any "nice" conservatives out there?

[Rudey]

Originally posted by KSig RC
For myself to reach the conclusions she has, the influence would have to reach the levels I inquired about - which would, to my mind, seriously violate the vision that the nation was founded upon (to tie this into a hypothesis).

Given that each of the Great Awakenings is tied to such important changes, how can anyone deny the strength of the influence?

-Rudey

[Phasad1913]

I can't say anything other than EXACTLY!!! Very well said. Seems pretty simple, doesn't it? Conservatives have really done a number on America by making it seem like this ideology is somehow loony or crazy. It all makes very good sense to me.

Originally Posted by AGDee

More people need to realize that difference. Not allowing schools to conduct formal prayers according to some administrator's choice of which prayer is said (which is the thing that's illegal) is not the same as a kid bowing his head to say grace to himself before he eats lunch in the cafeteria. There is nothing to stop that child from doing that and if anybody did stop them from doing that, the ACLU would probably be all over that too. I pray all over the place. Nobody can legislate my thoughts and I can converse with God any time I please.

Keeping abortion legal doens't mean forcing anybody to have one. Those who don't agree simply don't get them, don't date people who want them to get one (or who would get one), don't donate money to agencies that support it, etc. It simply allows other people the option of free will. It also doesn't mandate doctors to perform them. Only those who choose to perform them do so. Same with the staff in the clinics.

Allowing gay marriages doesn't affect anybody else in any way, shape or form. Nobody is going to force anybody else to marry someone of their own sex. People will choose to do this on their own. Nobody can force a church to perform the marriage. Churches can refuse to marry anybody they don't want to marry.

Drinking is legal for me, but I choose not to do it these days (because it makes me sick). That doesn't mean I believe in Prohibition.

I consider myself liberal simply because I think people should be able to choose whether or not to do all the above things, whether I personally believe or would choose to do them myself.

Dee

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by Phasad1913

I can't say anything other than EXACTLY!!! Very well said. Seems pretty simple, doesn't it? Conservatives have really done a number on America by making it seem like this ideology is somehow loony or crazy. It all makes very good sense to me.

Not conservatives, "some" conservatives. Please don't paint all of us with the same brush. There are some of us conservatives who don't think government should have its hand in everything.

[valkyrie]

Originally Posted by hoosier

Ann Coulter = hot looking conservative babe-o-licious, Time Magazine cover in '05.

You're with me, Ann Coulter.

[shinerbock]

Which is fine, but conservatives don't make the argument that we're being forced to get them, they make they argument that babies are killed as a form of birth control.

Most conservatives I know don't want school prayer. However, I don't see a problem with a student at graduation saying a prayer, or someone asking God to protect the players in a football game.

Gay marriage does affect people, particularly those who are married. Say I graduate from _________ and a few years later the school starts giving out a bunch of degrees to people who didn't meet the requirements I did. That changes the meaning of the degree, doesn't it? Similar case here. People didn't get married with the expectation that gay people would fall under the same title one day. Thus by providing for gay marriage, you're lumping in their union with something they might not want to be associated with.

On a side note, liberalism doesn't give everyone the freedom to do whatever they want. Liberal ideology decides that the government should invest your money for you. They decide that your money should go to public welfare causes, regardless of moral objection to them. Many of them want to restrict or eliminate my access to firearms. They think that since me or you have plenty of money, we should have to turn over more of that money to the government than other people are required to. Just a few of the reasons I'm a conservative.

[valkyrie]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Gay marriage does affect people, particularly those who are married. Say I graduate from _________ and a few years later the school starts giving out a bunch of degrees to people who didn't meet the requirements I did. That changes the meaning of the degree, doesn't it? Similar case here.

Apples and oranges -- both are tasty, but not at all the same thing.

[greekalum]

Also, shinerbock, schools often DO change their degree requirements. Someone who got the same degree as you did ten years ago possibly did not take all the same classes as you did.

(Per your own university catalog:

"Undergraduate students who have not
been enrolled at Auburn University for a period of five years or more
and who are returning to the same curriculum may be subject to different
university, college, school, or departmental requirements than those
which existed at the time of their initial entry, as well as those which
existed at the program level when continuous enrollment ceased."

"The following covers a number
of possible situations for students who enroll at Auburn University as
freshmen and for students who are transferring from another institution
into Auburn. Different requirements are based on when the student first
began collegiate study." )

[shinerbock]

Of course they are different. If I had an identical comparison that applied, there wouldnt be much of a debate.

As to whoever posted last...greekalum, of course things change. However, adding or taking away a class is quite different from changing the entire make up of what can create a marriage. I don't really think there is a debate that this substantially changes marriage, it is not merely a slight alteration. Lets say Auburn completely changed their degree programs, to the detriment and dismay of previous grads...don't you think they'd be angry about it? Perhaps they would have a valid grievance, no? What if I signed a petition, only to find that later someone had changed it, including something I had serious problems with, and my name still remained? Make all the statements you want about equality, but the fact is there are millions of couples upset at the prospect that something they value so dearly may soon include something they adamently oppose.

[greekalum]

How is this a detriment, though?

And universities DO perform major overhauls, at times, of their general education programs. Sometimes to make it more rigorous, sometimes to make it more current- and the complaints of past students don't change that.

You seem to be confused:

"there are millions of couples upset at the prospect that something they value so dearly may soon include something they adamently oppose."

No one is proposing that we force gays to horn their way in on straight marriages. I don't see how two men getting married affects my marriage any more than Britney Spears' marriages have. Nothing's being taken away from me.

[shinerbock]

You're right, Britney Spears is a detriment to marriage. However, historically marriage has always been between one man and one woman. Gay couples merely don't fit the requirement. So yes, they are "horn"ing their way in, seeing as they've not been included in marriage in the past. Granted, I don't expect you to really see this through conservative eyes, since homosexuality probably doesn't bother you. However, it does bother a lot of people, and they simply don't want their relationship with their spouse to have the same title as a relationship many believe to be wrong/sinful/whatever.

[RACooper]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

You're right, Britney Spears is a detriment to marriage. However, historically marriage has always been between one man and one woman. Gay couples merely don't fit the requirement. So yes, they are "horn"ing their way in, seeing as they've not been included in marriage in the past. Granted, I don't expect you to really see this through conservative eyes, since homosexuality probably doesn't bother you. However, it does bother a lot of people, and they simply don't want their relationship with their spouse to have the same title as a relationship many believe to be wrong/sinful/whatever.

...eh... Historically marriage hasn't been between a man and a woman - historically you'd get marriages between a man and "gods/goddess", man and state, man and animal, man and man, even man and the dead... yes historically a Conventional Marriage has been between a male and female (not always "man" and "woman"), and thanks to the monotheistic faiths Monogamous Marriage and Conventional Marriage have become synonymous; however that isn’t the historic reality…

As for same-sex marriage, as long as it’s monogamous I don’t have a problem with – what I do have a problem with is the many decrying same-sex marriage as “un-biblical” or a “sinful” all while turning a blind eye to their acceptance of divorce… or more esoterically: intolerance, hate, and war – all of which are as great or greater sins according to the Bible… but hey that just me

[shinerbock]

Where is war listed as a sin in the Bible? Also, its really annoying that people attempt to say "well you should allow this sin because other sins are allowed." Great logic there. Reminds me of the whole "we're not going after Iran or N. Korea" argument. I don't think we're gonna be able to end divorce, but its a good idea. I don't believe in divorce. Also, please enlighten us to where the hierarchy of Biblical sins is, I haven't seen that part...
As for marriage, it traditionally has been between a man and a woman, theres no debate. The huge majority of marriages have consisted of a man and a woman.

[RACooper]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Where is war listed as a sin in the Bible? Also, its really annoying that people attempt to say "well you should allow this sin because other sins are allowed." Great logic there. Reminds me of the whole "we're not going after Iran or N. Korea" argument. I don't think we're gonna be able to end divorce, but its a good idea. I don't believe in divorce. Also, please enlighten us to where the hierarchy of Biblical sins is, I haven't seen that part...
As for marriage, it traditionally has been between a man and a woman, theres no debate. The huge majority of marriages have consisted of a man and a woman.

Funny me... in War I assumed that killing would be involved, and last I checked killing is a big no-no according to the Bible... in fact, I think there might be a prohibition or commandment against it somewhere

Hierarchy of Sins? ummm... the Commandments come to mind as the big ones, while the others mentioned by the prophets and/or in the legal sections seem somewhat lesser: God's direct words and commands, verse those passed on through his prophets. Of course my Catholic theology breaks them up in to a much more layer heirarchy of sins... but that neither here nor there (though the philosphical/theological reasoning is pretty interesting).

Now as for marriage - yes there is a debate about the "traditional" make-up of a marriage - simply because the definition of marriage has changed and evolved through history: a legal/financial contract, a love-bond, a sexual/procreative agreement, and a spiritual joining - while at the present in Western society all of these are one and the same, with reference to the term marriage, one only has to look back a century and see seperate "marriages" in terms of definition.

[shinerbock]

Which is fine, but theres still not a debate about marriage traditionally being between a man and a woman. I just think its stupid that people say it is merely a modern change, when in reality its an enormous alteration to the very foundation of traditional marriage (Not saying you feel this way, just in general...).

As for sin hierarchy, I don't believe in it.

Regarding war, it might be a sin, who knows. I find it hard to believe God would condemn all war, but who is to say...It is one of many, many things in Christianity that I don't know, and I'm ok with that.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

On a side note, liberalism doesn't give everyone the freedom to do whatever they want. Liberal ideology decides that the government should invest your money for you. They decide that your money should go to public welfare causes, regardless of moral objection to them. Many of them want to restrict or eliminate my access to firearms. They think that since me or you have plenty of money, we should have to turn over more of that money to the government than other people are required to. Just a few of the reasons I'm a conservative.

The interesting part of this is that traditional conservatism is rooted in a small government that only handles the 'bare necessities' through legislation. The push for Federal legislation (as the states most likely have the power to dictate these terms on their own) against gay marriage really runs contrary to this ideal, in my mind.