Total Posts:22|Showing Posts:1-22
Jump to topic:

Gays and Conservative politics

Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 11:45:18 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Well, I went through and listened to the entire thing.

I thought that it was okay (I'm not a conservative, so no surprise there). There were really only two parts that threw me off. 1 where he claimed that to be truely representative of the population they should have X number of women, Y number of blacks, and Z number of gays (which they might have, they only have 2 open, but might have 8 in the closet). Which screams out affermative action to me, which is anti-conservative.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 11:52:49 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
He doesn't sound like a "conservative." He sounds like a liberal, speaking of "equal opportunity" and "ending preferential treatment." But, that's the British for you. Their conservatives are nothing more than liberals hiding behind a Tory blue banner.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 12:00:43 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 11:52:49 AM, Volkov wrote:
He doesn't sound like a "conservative." He sounds like a liberal, speaking of "equal opportunity" and "ending preferential treatment." But, that's the British for you. Their conservatives are nothing more than liberals hiding behind a Tory blue banner.

Most conservatives in the US speak towards "equal opportunity," however they speak of it towards, the government standing back and allowing a person to succeed on their own.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 12:13:48 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 12:00:43 PM, OreEle wrote:
Most conservatives in the US speak towards "equal opportunity," however they speak of it towards, the government standing back and allowing a person to succeed on their own.

That's because, as I've said like a million times on this website, the conservative tradition in the West is one of classical liberalism.

However, this doesn't mean they're open towards true equal opportunity. Most conservative say that the government should stand back, but otherwise, you know, f*ck the gays. If there is any form of social discrimination, it'll stay. Remember; conservatism is supporting the status quo. Wanting the government to "stay out of our lives" is really their way of making sure that traditionalist views stay strong, and that the government doesn't interfere with helping further progression away from such ideas as blacks have no rights, gays are sick, etc. etc.

And as you pointed out before, this Brit was essentially asking for affirmative action. He wants to move forward ideas, as does the entire UK Conservative leadership, to help include gays in society more, and break down the barriers surrounding the discriminatory traditionalist views. Does that seem very "conservative" to you?
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 12:21:46 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 12:13:48 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 2/20/2010 12:00:43 PM, OreEle wrote:
Most conservatives in the US speak towards "equal opportunity," however they speak of it towards, the government standing back and allowing a person to succeed on their own.

That's because, as I've said like a million times on this website, the conservative tradition in the West is one of classical liberalism.

However, this doesn't mean they're open towards true equal opportunity. Most conservative say that the government should stand back, but otherwise, you know, f*ck the gays. If there is any form of social discrimination, it'll stay. Remember; conservatism is supporting the status quo. Wanting the government to "stay out of our lives" is really their way of making sure that traditionalist views stay strong, and that the government doesn't interfere with helping further progression away from such ideas as blacks have no rights, gays are sick, etc. etc.

And as you pointed out before, this Brit was essentially asking for affirmative action. He wants to move forward ideas, as does the entire UK Conservative leadership, to help include gays in society more, and break down the barriers surrounding the discriminatory traditionalist views. Does that seem very "conservative" to you?

conservatism the word, and conservatism the political ideaology are different. conservatism in politics does not mean the status quo, otherwise they wouldn't be against Obama's spending (since big spending is the status quo for decades), they believe that government should not BENEFIT anyone, nor PREVENT anyone, and so the removal of discriminatory laws would be conservative.

That is one reason I've always hated that they used the words "conservative" and "liberal" in politics, since they no longer mean what they originally meant.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 12:37:13 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 12:21:46 PM, OreEle wrote:
conservatism the word, and conservatism the political ideaology are different. conservatism in politics does not mean the status quo, otherwise they wouldn't be against Obama's spending (since big spending is the status quo for decades), they believe that government should not BENEFIT anyone, nor PREVENT anyone, and so the removal of discriminatory laws would be conservative.

Lol, I think you're confusing political ideology with partisan politics. They're against Obama's measures because that is what is politically convenient at the moment. That doesn't mean they're necessarily against it - it just means they're hypocrites and opportunistic. And really, the removal of discriminatory laws being "conservative" depends on whether or not you consider MLK, LBJ, JFK, and all the rest, "conservative."

The reality is, conservative in politics is the same damn thing it is as a word. Its about following the status quo. It's being a reactionary. That's what a conservative is. That's the only way you can box it.

Some conservatives, yes, do view it the way you're claiming. But the majority do not. They view it in the light of, "is this the status quo? Is this traditional?" Currently, "conservatism" is based around the classical liberal tradition, because that is what the US was based off of in its beginnings. Just like how the old English Tories were pro-monarchy instead of pro-parliament. It's because that was the tradition of the time. I'll say it one last time: conservatism is TRADITION.

That is one reason I've always hated that they used the words "conservative" and "liberal" in politics, since they no longer mean what they originally meant.

Oh, I agree. But, you work with you got, because if you don't, then no one will understand you. Just do your best to figure out what it is exactly these terms are referring to, and go from there.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 1:00:56 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 12:37:13 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 2/20/2010 12:21:46 PM, OreEle wrote:
conservatism the word, and conservatism the political ideaology are different. conservatism in politics does not mean the status quo, otherwise they wouldn't be against Obama's spending (since big spending is the status quo for decades), they believe that government should not BENEFIT anyone, nor PREVENT anyone, and so the removal of discriminatory laws would be conservative.

Lol, I think you're confusing political ideology with partisan politics. They're against Obama's measures because that is what is politically convenient at the moment. That doesn't mean they're necessarily against it - it just means they're hypocrites and opportunistic. And really, the removal of discriminatory laws being "conservative" depends on whether or not you consider MLK, LBJ, JFK, and all the rest, "conservative."

LBJ passed the Civil rights act of 64 because of the conservatives in the Republican party. The republicans supported it 80% in congress while the democrats supported it 63%, it was more of an issue with North v South, since the North supported it 90% (that's both dems and reps) and the south supported it a whooping 7%. And in this time frame the conservatives were in the republican party.

Heck, Barry Goldwater, supported most civil rights movements and only went against the 64' civil rights, because of the power it gave to the federal government (which of course, conservatives don't support). He had done tons in support of civil rights on the state level and in the military.

http://www.frankenlies.com...


The reality is, conservative in politics is the same damn thing it is as a word. Its about following the status quo. It's being a reactionary. That's what a conservative is. That's the only way you can box it.

That is bogus and only a way to attempt to demonize them. A mere political defining stunt.

Why would conservatives support a flat tax? That is hardly the status quo.


Some conservatives, yes, do view it the way you're claiming. But the majority do not. They view it in the light of, "is this the status quo? Is this traditional?" Currently, "conservatism" is based around the classical liberal tradition, because that is what the US was based off of in its beginnings. Just like how the old English Tories were pro-monarchy instead of pro-parliament. It's because that was the tradition of the time. I'll say it one last time: conservatism is TRADITION.


That is one reason I've always hated that they used the words "conservative" and "liberal" in politics, since they no longer mean what they originally meant.

Oh, I agree. But, you work with you got, because if you don't, then no one will understand you. Just do your best to figure out what it is exactly these terms are referring to, and go from there.

Yes, you do, which is why I don't try to tell them to use a different word, even though they mean two different things.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 2:40:04 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 12:13:48 PM, Volkov wrote:
the conservative tradition in the West is one of classical liberalism.

This shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone, because of the meaning of the word "conservative" and the history of the United States.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 3:57:24 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 2:40:04 PM, wjmelements wrote:
At 2/20/2010 12:13:48 PM, Volkov wrote:
the conservative tradition in the West is one of classical liberalism.

This shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone, because of the meaning of the word "conservative" and the history of the United States.

The Founding Fathers considered themselves conservatives... so...
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 3:58:37 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 2:40:04 PM, wjmelements wrote:
At 2/20/2010 12:13:48 PM, Volkov wrote:
the conservative tradition in the West is one of classical liberalism.


I think that the phrase, "classical liberalism" has died.

I may be wrong.
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 10:41:22 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 3:58:37 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 2/20/2010 2:40:04 PM, wjmelements wrote:
At 2/20/2010 12:13:48 PM, Volkov wrote:
the conservative tradition in the West is one of classical liberalism.



I think that the phrase, "classical liberalism" has died.


I may be wrong.

how so?
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 10:46:45 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 10:41:22 PM, belle wrote:
how so?

Libertarians have basically adopted classical liberalism, slightly modified it, and gave it a new name -- libertarianism. Liberalism is the belief in individual liberty. Modern liberals have completely hijacked the term known as liberalism. Libertarians are now the torch-carriers of liberty. I'd still describe myself as a classical liberal before a libertarian, though. However, for the sake of simplicity, I only label myself as a libertarian whilst conversing with everyday people.
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 11:16:59 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 10:46:45 PM, Nags wrote:
At 2/20/2010 10:41:22 PM, belle wrote:
how so?

Libertarians have basically adopted classical liberalism, slightly modified it, and gave it a new name -- libertarianism. Liberalism is the belief in individual liberty. Modern liberals have completely hijacked the term known as liberalism. Libertarians are now the torch-carriers of liberty. I'd still describe myself as a classical liberal before a libertarian, though. However, for the sake of simplicity, I only label myself as a libertarian whilst conversing with everyday people.

meh... the term classical liberal has a lot less baggage associated with it... that alone (to me) makes it the superior term. people tend to get their panties in a twist about "libertarianism" for some reason.
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 11:23:25 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 11:16:59 PM, belle wrote:
meh... the term classical liberal has a lot less baggage associated with it... that alone (to me) makes it the superior term. people tend to get their panties in a twist about "libertarianism" for some reason.

True. Whoever is libertarian is devoid of a heart, has no compassion, and should be shunned from any conversations regarding politics. At least that's how the majority of people think of libertarians. A bit sad, but it's the truth. However, I'd rather struggle through the above than have people mistake me as a modern liberal, or to actually explain what a common liberal is.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 11:44:38 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 11:16:59 PM, belle wrote:
At 2/20/2010 10:46:45 PM, Nags wrote:
At 2/20/2010 10:41:22 PM, belle wrote:
how so?

Libertarians have basically adopted classical liberalism, slightly modified it, and gave it a new name -- libertarianism. Liberalism is the belief in individual liberty. Modern liberals have completely hijacked the term known as liberalism. Libertarians are now the torch-carriers of liberty. I'd still describe myself as a classical liberal before a libertarian, though. However, for the sake of simplicity, I only label myself as a libertarian whilst conversing with everyday people.

meh... the term classical liberal has a lot less baggage associated with it... that alone (to me) makes it the superior term. people tend to get their panties in a twist about "libertarianism" for some reason.

Unforetunately, I have to say that from my time online on various political forums, most libertarians are often (in negative terms) "cold" and "heartless" and "elitists" and lack "humility" and they are often (in positive terms) "smart" and "true to their beliefs" and "use logical arguments."

Please note that this is my personal experience and is a generalization. And I always allow for individuals to prove themselves one way or another before treating them any one way.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/21/2010 12:19:02 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 11:44:38 PM, OreEle wrote:
Unforetunately, I have to say that from my time online on various political forums, most libertarians are often (in negative terms) "cold" and "heartless" and "elitists" and lack "humility" and they are often (in positive terms) "smart" and "true to their beliefs" and "use logical arguments."

what about libertarians (in your experience) leads you to believe they are heartless?
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/21/2010 6:26:09 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 11:23:25 PM, Nags wrote:
At 2/20/2010 11:16:59 PM, belle wrote:
meh... the term classical liberal has a lot less baggage associated with it... that alone (to me) makes it the superior term. people tend to get their panties in a twist about "libertarianism" for some reason.

True. Whoever is libertarian is devoid of a heart, has no compassion, and should be shunned from any conversations regarding politics. At least that's how the majority of people think of libertarians. A bit sad, but it's the truth. However, I'd rather struggle through the above than have people mistake me as a modern liberal, or to actually explain what a common liberal is.

I agree with this, you say the term "classical liberal" and all people hear is liberal. Not many people are as educated in politics as many on this site.
I just know what I believe, it is what the founding fathers believed, and it can be labeled as libertarianism or a constitutional- conservative.

Or maybe even a conservative libertarian?
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/21/2010 6:35:45 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/21/2010 6:26:09 AM, comoncents wrote:

I agree with this, you say the term "classical liberal" and all people hear is liberal. Not many people are as educated in politics as many on this site.
I just know what I believe, it is what the founding fathers believed, and it can be labeled as libertarianism or a constitutional- conservative.

Or maybe even a conservative libertarian?

So what, you don't think that what the constitution should be adapted to modern day situations, seeing as the American Founding Fathers weren't physics?
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/21/2010 7:22:42 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/21/2010 6:35:45 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 2/21/2010 6:26:09 AM, comoncents wrote:

I agree with this, you say the term "classical liberal" and all people hear is liberal. Not many people are as educated in politics as many on this site.
I just know what I believe, it is what the founding fathers believed, and it can be labeled as libertarianism or a constitutional- conservative.

Or maybe even a conservative libertarian?

So what, you don't think that what the constitution should be adapted to modern day situations, seeing as the American Founding Fathers weren't physics?

Thats why there is room for amending it?
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/21/2010 7:24:57 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/21/2010 7:22:42 AM, comoncents wrote:
At 2/21/2010 6:35:45 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 2/21/2010 6:26:09 AM, comoncents wrote:

I agree with this, you say the term "classical liberal" and all people hear is liberal. Not many people are as educated in politics as many on this site.
I just know what I believe, it is what the founding fathers believed, and it can be labeled as libertarianism or a constitutional- conservative.

Or maybe even a conservative libertarian?

So what, you don't think that what the constitution should be adapted to modern day situations, seeing as the American Founding Fathers weren't physics?

Thats why there is room for amending it?

Even if it contradicts the constitution?
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/21/2010 7:35:01 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/21/2010 7:24:57 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 2/21/2010 7:22:42 AM, comoncents wrote:
At 2/21/2010 6:35:45 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 2/21/2010 6:26:09 AM, comoncents wrote:

I agree with this, you say the term "classical liberal" and all people hear is liberal. Not many people are as educated in politics as many on this site.
I just know what I believe, it is what the founding fathers believed, and it can be labeled as libertarianism or a constitutional- conservative.

Or maybe even a conservative libertarian?

So what, you don't think that what the constitution should be adapted to modern day situations, seeing as the American Founding Fathers weren't physics?

Thats why there is room for amending it?

Even if it contradicts the constitution?

The constitution has its fundamental points, Limit government and protect our liberties.
If we skew so far as to amend it beyond that, there is room, but i will not condone it.

Case in point, the income tax amendment seemed unconstitutional yet it passed and now there is an amendment to have ones income taxed.
I believe in the Founding Fathers but they knew that to predict the future was arrogant and foolish.

Benjamin Franklin once said after being asked what had they done in "Independence Hall", what did we get, "A republic if you can keep it" responded Franklin.