Sorry I'm not politically correct enough to satisfy your outlook
Superstring99 said:
All conservatives want to "throw out equal protection and institutionalize gender discrimination"? You're painting with a pretty broad brush there Tiassa.
Your contextual illiteracy makes it hard to take you seriously. Give it some work, String, and maybe you'll come to realize how inappropriate it is to make such a ridiculous leap and then assign it to other people.
I consider my self to be conservative leaning and I am about as egalitarian as you get on the gender issue
Do you consider yourself a Christian?
Are all Christians conservative?
See the note about your contextual illiteracy above.
I won't disagree with you there. I wasn't advocating [historically hypocritical] mass Christian values*, just arguing the point that if you looked at it biblically, government entities should be respected as well as their laws, etcetera.
Believe it or not, String, I'm actually aware of that and was at the time. Right now the only thing puzzling me is why you chose to split the hair you did.
You would like to believe that. It's an easy tune to sing and I will admit that a lot of conservatives provide you with ample ammunition, but it's just not true.
Says you. That's your right.
How much easier is it to hate conservatives if they are really sick and demented instead of just an alternative way of looking at government, that is neither evil or good.
Again, you're suffering that contextual problem, String.
Then again, it might be worth looking at the history of the conservative position. Part of what it involves, even all the way back to Jesus' time and beyond, is the preservation of conditions that are, coincidentally, at once unjust and advantageous to the conservatives.
Odd, that you're the liberal and I'm the conservative, and I'm the one who's more tolerant of varying opinions,
Not really. After all, you're more willing than I am to demand that supremacist ideology be treated equally. There is something inherently paradoxical, of course, about the idea that one's
equality should include their "right" to
supremacy.
Would you like that stated more simply? I'm happy to oblige:
Equality ≠ Supremacy
I find myself in this positions with extreme liberals all the time
Yes, "equality ≠ supremacy" is
so extreme, isn't it?
Conservatism doesn't necessarily encompass discrimination
Right. When that theory has substantial practical support, I will treat it so. In the meantime, however, you'd be hard-pressed to make the point without resorting to contextually irrelevant points of conservatism.
The fact is, if you look at a moderate conservative (and I know how much you hate to acknowledge that I am a moderate one),
Your frequent defense and advocacy of hardline and extreme conservatism render your status as a moderate as problematic. One defining characteristic of moderate conservatism, however, is that the moderating influence is generally a matter of direct self-interest.
The fact is, if you look at a moderate conservative ... the issue they advocate is not contrary to the core values of equality under a limited government.
It's a fascinating discussion, and a point I would not necessarily take issue with. But I do find your effort on this occasion to be a bit of a distraction from the original point. Unless, of course, you're suggesting that all conservatives are bound by Christian assertions, and thus are subject to "render unto Caesar".
I find odd the implicit suggestion that I must be so politically correct as to constantly disclaim myself by repeating the contextual theme of the general discussion. After all, let's start with the topic title itself:
The convenient hypocrisy of Republican Christians
We should also consider, since I am responding to both you and Buffalo Roam, the question to which you both responded. Spidergoat had asked,
"Where's the part in the Bible where Jesus talked about the sanctity of national borders?"
Apparently I need to keep reminding you of the context? My apologies, then, for not satisfying your standards of political correctness.
Additionally, we might consider your interpretation:
All conservatives want to "throw out equal protection and institutionalize gender discrimination"? You're painting with a pretty broad brush there Tiassa.
If you would be so kind, String, could you please explain why you find the phrase "In those instances" so irrelevant? Or were you just looking for a straw man?
I would probably be more sympathetic to your position if I thought it was honestly represented. Don't get me wrong, I won't doubt that you're representing how you honestly feel, but I find your statement of those feelings more than a little short on integrity.
Extremists exist at the fringe, but then I see equally whacked out extremists on the fringe of liberalism. In the end, I feel that Marxism is far more dangerous than Dixiecrat type conservatives.
Ah, now we see why you needed that straw man. It would seem that the one thing necessary to any discussion of conservative political philosophies is a demonization of liberalism.
It makes sense, I suppose. Or maybe it doesn't. But I'm not exactly surprised.
"...morally repugnant..." And liberal politics are clean and tidy? C'mon!
What, are you pushing for rhetorical quotas, or something?
On a more sympathetic note:
*I say "mass" because that's the general belief of most conservative
Christians. If you took Christianity at its heart, then you'd have a
pretty good philosophy, but most Christians at totally oblivious of
Christianity's true origins, and what its original philosophical beliefs
were.
Part of me wants to remind you that you shouldn't have to make such disclaimers, but then I remember that you're only covering your ass according to a hypersensitive, twisted standard of your own device.
You might consider yourself moderate according to some internet-based political quiz, but your belligerence toward liberalism suggests something a little farther from the center than you would have us believe.
