Galt's Gulch

Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

    -
  • Posted by Eudaimonia 11 years, 8 months ago
    I think this article has it wrong.

    "Social Conservatives" are a boogey man.

    Many, including myself, are against abortion for the following non-social-conservative reasons:
    1) It was bad law. (Emanations and penumbras?)
    2) Evidence is mounting that women who receive abortions are psychologically damaged by it.
    3) Planned Parenthood was founded by a eugenicist looking to exterminate blacks.
    4) It is not my moral duty to subsidize and encourage the poor decisions of others.

    Many, including myself, are against gay marriage for the following non-social-conservative reasons:
    1) Forcing the issue through SCOTUS would be as bad a legal decision as Roe V Wade.
    2) Marriage is the realm of religion, not government.
    3) Any legitimate legal issues such as hospital visitation, tax filing, and bequeathment can be handled under gay civil union law.
    4) As proved in CT, the factions which want gay marriage want it as a leverage to punish and sue existing religions for not performing/recognizing their union (Gay Marriage activists in CT were offered everything they wanted with the proviso that they would be prohibited from suing religious institutions for discrimination. They turned it down.)

    For these 2 issues, abortion and gay marriage, I would be labeled a Social Conservative who must be ousted, even though none of my reasons have a thing to do with Social Conservatism.

    It is my experience, that when "Conservative" is used as a derogative, especially when paired with "Extremist", the person who is using those labels is expressing their Ruling Class embarrassment of us Country Class Bumpkins clinging to our "bibles and guns".

    It is "Extreme" to the Ruling Class to live by a moral code: I try, and every other Objectivist/Randian I know tries, to live by one.
    Part of that moral code demands FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY from our Ruling Class overlords.
    The Ruling Class also calls this "Extreme"... because it is based in moral code... and therefore "Socially Conservative"... and therefore the purview of embarrassing, undereducated, toothless Country Class bumpkins clinging to their "bibles and guns".

    If anything, those with a moral code still left in the GOP should abandon it and its pompous, capitulating, sackless Ruling Class overlords and leave them to their simpering enjoyment of licking Marxist boots.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by DragonLady 11 years, 8 months ago
      Think you misunderstood the article. Mr. Hudgins did not say (in my reading, anyway) that anyone should be ousted, only that those who wish to leave the party should do so to enable the rest of us to get on with electing individuals who wish to take the country back to its constitutional roots. I am weary of Christians who try to "convert" me to their belief (I'm a deist), and tired of reminding them that, yes, they do have a constitutional right to worship as they see fit, but I also have the freedom NOT to worship as they do.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by Non_mooching_artist 11 years, 8 months ago
      Your last statement had me grinning from ear to ear, Euda. I do believe that so much spin has been hammered into popular culture and consciousness about how the social conservatives are just knuckle dragging Neanderthals, that anyone who tries to rise above that stigma is faced with a tough challenge. I think the whole party needs to be "torn down", and rebuilt from scratch.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by khalling 11 years, 8 months ago
        I was actually watching an interview at CPAC with Phyllis Schafley about this problem. She said it has always existed in the party (well since she got involved). She says the only way to make it happen is to get involved in the party locally and move up from there. That way there is influence coming from below that will stand against elites in the party out east. Look at that crazy guy they have currently running the party. He is an idiot. I was embarrassed every time I heard an interview with him during the presidential campaign. I've done the delegate business before. frankly, it's all very boring and I can't stand the time suck. maybe that's how they stay in power. they know effective, productive individuals won't sacrifice the time it takes. I do think making certain organizations stronger who are conservative might be a way to do it. I personally like Americans for Prosperity. in colorado, our local tea party orgs are pretty good. they tend to follow only one thing at a time. of course, it's 2nd amendment now-but with all the emphasis on that, they ignore other things, like tax hikes, judicial activism, other freedom removals.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by MrSelfish 11 years, 8 months ago
    The 'Pirate' has it nailed!

    Social conservatives are, like their social progressive cousins Constitutionally challenged, and fail to grasp the fundamentals.

    Social issues become irrelevant in a nation that's foundering in red ink and about to be marginalized into second rate irrelevance.

    And, a Constitution that's not respected and upheld from an originalist perspective, removes the People's authority to restrain extremist politicians of the left or the right, like mr. Obama, from pursuing an agenda, which is inimical to the intent of the Founders.

    WE MUST EXTRACT SOCIAL ISSUES FROM THE POLITICAL DISCUSSION GOING FORWARD, AND CONCENTRATE OUR EFFORTS ON SAVING THE CONCEPT OF LIMITED GOVERNMENT, AND THE PRE-EMINENCE OF INDIVIDUAL AND PROPERTY RIGHTS.

    A libertarian approach, for example, on birth control, gay marriage, or drugs, essentially maintains that these are issues that should not be subject to federal governmental action or be provided for under the Constitution. This must be the strategy that reignites an appreciation of what we fought a revolution for in the first place.

    If we fail in this effort, the progressives will continue their otherwise successful 'march to the sea'.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by $ rockymountainpirate 11 years, 8 months ago
    I see no difference between the Republican and Democrat parties. They are both the Political Elites. The Aristocracy of Pull. All bought and paid for. Both parties mean to spend us into oblivion while padding their own pockets. Both have the extremes, social progressives or social conservatives. My hope is that more libertarian or objectivist thinkers, the Rand Pauls, will rise to the top. The left/right noise is just a distraction hoping we won't notice and keep feeding the hogs. Will the Republicans survive if the social conservatives leave? I'm not sure that it matters. If 49% of the 18-39 crowd think socialism is better than capitalism we're screwed anyway.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo