowledgeable enough to elect good representatives that will preserve their freedoms.
· People must be moral enough to possess self-restraint to live responsibly and not tread on the rights of others.
· People must be vigilant enough to protect their rights. (Declaration of Independence states that men have a right and a duty to overthrow a government that tramples on their natural rights so they can pursue happiness and ensure security for their rights.)
It is at this place in history that we find ourselves.
Are we as a people knowledgeable enough, moral enough, and vigilant enough to protect our rights by replacing those that seek to govern by taking away our unalienable natural rights given to us by God with those that would protect them?
I think you proved with your post that knowledge is not something that you could spare. Lol
I think you proved that the reason America is so conservative is that we have a horrible educational system.
Read again what I wrote, maybe you'll learn a thing or two.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover
I really think you need to go back, requote it, and put your post in red..
I think you have proved how much leftist dont know about America..
Maybe, maybe not, you are aware companies use their political power to just created mindless regulations to in to keep the light guy out of business and prevent competition.
That private sector loves regulations when it benefits them..... How convenient when you try and argue the "private way".
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover
Yes and no, I am not force to buy any product or service under the threat of force, well at least I use to..
LOLz. And you just expect the private sector to keep it that way..... You put too much faith in your favored sector....
I really think you need to go back, requote it, and put your post in red..
I think you have proved how much leftist dont know about America..
LOLz. You got nothing.....
Saudi Arabia is the definition of conservatism.... They want to preserve the traditions of hard line Islam Conservatism.... Just like the Christian Right does in America with Conservatism....
You have no idea what conservatism entails.... maybe you think you are a libertarian...... What are you.... like 17?
Saudi Arabia is extremely conservative embracing almost none of the western progressiveness such as civil rights or women's rights for instance.
They have a Theocracy, which controls every major aspect of a persons life.
No drinking
No porn
No free speech
No freedom of religion
No voting rights for women
Sex slaves(a secret those who defend Islam will not even admit exist in that nation but we all know does)
All thanks to Sharia Law.
so a totalitarianistic theocratic state.
How again is that anything similar to American Conservationism?
Quote:
I don't. There are so many definitions that anyone can pick one that suits them.
Then how about you read up on the subject?
Quote:
Where does it say that in the constitution?
It does not, It is a part of our ideology.
Quote:
First of all You're applying XXI century definitions to XVIII century politics? Not to bright. Lol
Second, in the political context of XVIII century our Founding Fathers were on the far left of the political spectrum, and revolted against the entire conservative British ruling class, rejecting not just the monarchy but also all the noble titles and privileges associated with them: a circumstance one is born into.
You are the one applying late 19th and early 20th century political definitions to the 17th and 18th century and vice visa.
They are to the right. They rejected the ruling class of a oligarchy for limited government.
The fact that you think they would fit on the far left of the political spectrum is a joke.
Did they favor the redistribution of wealth?
Did they see the Central government as the all powerful entity it is today?
No they did not
They had a constrained view of humanity not unconstrained
The modem [1880 to today] progressives are the same ruling class the same oligarchy.
progressives’ wide-ranging willingness to contradict their own professed principles: gun-control proponents who travel with armed bodyguards, voucher opponents who send their kids to private schools, and minimum-wage-hike advocates who pay their staff less than the minimum wage, among others.
So what do progressives really want? If, as I suspect, the currency of progressivism isn’t policies or results, but emotions, what does that approach build? What kind of a country do you get when political leaders are driven by a desire to feel that they are more enlightened, noble, tolerant, wise, sensitive, conscious, and smart than most other people?
The evidence before us suggests progressives’ ideal society would be one where they enjoy great power to regulate the lives of others and impose restrictions and limitations they themselves would never accept in their own lives. Very few people object to an aristocracy with special rights and privileges as long as they’re in it.
For example, a key provision of Obamacare is a tax on “Cadillac health-care plans” — the architects of the legislation having concluded that part of the problem with America’s health-care system is that some employers are just too generous with their employees’ health insurance. Plans worth more than $10,200 for individuals or $27,500 for families face a 40 percent excise tax starting in 2018.
These people are not "progressives" they just used that term as a cover for what they truly are, Authoritarian statists.
A small elite ruling class, ruling over a mass of impoverished, dependent, disarmed slaves, yeah that is progress, that same system for the last 10,000 years give or take same areas of Greece and Sparta.
Quote:
As long as they don't break the law or otherwise harm the society. Constitution allows to put people in prisons, doesn't it?
Well if the terms of punishment are not found in the Constitution like piracy, then it is left to the states..
[quote=gunlover;34448367]
Happiness is not guaranteed. A “right” is something endowed at birth that cannot be taken away. Using the word “among” indicates there are other natural rights.
Quote:
Where does it say that in the constitution?
It is a self evident truth, you have the right to earn, buy, sale, and keep the fruits of your labor.
Just because something is not found in the Constitution does not mean it is not protected by it.
Why is that? Because the Constitution is a set of limits for the Federal Government not the Citizenry
Quote:
Does the constitution guarantee that you won't have to pay taxes? I don't think so, so no, you can't keep all the property you have earned. Does the constitution guarantee that you won't be sentenced to death for your crimes? No. So no, even the right to live can be taken away.
Did I say that it does not? Yes it can but only after a trial. Well at least it use to be that way, Obama murdering for lack of a better word Anwar al-Awlaki may have ended this.
Quote:
Property right were never sacred. First the properties of loyalists were simply confiscated and then the eminent domain principle takes precedent over the "sacred property rights" of any individual. Ever heard about it? Lol
Yes I remeberd that, and the cluster fluck of eminent domain, which I do not like at all, and wish to see ended....
We can restore the value and high integrity of property rights..
Quote:
Did you come up with that by yourself? It doesn't make any sense... Nobody redefined anything.
Really Google Second Bill of Rights
"economic bill of rights" which would guarantee eight specific rights:
Employment, with a living wage
Food, clothing and leisure
Farmers' rights to a fair income
Freedom from unfair competition and monopolies
Housing
Medical care
Social security
Education
Yeah not Marxist at right?
Quote:
This only refers to the source of the legitimacy of the US governments. The British monarchy authority was conveyed by God, during coronation of a king, performed by a bishop. By contrast, American republic came to life through the will of the people, the will of the people being the sole source of its legitimacy but it does not mean any further consent is necessary so when you're born American your consent is not necessary to make you a subject to American laws. That's automatic.
The will of the people is second only the Constitution.
Quote:
Did you come with that all by yourself? We have a democracy and chose our own governmenst. I am sorry if the people spoke and chose a government you don't like. Democracy doesn't mean that everyone has to agree. All we need is a majority.
More proof a ruling class is leading a nation of sheeple
We do not have a democracy, we have a Constitutional Republic with a democratic process for electing Representative.. A majority of 50.01 % does not get to limit, alter or abolish the rights of everyone else.
All we need is the Constitution, the knowledge and the will to defend it for all threats both foreign but more importantly domestic.
Quote:
LOL. How do you know what the progressive plan is? It doesn't make any sense.
How do I know? I read what they write, and I listen to what they say take them and everything they say as I do all threats, at face value..
the Cloward-Piven Strategy of orchestrated crisis, which they spelled out in “The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty,” published in the Nation magazine in 1966. The strategy called for aggressively recruiting poor Americans onto the nation’s welfare rolls in an effort to overwhelm governments. The theory was that imposing such impossible burdens would force radical change upon society.
Quote:
Who ever said that progressives want to replace capitalism with socialism? When? Where? How?
In fact all of the progressive Western European democracies are based on capitalism. Lol
Western Europe has Democratic Socialism and a massive welfare state that is going to bankrupt them.
The systems and laws that suggest speak their true intent.
Quote:
I think you proved with your post that knowledge is not something that you could spare. Lol
Coming from so one who know soo little about the basic foundations and ideal of the modern progressive IE regressive statist..I really don't think you are in position to pull rank on anyone..
They have a Theocracy, which controls every major aspect of a persons life.
No drinking
No porn
No free speech
No freedom of religion
No voting rights for women
Sex slaves(a secret those who defend Islam will not even admit exist in that nation but we all know does)
All thanks to Sharia Law.
so a totalitarianistic theocratic state.
How again is that anything similar to American Conservationism?
No it's similar to the Christian Right who identifies with the conservative party..... Were you around for "Family Values" during the Reagan years.....?
Christian Right... all thanks to the bible........
You are the one applying late 19th and early 20th century political definitions to the 17th and 18th century and vice visa.
They are to the right. They rejected the ruling class of a oligarchy for limited government.
LOLz.... Conservatives were in favor of the the monarchy.....
Quote:
The fact that you think they would fit on the far left of the political spectrum is a joke.
It's called history.....
Quote:
Did they favor the redistribution of wealth?
Define that....
Adam Smith had some progressive ideas about redistribution of wealth......
Quote:
Did they see the Central government as the all powerful entity it is today?
Of course not..... How could they see how capitalism has diminished America in the 21st century?
Quote:
They had a constrained view of humanity not unconstrained
Huh?
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.
