Opposed to Abortion in almost all cases. How many people really get pregnant from rape or incest. Most people, I feel, use it as birth control. Any way, it ought to be left up to the states. Why can’t New York allow abortion and Pennsylvania prohibit it?
Support Voluntary Suicide. If I ever am suffering through a terminal disease, I should at least be allowed to decide my own fate.
Support Capital Punishment. Some crimes are so heinous, society should impose a death penalty.
Support Gay Marriage. Although I’m not thrilled with the way the courts are handling it. It also ought to be a voter decided issue at the state level. If my state had it on the ballot, I’d vote in favor of gay marriage.
Oppose Affirmative Action. The government ought not to attempt imposing some correction of past wrongs by favoring certain groups and therefore alienating other groups.
This is a craven cop-out – if you were elected to a governorship of the presidency, you most certainly could keep it from happening (through exersize of executive clemency).
Opposed to same-sex marriage - Yes. (Because of the way it’s being done with judicial activism - not because I really mind the concept.)
Opposed to affirmative action - Yes. AA is racist. I’m against racism.
However, according to Airman Doors’ test [url=http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=272103] in this thread** I’m a moderate conservative on non-fiscal issues. I certainly would call myself more socially conservative than the center of the SDMB.
But, to answer your question, I don’t think there are “socially conservative” posters on the SDMB in large numbers. Maybe if they are, they just lay low and stay out of GD. They certainly would not be welcome if they harbor such opinions on a liberal message board. Fiscal conservatives have a hard enough time. The social conservative viewpoint could quickly result in pile ons and banning if they aren’t careful.
However, according to Airman Doors’ test in this thread I’m a moderate conservative on non-fiscal issues. I certainly would call myself more socially conservative than the center of the SDMB.
I line up pretty much the same way, although I think the term “euthanasia” is too broad to just say you support or oppose it. I’d need a clear definition before I weighed in. I’m generally opposed to capital punishment, and would support a constitutional amendment to end it. Until that happens, I don’t see it as materially different than allowing the state to imprison someone for life without the possibility of parole.
No way you’re a social conservative, and neither am I.
Opposed to abortion: Yes, I am opposed to murder. Sex comes with consequences that both parties are aware of before the act. In cases of rape, it is a horrible situation, but two wrongs don’t make a right. In the rare cases of the life of the mother, I have yet to meet a mother not willing to die for their child.
Opposed to euthanasia: Yes.
Supportive of capital punishment: Yes, preferably carried out 5 minutes after sentencing. Death Row is cruel and unusual punishment
Opposed to same-sex marriage: Yes, primarily for religious reasons, although I am not a huge fan of government benefits for any married couples.
Opposed to affirmative action: Yes, as I consider it to be the same thing as racism.
I would certainly agree not in large numbers. I don’t know if they stay low or not, but GD is the only forum I look at. (I have little time as it is)
As to being welcome or not, I would say that I have been treated with respect and dignity for the most part. I’ve never felt harrassed or unwelcome in spite of the fact that my views have often been contrary to the prevalent social/political climate here.
Your last sentence is the one that interested me. It wouldn’t speak much for the SDMB folks if they banned SoCons simply based on their views. Removing a significant part of the dialogue on idealogical grounds is hardly a recipe for fighting ignorance. So why would a SoCon need to be careful? (vis s vis a SoLib?) I’ve never been asked to leave by either a member, or the SDMB brass.
I have no reason to believe that they are anything but fair, and getting banned results from being a bonehead, whether conservative or liberal.
Opposed to abortion - Yes, unless the mother’s life is in danger.
Opposed to euthanasia - Mixed feelings, which I think would be too hard to describe here.
Supportive of capital punishment - Yes. Let the punishment fit the crime.
Opposed to same-sex marriage - I support same sex civil unions.
Opposed to affirmative action - Quotas and set asides, yes. Preference of a woman or minority for hiring or promotion, yes. If, after taking that out, there’s any other aspect of affirmative action remaining, then I might support that.
Also, topics mentioned by others:
*Legalized marijuana - Unsure.
*Legalized prostitution - Against.
*Gun rights - Support. But I also don’t have a problem with some gun control also, because I believe that guns should only be owned by mentally sound, law abiding citizens.
*Porn - Banning it is totally unrealistic, but I am strongly in support of shielding children from it, including letting public libraries put filters on their computers.
I think you can be a political moralist of progressive stripe & agree with various things some would think “socially conservative.” Social conservatism is a bit of an odd (even historically ignorant) idea, really. Those who have pushed for abstinence from drug use, say, started out as radicals. Most “socially conservative” positions were innovations at least once.
That said, I am a philosophical moralist, & tend to have mild social-conservative sympathies.
~ Used to be opposed to abortion, but what exactly are we going to do the perpetrators if we criminalise it? In an age of overpopulation, we have bigger worries.
~ Not really opposed to euthanasia, & don’t think such opposition is necessary anything to do with “conservative.”
~ I am for capital punishment in theory. Draco was misunderstood.
~ Sort of leery of same-sex marriage in theory, but kind of libertarian in practice, since losing an argument about it in the Pit several years ago. More specifically, I abstained in this year’s Missouri referendum to constitutionally prohibit it, whereas some close friends were against that prohibition, because I could see both sides.
~ I’m a libertarian on affirmative action. People can use whatever criteria they want to hire people, including racial exclusion or racial quotas, so long as they aren’t restraining people’s ability to be hired at all. So, I’m not opposed to affirmative action, but I am opposed to a lot of affirmative action cases.
~ Legalizing marijuana is asking for marijuana-related road fatalities. You can legalise after the fossil fuels run out & all the automobiles are junked.
~ Prostitution is illegal for a reason. It’s not that prostitutes sell their bodies, it’s that they sell them too cheaply, to too many, & for the wrong things.
~ Gun control is really an urban/rural difference. A perfectly reasonable-seeming hunting weapon is out of place in a densely populated area.
~ As for pornography: When one of <a href=http://scarygoround.com>John Allison</a>'s characters proposed, as a way to determine whether man is basically good or bad, a global vote on whether music or pornography should cease to exist; I had to think which was good & which was bad. Um, I deplore mind-warping violence in art, but I’m not really anti-porn specifically.
Supportive of capital punishment, but opposed to its return to Canada on purely practical grounds, i.e. I don’t wish to see our judiciary turned into an appeals industry
[ul][li]Opposed to abortion – Deeply, but would prefer to see women given better options and opportunities to avoid unwanted pregnancies and to deal with them when they occur over a legal ban.[/li][li]Opposed to euthanasia – From medical personnel, yes, but mainly because of the conflicts of interest engendered in allowing the practice. (And the classic slippery slope question – once it’s allowed, what’s to stop it from becoming mandatory?) But if you want your husband to smother you with a pillow because you can’t take it anymore, that’s on you and him, I suppose, and I might be persuaded to use my intense knowledge from 13 years of Law & Order and 30 years of mystery novels to help you craft a reasonable cover story for the cops who will investigate.[/li][li]Supportive of capital punishment – In concept, yes. In practice, not so much. If it were more uniformly used, and only in cases with incontrovertible evidence (i.e. strong eyewitnesses, DNA, fingerprints, gunshot residue, confessions) I’d be fine with it.[/li][li]Opposed to same-sex marriage – Nope. Strongly supportive of it and cannot fathom how it’s a “conservative” principle to support a constraint of liberty.[/li][li]Opposed to affirmative action – In concept, no. In practice, yes. I’d rather see all of the effort and money poured into affirmative action going toward improving our pathetic education system and advocating strong, intact families, both of which would have a huge impact on narrowing the acheivement gap between whites and minorities in the U.S.[/li][li]Supportive of gun rights – You bet your sweet bippy. You can have my gun when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers. Seriously. Worry about stolen, black market guns. Worry about criminals, who are usually doing other stuff that ought not be doing long before they get their hands on a gun. Leave me and other law abiding folks the hell alone.[/li][li]Decriminalization of drugs – For it in the cases of some drugs. Against it in the cases of drugs that can kill in one dose. It’s not a logically/theoretically consistent position, but I just have a hard time wrapping my brain around legal heroin or crack, but legal marijuana doesn’t bother me nearly so much.[/li]Prostitution & Porn – (I’m trying hard not to… oh has to be done – band name!) Uh, anyway, at the moment I’ve vascillated back toward the “your body, your choice” position on both. So long as the industries are regulated to protect against the spread of disease and coercion, and kids are kept away (from participating – protection from seeing porn is a parents’ job) I’m okay with them.[/ul]
Good for you. Being a conservative, you will find that you are outnumbered on the SDMB. This means that you will find you must perform to a higher standard than other posters. That you have had no problems as of yet would indicate to me that you are a reasonable and friendly poster. Because, after 300 posts, you would have been flamed otherwise.
True. Those who get banned do so because of behavior, not because of political orientation. I meant not to suggest that there is some conspiracy among the mods. Indeed, they do a great job of being fair and unbiased.
However, it is simply a naturally occurring event. Because there are so many liberals, they end up getting away with more. Out of line posts are more likely to go unnoticed. If they step across a line, they are more likely to be gently nudged back by their peers. However, as a conservative, if you cross the same line a pile on is likely to result. The end result is that many more conservatives get in trouble than liberals. After all, the mods go to where the fires are, and it’s usually a conservative being burned.
This is all simply MHO, but after years on the SDMB I have noticed a distinct pattern. Two posters (one liberal and one conservative) could both join the SDMB. They are both a little rough around the edges. They are rude, bend the rules and not open to new ideas. The liberal will be gently coaxed into the correct behavior over time and will learn from mistakes. The conservative will be isolated and attacked relentlessly.
That’s where he gets in trouble: the conservative refuses to admit he’s mistaken and will stick to his guns – and why not, after all, he knows he is objectively right, by God!! And in any case, isn’t dealing with aproblem with gentle, sensitive appeasement a wimpy liberal trait, while conservatives appreciate and exhalt steadfast directness and strength?
[/caricature]
But yeah, you are right in that the Mods can’t help but have to intervene where there’s already a conflagration, and very often by the time they get there it’s the party that feels backed against the figurative wall that will have behaved more aggressively.
As to the dearth of “social conservatives” in the SDMB, what I see we DO have is a lack of straight-“party”-line followers. Just look at all those criteria above: hardly anyone will give you a straight unconditional “yes” to every single one. AND, as mentioned, in the SDMB we’re far likelier to run into people who ARE supportive of many “conservative” positions but do not want them to be government-enforced.
**Conservative Dude: **You liberals have a weakness in that you don’t stick to your guns. By constantly being self critical and examining your own positions, you just show weakness and give us an advantage.
**Liberal Dude: **Wow. You know, you may be right. Perhaps that’s why we always…
Conservative Dude: See!!! Only a pussy would admit that.
