 }})
fansince62
Guest
I consider myself a republican because of my beliefs in how the government should be structured, and what it should/shouldn't provide. However, I find myself embarrassed to say I'm a republican because:
- i think religion has no place in government or education
- i think abortion should be allowed in the way it is now, no more restrictions
- i think gays should be allowed to marry, and the hatred republicans show towards the gay community is disgraceful
- racism is alive and well, but affirmative action is no longer needed and is racist itself
- i have no problem with a mosque being built in new york city, around the 9/11 site. i think people that do are (at best) misplacing their hatred of terrorism on a community that has nothing to do with terrorism, or (at worst) are just blind bigots and racists.
- the republican party in general has been taken over by crazy people who feel the need to impose their personal morals (often formed from a specific religious belief) and that we need to thoroughly cleanse the party of these people if we have any interest in being a relevant, 'better' party again.
- in general i hate the republican theme of 'if you disagree with us then you hate <insert object>', ie: if you don't like the wars you hate america, if you don't want abortion completely outlawed you hate babies, if you are ok with a mosque in NYC then you hate americans an are a terrorist sympathizer.
- the buzz word 'job creators' is an embarrassment to any republican with half a brain, the idea that we should 'protect' the super wealthy and elite because they are somehow 'job creators' is laughable.that would be one way of looking at things. another might be:
- religion has a place in private education institutions that CHOOSE TO EXERCISE THAT FREEDOM WITHOUT INTERFERENCE FROM THE GOVERNMENT. historically, religion has very clearly played a visceral role in the history of this country. while the institutional aspects of religion need to be separated from government....religions as expositors of moral codes have every RESPONSIBILITY to exercise that value system - just as do all the closet fascists parading as progressives these secular "scientific" days. the problem is inherent in the decision process of resource allocation - and certainly in precisely all the morally bound subjects you want to fence off from religious consideration (e.g., abortion). AND I AM NOT A RELIGIOUS PERSON.
- I won't engage in your abortion probe other than to respond "fine. just don't ask for ANY tax payer funding".
- let gays marry as a civil act with appropriate credentials...who cares? but when it gets to the resource allocation end of the problem....which is very much part of the equation...well...then...the discussion changes. and when it gets to the inherent part of the problem of deciding what is "normal" and what is "moral"...well that also gets to be an interesting discussion. or is everyone supposed to hold the same, approved view on this?
- so...just what is the litmus test for racism? how do you empiraclly know with near certainty that a state of mind is in fact racist?
- I have problems with institutions seeking to build mosques who have individuals and histories of funneling money to terrorist networks and advocating policies counter to national interest. but opinions vary! I also question the wisdom and motives of individuals who want to erect what are basicallly intentionally provocative monuments to actions that murdered 2900+ Americans IN THE VICINITY OF THAT VERY ATROCITY. at the very least....poor taste.
- I take great amusement in the notion that the Republican party is the poster child for "enforcing" moral beliefs when the clear evidence of the last 60 years is that not only have they failed, but the real fascism has come from the Left in the court systems and the 50 dozen regulatory agencies that are slowly but surely sapping any semblance of freedom from our daily lives.
- I hate gross generalizations.
- fine.....banish "job creators" from the public lexicon. but I guess that takes us out of economy and politics and back to what is hidden behind all these self contradictory assertions: what is "fair". which is an inherently value ridden decision. which also implies imposition BY FORCE (i.e., the government) of the very thing some claim to detest about religious individuals. and that is the assertion of one group's values over another. so, it would seem, what is really at stake here is whose set of bigotries should guide political decision-making.
- i think religion has no place in government or education
- i think abortion should be allowed in the way it is now, no more restrictions
- i think gays should be allowed to marry, and the hatred republicans show towards the gay community is disgraceful
- racism is alive and well, but affirmative action is no longer needed and is racist itself
- i have no problem with a mosque being built in new york city, around the 9/11 site. i think people that do are (at best) misplacing their hatred of terrorism on a community that has nothing to do with terrorism, or (at worst) are just blind bigots and racists.
- the republican party in general has been taken over by crazy people who feel the need to impose their personal morals (often formed from a specific religious belief) and that we need to thoroughly cleanse the party of these people if we have any interest in being a relevant, 'better' party again.
- in general i hate the republican theme of 'if you disagree with us then you hate <insert object>', ie: if you don't like the wars you hate america, if you don't want abortion completely outlawed you hate babies, if you are ok with a mosque in NYC then you hate americans an are a terrorist sympathizer.
- the buzz word 'job creators' is an embarrassment to any republican with half a brain, the idea that we should 'protect' the super wealthy and elite because they are somehow 'job creators' is laughable.that would be one way of looking at things. another might be:
- religion has a place in private education institutions that CHOOSE TO EXERCISE THAT FREEDOM WITHOUT INTERFERENCE FROM THE GOVERNMENT. historically, religion has very clearly played a visceral role in the history of this country. while the institutional aspects of religion need to be separated from government....religions as expositors of moral codes have every RESPONSIBILITY to exercise that value system - just as do all the closet fascists parading as progressives these secular "scientific" days. the problem is inherent in the decision process of resource allocation - and certainly in precisely all the morally bound subjects you want to fence off from religious consideration (e.g., abortion). AND I AM NOT A RELIGIOUS PERSON.
- I won't engage in your abortion probe other than to respond "fine. just don't ask for ANY tax payer funding".
- let gays marry as a civil act with appropriate credentials...who cares? but when it gets to the resource allocation end of the problem....which is very much part of the equation...well...then...the discussion changes. and when it gets to the inherent part of the problem of deciding what is "normal" and what is "moral"...well that also gets to be an interesting discussion. or is everyone supposed to hold the same, approved view on this?
- so...just what is the litmus test for racism? how do you empiraclly know with near certainty that a state of mind is in fact racist?
- I have problems with institutions seeking to build mosques who have individuals and histories of funneling money to terrorist networks and advocating policies counter to national interest. but opinions vary! I also question the wisdom and motives of individuals who want to erect what are basicallly intentionally provocative monuments to actions that murdered 2900+ Americans IN THE VICINITY OF THAT VERY ATROCITY. at the very least....poor taste.
- I take great amusement in the notion that the Republican party is the poster child for "enforcing" moral beliefs when the clear evidence of the last 60 years is that not only have they failed, but the real fascism has come from the Left in the court systems and the 50 dozen regulatory agencies that are slowly but surely sapping any semblance of freedom from our daily lives.
- I hate gross generalizations.
- fine.....banish "job creators" from the public lexicon. but I guess that takes us out of economy and politics and back to what is hidden behind all these self contradictory assertions: what is "fair". which is an inherently value ridden decision. which also implies imposition BY FORCE (i.e., the government) of the very thing some claim to detest about religious individuals. and that is the assertion of one group's values over another. so, it would seem, what is really at stake here is whose set of bigotries should guide political decision-making.
