Oh, I forgot about gun control. I find the idea of being unable to own a gun to protect myself and my kids pretty frightening. I can’t afford to live in an area where the cops show up before you hang up the phone.
Texican sez:
The actions of republicans I’ve known and observed in the public eye do not demonstrate this to a significant degree, unless you’re counting corporations and upper income individuals. However, since that’s a vague comment, fair enough
If the government’s role was reduced to strictly what’s in the Constitution (speaking of vague) and no more, modern society would degrade very quickly into utter chaos.
I would like to continue, but the babysitter’s here and I’m going to the Paul Weller concert…
Ta…
Total nonsense. We’re talking about the federal government here, not the state governments. The federal government should be smaller than the smallest state government, IMO…
Don’t count on Republican support. The “Assault Weapons Ban” was passed in 1994 because 38 Republicans voted for it…
“Assault Weapons” aren’t likely to be what the average American uses for personal security.
StG
Oy. The one thing I really didn’t want to do was start a debate about politics in this forum. And we’re already at ‘where does life begin’?
I agree that pro- or anti-choice has little to do with big government. What I was reacting to was the claim that republicans support greater individual freedom and responsibility, which I find inconsistent with anti-choice: If you favor my greater freedom, why do you want to remove my freedom to an abortion?
I am really, truly, not asking that question here. This is a friendly forum, and anyone who wants to start that ball rolling in GD can go start it. I apologize for even commenting on Mr Moto’s initial comment in that direction.
Bearing in mind that you qualified the above statement as generalizations, since you asked, here’s where I would agree and disagree:
Republicans more freedom, less government, more economic growth, more free trade. IMO, these are not always good things: more growth sometimes comes with costs I think aren’t worth it, for example. And I think there are many arenas where more rather than less regulation is needed. I don’t see the GOP as for more science or equal justice any more than democrats.
Democrats… well, I guess I can’t really agree with any of these as wrtten. More government (than republicans) yes, big gov for its own sake, no. Blatant racism and sexism no… I gather you’re thinking of affirmative action that way, but I don’t it reaches the point I would describe as racism or sexism. Limitations on free speech and press-- Not sure what you’re driving at, here. Limits on science and technology-- again not sure what you mean. I don’t associate the Democrats with either of these and would love to hear your thinking about it.
Oh, right. Thanks!
With all due respect, I think the people you see as pompously PC probably see you as projecting your values intrusively into their lives.
Many of the Democrats I know are truly tolerant, not polically correct. They might disagree vigorously with a lack of tolerance, and one might define that as PC, I suppose. And if they saw Christians, conservatives, or Republicans as opposed to tolerance, they probably would disagree with them pretty self-righteously. But maybe I travel in overly mature circles. Your #5 would have fit in college, for sure.
Noggin, I wasn’t trying to start an abortion debate, only point out that for a pro-lifer abortion isn’t about personal freedom. I’m not trying to convince you to agree with me on abortion, not at all. But I don’t know ANYONE who would call for more personal freedom to the point of legalizing murder – maybe an anarchist?
All I’m trying to say is that abortion is ONLY a personal freedom issue for those on the pro-choice side. For a pro-lifer, there is no contradiction between that stance and a desire for personal freedom. I mean, even if you don’t agree, can you see where my POV is coming from?
I don’t quite see where the Democrats are anti-science, but I can wager a guess as to the claim that they limit free speech. The US is a place where we have a right to be an asshole if we so choose. If I want to be a complete ass, I could spit racial slurs at every minority I meet, sling insluts at the handicapped, and wear t-shirt slogans that slander homosexuals. I’d be a huge jerk, but that’s my RIGHT. Sometimes, though, it seems like liberals want to make all of these things illegal. There are people who’d like to see a person thrown in jail for publicly using the “n-word.” (See how taboo it is? I can’t even say the word just talking about it in an academic way.) Frankly, putting legal limitations on these things would be a violation of free speech, and I would personally fight to stop it.
What’s that quote…
The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one’s time defending scoundrels. for it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all. – H.L. Mencken
Absolutely. That’s why I want to withdraw the comment and suggested that it boils down to when you think life starts. If you go for ‘when the sperm meets the egg’ then the morning after pill is murder.
It’s my nature to be a debater… I don’t know if it’s clear how hard I’m biting my tongue through the whole thread…
I appeciate your perception that the people who’d be telling you that you’re a jerk the loudest might be liberals. And that conservatives might be biting their tongues and simply thinking that you’re a jerk. But the people who’d be defending you in court if anyone was foolish enough to prosecute you for saying those things would be the biggest Liberals of them all-- the ACLU. I don’t think anyone in the US, especially in US politics wants to take away your freedom to speak. In GD I might also argue that the people who want to limit my right to burn Old Glory are not liberals. Here I’d just ask that you consider it.
I totally agree. And I couldn’t use the ‘n’ word either. I would feel like I’d eaten poop. I don’t know anyone (democrat or otherwise) who’d like the see it crimianlized, though.
Thanks for bringing that one back to the forefront. It’s akin to what Ben Franklin said: They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty nor security.
It’s a slippery slope.
See you tomorrow.
–Nog
Absolutely. That’s why I want to withdraw the comment and suggested that it boils down to when you think life starts. If you go for ‘when the sperm meets the egg’ then the morning after pill is murder.
It’s my nature to be a debater… I don’t know if it’s clear how hard I’m biting my tongue through the whole thread…
I appeciate your perception that the people who’d be telling you that you’re a jerk the loudest might be liberals. And that conservatives might be biting their tongues and simply thinking that you’re a jerk. But the people who’d be defending you in court if anyone was foolish enough to prosecute you for saying those things would be the biggest Liberals of them all-- the ACLU. I don’t think anyone in the US, especially in US politics wants to take away your freedom to speak. In GD I might also argue that the people who want to limit my right to burn Old Glory are not liberals. Here I’d just ask that you consider it.
I totally agree. And I couldn’t use the ‘n’ word either. I would feel like I’d eaten poop. I don’t know anyone (democrat or otherwise) who’d like the see it crimianlized, though.
Thanks for bringing that one back to the forefront. It’s akin to what Ben Franklin said: They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty nor security.
It’s a slippery slope.
See you tomorrow.
–Nog
Absolutely. That’s why I want to withdraw the comment and suggested that it boils down to when you think life starts. If you go for ‘when the sperm meets the egg’ then the morning after pill is murder.
It’s my nature to be a debater… I don’t know if it’s clear how hard I’m biting my tongue through the whole thread…
I appeciate your perception that the people who’d be telling you that you’re a jerk the loudest might be liberals. And that conservatives might be biting their tongues and simply thinking that you’re a jerk. But the people who’d be defending you in court if anyone was foolish enough to prosecute you for saying those things would be the biggest Liberals of them all-- the ACLU. I don’t think anyone in the US, especially in US politics wants to take away your freedom to speak. In GD I might also argue that the people who want to limit my right to burn Old Glory are not liberals. Here I’d just ask that you consider it.
I totally agree. And I couldn’t use the ‘n’ word either. I would feel like I’d eaten poop. I don’t know anyone (democrat or otherwise) who’d like the see it crimianlized, though.
Thanks for bringing that one back to the forefront. It’s akin to what Ben Franklin said: They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty nor security.
It’s a slippery slope.
See you tomorrow.
–Nog
Freakin’ hamsters. sorry to all!
Yeah, let’s give the hamsters a rest…
Why am I a Republican?
OK…
-
I do not consider myself wealthy ($30,000 a year, give or take) but I think that I can spend my money (please note…MY money)smarter than the Feds.
-
Much Republican spending goes to the military…just like the Constitution says that it should, to provide for the common defense.
-
Democrats seem to love social spending. I’ll admit that I’m no Constitutional scholar, but I can’t find the passage that authorizes the government to keep cracker brood sows in malt liquor, lottery tickets, and fast food and put it on my tab.
-
Personal responsibility. I am quite prepared to accept the consequences of my actions…it isn’t OK because 200 years ago your cat pissed in my cat’s eye.
-
I am my brother’s keeper. However, I will choose whodeserves my help. And they will get both my time and money graciously.
-
The Second Amendment. Yes, that one. Bush Sr. f*cked up royally on the Assault Weapon Ban, and he heard from me. However, Shumer, Waxman, Feinstein, etc. are eager to follow in the footsteps of the great god FDR (NFA of 1934) and deny me my rights under the Constitution.
Oh…and if you insist on misinterpreting the militia clause, since I’m an able-bodied male between the age of 18 and 45, I AM the militia. Please drop off my M16A2 at your earliest convenience…
- Pet peeve - National Endowment for the Arts. You want to display a 20-foot statue of Ronald Reagen made of fecal matter, fine. First Amendment sez you can. Just get a day job and pay for it yourself.
I’m a Libertarian.
Nuff said.
Nogginhead, it’s mostly liberals I’ve met IRL who act like certains speech should be a crime. I said I could wager a guess at the claim, not that I’d make it myself. 
You’ll have to find someone else to argue against the ACLU, though. Personally (and my husband will be shocked when he reads this) I think that even disgusting perverts like NAMBLA have freedom of speech. Of course, I also think the government has a right to investigate anyone who publically associates themselves with such a group. I mean, they are essentially confessing to a criminal act, right? The government ought to have a right to look for evidence and lock these people up if they’re really doing the things they talk about.
Balle_M, what exactly is a “cracker brood sow”?
I don’t think this thread ever had much of a chance in IMHO, as well-intentioned as the OP was.
Off to Great Debates.
Nogginhead, it’s mostly liberals I’ve met IRL who act like certains speech should be a crime. I said I could wager a guess at the claim, not that I’d make it myself.
You’ll have to find someone else to argue against the ACLU, though. Personally (and my husband will be shocked when he reads this) I think that even disgusting perverts like NAMBLA have freedom of speech. Of course, I also think the government has a right to investigate anyone who publically associates themselves with such a group. I mean, they are essentially confessing to a criminal act, right? The government ought to have a right to look for evidence and lock these people up if they’re really doing the things they talk about.
Balle_M, what exactly is a “cracker brood sow”?