I believe Brutus would fit your profile, given that he advocates strongly authoritarian right-wing government.
And the confusion in E-Sabbaths classification comes, I believe, from the utterly nonsensical manner in which the words “liberal” and “conservative” are used in the US. Elsewhere in the world, “liberal” refers to minimial government interference, either fiscally or socially.
Good point, Sentient.
I’m a conservative. I want things the way they were before the New Deal and WWI and WWII. Government out of my life.
I’m just so far right I meet at the left.
There’s yet another dimension to this, isn’t there. One can be staunchly conservative in their personal viewpoints on particular issues, yet feel it’s not the gov’t’s responsibiliy to enforce those views.
Whether one considers less gov’t involvement conservative or liberal seems to be ill-defined. I’m sure a lot of people think that the gov’t “allowing” certain activities is very liberal, wheras others see the same gov’t as “not interfering” and conservative.
YMMV, of course.
I do believe RevTim has a point. You see, the Government only does what we allow. We have all the rights, we have merely ceeded certain ones to the government. The government does not ‘allow’ jack. They don’t own us. All they can do is restrict certain things.
Liberal, where I come from, the leftist sort, the Great Society type, says that the government is the big father who makes programs to protect us all. I don’t hold much with that.
This is a slight hijack, but you don’t honestly think Maggie Thatcher is a small “l” liberal, do you Sentient?
So, one shouldn’t be allowed to express a political opinion on any issue that one is not personally affected by? This would mean we can’t speak up on anyone else’s behalf, even the behalf of those who can’t speak up for themselves. We couldn’t protest cruelty to animals, or abuse of small children, or inhumane treatment of the severely mentally disabled. We couldn’t protest exploitation of the poor unless we ourselves were the exploitees (or exploiters).
I agree that, when it comes to issues in which one is not directly involved, one should tread carefully; it calls for humility and wisdom. I strongly disagree that one is not entitled to express an opinion or try to effect change.
It seems to me that, among both conservatives and liberals, you’ll find wide differences of opinion over just how much they trust political power: should it be wielded whenever it looks like it’ll contibute to the common good, or should it be used sparingly and warily, to meddle with people’s lives as little as possible? (I myself am kind of stuck in the middle. I don’t trust government all that much, but neither do I trust what people will do without government.)
[ul]
[li]Opposed to abortion: No[/li][li]Opposed to euthanasia: No[/li][li]Supportive of capital punishment: No[/li][li]Opposed to same-sex marriage: Very much no.[/li][li]Opposed to affirmative action: Yes.[/li][/ul]
I suppose I don’t really fit your definition. But we agree on one point.
Economically, yes. (That’s in UK terms of course. In the US, Thatcher would practically be a leftist.)
Funnily enough, here she was called a fiscal conservative. That might have been due to her gushing admiration of President Reagan.
“…-i.e. voting–on abortion rights is the same thing as an Islamist state dictating a woman’s dress…”
That’s absolutely not true, and a poor analogy. If the fetus in a woman’s womb is indeed a child, a human being, than there is more than the woman’s “rights” at stake. There is now a second person who has a direct and compelling stake in the woman’s perceived “right to choose.”
And despite all of the rhetoric and clever bumperstickers on both sides of the debate, that is the central question: Is this a life, a human being, or is it simply ‘non-vital tissue mass?’ (Which is exactly how I’ve seen it phrased)
If it is a child, than the people (Read: the state, even men) have an interest in protecting the life of the [defenseless] child. In that context, the woman’s rights must be subordinated.
Currently, it is true that a man has no say as to whether an abortion is chosen or not. In addition, in the cases where he desires that an abortion takes place, and it is not, he is responsible for years of child support. Many men are chagrined at the notion that they have no “rights” in the matter, but only [the potential for] obligations; namely years of child support for a child they did not want.
(It’s compelling logic, but I have no sympathy for them. If you engage in activity that produces a child, stand up straight and accept personal responsilbility for your choices. The sames goes for a woman. Yet the prevailing attitude for many women is summed up in a statement I saw in a thread some months ago,
It’s not lost on many people (men and women) that killing an unborn child often brings charges of murder. If a drunk driver kills an unborn child he will likely be charged with manslaughter, even if she was on her way to an abortion clinic. It is clear that even the law recognizes the rights of the unborn in many circumstances.
But to suggest that the opposition to abortion (which incidentally is shared by both men and women) is the same mindset that puts women in burkas is misguided.
SocCon here!
Opposed to about 95% of abortions
Mostly opposed to legalized euthanasia (esp. active, but oy, I can understand the tough cases.)
Pro-capital punishment but willing to negotiate down
(life w/o parole, chemical castration for sex criminals, branding, maiming)
Opposed to same-sex marriage- oh yeah, but not opposed to civil unions or to getting gov’t out of the marriage business & making them all civil unions
Generally libertarian on medical marijuana & leans to decriminalizing ordinary marijuana use
Opposed to quotas & racial factors overriding actual job qualifications, not necessarily all affirmative action
And to add in a few-
Libertarian on adult consensual porn, but conservative about shielding kids from it
Ruthless about banning bestiality porn (believes in incarceration for the produces & forced psychiatric treatment for the performers)
RE any facet of child porn production or possession, see comment on capital punishment
The father’s contribution to the childs existence is minimal and can be completed within minutes. It is the woman who chose to incubate it and supply it with nutrients for 9 months.
FWIW, I support legalizing drugs and prostitution.
Your call.
[ul][li] Opposed to abortion[/li]No. However, it takes two to tango, and the question arises about how disagreements are settled when the male and female disagree. If the female has no wish to carry a fetus to term, then it is entirely her choice, IMO. If the male does not wish to reproduce, though, I think there should be a process by which he can renounce his parental rights and protect himself from parental liabilities.
[li]Opposed to euthanasia[/li]No. I wouldn’t even limit it to terminal illnesses, chronic pain, or similar situations. Limit it to having your affairs in order and a notification of relatives, perhaps…
[li] Supportive of capital punishment[/li]Yes. The purpose of prisons and jails is neither rehabilitation or punishment. It is, quite simply, to seperate certain individuals from society for the protection of the population. How we deal with criminals while they are segregated is where the question of rehabilitation v. punishment properly arrises. Capital punishment is a logical extreme of “seperation from society”, especially in cases where there is no intention of returning the individual to free society.
[li] Opposed to same-sex marriage[/li]Meh. Essentially, I’m opposed to marriage… mixed-sex or same-sex. I find it offensive that Tennessee took it upon itself to brand my relationship as “Holy Matrimony”. I think there should be secular categories of legally binding personal relationships… and if you want to dress yours up as “marriage” or “holy matrimony” or what-have-you, that’s your own business. Anyone who wants the legal status should get a “civil union” as far as the state needs to be concerned… and if they want to call it something else when they send out the inivitations or tell their friends, they can do so.
[li] Opposed to affirmative action[/li]Yes. Institutionalized racism is bad… Institutational counter-racism that is itself just a different kind of instituationalized racism is also bad. Which is not to say institutionalized counter-racism is necessarily bad… just that Affirmative Action is broken.
[li] Supportive of gun rights[/li]Yes. I interpret the 2nd Amendment as being about making sure the average citizens have the ability to fight the US military and win. Anyone who says anything about “legitimate hunting or sporting purpose” is missing the point, IMO.
[li] Opposed to legalization of drugs.[/li]No. Given the previously stated purpose of imprisonment, it’s difficult to find a justification for most “victimless crimes”. It should be taken into account as a factor for sentencing for other crimes, though.
[li] Opposed to legalization of prostitution.[/li]No. See above. Though it should be controlled in such a way to maintain protections against persons being coerced into the profession.
[li] Supportive of censoring Porn, the internet, “Think of the Children!”, etc.[/li]No. This is not the state’s job. If kids want to go look at porn, they should be free to do so… if parents don’t want their kids looking at porn, they’re also free to limit what their kids look at. OTOH, if you’re a dirty old man sending kids porn without their request, this falls under a different category.
[/ul]
I stand out on one issue, but I definitely consider myself a social conservative. I’m not going to pay to stay, though.
FWIW, I don’t think affirmative action belongs on a list of SocCon issues; I think of it more as a political issue. Plenty of social liberals are opposed to it (think libertarians) and plenty of people who oppose abortion, same-sex marriage, pornography, etc. support it.
Abortion: Murder, plain and simple. I get very riled about this issue, because as far as I am concerned everyone who promotes it is aiding and abetting homocide and committing a very grave sin. And I particualrly despise people who think the Catholic church shouldn’t even say something about it to their own followers who publicly support it.
Euthanasia: As much self-interest as theory. Pain is to be tolerated; the pentitent man can endure all things with God. if people are having trouble with it, they need to be more connected with society - almost anything can be dealt with, with friends. On the same hand, Euthanasia treats people as a piece of meat. Of course, I also don’t want corrupt doctors killing people off - and with legal euthanasia, its something that will start happening a lot. And of course, there will be people who get pressured into it by relatives or doctors.
Capital Punishment: I do oppose capital punishment. On the other hand, were I elected to a high office, I couldn’t really keep it from happening. Its so darn hard to care because most of the people who get are such awful humans beings. but overall, yes, I do oppose it and would like to change it to a life sentence without parole. if the political climate was right I would work to end it. On the other hand, i rather shamefully would ignore the McVeigh’s and Osama’s of the world to the firing squad. I also have no problem blowing the crap out of evil foreign regimes if I deem it neccessary.
Opposed to same-sex marriage: lets not even talk about it. You disagree with me, I don’t respect that, but its pretty obvious you aren’t going to change your mind and I won’t either. You obviously are missing a few assumptions. On the other hand, I have no problem with homosexuality itself, I just think they should be chaste about it. And hey, we’ve got plenty of openings for single priests…
Affirmative action: I oppose it on a number of grounds, most particularly because I think it is distinctly counter-productive. It tends to resut in the hiring of unqualified minorities - and mostly blacks despite the Mexican/Central/South American populations being an equal if not larger problem - and not actual social advancement. Token was a job position in the 70’s and 80’s. Liberals still haven’t learned that you can never, ever do something for anyone. You can make it easier or more attractive.
It also appears to be the case that new immigrants from Africa do no worse than other immigrants, which is pretty well.