12 Reasons Why I Am Conservative

Something has happened to the once great Democratic Party. In years past, Democrats stood for truly noble causes, such as equality and assisting the underprivileged. While one may argue that their methodology was flawed (the Great Society never produced fewer poor), it was hard to argue that their approach lacked moral authority. But the Democratic Party of today has morphed, moving away from many of its members. The views of the party have broadened (liberalized) to the point of being arbitrary and internally inconsistent. Indeed, the stands taken by the new Democratic Party are contradictory to their own former ideals, as well as to the historic precepts upon which America was founded. In trying to stand for everything, one really stands for nothing. (This would explain why, as Ann Coulter says, we have to consult a Ouija board to get John Kerry's final answer). I shall offer several lines of logic and evidence.

1. Too many powerful Democrat aligned groups, led by the ACLU, are at war with God. They want to remove every meaningful vestige of God from society. Can't they see, as our founders so clearly did, that unless we acknowledge unalienable rights from a source higher than ourselves, our only rights are those given or taken by people with the most political power? As John Adams put it, "We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people."

2. In addition to our religious heritage, there are many other areas in which activist Democratic judges are making law from the bench rather just interpreting it. There is a word for the condition when a few powerful people violate the constitution by nullifying law against the will of the people--tyranny.

3. Too many liberals are even questioning the very foundations of our free society based on individual rights and obligations. They want more power for the state over the lives of individuals. The genius of America is that man can govern himself, with help from God, from the bottom up. The elements of government in order of importance are self, family, local government, national government, not the reverse. The evidence is quite clear that all statist utopian ideas based on the false concept that man is inherently good or at least perfectible by the state, whether it be communism or Islamic law,always lead to oppression.

4. If the Democratic Party was true to its historical ideal of standing up for the most helpless in society, the first class of people they would protect are the innocent unborn. Why is it that so many pro-choice Democrats, Clinton, Gore, and others, once claimed to be champions of unborn children? Could it just be that they all switched when the political winds changed? Where is the moral authority in this? Just consider the position of John Kerry. He says life begins at conception, yet he supports the woman's right to choose. Logic does not allow us to accept the line that, "Well, I believe it is wrong, but I would not tell you what to do?" (Just substitute any other behavior in that sentence: How about, "I believe that rape is wrong, but I wouldn't stop you if you want to rape someone.") The moral principal is that we do not have the right to do wrong. Liberals would have us believe that they are pro-life for being against capital punishment and war. They have it backwards. The goal should be to protect the innocent and punish the guilty.

5. As for education, why is it that the Party opposes school choice? For what conceivable reason should they stop a parent from taking advantage of public financing options to send their child to a better school? Is the only consideration the affection of the teachers' union? Where is the moral authority in this?

6. The Democrats' pushing for hate crimes legislation is actually contrary to America's philosophy of equal justice under the law. Why should, for example, a perpetrator of a crime against your loved one or mine be treated less severely than someone who commits the same crime against a person who has been designated a victim of a "hate crime?"

7. And what is on the mind of the blindly anti-war Democrats? The fact is that there are many people in the world who have dedicated their lives to killing every American possible. The misguided idea that if we just acquiesce everything will be OK, flies in the face of reality. The entire history of mankind is that there is an evil side to people that seeks power over others. The utopian pacifists want to make us feel like America is the guilty party, when we were the ones who were attacked!

8. Despite the concept of equality in the Declaration of Independence, that everyone in America has a right to the Pursuit of Happiness, some Democrat leaders seem to denigrate success. Their rhetoric segregates "upper class" from everyone else. John Kerry and John Edwards speak of "Two Americas" as part of their campaign. Actually, 2% of Americans pay 45% of the federal income taxes. How much more do they want? While we should encourage voluntary philanthropy, we should not indulge in legal theft--the forced taking of something from one person to give to another. The historic ideal is to encourage people to move up the ladder; the Democrat idea is to belittle or punish those who do so.

9. Liberals often segregate us rather than integrate us in other ways. Our national motto is E Pluribus Unum (Out of Many, One). But the Democrats are trying to reverse it to be Out of One, Many. They continually identify some of us as African-Americans, or Native-Americans, etc. When will everyone in the melting pot of the world become just "Americans" again? As Bill Cosby points out, it does the black population no good to get unique names and to continue using their own dialect. Instead, a better way to meld into society is by learning to use standard English and by learning the principles of economics. Nor does it help to constantly give minorities negative messages by telling them that they need special privileges (affirmative action) to survive. As black columnist Walter Williams tells white liberals, "Stop your condescending and demeaning attitude toward blacks. Treat me like a white person." Democrats are actually suppressing minorities in our society!

10. There is untenable logic in their environmental views too. The valid reason to be an environmentalist is because God commanded us to be good stewards of the environment. The Christian worldview is one in which the individual has a moral commitment to sacrifice things of the self in order to uplift others and the world around himself. But many Democrats become "Mother Earth" environmentalists, worshipping the earth in clear violation of the First Commandment to have no other Gods before Him. They are also typically committed to the philosophy of philosophical naturalism--that is, Darwinian evolution. Is it not a contradiction that one would embrace a philosophy of the selfish survival of the fittest, and at the same time proclaim an unselfish obligation to the world outside of oneself?

11. Democrats seem to champion "alternative lifestyles," ignoring the truth that homosexuality is contrary to God's natural order. The body parts still do not fit. Yet liberals want gay marriage, domestic partnership benefits, and so forth. The irony is that the gay life style is terribly destructive. The best available evidence indicates that those practicing homosexuality have a 20-30% shorter life expectancy than the rest of the population, not even counting AIDS. Statistics are clear about the increased risk of many diseases in the gay lifestyle, in part because of the medical consequences of what homosexuals physically do, as well as promiscuity among gays. (There is almost no such thing as a monogamous homosexual, a situation that does not change with "gay marriage.") Indeed, the entire movement is based on a lie. The evidence says there is no "gay gene." All such purported studies have been discredited. After all, from which parent could they have inherited it? The only thing that comes from this movement is to perpetuate an awful lie, to foster more disillusionment, more disastrous lives. It is not compassionate in any sense to foster this.

12. The "Big Tent" philosophy of the modern Democratic Party is just another name for relativism--that there is no absolute truth. They accept anyone into their circle, except of course those of us who believe in absolute truth. The real truth is that while all people are equal, all ideas or actions are not equal. Taken to its logical extreme, we see that the perfect example of a moral relativist is a SOCIOPATH!

Mr. Meek is a hedge fund manager, investment newsletter writer, and founder of the Christian Information Foundation. He can be reached at mail@faithfacts.org

Great piece, what I've read so far. I've always voted Republican (I only could start voting in 1984, and the choice was obvious: Ronald Reagan :) )

But I know what the Democratic Party has become, especially to my elderly, religious, CONSERVATIVE family and friends; it's a slap in the face to them, for all of their support in the past. Almost, the way they tell it, like a betrayal. These people who would not give up their faith, their G-d,their moral values for any snake oil type promises or "plans"!

Something has happened to the once great Democratic Party. In years past, Democrats stood for truly noble causes, such as equality and assisting the underprivileged.

My father is a very old school Democrat and to be honest he was closer to the current Republican party than any liberal I have ever met. He is the one that started me on a more conservative path than any other person I have had in my life. Unfortunately, he has chosen to stay the liberal course and has chosen to break from the old school values that I valued in my youth. Now he would vote for a horse if they were pledged to be a Democrat...It wouldn't matter what the values or the purpose was of the Democratic party. I am voting for W for a second term. :)

Many good points -

One - From the post: "For what conceivable reason should they stop a parent from taking advantage of public financing options to send their child to a better school? "

This one is easy to answer if you ask yourself what they are teaching the students in public schools. Socialism - and "better school" doesn't enter into their thoughts. It's control.

Many in Congress know what's going on - but the ones who want to stop it aren't powerful enough anymore - they let things go until it was too late -

just my thoughts -

My parents are former Democrats who gave up on the Democratic party after the Carter administration. They now consider themselves heterodox ---oldtime, sixties liberals who feel that the Democratic party has fallen off a cliff and become unrecognizable. They still believe in many old liberal causes, but the party simply doesn't represent them or their values anymore.

I wish that someone would do a real analytical piece on the psychological origins of liberalism.

Liberalism, Communism, Socialism are all second industrial wave product holdover's, Society at the time did not have the mechanisms in place to deal with the peasant who came off the farm to work in factories i.e. No extended family's to take of them when they became ill or sick, Communism was the extream answer.(the early industrialists were brutal). This is why bush's Portable, medical IRA savings accounts are so revolutionary (third wave solution ) The Democracts are like watching the idealized movie "Reds" they are stuck in an earlier age and will fade into obscurity till they update themselves.

Actually, 2% of Americans pay 45% of the federal income taxes.

I really get tired of this kind of statistic. It means nothing if you don't also specify the percentage of income this 2% recieves. If the top 2% of Americans recieve 45% of the income (and no I'm not saying they are), where's the unfairness? If you don't give the income, the 2% figure is meaningless.

It doesn't matter if I make a trillion dollars a second -- forcing me to pay a greater percentage than others pay is punishing me for success. Not only that, it's also rewarding others for being less successful. It's wrong and it's evil.

To whatever extent you are deprived of the fruits of your own labor, to just that extent, you are a slave.

I have a few "reasons" too: George Soros, Ted Kennedy, Kerry, Edwards, Jimmuh Carter, The 'Mouth' McCauliffe, Dan Rather etal, the Clintoons, and I haven't even started on Hollywood yet!!

You might try reading Paul Johnson's "Intellectuals", and Horowitz's "Politics of Bad Faith", for at least an attempt at some insight into the psychology of Lieberals.

I doubt if any actual psychologist would attempt it, though - that would involve admitting that Lieberalism is a psychological "condition" of some sort, rather than just a "normal" state of mind - which would in turn require (a) some objectivity, and (b) introspection, on the part of the psychologist, since he/she/it would in 99% of cases already be a doctrinaire Lieberal. (They've attempted plenty of analyses of "conservatives", though, of curse...)

An oversimplified (but maybe not much) assessment claims that Lieberals are basically overgrown children who can't cope with life, are usually mad at the world, and are alternately either trying to get their surrogate Mommy/Daddy the Government to take care of them, or rebelling against it as the manifestation of a parental authority figure...

King Prout: Thanks for the thought provoking ping.

I've read and the author has many salient points. So let's go to my favorite questions to ponder.

Question 1: Do you like what you see of the Democratic party circa 2004?

Question 2: (Solely for the sake of discussion, let's imagine that I already agree with the author on all of his 12 points.) How do you change the Democratic party that represents 30-40%+ of the population?

1. No. I believe the current state of the Democrat Party to be nothing short of a disaster. It is bad for Dems, and it is bad for Republicans as well - Having a disloyal and vile opposition creates an opportunity for the GOP to slide into disgusting habits of its own.

2. I "change" that party one person at a time, through long-term interaction and rational discussion.

more broadly, the best way to change the Democrat Party is to kick its legs out - getting substantial numbers of their "core constituencies" to at least think about their blind devotion and evaluate their options is a start in that direction.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.