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.
But in the Red States, such as Oklahoma, many people wish more Republican church pastors, like Huckabee, would run for political office. The issues closest to the hearts of people in such states really are stopping gay marriage, banning abortion, promotion of Christianity in public schools, posting The Ten Commandments in or outside of public buildings, opposition to marijuana law reform, etc. And of course, pastors are closest to these issues as well. While he has a lot of competition, Huckabee is sure to win a number of Red States.
Pandering to that kind of thinking holds us back from reaching the magic number of 270.
California and Rhode Island alone have more electoral college votes than the 10 most Republican leaning states COMBINED. See the situation we are in? We need to appeal to places that have large numbers of votes in the Electoral College ... and it so happens that most of these places are populated by people who are secular about religion and moderate in terms of politics.
Social conservatives is a poison. It dictates how others should live their lives and is the enemy of freedom.
Conservatism dictates that progressive leftists should not attempt to write laws that coerce others to be molded into a singular collective dogma.
Conservatism is about individual identity and individual liberty: "to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions and their sensations...conferred, as against the Government, the right to be let alone--the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men." -Louis Brandeis
Progressivism is: the individual must be sacrificed for the monolithic collective, achieved through endless, leftist Big Government nagging, edicts, agency rules.
Conservatism dictates that progressive leftists should not attempt to write laws that coerce others to be molded into a singular collective dogma.
Conservatism is about individual identity and individual liberty: "to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions and their sensations...conferred, as against the Government, the right to be let alone--the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men." -Louis Brandeis
Progressivism is: the individual must be sacrificed for the monolithic collective, achieved through endless, leftist Big Government nagging, edicts, agency rules.
That definition of conservative is no longer true. Between conservatives and liberals, who is more likely to support the war on drugs? or sodomy laws? or dress codes? In what way do these types of things support the definition of conservative that you gave?
Conservatism dictates that progressive leftists should not attempt to write laws that coerce others to be molded into a singular collective dogma.
Conservatism is about individual identity and individual liberty: "to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions and their sensations...conferred, as against the Government, the right to be let alone--the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men." -Louis Brandeis
Progressivism is: the individual must be sacrificed for the monolithic collective, achieved through endless, leftist Big Government nagging, edicts, agency rules.
Not only does that definition of conservatism appear to be no longer true, it seems to me to be just the opposite of today's truth.
It seems that social conservatism wants to suppress individual identity and liberty. They don't want you to have enough individual identity to be gay, and they don't want you to have enough liberty to use (or even possess) cannabis.
In my opinion, this is due in large part to the wide exposure even the most "outrageous" behavior commands in the media and on the Internet -- a good example being Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner -- so that more and more people are becoming accustomed to thinking that something like "mere" homosexuality, that not so long ago was considered shameful and something to hide, is really no big deal to many (if not most people) now, and just a fact of life. (No different really than the fact that some people are geniuses, but most are not.) The same constant-exposure-equals-acceptance "rule" can also be applied to marijuana, embryo abortion, mixed-race marriages, and many other causes now accepted by most people that previously were mostly advocated by liberals.
Plus, also thanks to the media and the Internet, more and more people are being educated to the fact that there really are not so many hard and fast rules that can reasonably be applied to all cases in all situations, and that there are also plenty of exceptions to stereotypes (both in people and in situations).
(Btw, I am not saying this is necessarily a bad thing, but just that the boundary between what is okay and what is not is being pushed further and further back and becoming more and more blurred.)
I think they are. As millions and millions of people can't find work along with illegals enter the country and go on welfare and other government programs your naturally going to see these same people lean liberal. It's only natural to support and ideology that supports you. Think of it this way. We own a business and I work full time I lean toward getting people to work so they have money to spend. Folks who don't work want to make sure their provider, tax payers and government, are fully funded so they know that's where their paycheck is coming.
Social conservatives is a poison. It dictates how others should live their lives and is the enemy of freedom. That's not to say I don't sympathize with some of their views. Being forced to accept gay marriage if you are devoted to your faith is unfair, and I adamantly support gay rights and am willing to acknowledge that. Abortion is an uncomfortable subject and I refuse to claim that those who are against are doing so because they hate women. But aside from those two issues, I for the most part see it as nothing but invading people's personal lives. People should be allowed to do whatever drug they want. They suffer any consequences it brings, but someone who is addicted needs help, not punishment.
And that's not to say individualistic social conservatism is bad, as in, living your personal life in a socially conservative way. That's perfectly fine. But to expect others to do so is the enemy of liberty.
I'll offer my perspective. As a libertarian (lets face it libertarianism for all intents and purposes is a brand of conservatism, especially in terms of fiscally). I do agree that social conservativsm is a poison, as it is authoritarian in nature, and as you alluded to, an enemy of individual freedoms. Now having said that, I'll address your points;
1) Gay marriage- While I do not go to church or subscribe to any religion (I call myself a recovering Catholic) I do have faith and belief in God, and try to follow Christ's teachings. And, while I couldn't even begin to understand homosexuality, or how it happens other than it is my belief that they are born that way, I am secure enough in my faith, and focus on my own morality, and my relationship with and getting right with God than what 2 consenting adults do in their private lives, or their bedrooms. If 2 consenting adults of the same sex want to be together, and it makes them happy, then who am I to judge or deny them? I'll let the man upstairs be the judge.
2)Abortion- I personally think it's wrong and should not be used as a form of birth control, as there are other precautions that can be taken to avoid unwanted pregnancies in the first place. However; I do not seek to deny women what they can do with their body, and as a man am glad I've never been faced with the situation with any of the women I've been with back in the day. Not to mention, if it were banned, I don't think anyone would want to see it go back to the old days where it becomes surrounded by a black market, and done in back alleys.
3) Drug use- The war on drugs has been an abysmal failure. The government nor anyone else has the right to tell another adult what they can and cannot consume, especially if that person has caused no harm to another! If your actions cause harm to someone else then I understand. However; an individual should not face prosecution, potential jail time, and other legal problems for simply possessing, or consuming a drug.
4) To your final point of living individual social conservatism, I totally agree. We are NOT a theocracy, and given the numerous versions of Christianity alone, thank goodness that we are not! Because, which version would we live by? I agree, my morals are my own, and other than my child (as it should be, because it really does start at home), I do not seek to force them on others, nor do I want others forcing their version on me.
The poll surveyed 1,024 people in 50 states and DC. That's about 20 people per state.
Don't trust polls.
Public opinion polls are conducted the same way as election polls which almost always fall within the error of margin when all said and done.
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.
) I do have faith and belief in God, and try to follow Christ's teachings. And, while I couldn't even begin to understand homosexuality, or how it happens other than it is my belief that they are born that way, I am secure enough in my faith, and focus on my own morality, and my relationship with and getting right with God than what 2 consenting adults do in their private lives, or their bedrooms. If 2 consenting adults of the same sex want to be together, and it makes them happy, then who am I to judge or deny them? I'll let the man upstairs be the judge.