--that the Constitution was written to direct the national direction, not to herd subgroups into servitude to another group which takes the reins of government on occasion;
--that once a human being is alive, they have -according to our Declaration of Independence- the right to LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness;
--that taxation must have a legitimate reason else it is socilaims on the march through our pocketbooks;
--that the federal government is tasked with protecting -not taking care of us in every aspect of life- us collectively;
--that each individual has the right to own property which the government may not declare theirs for purposes of distributing wealth via taxation changes due to property siezures with redistribution in mind;
--that the individual sovereigns of this nation (that's us via We The People) have the right to keep and bear arms for our defense of self, family, property and beliefs; that a person's particualr religious beliefs are protected from government directing so long as those beliefs do not infringe upon the religious beliefs of someone else;
--that patriotism is an honorable thing, not to be confused with denigrating our volunteer military for political empowerment;
--that the social institutions which uphold a civilization ought not be subtended by interests groups wishing to change the historical and fundamental nature of the institutions in order to embrace degenerate factions within the nation demanding to be accepted based upon thier sexual proclivities;
--that we the people have the ... well, surely you get the picture, even you! MOST people at FreeRepublic are conservatives. We are not following Jim's lead, we are FreeRepublic, we are the lead, friend, each of us, in step with Jim in his vision, because we have the same vision.
So only the people who are "in step" with JimRob share the conservative vision?
What, precisely, does it mean to be "in step" with JimRob? I'm trying to get a feel for *how* "in step" you're talking about. Do you mean, like, *lockstep*?
I can assure you I agree completely with the vision statement of FR.
However, that does not mean that you or I, or you and JimRob, and JimRob and I, or fill in the blanks, will not from time to time have serious differences and debates on what constitutes and how to implement that conservative vision.
Otherwise, why not ask JimRob to write out his detailed political platform and have everybody pledge their fidelity to it hook line and sinker?
I doubt he would even consider anything of the sort. After all, he started a site for the express purpose of debate. Yes, there are boundaries. But debating within those boundaries does not mean that I do not share FR's values.
And wow--you surely went to a lot of trouble with that post. Did you actually believe that that lecture might be helpful?