Posted on 01/03/2016 5:07:32 AM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans
I enjoy a well reasoned debate without name calling and mud slinging. Thank you for your post.
What I understand to be conservative values (and thereby makes them a “conservative”), is this:
1. Belief in the US Constitution and Declaration of Independence
2. Belief in a Creator, and Biblical influence, as the Founders believed.
3. Belief in smaller, limited government.
4. Pro-Life
5. Against homosexuality
6. Honesty
7. Standing on these principles no matter what
I’m sure there are more, but those are the main ones, IMO.
And from what I’ve seen, read, and researched, there’s only one candidate that has an actual proven record of being close to that. Not just in talk, but in walk. Ted Cruz.
You’re right. Those are the facts.
“Never heard of the theology or of any Catholics referring to themselves as such.”
More likely ‘Dominionist’ refers to a branch of Calvinism known as Christian Reconstruction begun by RJ Rushdoony.
FYI, Editor-Surveyor is a Hebrew Roots cultist. He denies the Trinity and claims Jewish dietary laws are still binding, or else, as he says here, "you deny all that Jesus demanded of his disciples!".
With people like this calling me an enemy of God, I am not too bothered.
Yep you have pegged him correctly I believe.
Yup. I don’t know why so many here want to redefine the basics. It’s not like any of this is a secret.
Most of us hold Reagan up as the ideal. No he was not perfect. Yes he made mistakes. But he is unquestionably a solid embodiment of conservative and what it ‘is’.
He said he would not turn the party over. Today, people openly campaign for the ideas and people that would/have done exactly that.
He maintained strong faith in God. Today we have people mocking people for their faith. The OP is a prime example.
His big mistake was amnesty, which he called his biggest mistake. He trusted Tip and the Dems. Today, people argue over how their definition isn’t REALLY amnesty if their chosen candidate wants it.
How would he view Mitt Romney and the people on the right that demanded we elect him? Would he call them conservative when Romney was the polar opposite of conservative in every way possible?
I have had people tell me the founders words were nonsense here. How does one remotely square that and calling themselves conservative.
The examples are endless but it all boils down to one thing. They view conservatism the way liberals view the BOR/Constitution...a living ‘document’ that bends to what they want it to be and not what it has been for a very long time. They pay it lip service and when the chips are down, they abandon it and make excuses for doing so.
People can bitch at me all they want. One need only read FR during an election season to see thousands of examples of all of it.
I have been guilty of some in the past, I will correct that.
I may disagree with some good conservative FReepers at times on a matter here or there, but we are the salt of earth, a light shining on a hill and stand for the same things. This nomination and election is the fight for the future direction of our country and it is too important to be divided amongst ourselves.
I would guess if a list of the most important values were posted, FReepers would agree on those values in the high 90 percent range. We all basically agree on the same values we just don’t always agree on how to get there and who should lead us there.
God bless Free Republic and our Republic.
With people like this calling me an enemy of God, I am not too bothered.
~ ~ ~
Why are you so intent on dividing us?
I’m a Sen. Cruz supporter. I won’t vote for trump, and I don’t want to get into the reasons. It’s enough to say I wont. And that’s not the purpose of my post.
The purpose is to thank you for decency.
Even though I would not vote for trump, nonetheless I don’t agree with every attack against him. Some stuff is bullshit. And I’ve said so.
You need to get off that ruse. He stated in the debate that for excellent students from our top schools we should find a way for them to stay. You are implying that the students were here illegally.
You need to stop the BS. My post #479 wasn't about the graduating foreign student legalization. It was about the so-called "11 million" illegals here.
That’s good enough for me sitetest, we each need to stand for what we believe in and be honest, that is honorable.
If the epithet “Christianos” (Christian) is derogatory, then why does no less of an Apostle than Peter use it in 1 Peter 4:16? The one epithet that was never used by them was “Nazarene”, even though it appears as prophetic speech (not writing) in Matthew 2:23 and in derogatory context in Acts 24:5.
BTW, you just called the Founding Fathers of the USA “in opposition to God’s will and intent”, especially by their openly declaring that “the People” possess the “right” and “duty to throw off such government” as would be tyrannical. They were not.
Typical Trumpanzee. Can’t justify Trust Fund Donnie’s stated positions, so you just try to bluster them away.
Like candidate, like follower.
Hank
Nope. An internet school yard fight based upon opinion posts is not news.
“Untill TPP passes, there is no pact, no agreement.”
It only takes 51 votes and Republican leadership is all for TPP. Cruz was part of the 60 vote majority that got TPA into voting position; it could have been stopped cold then. TPA enables TPP.
“As I have instructed, at length, Cruz did not enable the current version of TPA.”
He voted for cloture which brought the bill up for vote, and then he voted for the bill. He praised the bill, but claimed to Mark Levin that he made a deal with “leadership” to vote for it if they would subsequently remove the language in the bill that turned immigration law over to a foreign cartel. “Leadership” lied, he said, so he voted against it the second time. The bill was still toxic without the immigration aspect.
“I understand that Senate dealings are hard for some to understand, but why must so many, including you, continue to spout this drivel?”
I am not spouting drivel, I am quoting Cruz.”
” Who TOLD you that Cruz enabled TPA as it now exists?”
Cruz, by voting it to go before Congress and voting for it.
“Who told you that TPP will definitely pass?”
No one “told” me, but the Republicans are for the bill. The Republicans and Obama are working together. It only takes 51 votes, and debate is very limited (TPA rule. TPA was passed to “fast track” i. e. ram, the bill through.)
Corker bill? There is no conceivable, rational explanation that can get Cruz off the hook on that vote. Rush Limbaugh (along with Mark Levin and Cruz, strangely enough) who called the bill a disaster, said on his show that Republican donors wanted that bill so they could make money off rebuilding Iran’s infrastructure. No sooner than Cruz voted for the bill, he started condemning the bill. He took a page out of Obama’s book — campaign against and disown your own policies for the low information voters.
As strong as Cruz is on the Tenth Amendment, I doubt he has the view that the USA should become a Christian theocracy, which is how the left would like to paint every Christian who actually believes that what God commands fits in nicely with the natural law.
Really?
If the sarcasm inherent in my ‘absurd projection’ was lost on you, I apologize. Apparently, I was overly nuanced or overly obscure for you in my attempt to mock the ways in which GPH linked his proofs to his attack on Ted Cruz. Attaching Beth Moore, Joel Osteen, and any number of other ‘name it and claim it’ Christians to a political campaign of a political figure who is attempting to attain a political position in the political institution of the presidency of America is easily as ‘truly absurd’ as anything you may have read from me. Are you so lacking in memory as to forget that Tina Fey’s parody of Sarah Palin led the world to believe that Palin actually said “I can see Russia from my back yard?” Just what do you think Greetingspunyhumans is doing with his/her post if not the same type of smear, albeit with a religious overtone? If you, Jane Long, don’t want a constitutional candidate on the ticket, then say it. Don’t cozy up with fellow travelers who use their own religious absolutism as a cover for their attacks on others whom they oppose. Or perhaps you are looking for the type of theocratic purity for which our FRiend GPH is apparently calling?
Vote in congress did not matter because the treaty did not become law only if congress voted for it not to become law but the president could veto that and congress would not be able to overturn that veto.
I don't know if you are just not able to understand that or you are a paid hack so tell me which.
No, the ‘sarcasm’, as another FReeper has mentioned, was not obvious. Your post sounded quite matter of fact.
Thanks for stopping by FR. Happy New Year.
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.