GOP without all the religious right BS

Upchurch

Papa Funkosophy
Upchurch
Joined
May 10, 2002
Messages
34,265
Location
St. Louis, MO
So, in another thread, Kodiak made the following comment:
Kodiak said:
I can't wait for the day when Buchanon and Robertson take the christian faction of the GOP and start their own party...
Click to expand...
That got me wondering: What would the GOP be like without the heavy religious influence in currently has?

I'm guessing the Republicans would be more like they were under Regan, but I don't really know. (I wasn't really politically aware at that time, so I don't really remember what it was like.) Would the gay marriage thing still be an issue for Republicans?

Any ideas what would be different in the party platform?
 
If he's talking about Pat Buchanan, it would about like having Stalin as your friendly neighbor.:p
 
Upchurch said:
So, in another thread, Kodiak made the following comment:

That got me wondering: What would the GOP be like without the heavy religious influence in currently has?

I'm guessing the Republicans would be more like they were under Regan, but I don't really know. (I wasn't really politically aware at that time, so I don't really remember what it was like.) Would the gay marriage thing still be an issue for Republicans?

Any ideas what would be different in the party platform?
Click to expand...

The GOP had a very religious aspect under Reagan. The "Moral Majority" was in full swing, there was a big stink about pornography, and as I recall one of those years (1984?) was offically called the "Year of the Bible" or something... I'd use google, but I'm lazy.

I've long said that if I got one magical wish in politics it would be switch out the religious right and the Libertarians. Have the Religious right wonder around like fools trying to get on the ballot while the Libs occupy a significant block of GOP support and dictate policy. I'm not a fan of the Libertarian Party, but I'd think as an influence they are preferable to the Religious Right...

I don't think it is possible. The GOP relationship with the religious right is a natural result of Nixon's "Southern Strategy" where the GOP decided to court the redneck vote. As racism begins to fade somewhat the identity of the south becomes more about that old time religion than the remnants of slavery.

As long as there is that block of voters, there will be someone to pander to them. If the GOP doesnt the Dems will, and we will be in the same place most likely, being upset about the Dems pushing populist religious nonsense...
 
"As long as there is that block of voters, there will be someone to pander to them. If the GOP doesnt the Dems will, and we will be in the same place most likely, being upset about the Dems pushing populist religious nonsense..."

Preach it Brother!! Amen!
 
Funny you should ask this. The West Wing last night had an episode where the Republican nominee for president basically admitted he was an atheist. Well, not explicitly, but he did say he didn't believe the bible and had an interesting discussion with a little girl who was talking about her friend who didn't believe in god but went to church whenever this little girl performed there because, well, she was her best friend.

I saw it an interesting comment, because it seemed the point was that the atheist could be a loyal friend, despite not believing in God. The presidential candidiate (Alan Alda, btw) also caught that comment, and particularly the non-chalantedness by which the girl talked about her best friend.

It got into a big deal about how this guy didn't go to church, yadda, yadda, yadda, and at the end, he made a big speech about how it is wrong to tie religion into politics, and if you want to talk about religion, go to church.

Note this is the republican candidate (very moderate republican), whereas the democratic president (Bartlet - Martin Sheen) has always been very religious. So there was a scene of Sheen and Alda discussing religion with the democrat Bartlet being the religious one.

The West Wing has been a shell of it's past in recent years, and all the usual characters have become so annoying (the less we see of Allison Janney, Brad Whitford, and especially Richard Schiff (Toby), the better it is). But this is an interesting development that I think is worth watching to see how they are going to play it out. To what extent are they going to play this "religion" angle? And how will Jimmy Smits, the guy who is going to be the democratic nominee, have religion play into the mix?

BTW, Alan Alda's character is apparently not sufficiently anti-abortion for the other republicans (although he is opposed to partial birth abortions). His pick for VP is strongly anti-abortion, though.
 
There is hope for the future. Young people are much less bigoted than their parents were. The republican party will need to adapt or die.

Many 20 year olds know openly gay couples and are OK with it - even in the south. The wink-wink, knudge-knudge version of racism also does not fly as well with young people. Stem cell research will either work miracles and be accepted (a la test tube babies) or fail and be rejected for non-religious reasons.

I imagine youngsters will be more amenable to abortion but I am not sure about. Ditto with evolution vs. religious idiocy.

CBL
 
Unfortunately, if we can learn anything from history, it is that idealistic and progessive thinking young people turn into venal and corrupt old whores, once they get addicted to power.

Or they settle into being bitter and apathetic lumpen if they don't get any.
 
crimresearch said:
Unfortunately, if we can learn anything from history, it is that idealistic and progessive thinking young people turn into venal and corrupt old whores, once they get addicted to power.

Or they settle into being bitter and apathetic lumpen if they don't get any.
Click to expand...

You took the words right out of my mouth.
 
crimresearch said:
...Or they settle into being bitter and apathetic lumpen if they don't get any.
Click to expand...

Is that when they start posting on message boards like this?;)
 
I've often said that I could see myself siding with the Republicans were it not for the religious, bigots, and blow-hards. I'm getting really tired of the Republicans and the Democrats. I would like to see some new successful political parties emerge in my lifetime. I think we are overdue for them.
 
Bruce said:
I've often said that I could see myself siding with the Republicans were it not for the religious, bigots, and blow-hards. I'm getting really tired of the Republicans and the Democrats. I would like to see some new successful political parties emerge in my lifetime. I think we are overdue for them.
Click to expand...

I agree. I don’t really identify much with either party.

Maybe if the Democrats keep cycling toward self-destruction, we’ll be able to take the moderate core, rid itself of the moon-bat fringe, and create something that will attract moderate Republicans into something new that encompasses the best of both parties.
 
Mycroft said:
I agree. I don’t really identify much with either party.

Maybe if the Democrats keep cycling toward self-destruction, we’ll be able to take the moderate core, rid itself of the moon-bat fringe, and create something that will attract moderate Republicans into something new that encompasses the best of both parties.
Click to expand...

Which might run along quite well for a year or two before becoming every bit as corrupt and fanatical as either of the two parties we have now.

The problem with politcalparties is that people are stupid and they get stupider in groups.
 
Nyarlathotep said:
Which might run along quite well for a year or two before becoming every bit as corrupt and fanatical as either of the two parties we have now.
Click to expand...

You make that sound like a bad thing.

Actually, that was exactly part of the plan.

You aren't allowed in our new party. You lack vision.

You can go join the neo-liberal-liberitarian-ultra-mega-wienie-loser party. Good luck getting 0.1% of the vote.:p
 
Bruce said:

You can go join the neo-liberal-liberitarian-ultra-mega-wienie-loser party. Good luck getting 0.1% of the vote.:p
Click to expand...

I'll stick to my refusal to join any party, thanks.
 
Nyarlathotep said:
I'll stick to my refusal to join any party, thanks.
Click to expand...

You'd be welcome in the party I'm forming, tentatively titled People's Progressive Party of Progressive People for Progress Party.

Either that, or "Sexy Monkey Party". Which would poll better?
 
TragicMonkey said:
You'd be welcome in the party I'm forming, tentatively titled People's Progressive Party of Progressive People for Progress Party.

Either that, or "Sexy Monkey Party". Which would poll better?
Click to expand...

Definately the 'Sexy Monkey Party', the 'People's Progressive Party of Progressive People for Progress Party' sounds a BIT close to 'The People's Front of Judea' and the only think the Judean People's Front hate more than the Romans is the 'People's Front of Judea', splitters.
 
Nyarlathotep said:
Definately the 'Sexy Monkey Party', the 'People's Progressive Party of Progressive People for Progress Party' sounds a BIT close to 'The People's Front of Judea' and the only think the Judean People's Front hate more than the Romans is the 'People's Front of Judea', splitters.
Click to expand...

You must be thinking of the Progressive People's Party for People Progressing Progress Progressively, or PPPPPPP. We at the Progressive People's Party for People Progressing Progress Progressively are very angry at the People's Progressive Party of Progressive People for Progress Party for stealing our domain name, PPPPPPP.com. :mad:
 
Bruce said:
You must be thinking of the Progressive People's Party for People Progressing Progress Progressively, or PPPPPPP. We at the Progressive People's Party for People Progressing Progress Progressively are very angry at the People's Progressive Party of Progressive People for Progress Party for stealing our domain name, PPPPPPP.com. :mad:
Click to expand...

Don't be silly. We'd never have used ppppppp.com as a domain name, because we're smart enough to know that those initials stand for a particularly disgusting sexual practice involving, well, I can't really spell it out here. Let's just say it's illegal in every state, and rightly so. It's so unhealthy, and really bad for the environment. Not to mention that pandas are endangered species...
 
The numbers of minorities, homosexuals, and non-christians identifying themselves as Republican is increasing every year.

Why couldn't a significant shift occur in the GOP, like what happened to the Dems in '68?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom