'Conservativism' is no longer enough; it's time for something new

[roamer_1]

Amen!! Allowing ILLEGALS into this country who refuse to assimilate to our values IS a huge problem.

This country was founded upon Christian values and principles. We have a prime example of those in Congress side stepping those values; Pelosi approving of abortion and our SCOTUS voting for same sex marriages, etc.  That IS the problem in a nutshell; our leaders sidestepping those values and principles for votes.  Most importantly, the SCOTUS is not there to re-write laws but to interpret law as it relates to the Constitution.

QFT 

[Right_in_Virginia]

There would not be a United States without the principles brought forth very specifically in Protestantism.

Like witch hunts?

[roamer_1]

Like witch hunts?

LOL! How many witches were killed in witch hunts in the united states? Salem! OMG!
Less than 20. In the mean time, Puritans and Shakers across the colonies functioned just fine.

No different than liberals screaming and whining about assault weapons, pointing at the relatively few accounts and blowing it out of all proportion... While half a million instances of the use of arms in defense exist every year.

By far and away, the right to bear arms is priceless and used appropriately far more than it is not...

And likewise, the Christian moral compass which is the root this country was founded upon, is the greatest success in the history of Man with regard to establishing liberty. And we would do well to go back to it.

So yeah. Warts and all. We could probably do with a few witch hunts these days.

[Free Vulcan]

non-material/material is courting gnostics, but then I am picking nits.

Even Paul noted the distinction in that our fight is not with the material, but 'powers and principalities' beyond the material or existential realm that we see from our perspective because we are bound to it for awhile, even if they aren't.

Still, the truth, one way or the other,  is that Yah owns the very breath in Caesar's mouth.

All may be God's ultimately, but for a little while Satan owns this earthly domain. It is a system, with certain rules and parameters, which the Founders tried to design a govt against.

[Right_in_Virginia]

 Christian Conservatives have been howling the warning all the way along.

How's this worked out? 

[Right_in_Virginia]

LOL! How many witches were killed in witch hunts in the united states? Salem! OMG!
Less than 20. In the mean time, Puritans and Shakers across the colonies functioned just fine.

No different than liberals screaming and whining about assault weapons, pointing at the relatively few accounts and blowing it out of all proportion... While half a million instances of the use of arms in defense exist every year.

By far and away, the right to bear arms is priceless and used appropriately far more than it is not...

And likewise, the Christian moral compass which is the root this country was founded upon, is the greatest success in the history of Man with regard to establishing liberty. And we would do well to go back to it.

So yeah. Warts and all. We could probably do with a few witch hunts these days.

You sound like a lunatic. 

[libertybele]

You sound like a lunatic.

This country was founded upon Christian principles and values and that has been working out just fine for most of the history of our Republic.  Things have gotten out of hand recently especially with the witch hunts after Trump.

[roamer_1]

How's this worked out?

 
No so good. Because populists always throw principle under the bus. And Republican leadership is fine with homos and pedophilia.

Don't blame the Christian Right for being the only ones fighting it.

[roamer_1]

You sound like a lunatic.

Annnnd... Back to ad hominem... It's all you've got. 

[DefiantMassRINO]

The US Constitution is antithetical to European monarchies of that time, especially that of England.

In the centuries before the writing of the US Constitution, Europe was ravaged by wars among Catholic heads of state and Protestant heads of state attempting to impose a state-sanctioned religion upon the people.

If the head of state was Catholic, that state was Catholic.  If the head of state was Protestant, that state was Protestant.  When Protestants rose to power in Catholic countries, and Catholics rose to power in Protestant countries, that nation would possibly be destabilized.

The Founding Father's wanted to avoid the Old World's strife and instability caused by state-sponsored religion, hence, the Separation of Church and State.

As of now, Fundamentalist Christians are united by their common struggle against the "immorality" of a society ruled by secular Government.

But once they obtained power, how long would it be before they fought among themselves just like the Europeans had?

Which Christian Denomination's or Sect's interpretation of Christianity would be the basis of a non-secular Government?

Would Darwinism be allowed to be taught?

Would Saturday or Sunday be the Sabbath?

Would Christmas trees be banned because they have their origins in Paganism?

Would Congressmen's and Senator's mistresses be burned or stoned to death for being harlots?

Things would get messy quickly.

The Founding Fathers were capitalist merchants who did not want religion's intrusion into government to destabilize society, Government, and the economy.

[Right_in_Virginia]

No so good. Because populists always throw principle under the bus. And Republican leadership is fine with homos and pedophilia.

Don't blame the Christian Right for being the only ones fighting it.

"Howling" is not fighting ---- it's noise.

And if you ever find the strength to pull your gaze from the rearview mirror, you'll see the "populists" you so despise are the only ones breathing life into the very principles you proclaim to support.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Annnnd... Back to ad hominem... It's all you've got. 

Nope. 

In case you missed it, I didn't say you are a lunatic ---- I said, and stand by it, you sound like one. I thought you would want to know.   

[sneakypete]

HORSESHIT.

You know what's the largest charitable entity on the planet? Sure as hell ain't no secular organization or government. It's them folks you keep cussin. You could take out the Catholics and organized Protestants and only count the independent Evangelicals, Fundamentals, and Pentecostals, and it would still be more than any other thing.. Not even close.

You keep harping on what the Catlicks did a thousand years ago, and beating your breast for what happened in Salem (where around twenty witches were killed, total), while forgetting conveniently that for half an aeon, every ounce of government on this continent was religious in nature, and run by folks who were religious in nature - And it was a whole helluva lot better than what we have now.

Where them folks are, to this day, those are the places with little crime, white picket fences, and quiet, happy towns full of folks that go about their business every day and still have the wherewithal to help folks just like me and you.

And this nation would be a better place if it were patterned after those folks and their ways, like it used to be.

@roamer_1

"True-believers" are always delusional. It is a requirement.

[sneakypete]

Fact is power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. And so too would even Christianity if it had absolutely power. Which is why limited government is best.

@Weird Tolkienish Figure

VERY true,but don't be surprised if you get flamed.

[sneakypete]

  I have no problem with conservatism, the problem is it's application. Conservatives tend to get static, stodgy, and doctrinaire, arguing on how many angels can fit on the head of a pin.

And as a result conservatives have dropped the ball on many things, like the grooming and sexualizing of our children that's going on in schools for starters. Even with all that is going on it doesn't seem like our leadership outside of DeSantis and Young are moving to counteract it.

And conservatives also suck at tactics and strategy, and rarely seem to be able to think on move ahead, or be articulate when engaging in debate or with the media. And we are abysmal in doing our research and being ready with facts for the liberal attacks.

Even though I agree, I'm tired of platitudes and academics. There needs to be strategy that leads to action. You're not going to win people trying to be the professor.

@Free Vulcan

ALL VERY true!

If  you are going to be successful at taking the power away from the left/globalists,you have to allow the people who want to join your movement to be allowed to think freely.

And the first thought you MUST come up with if you are trying to build a successful movement is "live and let live." Within reason,of course.

In other words,welcome people with different viewpoints to join your movement,but this does NOT mean you have to welcome people like rapists,serial killers,etc,etc,etc.

Like everything in life,there must be compromises unless you are willing to live with holding all your meetings in your living room.

[sneakypete]

what sparsely occupied, fertile territory do you suggest conquering that will give enough of a buffer zone to prevent the left from crushing us? Our first revolution only succeeded because the Royal Army was headquartered thousands of miles across an ocean in an era when it took months to travel that far.

And how would you sustain it when all the women of child bearing age have sided with the enemy? With no children, it becomes like the Ebenezer Society and dies.

Your fanciful dreams of revolution and a new apartheid state are no more plausible than any other proposal.

There is only one escape from this and it is death.

@jmyrlefuller

Not true. It IS possible to organize a political resistance if you have patience and use common sense to focus on the DIRECT problems and keep away from side issues.

And the further the left goes,the easier this will be.

And I have no doubt it won't be long before they get too ambitious and "step over the line" to the point where the middle class is fed up and gets political.

[sneakypete]

You seem to be concatenating Conservatives with Republicans... There ain't a Conservative I know that would not find that to be a hill to die upon. The mechanism is what is at fault, and that mechanism is the Republican Party.

THEY dropped the ball and decided not to fight homo marriage, sexualizing school, and grooming. Christian Conservatives have been howling the warning all the way along.

@roamer_1

ROFLMAO!

You really are a blind "True Believer",aren't you?

[sneakypete]

Like witch hunts?

@Right_in_Virginia

Not to mention the FACT that there are NO organizations in the US that spend more time and money aiding illegal aliens than organized religion.

They want their cut of that government welfare check each month,plus the political power a higher membership gives them.

[roamer_1]

"Howling" is not fighting ---- it's noise.

And if you ever find the strength to pull your gaze from the rearview mirror, you'll see the "populists" you so despise are the only ones breathing life into the very principles you proclaim to support.

Not true. Populism feigns support... runs hot and cold, believing only what matters today, and something else tomorrow.

Populism holds to no doctrine, and never has... Which is why it is always ineffective.

[roamer_1]

Nope. 

In case you missed it, I didn't say you are a lunatic ---- I said, and stand by it, you sound like one. I thought you would want to know.   

Nope. What I said is not only reasonable, and well reasoned, but also true.

[sneakypete]

You sound like a lunatic.

@Right_in_Virginia  @roamer_1

Not only that,but the US Constitution states we have "Freedom OF Religion",which means we have the freedom to avoid it because it is NOT a requirement.

Remember,many of the Founding Fathers grew up in environments where going to church on Sundays and "playing the game" was a REQUIREMENT if you wanted to run a business or do anything else other than live in the woods like a hermit.

"Freedom OF Religion" also means "Freedom FROM (mandatory) Religion.

[sneakypete]

This country was founded upon Christian principles and values and that has been working out just fine for most of the history of our Republic.  Things have gotten out of hand recently especially with the witch hunts after Trump.

@libertybele

Nope!

It was founded on the principle of INDIVIDUAL FREEDOMS.

[roamer_1]

@roamer_1

"True-believers" are always delusional. It is a requirement.

In bare fact, no one can possibly think the moral tenor of today is better than two generations hence. And it is no delusion to say that the America two generations hence was founded in Christian principle.

[sneakypete]

The US Constitution is antithetical to European monarchies of that time, especially that of England.

In the centuries before the writing of the US Constitution, Europe was ravaged by wars among Catholic heads of state and Protestant heads of state attempting to impose a state-sanctioned religion upon the people.

If the head of state was Catholic, that state was Catholic.  If the head of state was Protestant, that state was Protestant.  When Protestants rose to power in Catholic countries, and Catholics rose to power in Protestant countries, that nation would possibly be destabilized.

The Founding Father's wanted to avoid the Old World's strife and instability caused by state-sponsored religion, hence, the Separation of Church and State.

As of now, Fundamentalist Christians are united by their common struggle against the "immorality" of a society ruled by secular Government.

But once they obtained power, how long would it be before they fought among themselves just like the Europeans had?

Which Christian Denomination's or Sect's interpretation of Christianity would be the basis of a non-secular Government?

Would Darwinism be allowed to be taught?

Would Saturday or Sunday be the Sabbath?

Would Christmas trees be banned because they have their origins in Paganism?

Would Congressmen's and Senator's mistresses be burned or stoned to death for being harlots?

Things would get messy quickly.

The Founding Fathers were capitalist merchants who did not want religion's intrusion into government to destabilize society, Government, and the economy.

@DefiantMassRINO

Who the HELL do you think you are to bring both reason AND historical facts into this argument???

Why,ah neva..........!

[sneakypete]

Not true. Populism feigns support... runs hot and cold, believing only what matters today, and something else tomorrow.

Populism holds to no doctrine, and never has... Which is why it is always ineffective.

@roamer_1

So,you are saying we need to replace a popular movement with a unpopular movement?