Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Secular Conservative

Page 1 of 2 [ 20 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

minervx
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Apr 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,155
Location: United States

11 Jun 2011, 2:33 pm

I generally agree with conservatives on Bush-era national security policies, a strong national defense, a limited government with empowerment to the states and local government. But I am not religious and believe in seperation of church and state.

Anyone else like me?



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

11 Jun 2011, 6:29 pm

minervx wrote:
I generally agree with conservatives on Bush-era national security policies, a strong national defense, a limited government with empowerment to the states and local government. But I am not religious and believe in seperation of church and state.

Anyone else like me?


We did not have limited government under either the the Bush-s.

ruveyn



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

11 Jun 2011, 6:33 pm

ruveyn wrote:
minervx wrote:
I generally agree with conservatives on Bush-era national security policies, a strong national defense, a limited government with empowerment to the states and local government. But I am not religious and believe in seperation of church and state.

Anyone else like me?


We did not have limited government under either the the Bush-s.

ruveyn

Not to mention that the notion of limited government is entirely incompatible with Bush-era national "security" policies which posit nearly unlimited federal power. The OP's professed political views are simply incoherent.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


dionysian
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 May 2011
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 921
Location: Germantown, MD

11 Jun 2011, 6:36 pm

Orwell wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
minervx wrote:
I generally agree with conservatives on Bush-era national security policies, a strong national defense, a limited government with empowerment to the states and local government. But I am not religious and believe in seperation of church and state.

Anyone else like me?


We did not have limited government under either the the Bush-s.

ruveyn

Not to mention that the notion of limited government is entirely incompatible with Bush-era national "security" policies which posit nearly unlimited federal power. The OP's professed political views are simply incoherent.

Not only near unlimited power, but also unfettered expansion and utter secrecy... I agree, I don't really understand what he could possibly be thinking.


_________________
"All valuation rests on an irrational bias."
-George Santayana

ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL
BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS


Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,939
Location:      

11 Jun 2011, 7:13 pm

minervx wrote:
I generally agree with conservatives on Bush-era national security policies, a strong national defense, a limited government with empowerment to the states and local government. But I am not religious and believe in seperation of church and state.

Anyone else like me?

I disagree on only one point. That is, I believe in the abolition of organized religious institutions everywhere.

Failing that, I believe in the abolition of any law that grants tax-free status to any religious organization.



caissa
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 6 Nov 2009
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 130

11 Jun 2011, 7:46 pm

I am similar, I consider myself "conservative" in terms of limited government,limited taxation, limited government involvement in schools/ education, strong nation defense and protected borders, but I don't really care about social issues like abortion or gay marriage. However I would agree with previous posters that the majority of recent administrations have not really limited government power or reach in any way. And they seem more concerned with military aggression than "defense" or protecting our borders. We have 12 million illegal immigrants in this country... how can anyone pretend that we care about our borders (under either GOP or Dem administrations).



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

11 Jun 2011, 8:21 pm

Fnord wrote:

Failing that, I believe in the abolition of any law that grants tax-free status to any religious organization.


People have the right to form associations freely so one cannot prevent organized religion. But you correctly recommend that no religious institution receive preferential tax treatment.

ruveyn



psychohist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,623
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

11 Jun 2011, 11:35 pm

minervx wrote:
I generally agree with conservatives on Bush-era national security policies, a strong national defense, a limited government with empowerment to the states and local government. But I am not religious and believe in seperation of church and state.

Anyone else like me?

I could probably be categorized as a secular conservative, but there are certainly some Bush era national security policies I disagree with - such as the USAPATRIOT act, which I believe unconstitutional.



NeantHumain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jun 2004
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,837
Location: St. Louis, Missouri

12 Jun 2011, 12:02 am

Orwell wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
minervx wrote:
I generally agree with conservatives on Bush-era national security policies, a strong national defense, a limited government with empowerment to the states and local government. But I am not religious and believe in seperation of church and state.

Anyone else like me?


We did not have limited government under either the the Bush-s.

ruveyn

Not to mention that the notion of limited government is entirely incompatible with Bush-era national "security" policies which posit nearly unlimited federal power. The OP's professed political views are simply incoherent.

Not to speak for minervx, but I think, when conservatives say "small government," they're talking about government that doesn't personally benefit them (as they see it). Keeping us safe from terror is something we all benefit from, so unlimited power in the name of stopping terrorism is warranted. Collecting taxes only to hand out money to the lazy unemployed is just theft.



blunnet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,053

12 Jun 2011, 12:14 am

Orwell wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
minervx wrote:
I generally agree with conservatives on Bush-era national security policies, a strong national defense, a limited government with empowerment to the states and local government. But I am not religious and believe in seperation of church and state.

Anyone else like me?


We did not have limited government under either the the Bush-s.

ruveyn

Not to mention that the notion of limited government is entirely incompatible with Bush-era national "security" policies which posit nearly unlimited federal power. The OP's professed political views are simply incoherent.

It seems that 'limited government' proponents are focused on economics than anything else.



psychohist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,623
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

12 Jun 2011, 12:36 am

NeantHumain wrote:
Not to speak for minervx, but I think, when conservatives say "small government," they're talking about government that doesn't personally benefit them (as they see it). Keeping us safe from terror is something we all benefit from, so unlimited power in the name of stopping terrorism is warranted.

There are conservatives who are not in favor of small government. However, you are wrong about those that do favor small government. For example, while USAPATRIOT act renewals, which allow dangerous government powers like warrantless wiretapping, sailed through the Pelosi House with no problem, but were very nearly blocked by Tea Party Republicans in favor of small government.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,939
Location:      

12 Jun 2011, 2:00 am

ruveyn wrote:
People have the right to form associations freely...

... unless 2/3rds of the states ratify an amendment to the Constitution that removes tax-free status from all licensed businesses, and severely defines the term "Non-Profit" to only mean any business that does not make any profit at all.

Yes, religious institutions are businesses.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

12 Jun 2011, 8:21 am

Fnord wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
People have the right to form associations freely...

... unless 2/3rds of the states ratify an amendment to the Constitution that removes tax-free status from all licensed businesses, and severely defines the term "Non-Profit" to only mean any business that does not make any profit at all.

Yes, religious institutions are businesses.


3/4 of the States.

ruveyn



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

12 Jun 2011, 8:59 am

psychohist wrote:
NeantHumain wrote:
Not to speak for minervx, but I think, when conservatives say "small government," they're talking about government that doesn't personally benefit them (as they see it). Keeping us safe from terror is something we all benefit from, so unlimited power in the name of stopping terrorism is warranted.

There are conservatives who are not in favor of small government. However, you are wrong about those that do favor small government. For example, while USAPATRIOT act renewals, which allow dangerous government powers like warrantless wiretapping, sailed through the Pelosi House with no problem, but were very nearly blocked by Tea Party Republicans in favor of small government.

The great bulk of the GOP always favors such provisions. I think you are referring to a handful of people well outside the mainstream of the Republican party, eg Rand Paul. There were just one or two on each side who spoke out against renewing the PATRIOT Act. The Democrats backed down on their opposition because a Democrat is in the White House now, and neither party worries about abuse of power when they wield it. The Republicans, curiously enough, seem to have no trouble with the PATRIOT Act even when they are supposed to be acting in their watchdog role as the opposition.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


minervx
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Apr 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,155
Location: United States

12 Jun 2011, 9:08 am

NeantHumain wrote:
Orwell wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
minervx wrote:
I generally agree with conservatives on Bush-era national security policies, a strong national defense, a limited government with empowerment to the states and local government. But I am not religious and believe in seperation of church and state.

Anyone else like me?


We did not have limited government under either the the Bush-s.

ruveyn

Not to mention that the notion of limited government is entirely incompatible with Bush-era national "security" policies which posit nearly unlimited federal power. The OP's professed political views are simply incoherent.

Not to speak for minervx, but I think, when conservatives say "small government," they're talking about government that doesn't personally benefit them (as they see it). Keeping us safe from terror is something we all benefit from, so unlimited power in the name of stopping terrorism is warranted. Collecting taxes only to hand out money to the lazy unemployed is just theft.


Yes. You spoke it well.



dionysian
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 May 2011
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 921
Location: Germantown, MD

12 Jun 2011, 11:31 am

NeantHumain wrote:
Not to speak for minervx, but I think, when conservatives say "small government," they're talking about government that doesn't personally benefit them (as they see it).

Yes, this is what liberals and progressives have been saying for years and years. Conservatives are completely unprincipled.


_________________
"All valuation rests on an irrational bias."
-George Santayana

ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL
BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS