Conservative Paradox

Home :: Search :: Memberlist :: Privacy Policy :: Donate!

Conservative Paradox

Home // Liberals Versus Conservatives

Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

fellfire
Forum Elder

Joined: 13 Apr 2007
Posts: 2021
Location: Washington DC

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:36 am Post subject: Re: Conservative Paradox

cornopean wrote:

fellfire wrote:

False. Most of my parents grandchildren in my family (80%) have been home schooled in at least three states. The regulations were straight-forward and easily obtained. Home schooling such a normal process now, it is a simple process in most of the country; maybe you're just living in a backassward part of america?

your anecdotes are interesting but not really that cogent. the truth is, if cons were in control of the govt, there would be LESS govt control over your personal life than if libs were in control.
that is b/c with a voucher, you would be more free than without one. I think that is simple enough.

No "truth" there, you have only stated your opinion with as much validity as my anecdote. Therefore, Education is not an example of liberal intrusion of government.

cornopean wrote:

Quote:

Bullshit. That's like saying that a HVAC contractor being required to to be certified to install heaters, boilers and hazardous chemicals is a liberal interference with their life. I suppose having to go to school in order to have any trade is a liberal interference. Having to pass an driver's exam in order to get a driver's license? Liberal interference. Corny this has got to be one of your stupidest responses.

I am not now arguing that any of these intrusions are good or bad. I am simply trying to establish that with libs in govt, we would have much more intrusion into our personal life than if cons were in charge. now most cons want to ELIMINATE the dept of education. that would mean less govt regulation over teachers. furthermore, the voucher program that cons support would mean a tremendous growth in the number of private schools. these private schools would not be subject to the govt regulations that public schools are. hence, they could hire anyone they want to be a teacher regardless of whether they are certified or not. (btw...teacher certification does nothing for student achievement)

again, your statement that teacher regulations is a liberal intrusion is bullshit. You won't even defend it other then to say that "cons are less intrusive 'cause I say so." ... Really good argument there corny.

cornopean wrote:

Quote:

cornopean wrote:

taxation - too many to list. basically libs want higher taxes which has a huge impact on personal life.

Bullshit. "give unto Caeser what is Caeser's" Religion has never had a problem with taxes - especially the Protestants.

I am here talking about cons. and as much as you might hate to admit it, libs are all for getting into your wallet which definitely qualifies as an intrusion into personal life.
furthermore, it is cons who are suggesting a flatter or even the FairTax which would make it even more difficult for the govt to manipulate people's choices via the tax code.

Here the subject was all about liberals being intrusive in lifestyle (versus religious leaders). And here again, you dodge the subject of your illogical and false statements. We aren't talking about cons - we are talking about the religious.

cornopean wrote:

Quote:

cornopean wrote:

health care - with single payer health care, we are only one step away from the govt telling us what medical procedures we need and which we don't need.

If whales could fly, we are only one step away from drowning in your bullshit answers. Keep it real.

does it not make sense to you that if the govt is paying, they are going to want to have a say in what procedures you "need"? that seems fairly obvious to me.

Again, the subject was Shanks statement that you can't point out one instance of liberal intrusion on lifestyle, and again, you have failed in your attempt.

cornopean wrote:

Quote:

Judeo-Christian religions are all about control of the congregation by the oligarchy of the church hierarchy. That is what they were founded on, that is what is at the heart of all of their teaching; ergo, their "moral values" are about keeping their control.

pardon me for not seeing a problem here. shouldn't church leaders have control over their own churches? after all...membership is still optional in every church that I know.

Maybe church leaders should have control over their own churches and that is precisely why we don't want them to have control over a government, because the religion requires all to be subservient to the leaders. Membership in a nation is less optional then in a church; with a church, you can safely ignore it, if its the government, you risk much more not being a member.

As shank pointed out, religious leaders in government are more intrusive then liberal leaders.

cornopean wrote:

Quote:

Given the power of government-backing it would (and has) become abusive control.

yes I suppose if Christian fundies were in control, they would hang adulterers and stone gays. ha!! If this is the case, they sure haven't let on that this is what they secretly hope for. but thanks for letting us in on this great secret. this is quite a conspiracy if true. earth shaking. the great Christian secret....we are coming for you. haha!! can't wait for the lynchings to begin. haha!! this is all so silly. people really believe this. do any of the Christians you know act like this?

Yes, they do. If they could have me fired and living destitute on the street until such time as I "saw the light" and "came to Jesus" they would see that as proper suffering for my sins. As for lynching, no, they gleefully expect me to burn for eternity in a pit of fire and brimstone and since the End Times are here anyway, they don't see a need to hustle me off this mortal coil - God will take care of that in due time. Evil or Very Mad

exton
Forum Elder

Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:41 am Post subject: Re: Conservative Paradox

TrespassersW wrote:

I prefer the term same-gender union over same-sex marriage for a couple of reasons. First off, sex is an act; it's gender we're talking about here.

Sex is the correct word. It's a term for both the act and the biology. "Gender", on the other hand, isn't a matter of chromosomes; it's a sociological thing.

cornopean
Forum Elder

Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Posts: 3534

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 4:04 am Post subject: Re: Conservative Paradox

TrespassersW wrote:

Second, I'm not interested in the question of whether or not we call this or that legal, civil union a "marriage." Do... don't... I don't care. What business the government has in telling adults with whom they can fall in love, I just don't know. Of course, if government steered clear of attaching any special privileges to marriage in the first place, this wouldn't be an issue.

I would say the only business that the govt has with marriage is when it affects others. and since marriage affects children, the couple are not the only people involved. and govt has the responsibility of protecting the rights of children. (now were into whether this intrusion is justified or not; but I grant that this is an intrusion)

cornopean
Forum Elder

Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Posts: 3534

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 4:15 am Post subject: Re: Conservative Paradox

fellfire wrote:

No "truth" there, you have only stated your opinion with as much validity as my anecdote. Therefore, Education is not an example of liberal intrusion of government.

of course there is less intrusion with a voucher for the simple reason that with a voucher system you can choose to send your child to any school you want regardless of your income. under the liberal plan, you must send your child to the school that is in your district. if you are wealthy, then you can send your child to a private school. but if not, then you MUST (i.e. an intrusion) send your child to the school you are zoned for.

Quote:

I shall try to be clearer.

First, cons support a voucher system for funding education.
Second, with such a system, many more private schools would come into existence.
Third, these private schools would not be subject to the state laws regulating schools.
Fourth, one of these laws is that schools must use only certified teachers.
Fifth, hence many uncertified teachers would be able to get jobs at these schools.
Under the current system (which libs are fighting to preserve) uncertified teachers, who are nonetheless excellent teachers, are not allowed (here is the intrusion) to teach.

If you disagree, tell me exactly what proposition you take issue with.

Quote:

Chevy started this thread and he was definitely referring to cons.

Quote:

Again, the subject was Shanks statement that you can't point out one instance of liberal intrusion on lifestyle, and again, you have failed in your attempt.

well I tried.

Quote:

I never hear Christians talk this way about gays.

exton
Forum Elder

Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 5:38 am Post subject: Re: Conservative Paradox

cornopean wrote:

but if not, then you MUST (i.e. an intrusion) send your child to the school you are zoned for.

It's an intrusion of government that some people can't afford some things?

That's very unlike you, corno. And if one extends that logic to everything else, one reaches conclusions that you tend to distaste.

TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 988
Location: North Carolina, USA

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 5:56 am Post subject: Re: Conservative Paradox

cornopean wrote:

TrespassersW wrote:

Are you suggesting that all marriages involve dependent minors?

Toxic
Forum Elder

Joined: 25 Dec 2007
Posts: 1555

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 7:26 am Post subject: Re: Conservative Paradox

Quote:

and govt has the responsibility of protecting the rights of children.

And what right is that? The right not to be raised by gays and lesbians? Laughing

joeyjock
Forum Elder

Joined: 24 Dec 2006
Posts: 2108
Location: Fort Lauderdale

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 9:16 am Post subject:

For people who want less "intrusion" of gov't you sure don't stand by what you preach
A few republican gems

....Let's amend the Constitution to exclude the rights of a certain class of people
Oh I know.... let's introduce prayer in schools
How about... taking away a woman's right to choose

For a party that touts less government you sure don't walk the walk

cornopean
Forum Elder

Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Posts: 3534

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:25 pm Post subject: Re: Conservative Paradox

exton wrote:

cornopean wrote:

but if not, then you MUST (i.e. an intrusion) send your child to the school you are zoned for.

no...it's an intrusion of govt that they force you to send your child to the school in your district.
and I do get your point...but as long as this country believes in making education available to all, we had may as well do it in the least intrusive way possible. but libs love govt intrusion as long as it goes their way.

cornopean
Forum Elder

Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Posts: 3534

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:26 pm Post subject: Re: Conservative Paradox

TrespassersW wrote:

Are you suggesting that all marriages involve dependent minors?

no. many do. but all marriages have the possibility of producing such. and such children deserve the protection of govt.

cornopean
Forum Elder

Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Posts: 3534

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:27 pm Post subject: Re: Conservative Paradox

Toxic wrote:

Quote:

and govt has the responsibility of protecting the rights of children.

And what right is that? The right not to be raised by gays and lesbians? Laughing

yes. exactly.

cornopean
Forum Elder

Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Posts: 3534

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:31 pm Post subject:

joeyjock wrote:

cons dont even talk about school prayer much anymore.
and I have already admitted that cons want certain govt intrusions.
1. noone may kill a fetus;
2. same gender people cannot call their relationship a marriage;
3. people may not engage in prostitution;
4. people may not produce, sell, or use certain drugs.

Those are the only ones I know of. are there more?

Anym
Forum Elder

Joined: 07 Dec 2006
Posts: 2562
Location: Jersey

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 3:01 pm Post subject: Re: Conservative Paradox

cornopean wrote:

Toxic wrote:

Quote:

and govt has the responsibility of protecting the rights of children.

And what right is that? The right not to be raised by gays and lesbians? Laughing

yes. exactly.

Wait can we also get a right not to be raised by christian fundamentalist, or poor people.

joeyjock
Forum Elder

Joined: 24 Dec 2006
Posts: 2108
Location: Fort Lauderdale

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:58 pm Post subject:

Kill a fetus? There's no such terminology
Ending a pregnancy? It's legal in this country in most instances
As far as I knew Prostitution is legal in certain parts of this country
Buy and sell what drugs?
The Government stopping the medical use of marijuana?
The Government stopping euthanasia?