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.
Everyone I've met, listened to on TV, or read about on the internet who identifies as a fiscal conservative is also anti-abortion and gay marriage, and is usually a staunch Christian.
Yes they exist, and they are often called libertarians.
The language we use today? By today's language, social conservatives are the ones who are against gay marriage, against abortion, and against legalized drugs. Sounds like gov't involvement to me.
Everyone I've met, listened to on TV, or read about on the internet who identifies as a fiscal conservative is also anti-abortion and gay marriage, and is usually a staunch Christian.
Maybe because you see some of them like Hannity or Beck, and then just assume everyone else is too? The bible thumpers seem to always be inserting their religious views as the reason why they support certain positions. When in reality, you don't need to be a religious person to view abortion as an act that kills a baby. Nor do you need to be religious to think there is no reason for government to endorse and promote gay marriage.
Some religious person can cite the bible for why he thinks murder and robbery are wrong, it does not mean that if i oppose these things that I too, that am doing it for religious reasons also.
People are allowed to hold whatever views they want. As a social conservative, I believe the federal government has absolutely no business involving itself in abortions, marriage, deliberate discrimination, or even providing a social "safety net." These issues belong with either the State legislatures or the people, but not the federal government.
This is a good point, and it's why liberals have a hard time understanding conservatives. It's not that we are against caring for the poor, we just don't want the federal government taking over control of everything. It's also why libs love a large and powerful central government; it's easier to have a liberal congress sign one bill and force the entire nation to follow some new law, then it is for them to try and do it thru 50 state legislatures.
I'm not a social conservative. However, if we have fiscal conservatism, much social conservatism will take care of itself. All we have to do is not subsidize things like generations of fatherless children.
This is a good point, and it's why liberals have a hard time understanding conservatives. It's not that we are against caring for the poor, we just don't want the federal government taking over control of everything. It's also why libs love a large and powerful central government; it's easier to have a liberal congress sign one bill and force the entire nation to follow some new law, then it is for them to try and do it thru 50 state legislatures.
What about government in general taking over everything?
I don't consider being anti-abortion a form of social conservatism (in the sense that word is commonly used) as I see it as qualitatively different than taking an ethical stance against the following acts or lifestyles, provided they have no appreciable negative externalities:
Porn
Miscellaneous [other] positions relating to sexuality (promiscuity, living together or sex before marriage, homosexual sex, etc...)
Gambling
Alcohol
Drugs
Gay marriage or other "non-standard" marriages or living arrangements which sometimes irk them
A propensity for promoting and admiring as a virtue, an obedience to authority.
Whatever other vices I left out. I'm sure there are plenty of others.
Everyone I've met, listened to on TV, or read about on the internet who identifies as a fiscal conservative is also anti-abortion and gay marriage, and is usually a staunch Christian.
You have just correctly defined the Libertarian Party. Socially liberal -- they believe that the states should deal with everything you listed and not the federal govt -- and they are more fiscally conservative than the GOP.
I am not referring to just the last two years, I am referring to all liberals going back as far you like. For example,
Social Security;
MediCare/MedicAid;
Affirmative Action;
"War on Poverty";
"The Great Society"; etc., etc.
These are all examples of socially liberal ideologies, and every one of them a prime example of more government involvement in our lives and being completely fiscally irresponsible.
People are allowed to hold whatever views they want. As a social conservative, I believe the federal government has absolutely no business involving itself in abortions, marriage, deliberate discrimination, or even providing a social "safety net." These issues belong with either the State legislatures or the people, but not the federal government.
You seem to think that social and fiscal are the exact same thing. They are not.
Social liberal is let people do what they want, without calling everything a crime, and more socially progressive like equal rights, that sort of thing.
Fiscal liberal is let the government spend more money.
For example, a pure liberal (social and fiscal) is pretty much for things like legalizing marijuana (social liberal) and higher taxes to pay for more food stamps (fiscal liberal). A pure conservative (social and fiscal) is for lower taxes and more capitalism (fiscal conservative) but less freedom to stray from societal norms and traditions (social conservative).
Confusing, yes a bit, but this is how people use the terms these days (except you and a handful of others).
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.