Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Conservatism's Death Throes? (Joseph Farah On Why Conservatism Will Never Stop The Left Alert)
Worldnetdaily,com ^ | 11/13/2006 | Joseph Farah

Posted on 11/13/2006 12:31:54 AM PST by goldstategop

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-114 last
To: Terpfen
Are you really going to try arguing that before the Christian Conservative movement of the 70's and 80's--which started to self-identify as a voting bloc when Jimmy Carter made his Christianity part of the national debate as a way of arguing against them evil Republicans--the same folks who self-identify as Christian Conservatives were ALWAYS voting Republican?

The Catholics who voted for JFK would beg to differ, not to mention the blue collar workers who allied themselves to FDR and the dems around the time blacks started moving away from the GOP (around the time blacks started moving in significant numbers from their homes in the south and headed west and north).

A little perspective never hurt. Considering the disastrous pick for RNC head today, we all need to be thinking about this stuff honestly.

101 posted on 11/13/2006 3:28:59 PM PST by Darkwolf377 (Republican, atheist, pro-lifer, stranded in Blue Boston)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377
Are you really going to try arguing that before the Christian Conservative movement of the 70's and 80's... the same folks who self-identify as Christian Conservatives were ALWAYS voting Republican?

No, not always. I'm saying that in the present, they are inclined to vote for conservatives, particularly since they make an individual choice to do so, rather than voting as a bloc at the directive of some centralized group--which is why there is no "religious right" in the sense often meant when that term is used.
102 posted on 11/13/2006 3:45:55 PM PST by Terpfen ("Conservatives" who sat at home cost us the War on Terror, SCOTUS, and economic success.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: LowCountryJoe
I refuse to call them liberal or progressive, as they are neither. They are leftists & they come in two flavors, the statists & the nihilists.

There are statists among those who consider themselves conservative too. Statists have been in charge of the GOP. Nonstatist conservatives are the children of the English Enlightenment.
103 posted on 11/13/2006 5:46:20 PM PST by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: sirchtruth
I'm a Christian, yet am not a member of any religion. Many will believe that by distancing myself from religions, it means I am not, can not be a Christian. They can not see how I could possibly consider myself to be part of the body of Christ & some would consider me to be a heretic.

If our government selected any single version of Christianity, many of us would find ourselves out in the cold. Most conservative atheists accept the same core principles expressed by our FF's & believe in the golden rule as a universal truth. Unnecessary friction is created when attempts are made to make the state a tool of any single faith. I would include secular humanism as a faith, though I think many if not most atheists would disagree with me on that point. The answer to that particular conflict goes back to our nation's founding, where faith was a state level issue. Nationalizing it has caused great harm to our society.
104 posted on 11/13/2006 6:21:17 PM PST by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
You are SO da man. :)

You are So right. :-) j/k

105 posted on 11/13/2006 10:01:39 PM PST by Mr. Silverback (Welcome swingers! Pull up a groove and get fabulous!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377

Thank you, sir.


106 posted on 11/13/2006 10:02:31 PM PST by Mr. Silverback (Welcome swingers! Pull up a groove and get fabulous!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
Conservatism is an agenda for radical change. Just the direction is towards the individual rather than the state.

In the classical liberal sense, yes. Get into social issues & some conservatives believe the role of the state is to hold a firm line on individualism, for the common good.

Farah is spouting defeatist nonsense.

Could be Farah's waking up the the possibility that using the state to hold the line in the area of morality ends up as a net loss, when cultural influences are doing such a bang up job of undermining them.

107 posted on 11/13/2006 11:24:06 PM PST by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly
Nationalizing it has caused great harm to our society.

What are you talking about? I don't see anyone nationalizing faith! I do see a push for morale and traditional values, which can only be described as GOOD for the country. Gov'ts don't select any religion, but they should recognize peoples FREEDOM to practice it in PUBLIC. Especially Judeo-Christian religion on which most of this countries precepts were founded. Do you recognize this:

FREEDOM OF RELIGION.

You can call yourself a Christian, but I don't know what YOU mean?

108 posted on 11/14/2006 2:56:42 AM PST by sirchtruth (No one has the RIGHT not to be offended...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: olezip; HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity
Joseph Farah is correct. The foundation of our country, IMO, has been severely damaged like termites working on the foundation of a house. We have had no damage assessment. This has been going on for more than forty years, and most of America has not yet noticed.

You are right. But here is something to think about.

Cultures rise and fall. The Western Empire, before Theodoric bought off the last emperor, was pretty bad. The grandsons of brave Roman soldiers would cut off their thumbs to avoid being called up. Birthrates were low do to abortion and contraception (yes they had that then), and the most pressing worry for many people was what the next show was going to be in the Colosseum.

We are following along the time line in a similar fashion, but with one major difference. Western Rome was Christian, and they were conquered by Christians. Our culture is no longer Christian. Our fall will be a lot more messy.

109 posted on 11/14/2006 7:24:26 AM PST by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: redgolum

Yes. The alarming thing is the "warp speed" of the imminent downfall of western civilization. The Roman Empire lasted for hundreds of years. We have gone from "Rosie the Riveter" to "Rosie O'Donnell," in one generation!


110 posted on 11/14/2006 7:59:20 AM PST by olezip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: sirchtruth
What are you talking about? I don't see anyone nationalizing faith!

Every Federal court ruling about a religious question, where our courts had been previously silent, becomes a step toward establishing secular humanism as the national religion.

I do see a push for morale and traditional values, which can only be described as GOOD for the country.

That works great for you, when your traditions are the ones being imposed. Not so much for those who's traditions are struck down.

Gov'ts don't select any religion, but they should recognize peoples FREEDOM to practice it in PUBLIC. Especially Judeo-Christian religion on which most of this countries precepts were founded. Do you recognize this:

FREEDOM OF RELIGION.

Yes, I recognize freedom of religion. A combined use of the tenth & fourteenth amendments has been the Federal hammer that has been used to infringe upon our freedom of religion. The Federal government has reached into our communities, mostly through the courts, but also with the power of the purse to force us to accept a watered down version of freedom of religion. Uncle Sam even watches over our preachers in their pulpits, through the IRS codes.

Entire states had established churches at our nation's founding. It was once a state power, but not any more. A state would now find its constitution struck down if it tried to reestablish.

You can call yourself a Christian, but I don't know what YOU mean?

Communities or neighborhoods should be *allowed* to establish & anyone living there has to accept it. They don't like the prayers said in school, they can move. Seeing a cross in the public square bothers them, live somewhere that doesn't have one displayed. It would mean we'd have to accept communities following some kind of bizarre cult.

How bout you, do you recognize this:

FREEDOM OF RELIGION.

111 posted on 11/14/2006 11:02:53 AM PST by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: redgolum
Cultures rise and fall. The Western Empire, before Theodoric bought off the last emperor, was pretty bad. The grandsons of brave Roman soldiers would cut off their thumbs to avoid being called up. Birthrates were low do to abortion and contraception (yes they had that then), and the most pressing worry for many people was what the next show was going to be in the Colosseum. We are following along the time line in a similar fashion, but with one major difference. Western Rome was Christian, and they were conquered by Christians. Our culture is no longer Christian. Our fall will be a lot more messy.
109 posted on 11/14/2006 10:24:26 AM EST by redgolum

There are bunch of different but related problems going on - socialism, multiculturalism, liberalism, moral relativism, hedonism, depopulation, etc. You also have cultural elites who are out of touch with reality and mainstream American culture. You can't keep taxing the middle-class out of existence, piling up debt, staging an amoral circus culture, etc., and expect to have a healthy civilization.

112 posted on 11/14/2006 2:36:20 PM PST by HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly
It would mean we'd have to accept communities following some kind of bizarre cult.

No you don't! Alot of what is missed in this whole Separation Of Church and State argument is common sense. A community as long as it does not ESTABLISH religious RULE can place whatever religious symbol in the public square it wants... the problem comes in forcing people to adhere to religious tennants, which would not be the case by just "recognizing" a particlar religions arbitrary sign or allowing people to pray to their God in public.

Every Federal court ruling about a religious question, where our courts had been previously silent, becomes a step toward establishing secular humanism as the national religion.

Now this is something you've hit the nail on the head with! You're absolutely correct and futhermore what secularist are trying to establish is ANTI-JUDGEMENT rulings. So I'm not going to disagree with you at all on this great point you've brought up. Please expound...

113 posted on 11/14/2006 3:25:13 PM PST by sirchtruth (No one has the RIGHT not to be offended...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: sirchtruth
No you don't! Alot of what is missed in this whole Separation Of Church and State argument is common sense.

Equal protection is equal or it becomes something else. A government has power over government action in lower jurisdictions or it doesn't. A government powerful enough to grant rights is also one that is powerful enough to take them away.

A community as long as it does not ESTABLISH religious RULE can place whatever religious symbol in the public square it wants... the problem comes in forcing people to adhere to religious tennants, which would not be the case by just "recognizing" a particlar religions arbitrary sign or allowing people to pray to their God in public.

A community can not force anyone in it to adhere to the religious tenants chosen by people an area, as long as people are able to move to a different community. You are talking about accepting form over substance. You're telling a tiny cult of separatists to turn their ships around, forming communities that reflect their faith are no longer welcome here, in the land of the free...

Please expound...

I'd like you to chew on the points I made earlier in this post a bit first.

114 posted on 11/14/2006 4:42:35 PM PST by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-114 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson