Further Questions On What Defines Us
Well, it's time for me to jump in here on this whole thing about what defines a liberal. There are posts up all over the blogosphere about this. Michael P.F. van der Galien has it up and it has prompted a lot of comments. A lot of them mine. It's a great question in that it forces you to organize your thoughts and then to put those thoughts into words.
I'm going to turn this discussion around a bit though and I want to ask just what makes a person a social conservative. It's my understanding that they also go by the term values voters or even the conservative Christian voter. What is it that defines them?
I personally think they are basically the single issue voter or perhaps two issues, but primarily their vote is about being opposed to abortion. I think most of them would be fairly anti-gay as well.
Here is my question though for these people who have proclaimed the moral high ground based upon their religious position.
When your candidate you have helped elect into office employs immoral actions or laws, does that make you pull your support?
If that candidate sanctioned torture or started an unprovoked war or imprisoned people without due process and without any evidence would you pull support?
I would say these are all immoral or at least un-American actions.
I think that when the social conservatives got a president in office who is a dedicated anti-abortionist and has promised and delivered Supreme Court justices in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade they don't care what his morals are or what he does.
It's hard to be a values voter when you only have one or two.
Jim Martin
I'm going to turn this discussion around a bit though and I want to ask just what makes a person a social conservative. It's my understanding that they also go by the term values voters or even the conservative Christian voter. What is it that defines them?
I personally think they are basically the single issue voter or perhaps two issues, but primarily their vote is about being opposed to abortion. I think most of them would be fairly anti-gay as well.
Here is my question though for these people who have proclaimed the moral high ground based upon their religious position.
When your candidate you have helped elect into office employs immoral actions or laws, does that make you pull your support?
If that candidate sanctioned torture or started an unprovoked war or imprisoned people without due process and without any evidence would you pull support?
I would say these are all immoral or at least un-American actions.
I think that when the social conservatives got a president in office who is a dedicated anti-abortionist and has promised and delivered Supreme Court justices in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade they don't care what his morals are or what he does.
It's hard to be a values voter when you only have one or two.
Jim Martin
Labels: conservatism, policy, politics, society
posted by Libby Spencer at 8:55 PM
3 Comments:
I think what defines a conservative these days is they see the world in black and white. They are incapable of seeing Bush as evil, so he must be good. They were conviced that Saddam was evil, so the war must be good.
They are digital thinkers in an anolog world.
Amen! At the same time, many conservatives judge liberals as immoral based on one moral failing (adultery) without taking into consideration their overall accomplishments (fighting poverty, good stewardship of the environment, etc., etc.)
Thanks Kathy
I don't understand why these right-wingers are bestowed with high morality just because they are against abortion and are anti-gay rights. It's just not enough.
Post a Comment
<< Home