What am I?

[Irving]

That Zero Theory sure has moxy!

[MarkCO]

To the OP, honestly, i think you are one of the types of people that is unraveling the Republican party. Namely a social liberal and a financial conservative. I would argue that you are not a "firm supporter" of the founding principles of the constitution however. When Federal Government ignored state rights and passed several laws which you likely support, the constitution was violated and continues to be violated more and more every day. I am not being critical of your stances, they are yours and your right to have. But some of them are counter to the founding principles of the Constitution. The constitution is not sacred and must be supported in whole or nothing, but, at least today, it is still "assumed" as the law of the land even though many aspects of it are being violated.

Gay marriage is a farce. When the congress passed the "defense of marriage act", or even before when they gave married couples preferential treatment, the constitution was violated. Gay marriage is a platform that, from the legal side, seeks to place same sex couples on the same footing as traditionally married couples. Newsflash...marriage is NOT in the constitution and it is NOT enumerated as a protected right. Furthermore, the jurisdiction for marriage is at the state level, NOT the Federal level under the constitution. So passing a law to right the perceived inequality created by unjust laws and regulations is still an illegal law. We just have no politicians willing to call a spade a spade and fight for state rights to return the issue of marriage to the state level. America has tried to legislate morality and export democracy by force. Even if I agree with the "goals" the delivery method has been wrong way too often. The reaction of late has been to legislate amorality. It is all surface level bandaids refusing to deal with the root cause. You can not force a man to be good...you can only bring to bear penalties for evil which harms another person or their property. A lot of this blame lies in legalism in the American church, which when it fails to effect positive change, is angered and attempts to force change through legislation. It is a history lesson that humans refuse to learn as a majority.

Abortion is a moral issue. If you think life is valuable then you have to make a choice. Does life start when a human is conceived, has a brain wave, has a heartbeat. leaves the mothers body, or when it can fend for itself. There is no doubt that a baby inside the womb is living and is also dependant on the mothers body. But to you who think humans have no soul, then why can we not kill the guy who cuts us off in traffic? I can shoot the deer on the side of a hill and a doctor can kill a baby in the womb. Is any human who can not speak or fight for their rights okay to kill? If you believe humans have a soul, when does that soul "arrive" in a human. Yes, I believe abortion is murder and yes I believe it is wrong and yes I believe every life taken by men without moral justification grieves the creator of those lives. To force me to pay for murder, how does that jive with the Constitution? It does not!

Marijuana is a plant, like tobacco, peyote, coca. What we, as men do with it is a moral issue as well. I do not think alcohol is wrong even though it is made by men from agricultural products, but I do believe that the effects that alcohol creates in some people are wrong. I do not believe that any American should have to pay for the penalties of another's misuse or abuse of drugs or alcohol. However, the insurance and health care industries spread those costs out to me and take money out of my pocket to pay for other peoples lack of control, misuse and abuse. When the law protects me from other people's stupidity instead of forcing me to pay for it, then I think that there can be a common ground for a reasonable discussion.

Illegal immigration, yep, it is wrong. I do however think there is a need for immigration reform. I believe I am fortunate to have been born into the greatest (not perfect) country on the planet. What grieves me is the balls to the wall path to destroy America. There are people voluntarily leaving America (on both sides) because of their disdain for what it has become. The PC movement to let people hold onto their loyalty to another country while letting them into America is creating two classes of immigrants. Those who love America and vow allegiance to America as a country and want to prosper both themselves and America, and those who come only for the benefits but despise the foundation of our Country.

When it comes to 1st and 2nd amendment "rights" those have been infringed. However, America allowed and ushered in those laws which violate the constitution. Tell me how we can roll back all laws related to marriage (regardless of sexual orientation), guns, etc. and get back to the constitution and I am all ears...I just do not think it is possible in the current climate.

[ZERO THEORY]

To the OP, honestly, i think you are one of the types of people that is unraveling the Republican party. Namely a social liberal and a financial conservative. I would argue that you are not a "firm supporter" of the founding principles of the constitution however. When Federal Government ignored state rights and passed several laws which you likely support, the constitution was violated and continues to be violated more and more every day. I am not being critical of your stances, they are yours and your right to have. But some of them are counter to the founding principles of the Constitution. The constitution is not sacred and must be supported in whole or nothing, but, at least today, it is still "assumed" as the law of the land even though many aspects of it are being violated.

Gay marriage is a farce. When the congress passed the "defense of marriage act", or even before when they gave married couples preferential treatment, the constitution was violated. Gay marriage is a platform that, from the legal side, seeks to place same sex couples on the same footing as traditionally married couples. Newsflash...marriage is NOT in the constitution and it is NOT enumerated as a protected right. Furthermore, the jurisdiction for marriage is at the state level, NOT the Federal level under the constitution. So passing a law to right the perceived inequality created by unjust laws and regulations is still an illegal law. We just have no politicians willing to call a spade a spade and fight for state rights to return the issue of marriage to the state level. America has tried to legislate morality and export democracy by force. Even if I agree with the "goals" the delivery method has been wrong way too often. The reaction of late has been to legislate amorality. It is all surface level bandaids refusing to deal with the root cause. You can not force a man to be good...you can only bring to bear penalties for evil which harms another person or their property. A lot of this blame lies in legalism in the American church, which when it fails to effect positive change, is angered and attempts to force change through legislation. It is a history lesson that humans refuse to learn as a majority.

Well, let me go ahead and stop right at your first argument. Women didn't have the right to vote, given the framework of the Constitution at its inception. That was also a state affair. Would you say that we shouldn't have passed the 19th amendment? Should we undo the 15th as well? Whether or not you agree with gay marriage, arbitrary and subjective religious beliefs do not equate to fact. There is no quantitative or qualitative truth value; it's holds not data.

I would argue that saying anyone who doesn't fit your exact set of convictions is a false Republican is pretty shameful. If we all just parrot the exact same set of beliefs, we might as well be robots. I'd rather foster discussions and debate among differing viewpoints to figure out what is best for the nation, than shun potential allies in my fight to retain my rights.

[MarkCO]

In response to above...

Not picking a fight with the amendments...but marriage still is not a protected right under the constitution so arguing about changes made because of amendments has nothing to do with it. I do believe in marriage, however, you have missed the entire point of the argument...that is in agreement with what you wrote. Religious Freedom is a foundation of the Constitution...the warping by some to try and legislate morality now removes religious freedom. Amendments are the proper way to change law, not by legislation from the bench, which is where we now are.

Also never called anyone a "false Republican" those are your words and are not even close to what I wrote.

[RMAC757]

So, it seems my opinions and ideology vary depending on the subject matter. I've always kind of considered myself a very liberal conservative if that makes any sense.

I don't believe government should tell people how to live. I believe hard work and ambition should be rewarded. I don't believe in free handouts for those who lack in the hard work or ambition department. I'm a firm supporter of my country's constitution and the principles on which it was founded.

But....

I also believe in gay marriage, the legalization of marijuana on a federal level, and I'm pro-choice when it comes to abortion. I also am very open minded when it comes to illegal immigrants. I feel they serve a valid role in our society.

Oh, and for the record, I don't partake in marijuana or participate in homosexuality and I'm not an immigrant. And I always vote Republican because most of the candidates usually make more sense than their Democratic counterparts. I've always found third party candidates who's ideas and beliefs were in line with mine but have always realized a vote for them wasn't really a viable or realistic option.

Ray, I wonder the same thing everyday. Why don't we have more political choices. On the other hand screw that. I don't want to be categorized as anything other than a free thinker.

[davsel]

Well, let me go ahead and stop right at your first argument. Women didn't have the right to vote, given the framework of the Constitution at its inception. That was also a state affair. Would you say that we shouldn't have passed the 19th amendment? Should we undo the 15th as well? Whether or not you agree with gay marriage, arbitrary and subjective religious beliefs do not equate to fact. There is no quantitative or qualitative truth value; it's holds not data.

I would argue that saying anyone who doesn't fit your exact set of convictions is a false Republican is pretty shameful. If we all just parrot the exact same set of beliefs, we might as well be robots. I'd rather foster discussions and debate among differing viewpoints to figure out what is best for the nation, than shun potential allies in my fight to retain my rights.

You can trace back the liberalization of our country to the passing of the 19th Amendment. Repeal it. Or go back to the idea that only property owners/tax payers can vote - must have skin in the game.
Your second paragraph sounds like a justification for "Celebrate Diversity!" Nonsense. Take a look at Europe to see where we're headed on that front.

[ZERO THEORY]

You can trace back the liberalization of our country to the passing of the 19th Amendment. Repeal it. Or go back to the idea that only property owners/tax payers can vote - must have skin in the game.
Your second paragraph sounds like a justification for "Celebrate Diversity!" Nonsense. Take a look at Europe to see where we're headed on that front.

Saying that there's more than one set of beliefs for people who want to live freely is a justification for "Celebrate Diversity!" nonsense? Interesting. Because Whigs were constituted of strict Anglicans as well as Puritans. Meanwhile, they managed to consort with outspoken secularists like Thomas Jefferson.

In his Notes on Virginia (1781), Jefferson wrote: "Millions of innocent men, women and children since the introduction of Christianity have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned. Yet have we not advanced one inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth . . ." The Deist wrote: "The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as his father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter." (Works, 1829 ed., Vol. IV, p. 365).

It's almost like...there might be some differentiation between 319 million people. Weird. Anyway, what is the latest update on our Groupthink™ syllabus?

[asmo]

To the OP, honestly, i think you are one of the types of people that is unraveling the Republican party. Namely a social liberal and a financial conservative. I would argue that you are not a "firm supporter" of the founding principles of the constitution however. When Federal Government ignored state rights and passed several laws which you likely support, the constitution was violated and continues to be violated more and more every day. I am not being critical of your stances, they are yours and your right to have. But some of them are counter to the founding principles of the Constitution. The constitution is not sacred and must be supported in whole or nothing, but, at least today, it is still "assumed" as the law of the land even though many aspects of it are being violated.

No True Scotsman! One... love.

Gay marriage is a farce. When the congress passed the "defense of marriage act", or even before when they gave married couples preferential treatment, the constitution was violated. Gay marriage is a platform that, from the legal side, seeks to place same sex couples on the same footing as traditionally married couples. Newsflash...marriage is NOT in the constitution and it is NOT enumerated as a protected right. Furthermore, the jurisdiction for marriage is at the state level, NOT the Federal level under the constitution. So passing a law to right the perceived inequality created by unjust laws and regulations is still an illegal law. We just have no politicians willing to call a spade a spade and fight for state rights to return the issue of marriage to the state level. America has tried to legislate morality and export democracy by force. Even if I agree with the "goals" the delivery method has been wrong way too often. The reaction of late has been to legislate amorality. It is all surface level bandaids refusing to deal with the root cause. You can not force a man to be good...you can only bring to bear penalties for evil which harms another person or their property. A lot of this blame lies in legalism in the American church, which when it fails to effect positive change, is angered and attempts to force change through legislation. It is a history lesson that humans refuse to learn as a majority.

Argument from Consequences! Two... love.

Abortion is a moral issue. If you think life is valuable then you have to make a choice. Does life start when a human is conceived, has a brain wave, has a heartbeat. leaves the mothers body, or when it can fend for itself. There is no doubt that a baby inside the womb is living and is also dependant on the mothers body. But to you who think humans have no soul, then why can we not kill the guy who cuts us off in traffic? I can shoot the deer on the side of a hill and a doctor can kill a baby in the womb. Is any human who can not speak or fight for their rights okay to kill? If you believe humans have a soul, when does that soul "arrive" in a human. Yes, I believe abortion is murder and yes I believe it is wrong and yes I believe every life taken by men without moral justification grieves the creator of those lives. To force me to pay for murder, how does that jive with the Constitution? It does not!

Marijuana is a plant, like tobacco, peyote, coca. What we, as men do with it is a moral issue as well. I do not think alcohol is wrong even though it is made by men from agricultural products, but I do believe that the effects that alcohol creates in some people are wrong. I do not believe that any American should have to pay for the penalties of another's misuse or abuse of drugs or alcohol. However, the insurance and health care industries spread those costs out to me and take money out of my pocket to pay for other peoples lack of control, misuse and abuse. When the law protects me from other people's stupidity instead of forcing me to pay for it, then I think that there can be a common ground for a reasonable discussion.

Illegal immigration, yep, it is wrong. I do however think there is a need for immigration reform. I believe I am fortunate to have been born into the greatest (not perfect) country on the planet. What grieves me is the balls to the wall path to destroy America. There are people voluntarily leaving America (on both sides) because of their disdain for what it has become. The PC movement to let people hold onto their loyalty to another country while letting them into America is creating two classes of immigrants. Those who love America and vow allegiance to America as a country and want to prosper both themselves and America, and those who come only for the benefits but despise the foundation of our Country.

Non sequitur... love and game.

[jhood001]

You can trace back the liberalization of our country to the passing of the 19th Amendment. Repeal it.

Dude, seriously? We've crossed this topic before. You honestly want to remove the right of women to vote in this country?

Do you also want them to wear a burqa? Or is there some other clothing that you believe is suitable for 'them' that also hits your horny button?

Nun outfits? What does it for you?

If you want to make our women unequal, you might as well go for broke and spell out all of the other things you would like to see done to them.

Yeah, some of that which I wrote is probably unfair, but a full explanation of your beliefs would be nice... so that anyone living in the 21st century can comment, counter and properly destroy them.

[HBARleatherneck]

lets be honest....as lovers of freedom the last thing in the world we need is a Constitution convention. Do you remember that 50% + of the country voted for Barry twice? We would almost guaranteed lose the 2nd ammendment. Can you imagine the troubles we would have after that? I would love to see the 14th ammendment repealed but, I would settle for it being severely infringed like they have done to the second.