- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Social "Conservatives" = Economic Socialists
Posted on 6/24/14 at 4:00 am to RD Dawg
Posted on 6/24/14 at 4:00 am to RD Dawg
The problem is that too many people can't handle the freedom. There must be state controls to protect folks from themselves even if that means that the few who can exhibit control are constrained. That is just the way it is.
Posted on 6/24/14 at 4:08 am to Eurocat
quote:
There must be state controls to protect folks from themselves
How come evolutionists never want to put Darwin to practice?
Posted on 6/24/14 at 4:13 am to TrueTiger
quote:
How come evolutionists never want to put Darwin to practice?
I've often wondered the same thing.
Posted on 6/24/14 at 7:18 am to Revelator
Why would you assume that everyone who accepts a scientific principle would also be a statist like yourself?
Posted on 6/24/14 at 8:32 am to Sentrius
quote:
Rick Santorum
I couldn't believe how many "conservatives" liked that guy
Posted on 6/26/14 at 4:53 am to Volmanac
quote:
True
Of course, it's a generalization, but there's a lot of truth in the quote.
This post was edited on 6/26/14 at 4:57 am
Posted on 6/26/14 at 5:32 am to Volmanac
I'll add to Paul's quote that "economic interventionists" are also often motivated by a spirit of egalitarianism/spirit of helping the poor. I have a lot of those feelings/motivations in me, but I think the issues are deeper/more systemic than something that can be corrected with legislation.
For the "social interventionists," many of them are motivated by religion. The issue with religious people is that many of them won't back off of their absolute certainty that they've got it right. And it's not enough for them to live by their religion, they're certain that other people should be doing the same. Not ALL religious people, just like not ALL "economic interventionists" are motivated by envy.
I have no issue with personal religions. I like going to different types of churches on occasion. I'm willing to listen to proselytization. Just don't try to force it on me.
For the "social interventionists," many of them are motivated by religion. The issue with religious people is that many of them won't back off of their absolute certainty that they've got it right. And it's not enough for them to live by their religion, they're certain that other people should be doing the same. Not ALL religious people, just like not ALL "economic interventionists" are motivated by envy.
I have no issue with personal religions. I like going to different types of churches on occasion. I'm willing to listen to proselytization. Just don't try to force it on me.
This post was edited on 6/26/14 at 5:48 am
Posted on 6/26/14 at 6:27 am to Eurocat
quote:It's not myself I'm worried about, it's everyone else. It is human nature for an individual to look after his own self-interests, and to take advantage of other people, especially when he will be distant from any repercussions. Just look at how labor forces are exploited in some third world countries where labor laws are loose or unenforced.
The problem is that too many people can't handle the freedom. There must be state controls to protect folks from themselves even if that means that the few who can exhibit control are constrained. That is just the way it is.
Some people think that the free market is capable of self-regulation because 'bad' businesses will not be rewarded, but I think that's a pipe dream.
This post was edited on 6/26/14 at 6:28 am
Posted on 6/26/14 at 6:41 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
You can take someone who's somewhat attractive and has good "handlers" and that person will do well in politics. You can take someone who is ideologically sound, and without the ability to bullshite effectively that person will never be president.
I'm reading a collection of Ernie Pyle's pre-war columns. A fellow newspaperman is quoted as saying that no one who couldn't speak well on radio would ever be elected president.
Nothing's changed.
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:22 am to Hog on the Hill
quote:
Just look at how labor forces are exploited in some third world countries where labor laws are loose or unenforced.
Some people think that the free market is capable of self-regulation because 'bad' businesses will not be rewarded, but I think that's a pipe dream.
That's a big concern for me as well.
Case in point - Hershey Investors Suing Over Child Labor Can Pursue Files
Backstory - Is There Child Slavery in Your Chocolate?
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:31 am to Volmanac
The most important part in that quote is "the misunderstanding that tolerance is an endorsement of certain activities".
That is what many people in this country fail to grasp.
That is what many people in this country fail to grasp.
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:39 am to Scruffy
I think the disintegration of the family is owed in large part to government economic activity. Social conservatives believe the remedy is more government. This is misguided. You don't keep pouring on gasoline to put out a fire.
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:43 am to Roger Klarvin
quote:
Social conservatives do not desire less government, they merely desire the government to enforce the values and behaviors which they deem acceptable. In practice, though not in principle, they are no different from what they accuse social/economic liberals of beings.
Upvotes galore
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:55 am to GoBigOrange86
quote:
I think the disintegration of the family is owed in large part to government economic activity.
This is being corrected by building up the gay family.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News