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 seriously doubt the religious right applies much logic in its decision making processes.
As to progressives there is a whole lot of logic there.
Progressives were for the 19th amendment because many of them were women and logically felt the would be listened to more if they could vote.
Progressives were logical when the put in social security, because they knew that some folks for a variety of reasons, especially in light of bank failures, would be frustrated in their ability to save for retirement and would need some support when they could no longer work.
Progressives were logical in their demands to clean up rivers that caught on fire and protect streams that provided drinking water from heavy metal pollutants.
Progressives were logical when they realized it would be difficult for many people over the age of 65 to get medical insurance and they created medicare.
It was a progressive, LBJ, who took SS and put it on budget instead of leaving it alone and untouchable.
It was Republicans who were for the 19th Amendment.
If you really believe more government, more laws, and more regulations increase your liberty and freedom, you have some very serious problems to address.
If you believe anarchy affords the most freedom, then I'll pay for your ticket to Somalia.
Progressive: Make law after law, to control the people and freedom.
Conservative: Reverse the laws the Progressives make.
There is nothing Progressive about maintaining individual liberties & freedoms.
There is nothing Conservative about restricting or taking individual liberties & freedoms.
Before so-called "progressiveness," we had slavery, indentured servitude, legalized segregation, legalized discrimination, disenfranchisement of women--the list goes on and on. Almost all the freedoms we enjoy today we were won by people who could be broadly be called "progressive." Stop trying to rewrite history.
Oh bulls***! Quit drinking the damn kool aide already and using the "anarchist" card or the "Somalia" reference! You seriously need to do a little research on libertarianism and the Libertarian Platform! No where in their platform does it state anything about anarchy, or wanting no government! Wanting smaller, efficient, and a fiscally responsible government does not equal no government!
Government's purpose is to make law. If the argument is that law restricts freedom ( as has been stated in this thread), then you are an anarchist.
Why do you say libertarians are anarchists? There are SOME libertarians that are anarchists, but that is a tiny group. Most libertarians support the core platform of the Libertarian party. That is a small government, Constitution based philosophy. It differs from Republicans in general by its positions toward defense (smaller, don't intervene in other country's business), immigration (much more tolerant of immigration), and social issues (government stay out).
Fine. Then you agree that law is useful and necessary. The only difference would be where to draw the line. A difference of degree only.
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.
