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

Skip to comments.

Is Free Republic becoming increasingly hostile towards Social Conservatives?
self ^ | self

Posted on 02/07/2002 8:02:41 AM PST by watsonfellow

In the past few months I have noticed that the posters on Free Republic have become more and more hostile towards social conservatism.

And I do not mean indifference (less pro life threads etc) but an outright hostility at pro life and other social conservative causes.

Am I alone in thinking this?

In particular, notice the responses to the thread concerning the recent request by social conservative groups to the FCC to reign in Fox's racey primetime programs.

I wonder if this is becoming only a haven for hedonists and libertarians, and if so, perhaps it would be better for social conservatives to find their own site.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 701-733 next last

1 posted on 02/07/2002 8:02:41 AM PST by watsonfellow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
No, just that you can be against something without calling the police. in some cases, like the Drug War, it's a bad idea to get the police involved in the first place. In other cases, like abortion, you may find that laws are not the whole solution.

Constitutionalism is not libertarianism. A constitutional government may LOOK like a Libertarian's dream, but ask any Libertarian and they will not want to stop there.

Same with hard-line social conservatives. On FR, your causes take a back seat to constitutional government.

2 posted on 02/07/2002 8:08:46 AM PST by eno_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
Although I expect tons of flaming for this....
3 posted on 02/07/2002 8:11:38 AM PST by watsonfellow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
I wonder if this is becoming only a haven for hedonists and libertarians, and if so, perhaps it would be better for social conservatives to find their own site.

Yes, that would be a splendid idea. Go find your own site, and best of luck to you.

4 posted on 02/07/2002 8:12:40 AM PST by Ratatoskr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
It does not make you a 'hedonist' to want less government intervention. If you continually want the government to mandate what can be on television and when, you don't sound like a conservative in the first place.
5 posted on 02/07/2002 8:12:52 AM PST by riley1992
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
You are not alone.
6 posted on 02/07/2002 8:13:16 AM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
I, too, have noticed a difference lately. Can't put my finger on it....
7 posted on 02/07/2002 8:13:20 AM PST by SheLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: eno_
No, just that you can be against something without calling the police.

Spot on comment.

8 posted on 02/07/2002 8:13:37 AM PST by MileHi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
I always thought FR was hostile to people who weren't social conservatives,,some conservatives are pro choice after all and do the flames start when they are around. I have noted there is more bickering and intolerance and accusing etc lately,,seems like every thread turns into nitpicking and backbiting,,not as easy to chat freely as it used to be. Everyone accusing everyone else of being a dem or something else.
9 posted on 02/07/2002 8:13:42 AM PST by cajungirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
re : Is Free Republic becoming increasingly hostile towards Social Conservatives?.

No

This is just an aggressive site which is why I like it, on any thread on any subject you will get flame wars going, all you do is know your facts, stand your ground and beat the other side down.

Cheers Tony

10 posted on 02/07/2002 8:13:46 AM PST by tonycavanagh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow, OWK
Oh, you sanctimonious pecksniff....

Social conservatism is fine as long as it isn't dispensed from the barrel of a state-owned gun.

This is good social conservatism:

"I don't watch those damned racy Fox shows. I won't let my kids watch them--I'm gonna get my like-minded friends together and we are going to contact the advertisers on those shows..."

This is bad social conservatism:

"No one should watch those damned racy Fox shows. I'm gonna contact the government so that the government can show up and shut them down by force if necessary"

Is that so hard?

11 posted on 02/07/2002 8:14:57 AM PST by Cogadh na Sith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #12 Removed by Moderator

To: watsonfellow
Hmm, I thought the place was going the other extreme. Seems like an increase of the "my party is in charge and they can do anything they D@mn well please" types to me. Toe the party line or you get a DU disruptor label.
13 posted on 02/07/2002 8:15:17 AM PST by steve50
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
Where can I get a good deal on a wheel of Gouda?
14 posted on 02/07/2002 8:15:41 AM PST by Cyber Liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
He's baaaaaaack....
15 posted on 02/07/2002 8:16:04 AM PST by Cogadh na Sith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
I wonder if this is becoming only a haven for hedonists and libertarians, and if so, perhaps it would be better for social conservatives to find their own site.
I don't mean to sound rude, but then what? Find our own state? Find our own country? At least we get to engage on this site.
16 posted on 02/07/2002 8:17:11 AM PST by eastsider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
I don't think that members of FR are flaming or attacking "social conservatives" with increasing regularity.

I will say that I have gotten into it with a few people you would classify as "social conservatives" and I have not held back. Their interests seemed to be more in having a theocracy than a representative republic.

17 posted on 02/07/2002 8:17:19 AM PST by Phantom Lord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #18 Removed by Moderator

To: watsonfellow
In particular, notice the responses to the thread concerning the recent request by social conservative groups to the FCC to reign in Fox's racey primetime programs.

How very strange. The social conservatives want to use the power of nanny government to do the job THEY should be doing, which is to monitor and turn off objectionable television.

And a whiny thread like this does you no good either.

19 posted on 02/07/2002 8:18:37 AM PST by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
There just might be a difference between someone who orders his own life along conservative principles, and someone who wants the government imprisoning people for personal vices.
20 posted on 02/07/2002 8:19:01 AM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chookter;riley1992;francisandbeans;Doctor Doom
Bump to what chookter said!
21 posted on 02/07/2002 8:19:36 AM PST by Bella_Bru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
Based on the continuing homo-bashing threads and yesteraday's pornography thread and the religious threads, I'd say you doest protest too much.

PS: some of us grew up with Buckley and Goldwater, before Falwell and Robertson, and we believe in the freedoms expressed in the declaration and the constitution. We believe government should not stand on the side of the road and point fingers at sinners. This is the traditional meaning of conservative before it became a refuge for some religious who want their idea of sin prohibited by the government.

If you want solace, flag cultural jihad and others of his ilk. They're still here in force.

22 posted on 02/07/2002 8:19:51 AM PST by breakem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
In the past few months I have noticed that the posters on Free Republic have become more and more hostile towards social conservatism.

If there has been such a trend, I attribute it to this: A lot of social conservatives left FR after the Buchanan Brigade debacle, while most of the socially liberal libertarians stayed around. That skewed the social conservative / social liberal ratio on a lot of threads.

Additionally, a lot of social conservatives on FR still tie their conservatism to causes like opposition to Bush and the Republican Party. That's obviously going to annoy most Freepers, who are largely Republicans and Bush supporters.

23 posted on 02/07/2002 8:20:30 AM PST by Snuffington
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
Boohoo, you don't share my belief system, get lost.

No thanks.
24 posted on 02/07/2002 8:20:37 AM PST by Djarum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chookter
Two things which seem to stoke the anger of most posters here; social conservatism and any criticism at all of St. GW Bush, blessed be his name.
25 posted on 02/07/2002 8:20:39 AM PST by watsonfellow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: cajungirl
Everyone accusing everyone else of being a dem or something else.

Actually, it was like that before the GWB nomination, with those supporting someone else really having to put up with a lot. And remember the Elian controversy...whew!!

I find that the controversy is healthy. When one's ideas are challenged, it forces one to think about his/her beliefs.

About the only things we seem to agree on totally is that Hillary is really, really disliked.

26 posted on 02/07/2002 8:21:26 AM PST by grania
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
Oh, you mean politically active Christians?
The whole world is hostile to us - but then that is what Jesus promised to those who follow Him.
We enter in through the narrow gate, my friend.
(And remember Ephesians 6:10-19). <><
27 posted on 02/07/2002 8:21:29 AM PST by Psalm 73
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
The problem is that many are looking for a fight rather than a discussion - Some are here for flame wars as entertainment. There is a not-so-subtle difference between trying to win the hearts and minds of people through ideas, and simply trying to win.

JMHO

28 posted on 02/07/2002 8:21:30 AM PST by HairOfTheDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
perhaps it would be better for social conservatives to find their own site.

Kitchen too hot-diddly-ot for you, Ned?

29 posted on 02/07/2002 8:22:07 AM PST by dead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
How is it conservative at all to ask for BIGGER government?
30 posted on 02/07/2002 8:22:08 AM PST by Bella_Bru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
"How very strange. The social conservatives want to use the power of nanny government to do the job THEY should be doing, which is to monitor and turn off objectionable television."

sinkspur? Is that really you? There is hope. Thank ye gods, there is hope.

31 posted on 02/07/2002 8:22:11 AM PST by toenail
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Ms. AntiFeminazi
I have found that I must have some contrarian blood in me.

The more rabid Libertarians who have been coming on strong lately, who seem to me to have more in common with those who were running the streets of New York last weekend, have caused me to solidify my conservative views and to soften my libertarian leanings.

And the rabid paleos who keep popping up like self-parodies have caused me to move away from whatever leanings I had in their direction.

They do make quite a mess of this place though.

32 posted on 02/07/2002 8:22:22 AM PST by Dales
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
Proof... poof!!
33 posted on 02/07/2002 8:22:25 AM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: breakem
If you read Buckley you would realize that he is indeed a social conservative.
34 posted on 02/07/2002 8:24:00 AM PST by watsonfellow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: js1138
OOOOOHHH YEAHHHH!!! I like it. As a follower of Christ, there is much that I find objectionable on TV, in movies, and in magazines. That's why I don't watch, go to, or buy the stuff I object to.

I can't figure out why I need to be feeding people in jail though, if all they wanted to do was "lookit' some dirty pitchers".

35 posted on 02/07/2002 8:24:44 AM PST by L,TOWM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
There are many people on FR who claim to be conservatives but are pro-abortion and pro-gay, et al. It seems there are quite a few libertarians on FR who believe they are conservatives but really don't know the meaning of conservatism. Conservatism without the social aspect is tantamount to empty-headed libertarianism (restrain the spending and restrictions on individual liberty). Libertarianism and objective moral standards do not seem to mix very well, but I am sure there are different strains of libertarianism and some probably do believe in moral standards - they just can't explain where the moral standards come from.
36 posted on 02/07/2002 8:25:23 AM PST by exmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
Why don't you learn the proper category to post vanities, idiot!

...sorry, was that hostile?...

8~)

37 posted on 02/07/2002 8:25:23 AM PST by real saxophonist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
Sadly, Free Republic, and likely the conservative movement as whole, is becoming infected with the libertarian cancer. Not only is there hostility toward social conservatives and Christians, but this web site probably has become one of the leaders in calling for drug legalization. You'd think one was corresponding with Joycelyn Elders or leftovers from the hippie generation. And, very rarely, can someone post an article critical of homosexual behavior or abortion with being attack by a large number of people at this site. It's also become a haven for evolutionists seeking to peddle pseudo-science that is on a higher level of absurdity than global warming.
38 posted on 02/07/2002 8:25:45 AM PST by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
social conservatism

What's your definition? Did you even bother to read my post or is that just a 'canned reply' that you started this thread to use?

39 posted on 02/07/2002 8:25:53 AM PST by Cogadh na Sith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
Although I expect tons of flaming for this....

IMO, expect and want.

40 posted on 02/07/2002 8:25:54 AM PST by dighton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cyber Liberty
"Where can I get a good deal on a wheel of Gouda?"

Just check the General Store portion of the catalog put out by our top-secret VRWC/Illuminati/Masonic/Templar organization. Prices are very inexpensive and come with a complimentary Møøse for our more discriminating clientele.

Remember, order now and receive your complimentary Møøse and fiscal year 2002 decoder ring absolutely free.

Der Elite Møøsenspåånkengruppen OberKømmååndø

41 posted on 02/07/2002 8:26:37 AM PST by BlueLancer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
As a social conservative, I want the Government to do one thing and one thing only.

Leave me alone!

42 posted on 02/07/2002 8:26:42 AM PST by asformeandformyhouse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BibleBeliever;watsonfellow
I disagree with both of you. This is a conservative news forum. There are many kinds of conservatives in here.

But you will have to be able to defend your positions with real substantive points of argumentation, facts, beliefs with support.

People on here strongly believe in their point of view just like you do. I have seen no limitation of debate unless someone is attacking in a personal manner.

Many arguments that social conservatives have (not all) are based on strong emotion or faith...this is fine but to persuade someone or support your belief you

will have to temporarily leave you status as "mere believer" and go into a status of debater with support for you opinion. Of course you dont have to, but if you dont you arent going to build any hearing with people who disagree.

btw, I take views from all sides so attacking me as an anti-social conservative will be misplaced.

43 posted on 02/07/2002 8:26:44 AM PST by rbmillerjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
The RINO global corporate taliban drones & bushbots have been around for a long time.
44 posted on 02/07/2002 8:26:51 AM PST by Willie Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
After the March for Life there were two threads running concurrently.

The first was a synopsis of the March with pictures and comments from those who attended. Maybe 75 hits to the thread.

The second was on the organizers of the march disallowing the Men From Glaad to march under a banner proclaiming how they got their rocks off. That thread had over 500 hits.

Yeah, I've noticed a change.

45 posted on 02/07/2002 8:26:59 AM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
read him and listened to him for 35 years, thank you. You fail to make the distinction between believing in sin and wanting the government to sanction it. This is the common problem for those who believe as you do.
46 posted on 02/07/2002 8:27:07 AM PST by breakem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: watsonfellow
Watson:

I applaud your intent, however Free Republic is hostile to anyone who doesn't use logic. (Sometimes it is hostile to those who do)I support social conservatism as a personal guidance system and educatory process. I do not support it as a national policy. I haven't seen much of any anti-pro-life posts here (although they could be here). I believe that there is a place for this debate within the policy structure.

That being said, I don't see television standards and policies based on social conservatism to do nothing but undermine your goals. The culture exsists because of the voices within society and not the laws that exsist. Speak your mind....lend your wisdom. Just keep the gvt. out of it.

47 posted on 02/07/2002 8:27:21 AM PST by francisandbeans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eno_
Opposing the Drug War is a completely different topic than utter stupidity of legalizing drugs. And, yes, most conservatives in the nation still oppose that moronic concept. Yet, Free Republic is filled with freaks promoting drug legalization.
48 posted on 02/07/2002 8:27:39 AM PST by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
Sadly, Free Republic, and likely the conservative movement as whole, is becoming infected with the libertarian cancer.

BWAAAAAA HAHAHAHAAhahahahahahaah!!!

49 posted on 02/07/2002 8:28:23 AM PST by OWK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: breakem
Actually he is very much in favor of the legislative goals of the social conservative movement.
50 posted on 02/07/2002 8:29:12 AM PST by watsonfellow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 701-733 next 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