Conservatives avoiding the real socia...

Conservatives avoiding the real social issues

There are 75 comments on the onlineathens.com story from Feb 12, 2011, titled Conservatives avoiding the real social issues. In it, onlineathens.com reports that:

Social conservatives say they're trying to address the problems of family breakdown, crime and welfare costs, but there's a huge disconnect between the problems they identify and the policy solutions they propose.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at onlineathens.com.

First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Since: Feb 10

Woodstock, Illinois

#1 Feb 12, 2011
This article brilliantly exposes Focus on the Family, NOM, and all the other hate groups. Take away their irrelevant religious reasons and all they have is hatred and bigotry. Their feeble attempt to fabricate reasons to discriminate against homosexuals are quite transparent.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#2 Feb 13, 2011
Ron431 wrote:
This article brilliantly exposes Focus on the Family, NOM, and all the other hate groups. Take away their irrelevant religious reasons and all they have is hatred and bigotry. Their feeble attempt to fabricate reasons to discriminate against homosexuals are quite transparent.
Yep! All you have to do is ask one of those idiots to explain HOW banning marriage equality is going to improve society. They can't tell you because they don't know. Because the truth is, it won't.

But then what else would you suspect out of people that scream their heads off about unwed parenthood and teen pregnancy rates while at the same time demanding an end to all forms of sex education and limiting access to birth control???
Frank Stanton

New York, NY

#3 Feb 13, 2011
Ron431 wrote:
This article brilliantly exposes Focus on the Family, NOM, and all the other hate groups. Take away their irrelevant religious reasons and all they have is hatred and bigotry. Their feeble attempt to fabricate reasons to discriminate against homosexuals are quite transparent.
I agree.

Since a TRUE conservative believed that "the government is best when it governs the least", these so-called "Christian conservatives" or "social conservatives" are LYING. They are NOT "conservatives" at all. The more accurate terms are "statists" or "Totalitarianists", because they want BIG GOVERNMNET to criminalize behavior that falls under personal LIBERTY. It IS a matter of LIBERTY, a word we sadly hear very rarely in this century, because it harms no one.

These "totalitarianists" ar LYING hwne they call themselves "conservatives". They're not.

And Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan would agree with me.
Agitator

Broken Arrow, OK

#4 Feb 13, 2011
They are also avoiding eliminating subsidies which is corporate welfare. I guess because they get their bribe money through subsidies they give to Big Corporations.
Agitator

Broken Arrow, OK

#5 Feb 13, 2011
There is NO Conservatives in the federal government only wolves in sheep clothing.

Since: Feb 10

Woodstock, Illinois

#6 Feb 14, 2011
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep! All you have to do is ask one of those idiots to explain HOW banning marriage equality is going to improve society. They can't tell you because they don't know. Because the truth is, it won't.
But then what else would you suspect out of people that scream their heads off about unwed parenthood and teen pregnancy rates while at the same time demanding an end to all forms of sex education and limiting access to birth control???
They seem to believe that going back to the puritanical, Ozzie & Harriett dream world that never existed is best for America. What they fail to realize is that, by their very actions, they are furthering the very problems they claim to be fighting. If they were to truly "focus on the family", they would not care at all about marriage equality, but marriage education and marriage counseling, but then, there is not as much money in that, is there?

Since: Feb 10

Woodstock, Illinois

#7 Feb 14, 2011
Frank Stanton wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree.
Since a TRUE conservative believed that "the government is best when it governs the least", these so-called "Christian conservatives" or "social conservatives" are LYING. They are NOT "conservatives" at all. The more accurate terms are "statists" or "Totalitarianists", because they want BIG GOVERNMNET to criminalize behavior that falls under personal LIBERTY. It IS a matter of LIBERTY, a word we sadly hear very rarely in this century, because it harms no one.
These "totalitarianists" ar LYING hwne they call themselves "conservatives". They're not.
And Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan would agree with me.
Unfortunately, the "conservative" politicians pander to this faction of the party as they are very good about voting in the primaries. They are detrimental to America and freedom.
Cobden Apples

Germany

#8 Feb 14, 2011
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep! All you have to do is ask one of those idiots to explain HOW banning marriage equality is going to improve society. They can't tell you because they don't know. Because the truth is, it won't.
But then what else would you suspect out of people that scream their heads off about unwed parenthood and teen pregnancy rates while at the same time demanding an end to all forms of sex education and limiting access to birth control???
You go on Spamming us with the same nonsense, despite the fact that you cannot refute even one of the following points. You make no sense. Why do you think you have the right to disenfranchise others in order to force your concocted, failed redefinition of marriage into law?

Americans have overwhelmingly rejected homosexual marriage at the ballot box, just as homosexuals have overwhelmingly rejected it as an actual practice in every country that allows it.

Now you know.
Frank Stanton

New York, NY

#9 Feb 14, 2011
Ron431 wrote:
<quoted text>
Unfortunately, the "conservative" politicians pander to this faction of the party as they are very good about voting in the primaries. They are detrimental to America and freedom.
I agree. KILL THEM ALL !

:)

As the mohels always say: "Off with their heads !"

LOLOLOLOLOLOL

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#10 Feb 14, 2011
Ron431 wrote:
<quoted text>
They seem to believe that going back to the puritanical, Ozzie & Harriett dream world that never existed is best for America. What they fail to realize is that, by their very actions, they are furthering the very problems they claim to be fighting. If they were to truly "focus on the family", they would not care at all about marriage equality, but marriage education and marriage counseling, but then, there is not as much money in that, is there?
Very true. It IS all about the money. You can't make much money trying to improve marriages and educating and supporting married couples and couples seeking to marry.

But you can make BILLIONS by panicking a whole bunch of scared stupid people into believing threats are real where none exist. It's actually easier to do if you fabricate the threat because you don't have to defend it (apparently).

Since: Mar 08

Allentown, PA

#11 Feb 14, 2011
Ron431 wrote:
<quoted text>
They seem to believe that going back to the puritanical, Ozzie & Harriett dream world that never existed is best for America. What they fail to realize is that, by their very actions, they are furthering the very problems they claim to be fighting. If they were to truly "focus on the family", they would not care at all about marriage equality, but marriage education and marriage counseling, but then, there is not as much money in that, is there?
San Francisco baned Happy Meals. Is there any differene between left wing progressive Democrats and those puritanicals you whine about?
.
Your argument is a lazy one.

Since: Mar 08

Allentown, PA

#12 Feb 14, 2011
LookingToEscape wrote:
<quoted text>
San Francisco baned Happy Meals. Is there any differene between left wing progressive Democrats and those puritanicals you whine about?
.
Your argument is a lazy one.
oops... "banned"

Since: Feb 10

Woodstock, Illinois

#13 Feb 14, 2011
LookingToEscape wrote:
<quoted text>
San Francisco baned Happy Meals. Is there any differene between left wing progressive Democrats and those puritanicals you whine about?
.
Your argument is a lazy one.
What does a city banning happy meals (which I would not condone ) have to do with my post?

Your argument is an irrelevant one.

Since: Feb 10

Woodstock, Illinois

#14 Feb 14, 2011
Frank Stanton wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree. KILL THEM ALL !
:)
As the mohels always say: "Off with their heads !"
LOLOLOLOLOLOL
You like to take things a "little" over the top, don't you? LOL.

Since: Mar 08

Allentown, PA

#15 Feb 14, 2011
Ron431 wrote:
<quoted text>
What does a city banning happy meals (which I would not condone ) have to do with my post?
Your argument is an irrelevant one.
You said (and I quote):
"They seem to believe that going back to the puritanical"
.
Observing the the American Progressive Left over the years, I think they are the new puritans, dictating life right down to our snack foods.
.
America has done quite well without gay marriage, it will not do well with the loss of freedom the new puritans push. With Ozzie and Harriet, at least you could chose the color car you liked. With your crowd, you can have gay marriage and lose evrything else. Some trade off, huh?
.
Your argument was reactionary.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#16 Feb 15, 2011
LookingToEscape wrote:
<quoted text>
San Francisco baned Happy Meals. Is there any differene between left wing progressive Democrats and those puritanicals you whine about?
.
Your argument is a lazy one.
Quite a bit, actually.

While I personally believe that banning Happy Meals is rediculous and completely mis-guided, the idea still is in response to a valid national problem, obesity. This issue cost taxpayers billions and destroys lives and futures.

Stopping gay couples from having the same security and protections that straight couples receive through marriage can't even be said to TRY to further ANY state interest.

So there is quite a difference here.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#17 Feb 15, 2011
LookingToEscape wrote:
<quoted text>
You said (and I quote):
"They seem to believe that going back to the puritanical"
.
Observing the the American Progressive Left over the years, I think they are the new puritans, dictating life right down to our snack foods.
.
America has done quite well without gay marriage, it will not do well with the loss of freedom the new puritans push. With Ozzie and Harriet, at least you could chose the color car you liked. With your crowd, you can have gay marriage and lose evrything else. Some trade off, huh?
.
Your argument was reactionary.
And, If I read this right, your argument is irrational.

Some good tax-paying Americans have struggled without the protections and security that marriage brings to families. That's hardly "America doing well."

And please explain how gay couples and their klids having such security will cause the rest of America to "lose everything else"?

If MORE families and children are more, stable, protected and secure, isn't that good for America?

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#18 Feb 15, 2011
Cobden Apples wrote:
<quoted text>You go on Spamming us with the same nonsense, despite the fact that you cannot refute even one of the following points. You make no sense. Why do you think you have the right to disenfranchise others in order to force your concocted, failed redefinition of marriage into law?
Americans have overwhelmingly rejected homosexual marriage at the ballot box, just as homosexuals have overwhelmingly rejected it as an actual practice in every country that allows it.
Now you know.
Oh David, as the King of Spam, you are being a little hypocritical, don't you think?

Americans have not "overwhelmingly" rejected same-sex marriage--in CA the margine was TINY.

And you keep forgetting all of the tens of tens of thousands of happily married gay couples, throughtout the world, and in this country.

Hardly a "rejection".

But keep spamming nonsense under different names. You aren't fooling anyone, and it's folks like you and Maggie that are turning more and more minds and hearts toward equality.

Since: Mar 08

Allentown, PA

#19 Feb 15, 2011
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
And, If I read this right, your argument is irrational.
Some good tax-paying Americans have struggled without the protections and security that marriage brings to families. That's hardly "America doing well."
And please explain how gay couples and their klids having such security will cause the rest of America to "lose everything else"?
If MORE families and children are more, stable, protected and secure, isn't that good for America?
I am not arguing for or against gay marriage. Keep in mind society routinely regulates behavior. The San Francisco Happy Meal ban is one example.
.
My comments were towards Ron431's comment:
"They seem to believe that going back to the puritanical, Ozzie & Harriett dream world that never existed"
.
This is a cartoonish, reactionary view of conservative values. Conservatives no where near argue for regulation to the depth Progressives do.

Since: Feb 10

Woodstock, Illinois

#20 Feb 15, 2011
The article covers the Family Research Council's 2010 Values Voter Summit. These are the "conservatives" I was referring to. They themselves are "cartoonish and reactionary". They are the ones longing for a return to the "family values" of the Ozzie & Harriett days.

I still do not see the correlation to a city banning happy meals.

Lastly, you state that you are not arguing for or against marriage equality, but you also state that "America has done quite well without gay marriage."

Your words contradict themselves.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Mike Pence Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News First Pence, Gregg skirmish comes on the jobs f... Aug 28 kuda 5
News Central Indiana, nation in shock over on-air fa... Aug 27 The Truth Sayer 2
News Anti-abortion supporters protest outside Planne... Aug 24 Sneaky Pete 5
News Planned Parenthood broke no abortion laws, Indi... Aug 15 Lamer 11
News Indiana Gov. Pence signs religious objections bill Aug 12 goonswab 6
News Renewable energy standards reconsidered as stat... Aug 11 Radagast 4
News The tax cut no county wanted Aug 5 discocrisco 1
More from around the web