What does it mean to be a Conservative

The Central Scrutinizer said:
No, Tony has made it clear that there is only one true path, i.e. being anti-choice, pro-religion, etc.

I am arguing for the traditional definition of Conservative, back when the term carried respect.
Click to expand...
Actually you are arguing for the traditional definition of liberal, if you want to see a traditional conservative look here .
The trouble is, you cant use the term "liberal" to describe yourself, as the most vocal people in the US who self identify as liberal are social democrats (almost). thus liberalism has taken on a new meaning.
However the most vocal groups in the US who self identify as conservative are closer to the Robinson type, and are part of a conservative tradition which predates free market liberalism's adoption of the term.
 
The Central Scrutinizer said:
No, just because fundy perverts have hijacked the term in the last twenty years, does not make them conservatives.
Click to expand...

A very signifigant part of conservativism (I think it's the definition, in fact) is the belief that traditions shold be preserved and that social and/or political changes are generally a risky idea. The Religious Right believes that Christianity is a part of the American tradition and that that tradition needs to be preserved. Of course, there's another part of conservativism which believes that classical liberalism (small government, private property, natural rights, etc.) is a big part of the American tradition and thinks that the religious right is woefully misinformed.

But that doesn't change the fact that the Religious Right is essentially a conservative movement, even if it is a perversion of what conservativism has historically stood for. Trying to conserve a past which never actually happened is still conservative, as far as I see it.
 
Last edited:
Dcdrac said:
well for me my views are governments do not have the power or right to tell you how to live unless it is clear that you and your actions are hurting others on a large scale.
Click to expand...

What do you mean "large scale"?

Governments do not have the right to demand unconditional loyalty nor do Nation States.

I do beleive if a government is taxing you then it should give you something in return ie welfare, schools, public goods etc.
Click to expand...

I agree with you here. Furthermore, I would not include the military under "giving me something in return".
 
New Ager said:
Liberals, of course. In the US, over 300 billion is given to needy in some form. Want to bet all of them are not thrifty workers? And guess who's for more of it.

Yep, our liberal friends.
Click to expand...

I'm still waiting for evidence that liberals advocate handouts to the lazy.

It's quite possible that lazy people have received welfare, just as some incompetent and/or corrupt military contractors have apparently squandered away some of our tax dollars. But the idea of welfare to the needy is not to give handouts to those who are too lazy to work, just as the idea of military spending is not to waste the money. I would not accuse conservatives of advocating wasting tax dollars earmarked for military spending.

eta:

My point is that the intention of welfare is not to reward the lazy. We can argue about how many (if any) people receive welfare who are merely too lazy to work, but to my knowledge no proponent of welfare has advocated giving handouts to the lazy. If anyone has evidence to the contrary, please cite it. Also I welcome evidence that welfare money commonly goes to those who are merely too lazy to work.
 
Last edited:
Upchurch said:
Who is anti-Constitution?
Click to expand...

Those who like to water it down in order to use it to justify their individual desires.

Those who want it to apply to inter-personal relationships instead of federal-to-state & individuals.

I could probably think of some more................
 
Grammatron said:
I think what this thread demonstrate -- with the help of Tony -- is that people on the far left think "conservatives" are the worst what they perseive to be wrong with their country, while people on the far right seem to think "liberals" are. Which makes these terms pointless.
Click to expand...

I think the terms have become more point-y than point-less.
 
A conservative is a person who advocates control of a woman's uterus (anti-abortion), is against scientific research in the field of stem-cells, loves Jesus, hates homsexuals, thinks war is the best way to achieve peace, and thinks the wealthy have a tough life in the USA.
 
WOW! And no 2nd amendment.

As to eating babies and puppies, now, is that wrong? :D
 
RandFan said:
WOW! And no 2nd amendment.

As to eating babies and puppies, now, is that wrong? :D
Click to expand...
eating babies is the good upstanding all American conservative thing to do, only pinko homo-commie-Nazi America hating liberals eat puppies. ;)
 
New Ager said:
Liberals, of course. In the US, over 300 billion is given to needy in some form. Want to bet all of them are not thrifty workers?
Click to expand...
Yes, well, I'm sure a certain proportion of them are pedophiles too. And I'm sure the same could be said of the beneficiaries of "corporate welfare". And of military spending, and every damn thing else.

And yet it would be dishonest to go about saying that anyone in favor of "corporate welfare", or of social security, favors "handouts to pedophiles".
 
Huntster said:
The Lazy.
Click to expand...
:)


And don't forget that other people who advocate the handouts. It's those people who insist that no one is really lazy.


(FWIW, I advocate some handouts to the lazy. I don't think ;lazy people should starve. But, folks, they really are lazy. It's not right wing propoganda.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom