The Candidates
Featured Archives
Late, late, late, I know.
I’m going to name some issues, and on a scale of 1-10, 10 being the most conservative, indicate where you are on that issue…
I realize that there are some issues, such as free trade and the war against jihadism, that have multiple ‘conservative’ positions — paleoconservatives are protectionist, for instance. In cases such as this, please use the standard Republican position to indicate what is conservative.
Abortion:
Business Regulation:
Death Penalty:
Drugs:
Environment:
Gay Marriage:
Gun Control:
Health Care:
Immigration:
Judges:
Right to Die/Euthanasia:
School Prayer:
Social Security:
Taxes:
Trade:
The War Against Jihadism:
I’ll leave my own responses in the comments section so that you can copy-paste this list without having to erase my answers…
August 9th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
Abortion: 3
Business Regulation: 10
Death Penalty: 5
Drugs: 1
Environment: 10
Gay Marriage: 2
Gun Control: 10
Health Care: 10
Immigration: 3
Judges: 8
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 1
School Prayer: 1
Social Security: 10
Taxes: 10
Trade: 10
The War Against Jihadism: 10
August 9th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Abortion- 7
Business Regulation- 10
Death Penalty- 8
Drugs- 9
Environment- 10
Gay Marriage- 6
Gun Control- 7
Health Care- 10
Immigration- 5
Judges- 10
Right to Die- 8
School Prayer- 6
Social Security- 8
Taxes- 7
Trade- 10
War Against Jihad- 10
August 9th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Abortion 2
Business Regulation: 10
Death Penalty: 8
Drugs: 4
Environment: 7
Gay Marriage: 5
Gun Control: 6
Health Care: 5
Immigration: 6
Judges: 10
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 1 (That’s nobody busines othen than the pacient)
School Prayer: 0 (School is not the place for that)
Social Security: 10
Taxes: 10
Trade: 10
The War Against Jihadism: 10
August 9th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
Abortion: 9
Business Regulation: 8
Death Penalty: 5
Drugs: 5
Environment: 8
Gay Marriage: 7
Gun Control: 9
Health Care: 6
Immigration: 7
Judges: 10
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 9
School Prayer: 6
Social Security: 8
Taxes: 8
Trade: 9
The War Against Jihadism: 10
August 9th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
Abortion: 5
Business Regulation: 8
Death Penalty: 10
Drugs: 8
Environment: 8
Gay Marriage: 5
Gun Control: 9
Health Care: 8
Immigration: 6
Judges: 6
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 4
School Prayer: 3
Social Security: 7
Taxes: 9
Trade: 8
The War Against Jihadism: 10
August 9th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
Abortion: 1
Business Regulation: 10
Death Penalty: 8
Drugs: 1
Environment: 5
Gay Marriage: 1
Gun Control: 10
Health Care: 5
Immigration: 5
Judges: 5
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 1
School Prayer: 1
Social Security: 5
Taxes: 10
Trade: 10
The War Against Jihadism: 10
August 9th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
If I get a fair amount of responses, I’ll average these together and make a Race42008 On the Issues profile or something.
August 9th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
Abortion: 6
Business Regulation: 6
Death Penalty: 1
Drugs: 5
Environment: 5
Gay Marriage: 1
Gun Control: 4
Health Care: 6
Immigration: 4
Judges: 7
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 3
School Prayer: 1
Social Security: 8
Taxes: 8
Trade: 9
The War Against Jihadism: 7
August 9th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
#1, “Gay Marriage: 2″, what does that mean?
August 9th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Abortion: 7
Business Regulation: 7
Death Penalty: 4
Drugs: 2
Environment: 5
Gay Marriage: 2
Gun Control: 10
Health Care: 5
Immigration: 7
Judges: 10
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 2
School Prayer: 2
Social Security: 6
Taxes: 10
Trade: 8
The War Against Jihadism: 10
August 9th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
lets see…
abortion: 8 (only exceptions for life or health of mother, rape, or incest, the last two only in the first tri)
Business Regulation: 9 (some mild regulation to prevent abuse of workers is acceptable)
Death Penalty: 7 (not an issue where I can say I was always conservative)
Drugs: 8 (more important things, but the government shouldn’t approve of things that are destructive on many levels)
Environment: 8 (Global warming is not primarily man-made, the earth is far more resilliant than liberals give it credit)
Gay Marriage: 8 (Marraige should only be between a man and a woman – moral, social, and logical grounds. Civil unions OK as long as straight people can also have them. Tax incentives for straight marraige only)
Gun control: 7 (no real opinion on assault weapons ban)
Health Care: 7 (no government-takeover, but more people should be covered. state programs similar to Romney’s MASS plan – with some tweaking – are probably the way to go)
Immigration: 8 (no amnesty, guest worker program OK, immigration should favor those with skill, education)
Judges: 9 (govern to letter of law, we don’t always know intent – defer to legislature on issues with no clear guide)
Right to die: 9 (right to refuse treatment, but “right to die” turns into pressure to do so)
School prayer: 10 (children do better with strong moral guide, government has no right to restrict prayer in a place a person is forced to be – by law or circumstance)
Taxes: 9 (some taxes necessary, favor a flat tax – admittedly unlikely. no VAT or fair tax)
trade: 8 (trade must be fair, free whenever they don’t contradict. No protectionism, just a level playing field)
War on terror: 10 (no explanation needed)
August 9th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
Abortion: 9
Business Regulation: 7
Death Penalty: 5
Drugs: 7
Environment:
Gay Marriage: 9
Gun Control: 6
Health Care: 7
Immigration: 4
Judges: 9
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 9
School Prayer: 2
Social Security: 6
Taxes: 6
Trade: 9
August 9th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
* environment – 7
August 9th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
Oh, this is fun:
Abortion: 5
Business Regulation: 8
Death Penalty: 5
Drugs: 3
Environment: 7
Gay Marriage: 3
Gun Control: 8
Health Care: 6
Immigration: 6
Judges: 7
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 2
School Prayer: 1
Social Security: 7
Taxes: 8
Trade: 9
The War Against Jihadism: 8
August 9th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Sampo i thought you were more liberal, err, moderate.
August 9th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Anyone who’s a 9 or 10 on the environment better turn on NBC! My gosh!!!!!
August 9th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
15, Yeah, lots of people thought that about McCain too.
August 9th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
17, I still believe he is.
August 9th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
Abortion: 6
Business Regulation: 9
Death Penalty: 2
Drugs: 4
Environment: 5
Gay Marriage: 1
Gun Control: 8
Health Care: 6
Immigration: 6
Judges: 8
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 2
School Prayer: 1
Social Security: 10
Taxes: 6
Trade: 10
The War Against Jihadism: 7
August 9th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
sampo,
No opinion on The War Against Jihadism?
August 9th, 2008 at 2:27 pm
I’ll just copy act’s answers with some minor tweaking…..marked with *
abortion: 8 (only exceptions for life or health of mother, rape, or incest, the last two only in the first tri)
Business Regulation: 9 (some mild regulation to prevent abuse of workers is acceptable)
**Death Penalty: 10 (Some times I wish we could be more like China…)
*Drugs(Alcohol): 5 (The war on drugs is not winnable but the government shouldn’t approve of things that are destructive on many levels)
*Environment: 7 (Global warming may not primarily man-made but we should still be responsible caretakers of what we have.)
Gay Marriage: 8 (Marraige should only be between a man and a woman – moral, social, and logical grounds. Civil unions OK as long as straight people can also have them. Tax incentives for straight marriage only)
*Gun control: 8 (no real opinion on assault weapons ban)
Health Care: 7 (no government-takeover, but more people should be covered. state programs similar to Romney’s MASS plan – with some tweaking – are probably the way to go)
*Immigration: 8 (no amnesty, guest worker program OK, immigration should favor those with skill, education and shouldn’t be discouraged)
*Judges: 9 (cling to constitution like a baby to a mother’s breast and defend it – defer to legislature on issues with no clear guide)
*Right to die: 7 (right to refuse treatment, but “right to die” without pressure to do so)
*School prayer: 8 (Let people decide if they want to pray or not)
*Taxes: 8 (some taxes necessary and no VAT or fair tax)
trade: 8 (trade must be fair, free whenever they don’t contradict. No protectionism, just a level playing field)
*War on terror: 9 (You can’t win with just bombs but they sure can help sometimes!)
August 9th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
#1, “Gay Marriage: 2?, what does that mean?
I don’t think that marriage should be in the realm of the government in the first place. I also have no problem with not calling it marriage, as long as the benefits are available. I also don’t see any legal grounds on which gay marriage could be currently legalized, so using the court system is ridiculous, if we’re speaking on purely legal grounds.
August 9th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
“Anyone who’s a 9 or 10 on the environment better turn on NBC! My gosh!!!!!”
The Olympics? Yes, China has pollution problems, but much of what you see is actually two things: dust blown into the “soup bowl” formed by mountains around Beijing, and heavy humidity.
August 9th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
#22, “I also have no problem with not calling it marriage, as long as the benefits are available.”
We have to talk later about this statement.
August 9th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
20, oops. i guess i didnt highlight it when i copied the text.
War on Terror is a 9 or 10 for me.
August 9th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
24 – Well, remember that I don’t think that the government should be involved in marriage in the first place. It’s just the benefits that I’m concerned about. Everyone will just start calling whatever it’s called ‘marriage’ anyway. As long as I’m able to get my benefits, currently being hoarded by the government for straights only, then call it whatever you want. I’m opposed to civil unions — they don’t provide for federal-level benefits. But the semantics are irrelevant, to me.
August 9th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
#23, not true.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/01/06/sports/AS-SPT-OLY-Beijing-Olympic-Cleanup.php
August 9th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
Abortion: 9
Business Regulation: 9
Death Penalty: 5
Drugs: 9
Environment: 9
Gay Marriage: 7
Gun Control: 10
Health Care: 8
Immigration: 9
Judges: 10
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 8
School Prayer: 6
Social Security: 10
Taxes: 9
Trade: 10
The War Against Jihadism: 9
August 9th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Abortion:8
Business Regulation:8
Death Penalty:8
Drugs:7
Environment:8
Gay Marriage:7
Gun Control:9
Health Care:8
Immigration:8
Judges:9
Right to Die/Euthanasia:8
School Prayer:9
Social Security:9
Taxes:9
Trade:9
August 9th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Abortion- 7
Business Regulation- 10
Death Penalty- 10
Drugs- 10
Environment- 7
Gay Marriage- 7
Gun Control- 10
Health Care- 10
Immigration- 7
Judges- 10
Right to Die- 7
School Prayer- 7
Social Security- 10
Taxes- 10
Trade- 10
War Against Jihad- 10
August 9th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Alex, for someone who thinks there is no God and therefor life on earth is just some huge glitch in the universe, you seem surprisingly care free about preserving the planet….
August 9th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
War on Terror: 8(We must not let the jihadists win, but we should also avoid military action when possible I guess I could be a hybrid between paleoconservatism and neoconservatism
August 9th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
This becomes even more interesting when I group the issues and calculate my average ranking.
If I add up all of my rankings and divide by the number of categories (16), I’m a 5.8 on a left to right scale of 1 to 10.
But if I split the issues up into 8 largely cultural issues and 8 largely economic or defense issues, I find that I’m a 7.4 on the econ/def issues and a 4.3 on the social issues. So I’m basically a center-right Republican who is slightly left of center on social issues, which creates the illusion that I am in sum a moderate Republican.
How interesting. I encourage everyone to try it with their own scores.
Incidentally, I categorized the following as cultural issues: abortion, gay marriage, right to die, gun control, school prayer, judges, death penalty, and drugs. The rest had some relation to either economics or defense.
August 9th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
I’m not opposed to government being involved in marraige – particularly when it plays the role of encouraging couples to get married and have families – which is essential to this country.
–
…and for anyone who listens to my show, I’ve moved the time to 9:00 PM EDT on Wednesdays.
August 9th, 2008 at 2:42 pm
i’m surprised government spending/budgets was not on this Alex
August 9th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
Abortion: 10 (very important)
Business Regulation: 9
Death Penalty: 3
Drugs: 8 (don’t care much)
Environment: 8
Gay Marriage: 9.5
Gun Control: 8
Health Care: 9
Immigration: 3.5 (don’t care much)
Judges: 9
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 9.8
School Prayer: 8 (not as important)
Social Security: 9.2
Taxes: 9 (not as important)
Trade: 8
The War Against Jihadism: 10 (very important)
August 9th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Alex, for someone who thinks there is no God and therefor life on earth is just some huge glitch in the universe, you seem surprisingly care free about preserving the planet….
I suppose you can categorize it as a ‘glitch’ if you so please.
I’m not “carefree” about preserving the planet. Capitalism is the greatest thing that’s ever happened to the environment. The dirtiest countries on Earth are the more repressed, and the cleanest are the most capitalistic.
What I’m opposed to is counter-productive, anti-growth liberal environmentalism.
August 9th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
for me, there are different sides to the issue. What I agree with in principal, what I think the government has a right to do, and what I think is actually practical. But I think the point is to get a general feel, so here goes:
Abortion:10? (Overturn Roe. demand the courts define when life starts, legislate from there)
Business Regulation:10
Death Penalty:5? ( I think the death penalty is morally right. but in its current state, pretty worthless)
Drugs:10? (i think marijuana should be legal in all cases, crack down on meth, and not set up needle exchange programs. What is the conservative position?)
Environment:5 (I hate hippies!)
Gay Marriage:5 (Don’t really care personally what people do in the bedroom, don’t think marriage is a gauranteed right for everyone. Or else, why can’t I marry ten women, a relative, or a pet?)
Gun Control:5
Health Care:10
Immigration:5
Judges:10
Right to Die/Euthanasia:0 (I don’t think it should be legal to assist in taking a life. If people want to take their own life, they have that right.)
School Prayer:0 (I’m against prayer in public schools, but also against all the special treatment that muslim students get)
Social Security:5
Taxes:10
Trade: 5
The War Against Jihadism: 10
August 9th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Gay Marriage:5 (Don’t really care personally what people do in the bedroom, don’t think marriage is a gauranteed right for everyone. Or else, why can’t I marry ten women, a relative, or a pet?)
Because those are lifestyle choices, not orientations. And animals can’t consent.
August 9th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
#37 – Alex, I mostly agree with you on your environmental position. But capitalism follows self interest. Why are the capitalist countries the cleanest, when on the surface it wouldn’t seem to be self interesting to be eco-friendly? How do you feel about measures that would create an incentive for being clean?
August 9th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
#37 – Alex, I mostly agree with you on your environmental position. But capitalism follows self interest. Why are the capitalist countries the cleanest, when on the surface it wouldn’t seem to be self interesting to be eco-friendly? How do you feel about measures that would create an incentive for being clean?
There are, of course, ugly and polluted areas in capitalist countries, but they’re not anywhere where consumers have any interest in going. And besides, you have every right to trash up your own property.
Businesses have all the incentive in the world to provide beautiful conditions for their customers: who wants to live or shop in a filthy environment?
August 9th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
#34, “I’m not opposed to government being involved in marraige – particularly when it plays the role of encouraging couples to get married and have families – which is essential to this country.I’m not opposed to government being involved in marraige – particularly when it plays the role of encouraging couples to get married and have families – which is essential to this country.”
act, this is incorrect. Countries with “conservative” birth rates, are also generally more well off.
August 9th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
How do you feel about measures that would create an incentive for being clean?
I’m indifferent, to be quite honest. I suppose I’d support it as a pragmatic compromise with the environmentalists, so we can look like we’re “doing something” while still remaining business-friendly.
August 9th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
I’m not opposed to government being involved in marraige – particularly when it plays the role of encouraging couples to get married and have families – which is essential to this country.
And those of us that know that people get married out of love realize that people aren’t teetering on the edge, wondering whether to get married, until — oh! There’s that tax credit! We weren’t sure before, but now we’ll get married!
Yeah, okay, act-blog.
Humans aren’t robots; they aren’t tools for social engineering. Marriage and family-building is based upon love. Gay parents that adopt children currently lack the sorts of benefits that straight couples do. They’re adopting children because they so very much want a family. The real consequence of your position, is, of course, that they have a harder time than straight parents raising their kids.
August 9th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Abortion: 10
Business Regulation: 9
Death Penalty: 1
Drugs: 5
Environment: 1
Gay Marriage: 1
Gun Control: 4
Health Care: 5
Immigration: 4
Judges: 10
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 1
School Prayer: 7
Social Security: 7
Taxes: 10
Trade: 6
The War Against Jihadism: 3
August 9th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Abortion: 2
Business Regulation: 7
Death Penalty: 7
Drugs: 2
Environment: 2
Gay Marriage: 2
Gun Control: 8
Health Care: 9
Immigration: 3
Judges: 5
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 2
School Prayer: 5
Social Security: 7
Taxes: 5
Trade: 9
The War Against Jihadism: 4
August 9th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
DaveG,
Which 8 issues did you have as social issues? I have 10 on my list, but immigration, gun control, and the death penalty could arguably be termed “defense” issues and the environment might be considered an economic issue. If I leave the environment and gun control out (which seem the most natural exclusions) I have a 7.25 on social issues and an 8.25 on fiscal/defense.
August 9th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
Abortion: 9
Business Regulation: 8
Death Penalty: 9
Drugs: 10
Environment: 8
Gay Marriage: 10
Gun Control: 9
Health Care: 6
Immigration: 8
Judges: 10
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 9
School Prayer: 8
Social Security: 8
Taxes: 8
Trade: 9 (absolutely for free trade, but also recognizing that there are things that could/should be done to make it more favorable for the USA)
The War Against Jihadism: 10
August 9th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
I’m opposed to Gay addoption, so that not much of an issue for me.
—-
As for the “conservative birth rates” thing – eh…. I don’t know about this statement. I’ll agree that nations like the U.S. and Europe are better off than countries in Africa or some in South America, but I think this has little to do with the birth rate, at least at the heart of the problem. A lack of education, skill, and infrastructure – along with location and ability to grow crops and the like – are the causes of wealth or poverty.
I’ll point out that our biggest economic booms have come when, among other things, large numbers of people were added to the population. After the waves of immigration, we saw an economic boom. After all the men returned from WWII and had children, we saw a boom. In the 1980s, as baby boomers became of a career age (the early baby boomers didn’t see this kind of boom in the 70s because of other economic problems), we saw a boom.
…and when you think about the large numbers of older people in this country, who will soon leave the work force, and eventually die off, you are faced with the possibility of a declining population rate – a real problem.
August 9th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
You cannot use the term ‘fair’ in trade and give yourself a score above 5.
August 9th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
IllinoisGuy,
I hate this “free trade needs to be fair” nonsense. Do you suppose any American trade negotiator says to themselves purposely passes up trade deals more favorable to the US? What possible leverage could fair traders bring to the table, that we’re not already employing, if you’re eliminating the possibility of levying tariffs? And you do realize, I hope, that threatening tariffs is the definition of protectionism? The “free trade, but also fair trade” folks have a position roughly as coherent as Barack Obama’s “we’re not going to capitulate to Iran, but we can’t attack them and must negotiate sternly” as if no one had ever thought of negotiating before.
August 9th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Abortion: 10
Business Regulation: 7
Death Penalty: 2
Drugs: 7
Environment: 7
Gay Marriage: 10
Gun Control: 9
Health Care: 6
Immigration: 3
Judges: 10
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 10
School Prayer: 10
Social Security: 7
Taxes: 7
Trade: protectionist
The War Against Jihadism: 3
August 9th, 2008 at 3:46 pm
Abortion: 8
Business Regulation: 8
Death Penalty: 9
Drugs: 8
Environment: 8
Gay Marriage: 6
Gun Control: 4
Health Care: 7
Immigration: 5
Judges: 10
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 6
School Prayer: 8
Social Security: 5
Taxes: 4
Trade: 7
The War Against Jihadism: 10
I’m 26, grew up middle class in the Bible Belt, have a Bachelor’s Degree and 2 kids, a Dad who volunteered for six months in Afghanistan, and a brilliant husband who’s going to make me a lot of money. And I love Mitt Romney.
August 9th, 2008 at 3:46 pm
Alex -37- capitalism wouldnt do much good on Mars of Venus.
August 9th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
If we have to go to tariffs, thats fine, but its not protectionism if your only intention is to provide a level playing field.
Protectionism is about trying to give your nation an unfair advantage – its what China does by tying their currency at a certain level, its what certain subsidies do.
August 9th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Abortion: 6 (Legal in most cases, but with restrictions — e.g., parental consent, possibly a short waiting period)
Business Regulation: 9 (some regulation is necessary)
Death Penalty: 4 (I’d be a 1 probably if there were an absolutely fool-proof life penalty that nobody could overturn, shorten or pardon)
Drugs: 5 (Mostly legal, with strong regulations)
Environment: 7 (I like clean air and water, but I think the litmus test on this issue right now is belief in AGW, and I fail the test)
Gay Marriage: 3 (It will come about eventually, but I understand a need to go slow to soothe the feelings of the hardliners)
Gun Control: 8 (Not a hot button for me, but the basic point is that is doesn’t work)
Health Care: 7 (Obviously, reforms are needed, but having the government run it? OMG!!)
Immigration: 7 (Secure the borders first, tough sanctions on employers and then, a few years down the road, we can discuss amnesty)
Judges: 8 (By which I mean I want judges who rule based on the law, not those who impose conservatism by judicial fiat)
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 3 (Legal, with restrictions to prevent abuses — e.g., greedy heirs)
School Prayer: 2 (No possible way forced prayers can be justified — I can see possible justification for “moment of silence” or such)
Social Security: 8 (Reform needed, but I’m unconvinced by any of the proposals I’ve seen)
Taxes: 8 (As low as possible while maintaining a mostly balanced budget — but I’m opposed to unfunded tax cuts)
Trade: 10
The War Against Jihadism: 10
August 9th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Abortion:6
Business Regulation:7
Death Penalty:10
Drugs:2
Environment:5
Gay Marriage:7
Gun Control:6
Health Care:9
Immigration:6
Judges:9
Right to Die/Euthanasia:2
School Prayer:4
Social Security:8
Taxes:10
Trade:
The War Against Jihadism:10
August 9th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
#50 – “You cannot use the term ‘fair’ in trade and give yourself a score above 5.”
Well said, LogCabin. Two of my favorite self-negating statements are:
*I’m a free-trader, but …
*I’m for free speech, but …
The minute I hear the “but” I know that what follows it will totally negate what preceded it.
August 9th, 2008 at 4:09 pm
You start redefining marraige, and you can’t stop, and you eventually have the collapse of the institution itself.
If gays can get married, then you have to reason to prevent polygamy, group marraige, or marraige to family, animals, or, when technology allows it, robots. And if Marriage to anybody and everybody is legal, it is less special, less important, particularly if you start extending the same benefits to civil unions (which I favor only as the lesser of two evils), fewer people get married, which will lead either to less stable families, or fewer families – neither is desirable.
—-
As for abortion – abortion on demand in any trimester for any reason is unacceptable. 1) Because it is the destruction of a human life. 2) Because it has negative effects on society. 3) Because it promotes a lifestyle of unaccountability.
Does anybody else think that their might be a connection between increasing “get out of jail free” cards on the social level – abortion, no-fault divorce, etc. and the “if it gets difficult, just leave” attitude about foreign policy that we have seen since Vietnam?
—-
As for school prayer – organized prayer should be legal, as long as anyone wants wants to can step out of the room for a minute. But the idea that prayer, even voluntary, private or group prayer can be restricted in a place someone is required to be, in my opinion, violates the first amndt.
August 9th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
Alex, I’m not trying to be smart alecky or anything, but specifically which benefits are you interested in?
August 9th, 2008 at 4:13 pm
Abortion: 5
Business Regulation: 8
Death Penalty: 9
Drugs: 7
Environment: 2
Gay Marriage: 4
Gun Control: 10
Health Care: 8
Immigration: 10
Judges: 10
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 3
School Prayer: 5
Social Security: 9
Taxes: 10
Trade: 10
The War Against Jihadism: 10
August 9th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
Abortion: 2
Business Regulation: 9
Death Penalty: 9
Drugs: 2
Environment: 8
Gay Marriage: 4
Gun Control: 8
Health Care: 9
Immigration: 4
Judges: 9
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 1
School Prayer: 1
Social Security: 9
Taxes: 9
Trade: 9
The War Against Jihadism: 10
August 9th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
Alright, lets look at it like this: China unfairly keeps the Yuan (spl?) low to give it an advantage in world markets, since its goods will be cheaper in any country that has a stronger currency. This isn’t a market-created situation, since it would be much higher if freely floated.
Is it wrong for us to impose a tariff to combat the currency manipulation?
August 9th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
Abortion: 9
Business Regulation: 10
Death Penalty: 1
Drugs: 2 (If someone wants to contaminate themselves, that’s their business)
Environment: 6
Gay Marriage: 1 (very insistent upon marriage equality)
Gun Control: 10
Health Care: 9
Immigration: 5
Judges: 9
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 1 (again, if you want to die, that’s your business)
School Prayer: 5 (I’m in favor of quiet time in which students can pray or meditate or whatever)
Social Security: 10 (I’d love to abolish SS)
Taxes: 10
Trade: 8
The War Against Jihadism: 6 (I was against the war but supported the surge and support out presence now that we’re there and things are looking up. I still think the war in Iraq was a mistake, so I’m just going to call this a six.)
I’m heartened to see that gay marriage doesn’t seem to be much of a rallying point here. It seems to me like this board is principally neo-con/libertarian-leaning.
August 9th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
That should be *OUR presence.
August 9th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Act, check your math, more babies will not compensate for the aging population, we require more immigrants who are 30 years old. And act, I am sure if tipr parents were gay, you will have still turned out to be an intelligent, articulate young man.
August 9th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
8 on immigration, 9 on abortion (exceptions for rape, incest, or certain death of the mother), and 10 on the other 14.
August 9th, 2008 at 4:25 pm
#51 – you were a Mitt supporter in the primary, and I assume you heard him discussing this issue in the debates. How did you square your position with his. He was confident that we needed people who had business backgrounds to be parties to trade agreements, and having that we would come out with trade agreements more fair to the American worker. I agree with him. I don’t know everything, but I do trust that Mitt knows what he’s talking about. I value your opinions too, but to be honest, I value his more.
August 9th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
Some of these are issues I *feel* very conservative about, but have a somewhat liberal outlook on the legality of. So on the issues of abortion and drug use, for example, I’m pretty personally conservative, but I think government involvement in those issues can go too far and create more problems than they solve. I’m asterisking things where I consider myself personally totally conservative, but politically a little more liberal.
Abortion: 6*
Business Regulation: 10
Death Penalty: 1
Drugs: 3*
Environment: 3
Gay Marriage: 5*
Gun Control: 10
Health Care: 10
Immigration: 2
Judges: 7*
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 7*
School Prayer: 7* (privatize the education system! then it’s not a problem…)
Social Security: 10
Taxes: 10
Trade: 10
The War Against “Terror”: 2
August 9th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
“Act, check your math, more babies will not compensate for the aging population, we require more immigrants who are 30 years old.”
This is true, it would not completely compensate, though we could probably add 1-1.3 millions babies per year by restricting the “abortions of convenience” – with reduces the number of immigrants we need to bring in. I don’t have anything against immigrants, but I think someone who was raised in the U.S., grew up in our culture, has our language as their primary language, went to our schools, etc., etc. is preferable to someone who was raised in another country, is unfamiliar with our culture, and has to learn english.
—
“And act, I am sure if tipr parents were gay, you will have still turned out to be an intelligent, articulate young man.”
…and I’m going to assume that “tipr” is “your” – and I don’t know. On matters of intelligence, very possibly. But on other things, things less mesurable. Part of this comes from my faith, but I think there is a reason it takes a man and a woman to have a child – because a man and a woman are supposed to raise a child. Nature has an order to it, and generally things are the way they are for a reason. Humans have certainly been around long enough to evolve significantly – at least if science is correct – don’t you think that if people of the same gender were inteded to raise children that we’d all have the ability to have kids?
and I know there are stuides that show that the effects of having gay parents seems to be minimal, though some problems were shown, such as some confusion of traditional gender roles (not that liberals will have any problem with that), but I don’t think that it is a widespread enough thing for us to really tell.
August 9th, 2008 at 4:42 pm
Abortion: 10
Business Regulation: 4
Death Penalty: 2
Drugs: 8
Environment: 8
Gay Marriage: 10
Gun Control: 5
Health Care: 8
Immigration: 4
Judges: 10
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 6
School Prayer: 10
Social Security: 8
Taxes: 6
Trade: 2
The War Against Jihadism: 10
August 9th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
This is a bit confusing to me… perhaps the typical GOP response should be posted for all these issues? I’ll assume that 5 is center-right Republican, 1 is really liberal Republican, and 10 is really conservative.
Abortion: 10
Business Regulation: 7
Death Penalty: 7
Drugs: 8
Environment: 10
Gay Marriage: 10
Gun Control: 10
Health Care: 8
Immigration: 9
Judges: 10
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 10
School Prayer: 9
Social Security: 5
Taxes: 10 (FairTax)
Trade: 4 (fair vs. free trade)
The War Against Jihadism: 10
Oh, whatever. I guess those are my answers…
August 9th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
Abortion: 8
Business Regulation: 9
Death Penalty: 2
Drugs: 4
Environment: 5
Gay Marriage: 3
Gun Control: 9
Health Care: 6
Immigration: 3
Judges: 10
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 10
School Prayer: 6
Social Security: 9
Taxes: 8
Trade: 10
The War Against Jihadism: 6
August 9th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
#
Abortion: 9
Business Regulation: 7
Death Penalty: 8
Drugs: 7
Environment: 5
Gay Marriage: 8
Gun Control: 9
Health Care: 8
Immigration: 1—(if you lived in an area where Mexicans are needed to produce Americas food, you would probably have a different perspective)
Judges: 10
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 7
School Prayer: 7
Social Security: 9
Taxes: 10
Trade: 10
The War Against Jihadism: 10
August 9th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
Abortion: 7 (only allowed in the case of threat to life of the mother, but first overturn Roe v. Wade and return issue to states, focus more on preventing premature pregnancy and promoting adoption, not just outlawing abortion)
Business Regulation: 6 (too much regulation on some things that hinder econ growth while not protecting workers; too little on others, like the oil commodities futures markets)
Death Penalty: 8 (definitely for it, but only in murder and other heinous cases like child rape… the punishment has to be proportional to the crime)
Drugs: 5 (dont really care either way… cant have a policy that goes too far either way)
Environment: 7 (some govt regulation of air/water quality, basic necessities… but more in favor of private/public partnerships to eliminate pollution/acid rain than only govt mandates that do more harm than good… govt should incentivise good environmental behavior rather than punish bad environmental behavior)
Gay Marriage: 8 (civil unions are ok so long as gay couples dont receive the same benefits as straight married couples… i’m all for gays having rights, just not marriage from a moral, social, and economic standpoint– look to ACT Blog. He desribed my position better than mine
)
Gun Control: 7 (the right to own a gun is a right, but it must come with sensible regulations– guns should not be available to madmen, felons, and juveniles. gun licenses are ok too)
Health Care: 8 (socialized medicine is not an option, though Medicare/Medicaid are needed though wuth serious reforms… HSAs, tax credits, preventative medicine, better health programs in schools… we cant cover everyone, just get the cost down so more ppl can afford insurance)
Immigration: 8 (must deport alien criminals immediately and ensure that illegals pay taxes for the services they receive, learn to read and write in English, create a guest-worker program under strict scrutiny, employer verification, temper-prrof ID card)
Judges: 10 (very important– the Court shapes so much policy)
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 8 (right to refuse treatment, but no assisted suicide)
School Prayer: 8 (shouldnt be forced on students, but shouldnt be banned either… an issue of religious freedom and secular liberals wanting to throw Christians out of the public square)
Social Security: 7 (partially privatized accounts gradually over time with regulation to ensure fair lending practices… works better than govt accounts)
Taxes: 10 (FairTax)
Trade: 7 (cant turn to protectionism, but i do think our trade agreements are poorly constructed wuth not enough protections for U.S. workers. support NAFTA, but more regulated trade w/ China– ok to trade with them, we just need to make sure China abides by their side of the agreements, e.g, on safety of products)
The War Against Jihadism: 10 (VERY IMPORTANT… its our national security… we need to focus more on radical jihad than on “terror” which is only a tactic to expand a dangerous ideology)
August 9th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
Some of these categories are difficult to determine what the conservative position is. For example, School Prayer. To me, the conservative position is to designate about a short period of silence each day for the student to use in whatever manner they choose, as long as they are not distracting, and are quiet. If you actually have someone lead in prayer, then who will give the prayer?
However, some may think the conservative position is that someone leads in prayer each day. One problem with that is that not everyone believes the same thing. Not everyone is religious, and it would be offensive to some. I think that is why some of you had a low number for this category, because they were assuming the conservative position was to believe that someone would recite a prayer each day.
August 9th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
Abortion: 2
Business Regulation: 7
Death Penalty: 5
Drugs: 3
Environment: 3
Gay Marriage: 3
Gun Control: 8
Health Care: 7
Immigration: 3
Judges: 5
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 7
School Prayer: 6
Social Security: 10
Taxes: 9
Trade: 8
The War Against Jihadism: 3
August 9th, 2008 at 6:08 pm
and ditto to #76, Alex, it would be helpful to specify a little more clearly what a “10″ in “school prayer” means, for example
August 9th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Abortion: 2
Business Regulation: 10
Death Penalty: 1
Drugs: 2
Environment: 10
Gay Marriage: 1
Gun Control: 4
Health Care: 10
Immigration: 3
Judges: 7
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 1
School Prayer: 1
Social Security: 10
Taxes: 10
Trade: 10
The War Against Jihadism: 10
August 9th, 2008 at 6:19 pm
Abortion: 10
Business Regulation: 8
Death Penalty: 8
Drugs: 6
Environment: 5
Gay Marriage: 10
Gun Control: 8
Health Care: 8
Immigration: 10
Judges: 8
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 8
School Prayer: 9
Social Security: 6
Taxes: 7
Trade: 7
The War Against Jihadism: 8
August 9th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Sean Oxendine, what’s the rationale for Drugs = 4 combined with Right to Die = 10?
August 9th, 2008 at 6:26 pm
Uh…what’s a “conservative” environmental stance?? I mean look at the word “conservative”…conserve is the root word. A true “conservative” could be a position that prohibits an activity that results in the preservation of the natural environment. Lets “conserve” the natural environment for future generations to enjoy. THat means little or no change,,,not allowing activities that destroy the environment.
Okay so this is mainly a semantic arguement…
August 9th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
Ditto to #76. I wouldn’t be ok with a formal recited school prayer but I would be ok with a few moments of quiet time for “meditation” or whatever.
August 9th, 2008 at 6:47 pm
Abortion: *10*
Business Regulation: 6
Death Penalty: 7
Drugs: 7 (I’m open to marijuana legalization, taxation and regulation on a statewide level. I oppose legalizing all other hard drugs.)
Environment: 5 (I may be more conservative than that since I reject man-made global warming.)
Gay Marriage: 7
Gun Control: 9
Health Care: 3
Immigration: 5
Judges: *10*
Right to Die/Euthanasia: *10* (Has been a disaster in the nations that have adopted it.)
School Prayer: 2 (I don’t care about this issue.)
Social Security: 3
Taxes: 4
Trade: 9 (Free Trade is my goal but we must prevent nations or internal cartels from manipulating world markets.)
The War Against Jihadism: 5 (I’m not sure what this term means but I’m pretty sure I’m to the right of Hillary and to the left of McCain on it.)
August 9th, 2008 at 6:48 pm
Abortion: 8 – Pro-life.
Business Regulation: 7 – Largely supportive of the position, but there are some positions that require regulation.
Death Penalty: 9 – Some criminals cannot be rehabilitated.
Drugs: 5 – I have policemen in the family, and I have friends who do drugs. Its difficult to fight something ingrained in society.
Environment: 5 – more on the Teddy Roosevelt side of things, rather than the ‘modern’ Republican stance.
Gay Marriage: 7 – Not a fan, but I believe the country will slowly shift towards acceptance.
Gun Control: 9 – Proud Life Member of the NRA
Health Care: 8 – Competition breeds better deals.
Immigration: 8 – Strong stance on ‘No Amnesty,’ but I find it difficult to believe we’ll be able to deport 12 million people.
Judges: 8 – No legislating from the bench.
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 5 – Meh. Not sure on my stance.
School Prayer: 3 – School is for schooling. As for education, I guess I’m more about the 50s and 60s strong national education (to catch the commies) to prepare our youth for the future.
Social Security: 9 – I’m young. Social Security won’t be there for me when I retire in its current state. Privatize!
Taxes: 8 – I like my money. I like the FairTax.
Trade: 8 – Free trade ftw. However, China and its lead should be worked on.
The War Against Jihadism: 8 – Find Osama, find him now.
I hesitate to give myself a 10 on anything.
August 9th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
“Ditto to #76. I wouldn’t be ok with a formal recited school prayer”
Why not? I have no desire to see people forced to pray, but if it is optional – i.e. a student can step out of the room – why not have formal prayer? A simple prayer to God as creator should be more than acceptable to Christians, Jews, and Muslims alike.
August 9th, 2008 at 6:59 pm
On #86. I doubt it’d be comfortable for atheists or agnostics.
August 9th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
I’m on a 10 on everything! Just kidding. Here goes.
Abortion: 10
Business Regulation: 7
Death Penalty: 1
Drugs: 1
Environment: 6
Gay Marriage: 9
Gun Control: 9
Health Care: 8
Immigration: 4
Judges: 10
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 10
School Prayer: 9
Social Security: 6
Taxes: 10
Trade: 9
The War Against Jihadism: By phrasing it as “The War Against Jihadism”, you immediately create a neo-conservative bias. However, using the neo-con position as the conservative position, on the Afghanistan War I’d give myself a 10, but I’ll only give myself a 4 on Iraq.
August 9th, 2008 at 7:05 pm
Act blog, I don’t see a government role in promoting monotheism as opposed to other religious systems.
August 9th, 2008 at 7:12 pm
ACT, to teach students that they have to say a prayer a certain way to accommodate everyone not bein goffended would be forcing them to do it differently than they are taught in their religious institutions. I think a silent period is a a better way to handle it. For example, we always open addressing our Heavenly Father, and close in the name of Jesus Christ. I really don’t want my grandkids being forced to it differently, ok?
August 9th, 2008 at 7:16 pm
#86,
Because not all people feel the need or desire to pray to their creator and it is not fair for those of us who do to put them in the position of wanting to “step out”. Better to create an environment where the opportunity is there but nothing else.
August 9th, 2008 at 7:25 pm
If Alex have a definition of each on a sliding scale,that would be all we would be talking about. Act, many gays are Christians.
August 9th, 2008 at 7:35 pm
“I don’t see a government role in promoting monotheism as opposed to other religious systems.”
right – its just that sometimes you have to pick one thing, and since 70%+ of Americans are monotheistic, that is what you choose.
As for why not just a silent period – have you ever been in a classroom during a “silent period”? The kids aren’t thinking quietly or praying – they’re passing notes, whispering, fooling with pens, pencils, notebooks, etc., or sleeping.
If all you are going to do is have a few quite minutes, you are better not to have it at all.
—
“many gays are Christians”
…I’m more than aware of that fact, though I’m not sure what that is in reply to.
August 9th, 2008 at 7:37 pm
I agree with creating the opportunity, sure, and in higher grade levels, that might work just fine. But I question the effectiveness – particularly in the lower grades, where, I might point out, that kind of thing would be most effective. Habits, morals, character – its all learned young, at an age where the kids might not do it without instruction.
August 9th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
On #93. If you believe in the free marketplace when it comes to economics, why not have “free competition” in religion/spirituality/god as well. You’re basically suggesting that the government ought to reinforce existing religious thought. That will just lead to everyone thinking the same thing merely because everyone else things the same thing.
August 9th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
81. I view it as pretty much being in line with my views on abortion and the death penalty. I view life issues as being different from the standard libertarian ‘do what you will’ view (to which I generally subscribe). On of the primary legitimate roles of a society is protecting the lives of its members.
August 9th, 2008 at 7:51 pm
no, what I’m saying is that, when you don’t have time to have everything represented equally, you have to pick, and so you pick what most people support.
This is the same reason Christmas and Easter play a much bigger role in government recognition than Ramadan.
August 9th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
I agree with creating the opportunity, sure, and in higher grade levels, that might work just fine. But I question the effectiveness – particularly in the lower grades, where, I might point out, that kind of thing would be most effective. Habits, morals, character – its all learned young, at an age where the kids might not do it without instruction.
And this is something that public schools should do, through prayer?
Oh, but only in the moral sense that you, act-blog, agree with, of course! Otherwise it’s leftists indoctrinating your kids.
What a crock. Leave the morals to home.
August 9th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
“when you don’t have time to have everything represented equally, you have to pick, and so you pick what most people support.”
You do realize that means most school prayer would be Roman Catholic then?
August 9th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
81. I view it as pretty much being in line with my views on abortion and the death penalty. I view life issues as being different from the standard libertarian ‘do what you will’ view (to which I generally subscribe). On of the primary legitimate roles of a society is protecting the lives of its members.
Even through your point of view, there’s still a major difference. With abortion and the death penalty, that which is dying is not consenting to it. In right-to-die cases, it isn’t ‘protection’. It is religious fascism, telling the individual that he does not have the right to his own body; that it belongs to the state.
August 9th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
“leave the morals to home”
…thats a little hard to do when you have schools sending seemingly contradictory messages on everything of the origin of man to sex ed.
If you want to leave moral/religious things to home, thats fine, but then the education system needs a serious overhaul.
August 9th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
“when you don’t have time to have everything represented equally, you have to pick, and so you pick what most people support.”
Or we could like, leave the schools to, you know, educate, rather than act in a religious manner.
If I had my way, schools would simply declare the truth, which is that Christianity, Islam, and Judaism are false (I am a strong atheist in that regard: I am 100% certain that those religions are false), of course.
August 9th, 2008 at 7:59 pm
…thats a little hard to do when you have schools sending seemingly contradictory messages on everything of the origin of man to sex ed.
Contradictory? In what ways? Schools teach evolution, as they should. A lot of Southern schools simply ignore it, though.
But sex ed..?
If you want to leave moral/religious things to home, thats fine, but then the education system needs a serious overhaul.
What on Earth do you mean?
August 9th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
Present evidence that they are false – oh, sorry, you can’t.
Not only is there no evidence that God doesn’t exist – but there isn’t even a viable theory for an alternative.
Everything in the universe, everything that is bound by natural laws, has to come from something else – nothing creates itself. That means, that even if you accept the most liberal evolutionary doctrine, even if you accept the big bang theory, you still cannot explain the orginal source, and, in fact, unless you can present evidence of natural things just springing into existence, there has to be some supernatural force.
August 9th, 2008 at 8:03 pm
Abortion: 4
Business Regulation: 10
Death Penalty: 9
Drugs: 9
Environment: 7
Gay Marriage: 6
Gun Control: 8
Health Care: 9
Immigration: 10
Judges: 8
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 7
School Prayer: 4
Social Security: 10
Taxes: 10
Trade: 7
The War Against Jihadism: 10
August 9th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
“Schools teach evolution, as they should.”
Yes, they should – I agree. But the way it is taught is the problem – its shown as fact, without leaving open the possibility of a God. The shortfalls of the theory are not discussed, and, as far as I know and have seen, neither is the fact that it is actually nothing more than a widely believed theory.
As for sex ed, see the whole birth control vs. absinence debate.
August 9th, 2008 at 8:06 pm
Present evidence that they are false – oh, sorry, you can’t. Not only is there no evidence that God doesn’t exist – but there isn’t even a viable theory for an alternative.
If I hear the fallacious argument “prove that God DOESN’T exist lol o u cant haha i win” one more time, I’m gonna shank someone. Read something about the burden of proof sometime. How about you provide some evidence for the existence of a heaven? For Jesus’ divinity? For the existence of the Christian God? Oh, sorry, you can’t.
Everything in the universe, everything that is bound by natural laws, has to come from something else – nothing creates itself. That means, that even if you accept the most liberal evolutionary doctrine, even if you accept the big bang theory, you still cannot explain the orginal source, and, in fact, unless you can present evidence of natural things just springing into existence, there has to be some supernatural force.
But God, of course, is immune to this rule. No one ever seems to care to answer where this fella came from, this spirit with the means and knowledge to create infinitely complex universes.
Every challenge to naturalism that you just put up is a challenge to the God Theory, too.
We know that natural forces exist. So the default assumption is that things came about through natural processes until evidence of the supernatural comes about. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever for a supernatural realm. You’re simply filling in the blanks of what you don’t know with God, afraid of admitting your own ignorance.
August 9th, 2008 at 8:06 pm
http://www.act-blog.co.nr,
If you do not mind me asking, are you Roman Catholic or LDS?
August 9th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
RC
August 9th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
Okay, thanks. I used to be RC myself. I understand where you are coming from.
August 9th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
Yes, they should – I agree. But the way it is taught is the problem – its shown as fact, without leaving open the possibility of a God. The shortfalls of the theory are not discussed, and, as far as I know and have seen, neither is the fact that it is actually nothing more than a widely believed theory.
It’s a fact.
There are not shortfalls in the theory. Any “shortfalls” are only unanswerable to those that have no interest in actually finding out the answer. “Irreducibly complex” parts are not.
As for sex ed, see the whole birth control vs. abstinence debate.
The job of a school should be to educate; abstinence-only education is utter madness, and is the reason that the US has the highest teen pregnancy rates and abortion rates in the entire Western world.
August 9th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
RC
Do you believe in transubstantiation?
August 9th, 2008 at 8:15 pm
Alex, Christians believe God is the origin of existence. He’s aseitic.
That means existence comes from God who neither changes nor experiences time (like all the rest of existence).
August 9th, 2008 at 8:22 pm
In the developed world, the United States is dead last in teen pregnancy rates. DEAD LAST. The US rates are so bad, it ranks in the same range as developing/third world nations.
Per Thousand;
South Korea 3
Netherlands 5
Russia 30
United States 53
Indonesia 55
South Africa 66
August 9th, 2008 at 8:24 pm
Alex, Christians believe God is the origin of existence. He’s aseitic. That means existence comes from God who neither changes nor experiences time (like all the rest of existence).
Can you explain the logic of this? How does this work?
See, to someone that isn’t trying to rationalize away beliefs, and is working with the tools of reason and logic, that’s impossible.
August 9th, 2008 at 8:25 pm
Abortion: 8 I feel we need to protect innocent life, but in cases of threat of death to the mother, rape, or incest, abortion is serves the greater good, but only in those circumstances.
Business Regulation: 6 While I am a capitalist, I feel there is a place for gov’t to interfere to make our own corporations more competitive than foreign competition (especially auto industry). Furthermore, the continuous decline of employee benefits from their employers, and the free reign for foreign competitors to come into our country and contract cheap benefits with employees… it all sickens me. Americans deserve better.
Death Penalty: 9
Drugs: 10
Environment: 5 I am an envrinmentalist / conservationist, but only if it is measured and well thought out… in other words, balance competing priorities, and I’m afraid national security and the economy often trump environmental policy… although I also feel we have the opportunity in America to take the lead in alternative energy technology, and be an example for the world to follow in environmental policy
Gay Marriage: 10 Strong, traditional, loving families are the root of a good society. Children need a father and mother who love eachother and love the child.
Gun Control: 8 We need freedom to bear arms, but within certain limits in today’s environment of assymetric terrorism threats.
Health Care: 7 I liked how Massachusettes implemented their health care plan. Health care costs are out of control, and the medical industry is one of the few services where the customer has almost zero control over what they’re paying for. Reform is needed, and quite frankly, I think in America the least our employers can do is provide adequate health care for employee.
Immigration: 10 No, make that and 20… This is my biggest issue… and unfortunately both party’s candidates are horrible on this issue. Nothing enrages me more than to see our country be subverted in the way it is by foreigners taking advantage of our health care, labor market, and schools… and then to have the audacity to raise Mexican flags in our streets and demand the foreign language of Spanish to be spoken. We need to keep America America.
Judges: 8 In general, I have a huge amount of respect for judges… most of the ones I know can see through politics and get down tot he law and the constitution. So I don’t want strictyl conservative judges…. I want judges who judge by the law. But there are big problems in some of our liberal courts, like the 9th, which need to be dealt with.
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 5. Hmmm.. I know how I feel religiously about this, but I’m not sure how this issue relates to law.
School Prayer: 5 I pick a 5 because I don’t know what exactly this means. On the one hand I feel taking God out of our vocabulary and public places is a tragedy, and not constitutional, but I also know what some fundamentalist Christians might do to minority faiths if school prayer is commonplace. Depends on the issue I suppose.
Social Security: 7 I feel every American should be entitled to social security, but I support the idea that we can be in more control over the investment.
Taxes: 8 While low taxes are good for the economy, we are also in debt, and as we have seen, eventually debt catches up to us, and then we end up hurting worse in the end (Freddie Mac for example). Taxes should be cut, but so should our debt. I think the Fair Tax idea is a loony, unrealistic populist dream.
Trade: 6 Open trade helps us on many fronts, but when we do it at the cost of our own American industries, it shouldn’t happen. We need to protect our own country first and foremost.
The War Against Jihadism: 10 Make that a 100. We need to crush the terrorists wherever they are. They are the greatest evil mankind has ever faced, and we need to do everything we can to destroy not just their capability and networks, but also their hope. While we should always follow Geneva Conventions, we are not doing nearly enough in this war, nor is the rest of the world. And we need to win this war on more than the military front. Terrorism is breeded by failed societies.
August 9th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
Abortion: 8 (Rape, incest, and the life of the mother)
Business Regulation: 8
Death Penalty: 10
Drugs: 10
Environment: 5
Gay Marriage: 8
Gun Control: 8
Health Care: 10
Immigration: 5
Judges: 10
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 10
School Prayer: 8
Social Security: 8
Taxes: 8
Trade: 10
The War Against Jihadism: 10
August 9th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
Not to get off topic, but I’d just like to say that I’m currently watching the Olympics on NBC, and what commercial comes on during the break? John McCain’s most recent ad (hammering Obama on celebrity, taxes, and energy).
I live in NY…national ad during the Olympics??
August 9th, 2008 at 8:34 pm
“If I hear the fallacious argument “prove that God DOESN’T exist lol o u cant haha i win” one more time, I’m gonna shank someone. Read something about the burden of proof sometime. How about you provide some evidence for the existence of a heaven? For Jesus’ divinity? For the existence of the Christian God? Oh, sorry, you can’t.”
Well, your the one trying to change minds, so I would argue the burden of proof is on you, at least as much as it is on me. You seem to be demanding proof without providing any of your own.
—
Now, as for providing evidence of a Chrisitan God, or Jesus, or Heaven, I can’t – thats why its called faith. I can give a strong argument for the existance of a supernatural force(s), not how that force manifests itself.
—
“But God, of course, is immune to this rule.”
exactly, because he is the super natural force – the exception that has to exist. The core of the theory that I described is that all natural things have to come from something else – people, animals, plants – it all comes from something else. Yet, there had to be an origin point, and, since nothing natural can create itself, let alone other things, that source has to be super-natural.
I suppose you could argue that, for a split second, everything had the ability to manifest itself out of nothing – but then why not now? It would be a useful thing – water able to come into existence in drought-ridden areas, animals from endangered species able to come into existence to keep the species alive.
—
“We know that natural forces exist. So the default assumption is that things came about through natural processes until evidence of the supernatural comes about. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever for a supernatural realm.”
The assumption that they come through a natural process can be disproved – nothing comes from nothing, everything natural, everything in this realm, everything tangible to living things, comes from something else. Natural law doesn’t permit things to just spring into being.
—
“You’re simply filling in the blanks of what you don’t know with God, afraid of admitting your own ignorance.”
Ignorance? You are just as ignorant as I am about the issue – neither of us can produce firm proof of our belief, but I’m not the one trying to explain how something defies natural law without becoming “super natural”
August 9th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
Alright Alex, I’ve had enough playing defense. You started the whole debate, so lets get your view.
What is the ultimate origin of life and everything else that exists?
August 9th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
Alex, could you specify what you want explained?
There are theological thesis hundreds of pages long on this single topic. I’m uncertain exactly what you’re confused by.
August 9th, 2008 at 8:50 pm
Abortion: 9 (essentially pro life, but against an HLA)
Business Regulation: 10
Death Penalty: 7 (I’m against the death penalty)
Drugs: 4
Environment: 8
Gay Marriage: 3 (don’t want a federal amendment)
Gun Control: 10
Health Care: 8
Immigration: 9
Judges: 10
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 9 (believe family should be able to make decisions)
School Prayer: 1
Social Security: 9
Taxes: 10
Trade: 10
The War Against Jihadism: 9
August 9th, 2008 at 8:55 pm
What is the ultimate origin of life and everything else that exists?
Hell if I know. But unlike some, I don’t feel uncomfortable admitting my ignorance, and I don’t feel the need to fill in all of the blanks with “God”.
August 9th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
Well, your the one trying to change minds, so I would argue the burden of proof is on you, at least as much as it is on me. You seem to be demanding proof without providing any of your own.
The burden of proof is not on the person trying to change minds. It’s on the person making the affirmative statement. If I say that leprechauns exist, it’s up to me to provide evidence for it, not to say that it’s true until someone proves me wrong. That’s essentially what you’re doing: saying that God exists until I prove that he doesn’t.
Now, as for providing evidence of a Chrisitan God, or Jesus, or Heaven, I can’t – thats why its called faith. I can give a strong argument for the existance of a supernatural force(s), not how that force manifests itself.
And why is faith acceptable as a method of coming to your beliefs? Faith literally means ‘belief without evidence’. Muslims have just as much faith as you do — why should I come to Christianity when Muslims believe just as strongly as you do? You want me to convert, right? Well, why should I believe you and not a Muslim?
August 9th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
I get the impression Alex thinks Christians believe in God to “fill in the blanks”. This is called the “God of the Gaps”.
I know that some Christian do this, it bothers and slightly offends me.
God is not a scientific hypothesis or a method of filling in the gaps to me.
August 9th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
Alex, could you specify what you want explained? There are theological thesis hundreds of pages long on this single topic. I’m uncertain exactly what you’re confused by.
How, exactly, God can be immune to the laws of the universe, other than “because Doug Forrester and a bunch of believers say so.”
It’s easy to win when you’re making the rules up as you go along, I suppose.
“Where did the universe come from?”
“I don’t know.”
“Hah! So it must have been God!”
“Where did God come from, though?”
“Well, he exists outside of space and time and doesn’t have to play by the rules. Why? Because he’s God, see!”
“Wait, huh? How does that work!?”
“Well, I don’t know why you’re confused, really.”
August 9th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
Worse still are the people that insist that they believe in God based on faith and project their own beliefs onto him. My mom does this, and I tell her that she believes in Amyism (her name’s Amy). She says that Islam couldn’t possibly be right because it preaches violence and women’s submission — but um, what if God wants that? Well, too bad, she said: she can’t believe in something like that.
Uh…
August 9th, 2008 at 9:12 pm
I believe the ‘rules of the Universe’ are mere qualities of God. That is absent God (directly or indirectly) nothing exists or has any force/substance.
If we believe the Universe is consistent than nothing we have ever observed (matter, energy, spatial superstructures, quantum effects) is capable of existing without a precursor that is utterly alien to our existence.
A rational atheist could suggest this aseitic precursor and foundation of existence need not be intelligent or willful. The extraordinary structure of the Universe makes this rational atheist alternative seem odd to me.
August 9th, 2008 at 9:21 pm
I believe the ‘rules of the Universe’ are mere qualities of God. That is absent God (directly or indirectly) nothing exists or has any force/substance. If we believe the Universe is consistent than nothing we have ever observed (matter, energy, spatial superstructures, quantum effects) is capable of existing without a precursor that is utterly alien to our existence.
The universe has to be consistent. Anything that exists has to be consistent with some sort of natural law, by definition. But it’s a complete non-sequitur to say that because it is all constant, it has to follow that an alien precursor has to exist. And even if so, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that it’s the Christian god.
A rational atheist could suggest this aseitic precursor and foundation of existence need not be intelligent or willful. The extraordinary structure of the Universe makes this rational atheist alternative seem odd to me.
For the sake of argument, I’ll accept what you’re saying and ask you: why have you rejected Islam?
August 9th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
Alex, nothing we observe is capable of existing aseitically. All that we have observed is temporary and appears to require alien precursors. That’s because no substance we’ve observed can create surplus substance (conservation of mass/energy/momentum/quantumspin).
I haven’t categorically rejected any religion. I can explain that further if you like.
August 9th, 2008 at 9:39 pm
127.
Good point on Amyism. Whether God exists, or doesn’t is independent of what we think or hope. If it wasn’t then there would be no God, since at that point God would definitely be the creation of our own imagination. But I hope you see the double standard you created (not knocking you) when you fault your mom for finding a faith that doesn’t conflict with her ideals, yet fault people who subscribe to faiths that do fault their ideals. It’s a no win. It actually seems like your using your logic backwards, coming to the conclusion first, than taking whatever argument can lead you there.
But I really don’t see what separates an atheist from a Christian or Muslim. They have come to a certain conclusion for which they could never prove 100%. I would think if ones argument against a belief in God would be it’s impossible to prove so one can’t believe, than the only honest/logical route would actually be agnosticism. Actually, I think an agnostic has much better ground than atheist.
So my question is, how can you with a certainty know there is no God? At least to the point where atheism is not a faith, but a knowledge.
August 9th, 2008 at 10:01 pm
But I really don’t see what separates an atheist from a Christian or Muslim. They have come to a certain conclusion for which they could never prove 100%. I would think if ones argument against a belief in God would be it’s impossible to prove so one can’t believe, than the only honest/logical route would actually be agnosticism. Actually, I think an agnostic has much better ground than atheist. So my question is, how can you with a certainty know there is no God? At least to the point where atheism is not a faith, but a knowledge.
The difference between your faithful adherence to your religion and my rational atheism is that, if you provide me with evidence, I can be talked out of my position. I am more than willing to be converted to Christianity, if only someone would give me some sort of evidence that the God of the Bible exists.
On the other hand, absolutely nothing I say will possibly convince you that an ancient civilization of Jews existed in North America, and that your conception of Heaven is surely false. You can’t be talked out of it, because you didn’t come to such a belief by the evidence — you believe it on faith — which, by definition, is a belief without evidence. You believe it because you feel that it’s true, more or less: you can’t give me any actual reason that I should believe it. It’s one of those things that you “just know”. Well, sorry. That makes for a poor reason for someone like me to convert.
August 9th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
Real knowledge should be objective and capable of being tested, demonstrated, and/or experimentally verified.
Therefore, I am agnostic, not atheist.
Alex,
A true atheist can disprove the existence of god(s), probably.
Can you?
August 9th, 2008 at 10:03 pm
that an ancient civilization of Jews existing in North America did not exist**
August 9th, 2008 at 10:05 pm
Real knowledge should be objective and capable of being tested, demonstrated, and/or experimentally verified. Therefore, I am agnostic, not atheist. Alex, A true atheist can disprove the existence of god(s), probably.
Can you?
If you want to get ultra-technical with me, you can consider me an agnostic, in the same way that I am agnostic as to the existence of leprechauns and unicorns: if you show me some evidence that they exist, I’ll believe in them. My mind isn’t closed to the possibility of the realm of the supernatural. But the default position is not to throw your hands up in the air and go “Well, I’ve got no idea, really!” The default position is lack of belief — unless you’d like to consider yourself “agnostic” on the subject of unicorns and dragons. Based on the definition you gave, you’d have to say that you are.
August 9th, 2008 at 10:06 pm
Alex, nothing we observe is capable of existing aseitically. All that we have observed is temporary and appears to require alien precursors. That’s because no substance we’ve observed can create surplus substance (conservation of mass/energy/momentum/quantumspin). I haven’t categorically rejected any religion. I can explain that further if you like.
What would it take to talk you out of Calvinism, out of curiosity? What made you accept Christianity and not Islam?
August 9th, 2008 at 10:07 pm
Abortion = 9
Business Regulations = 7
Death Penality = 5
Drugs = 10
Enviroment = 6
Gay Marriage = 8
Gun Control = 9
Health Care = 4
Immigration = 2
Judges = 10
Trade = 8
Social Security = 8
Taxes = 3
School Prayer = 4
Euthanasia = 10
Trade = 8
GWOT = 10
August 9th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Wow. This is why you don’t mix religion and politics…
August 9th, 2008 at 10:09 pm
Abortion: 10 (I am probably more extreme than most when it comes to protecting the lives of the unborn – Metro must hate me for this)
Business Regulation: 10
Death Penalty: 10 (we should execute more criminals for more crimes. There needs to be some real consequences for criminals to consider when they decide to commit their crimes)
Drugs: 4 (I’m pretty libertarian when it comes to drugs – if more were legalized there would “probably” be less crime associated with them [I'm talking about traffickers, dealers, gang wars])
Environment: 10
Gay Marriage: 2 (As long as the government is involved in marriage then it should be open to everyone.)
Gun Control: 8 (There are probably some guns that aren’t really necessary)
Health Care: Where would one rank a supporter of RomneyCare?
Immigration: 10 (yeah – I’m one of those)
Judges: 8
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 2 (let them die if they want to)
School Prayer: 8 (I think it should be allowed but not mandated)
Social Security: 10 (100% privatized – we should take care of those somewhere between 35 and 45 and beyond because they have already committed quite a bit. I think anyone under the age of 40 should be allowed to go completely private)
Taxes: 10 (taxes should only be collected to support the military and interstate commerce)
Trade: 7
The War Against Jihadism: 10 (we should do a lot more Special Ops/Assassinations wherever on the globe we damn well feel like)
August 9th, 2008 at 10:10 pm
137 – What on Earth are your guiding economic principles?
August 9th, 2008 at 10:15 pm
#135, “My mind isn’t closed to the possibility of the realm of the supernatural”.
Either is Doug with his God, he chooses to believe, just as you do with atheism .
Alex and Doug are not as far apart from each other in theory and approach, they have just drawn different conclusions.
August 9th, 2008 at 10:15 pm
140. The government should allow as much freedom and capitalism as possible without allowing people to starve or have miserable lives, unless they refuse to work.
August 9th, 2008 at 10:18 pm
I’ve got no interest in convincing an atheist or a non-Christian to believe as I do in religious matters. My interest is only in demonstrating that my beliefs are rational and not a sign of insanity. Also that we should respect the First Amendment. I have access to evidence I am not capable of sharing.
The new atheists share the same assumptions towards religious people that Inquisitors had towards heretics.
“You believe differently than my Church, therefore you must be inhabited by demons or influenced by Satan.”
“You believe in religion so you must be irrational and illogical.”
There’s an assumption there on the part of the atheist that they have access to all the evidence religious people have observed. It doesn’t occur to them that perhaps there are important elements others have observed and considered that they have not. The new atheism seems a bit arrogant to me in that it assume it’s believers are the most rational and intelligent people in the world. They even call themselves “brights”. It almost seems to me as if that is the point of the recent flavor of atheism.
August 9th, 2008 at 10:20 pm
Either is Doug with his God, he chooses to believe, just as you do with atheism . Alex and Doug are not as far apart from each other in theory and approach, they have just drawn different conclusions.
Doug pre-assumes a supernatural realm. He has absolutely no evidence that one exists.
I am 99.99% certain that there is no supernatural realm or any supernatural being, and 100% sure that all of the world’s religions are false, including Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and Hinduism.
It doesn’t add up that a supernatural realm exists, but, well, if you show me some evidence, I’ve got no problem with adjusting my viewpoint.
August 9th, 2008 at 10:23 pm
I’ve got no interest in convincing an atheist or a non-Christian to believe as I do in religious matters. My interest is only in demonstrating that my beliefs are rational and not a sign of insanity. Also that we should respect the First Amendment. I have access to evidence I am not capable of sharing.
Your beliefs are certainly not rational, but they’re more rational than most Christians’. Calvinism is the only logically sound form of Christianity (if you accept its other precepts). Free will and God’s omniscience are incompatible. Calvinists have solved that problem by being intellectually honest and saying — hey! Of course they are. There’s the elect and the non-elect.
There’s an assumption there on the part of the atheist that they have access to all the evidence religious people have observed. It doesn’t occur to them that perhaps there are important elements others have observed and considered that they have not. The new atheism seems a bit arrogant to me in that it assume it’s believers are the most rational and intelligent people in the world. They even call themselves “brights”. It almost seems to me as if that is the point of the recent flavor of atheism.
Ew. Please don’t associate me — or other clear-thinking atheists — with the idiotic Brights movement. It was enough to make me return my copy of Daniel Dennett’s “Breaking the Spell” to Borders. He mentioned that he considered himself a “bright” and I just thought — good grief, gag me with a knife and put me out of my misery. I exchanged the book for the much better “The Mystery of Capital” by Hernando de Soto.
August 9th, 2008 at 10:24 pm
Abortion: 10
Business Regulation: 8
Death Penalty: 6
Drugs: 9
Environment: 5
Gay Marriage: 10
Gun Control: 10
Health Care: 8
Immigration: 8
Judges: 10
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 10
School Prayer: 10
Social Security: 10
Taxes: 10
Trade: 10
The War Against Jihadism: 10
August 9th, 2008 at 10:24 pm
I haven’t come to a firm conclusion on what the government should do regarding making an even playing field. For example, whether or not the government aid should help to provide the same opportunity to a handicapped person as one who is well. On theory it seems like that might be fair. However, in practicality since everybody has different abilities, the government evening things out would probably lead to a great loss of individual freedom and to socialism. That’s why for now I’m just for a government keeping folks from starving and such.
August 9th, 2008 at 10:26 pm
Alex, why do you assume Christianity is false. I’m just curious how you know that with total certainty.
I didn’t think materialists believed in total certainty.
August 9th, 2008 at 10:29 pm
Lol. #144 is rather amusing following #143. Way to go Alex demonstrating his point.
Doug,
I agree completely with #143.
August 9th, 2008 at 10:29 pm
I’d also point out that to be a Calvinist (or Reformed) one must reject the theological concept of “Free Will”. Some other forms are consistent with the theology.
August 9th, 2008 at 10:29 pm
#145, Do you not believe that at least one deity exists? Something started…..this/us, originally?
August 9th, 2008 at 10:32 pm
Alex, why do you assume Christianity is false. I’m just curious how you know that with total certainty. I didn’t think materialists believed in total certainty.
Because the Bible contains several factually false statements and contradicts itself. A lot of the stories are borrowed from old myths, anyway, beginning right at the start with the Creation Story.
It’s all so obvious that Christianity and the Bible were invented by men, for men, to keep them in line. All of the moral precepts were obviously written for the people of the time, based upon the problems of the time. And how convenient that all one has to do to gain eternal life is to believe that Jesus is the Son of God — I mean, hell, you don’t even have to do anything. Just believe it and win the grand prize.
August 9th, 2008 at 10:33 pm
#152m you mean Mithrasism.
August 9th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
#145, Do you not believe that at least one deity exists? Something started…..this/us, originally?
No, because then that just opens a new set of questions — where did it come from? Where did it get the means and knowledge to create universes?
August 9th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
#154, you are a Darwinist?
August 9th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
“Your beliefs are certainly not rational, but they’re more rational than most Christians’. Calvinism is the only logically sound form of Christianity (if you accept its other precepts). Free will and God’s omniscience are incompatible. Calvinists have solved that problem by being intellectually honest and saying — hey! Of course they are. There’s the elect and the non-elect”
Free choice isn’t all that logical actually. From naturalistic perspective, I would say it probably makes more sense to be a determinist. However, I think the Bible implies choice. Choice is supernatural. As to God’s omniscience, I’m an open theist.
August 9th, 2008 at 10:38 pm
Alex, I don’t think you mention anything inconsistent with Christianity.
Of course I accept that the Bible contains myths especially the Creation Stories (there are more than one). I’m not aware of any factually false statement that are elements of the Nicene Creed.
August 9th, 2008 at 10:38 pm
Abortion: 5
Business Regulation: 8
Death Penalty: 5
Drugs: 7
Environment: 6
Gay Marriage: 3
Gun Control: 4
Health Care: 7
Immigration: 4
Judges: 8
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 1
School Prayer: 1
Social Security: 7
Taxes: 8
Trade: 9
The War Against Jihadism: 10
August 9th, 2008 at 10:46 pm
#154, you are a Darwinist?
Yes, I believe in evolution.
Of course I accept that the Bible contains myths especially the Creation Stories (there are more than one). I’m not aware of any factually false statement that are elements of the Nicene Creed.
If all that Christianity is to you is whatever the church has declared to be The Essential, then so be it, but Christianity is about more than the Nicene Creed.
August 9th, 2008 at 10:51 pm
Alex is saying,
“If an entity is not shown to be neccessary, then it is unneccessary.
If it is unneccessary, OR says it should not be included.”
“If you cannot offer a reason that God is neccessary, then God is unneccessary.
If God is unneccessary, do not include it.”
August 9th, 2008 at 10:51 pm
What is there of essential substance in Christianity besides the Nicene Creed?
August 9th, 2008 at 10:52 pm
Abortion: 10
Business Regulation: 10
Death Penalty: 5 (I can’t make up my mind on this one)
Drugs: 1
Environment: 10 (Not sure what the traditional Republican position on this is now, with McCain leading the party, but I’m going to go with the pre-McCain GOP position)
Gay Marriage: 2
Gun Control: 10
Health Care: 10
Immigration: 10
Judges: 10
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 1
School Prayer: 1 (assuming this is referring to teacher-led prayer)
Social Security: 10
Taxes: 11 (I’ll say 11 because I think the traditional GOP position is to just significantly lower taxes/reform the tax code, while I want to abolish the entire income tax and replace it with nothing–no national consumption tax, no flat tax, no VAT, nothing)
Trade: 10
The War Against Jihadism: 2 (get OBL and any other perpetrators of 9/11 and then get our asses out of all foreign countries)
—-
Btw, no education (i.e. school choice), size of government (i.e. federalism), or civil liberties (i.e. wiretapping, Patriot Act, etc.) options?
August 9th, 2008 at 10:53 pm
The thing is, through pure human logic you can’t prove that your whole isn’t a dream or figment of the imagination, let alone prove that a religion is false.
August 9th, 2008 at 10:55 pm
What is there of essential substance in Christianity besides the Nicene Creed?
Is the Bible accurate or is it not? Are some books of the Bible reliable, while others aren’t? By what metric will we determine this? Is the Bible a guide for living or isn’t it? If we’re going to determine how we should live on Earth based on the Bible, then I certainly want answers to questions such as those.
There is absolutely no evidence that Jesus was divine. Say what you will about the arguments for whether a supernatural realm exists — there is NO evidence of Jesus’ divinity. THAT is a statement of utter blind faith.
August 9th, 2008 at 10:56 pm
#162, Gingrich has an environmental position.
August 9th, 2008 at 10:56 pm
The thing is, through pure human logic you can’t prove that your whole isn’t a dream or figment of the imagination, let alone prove that a religion is false.
It is incredibly stupid to think that your existence is a figment of the imagination. A figment of your imagination? To have an imagination, mustn’t one exist?
August 9th, 2008 at 10:58 pm
Aw, Josiah, aren’t you going to follow Ron Paul off of the cliff on evolution? “It’s only a theory!”
August 9th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
#166,
Does the existence of the universe or any aspect of it necessitate God as an explanation?
August 9th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
166, Yes of course. But it could be ( by pure human logic) be that your existence and imagination is all there is to life, and that everyone else is a figment of the imagination.
August 9th, 2008 at 11:02 pm
Alex, you didn’t answer my question in #161.
I’d be glad to answer your questions after you answer mine.
August 9th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
Alex #167,
Evolution? Where’d that topic come from?
There are some things I absolutely disagree with Ron Paul on (religion & the NAU to name a couple).
August 9th, 2008 at 11:05 pm
Does the existence of the universe or any aspect of it necessitate God as an explanation?
Obviously I don’t think so, seeing as I am an atheist.
August 9th, 2008 at 11:06 pm
I’d be glad to answer your questions after you answer mine.
You’re right. I didn’t answer it!
Do you not consider following the Bible to be essential to Christianity?
August 9th, 2008 at 11:08 pm
#172, okay then, does the existence of the universe or any aspect of it necessitate an originating explanation?
August 9th, 2008 at 11:11 pm
132.
I wasn’t talking about my religion and yours. I could be talked out of mine, so far no one has shown me good enough reason, much like no one has shown you good enough reason. You make it sound like I am an ostrich with my head in the sand or something. As if I don’t read and think about my beliefs and how I arrive at them. That tends to be the foundation of your arguments.
Also, DNA researchers are starting to link the Hopewells to European markers (same markers which the Jewish people share.)
August 9th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
174 – Well, of course it does. Everything has an origin. We just don’t know precisely what the universe’s is. It certainly isn’t the Christian god.
August 9th, 2008 at 11:14 pm
#175 Jason, I was thinking of having my mitochondrial DNA analyzed (for my son, so he knows his blood and history). What do you think? Is the science accurate enough?
August 9th, 2008 at 11:15 pm
My point about the Hopewells is not that that’s what I think or that I am hanging on it, but rather, I wouldn’t be caught making such strong statements based upon 4 year old science.
August 9th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
#176, “It certainly isn’t the Christian god”. Probably not, but you cannot be certain, yes?
August 9th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
Kristofer,
I am not a DNA scientist, although I do play one on TV.
August 9th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
“We just don’t know precisely what the universe’s is. It certainly isn’t the Christian god.”
And once again you show off your arrogance. Either you know or you don’t know.
August 9th, 2008 at 11:25 pm
#164.
I cannot see your brain right now, nor do I have evidence that one exists…
Conclusion – You must not have a brain?
That is your logic.
August 9th, 2008 at 11:27 pm
“I am not a DNA scientist, although I do play one on TV.”
Huh????? Please expalin?
August 9th, 2008 at 11:31 pm
I put together a spreadsheet of the results in truncated form. Because I am thoroughly lazy, and because I wanted to deal with the “three-legged stool” question, I dealt with three SoCon questions (abortion, gay marriage, and euthanasia), three Econ questions (biz regulation, taxes, trade), and the only military question (the war).
The results:
* We are, on average, moderately conservative on social issues (6.1), and fairly strongly conservative on econ and defense (8.4 each).
If we assume that 1-3 = Liberal, 4-7 Moderate, and 8-10 Conservative, then the heavy majority of us are conservative on economics (39 Con, 10 Mod) and defense (36 Con, 7 Mod, 6 Lib), but we are very split on social issues (20 Con, 19 Mod, 10 Lib).
The reason I was interested in this was that Act said last night that “the overwealming majority of the GOP is conservative, socially, economically, and militarilly.”
I answered that this seemed unlikely, and asked for proof (to which I got no reply). My guess was that most Republicans are conservative on two of the three and willing to compromise on the other leg.
Of the 49 responses, only 9 qualify as conservative on all three points.
Obviously, this is not scientific, but until I’m offered some contrary evidence, I’ll continue to assume that there are relatively few “three-legged stool” Republicans.
August 9th, 2008 at 11:32 pm
David #182,
Some group of Scandinavian pig-skinners says that there’s a giant, invisible celestial teapot orbiting the sun in between the orbits of Mercury and Venus.
Conclusion – the celestial teapot exists.
That is your logic.
August 9th, 2008 at 11:33 pm
Online Republicans are little like the broader group.
August 9th, 2008 at 11:35 pm
183, I was just joking. I have no idea about DNA testing and exactly how valid it is for the kind of testing you are looking for. I do know that the DNA evidence that Alex uses to argue with, is 4 years old and already emerging into different directions.
August 9th, 2008 at 11:38 pm
Doug: I agree, though my guess is that we are probably more conservative than average. In any case, I would be delighted to receive contrary data on all Republicans, if Act can provide it.
August 9th, 2008 at 11:38 pm
ah okay, I was wondering, because their is an actor name Jason Bonham.
I knew you were joking, but you referenced mitochondrial DNA testing, so……
August 9th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
Alex, does #173 mean you think someone has to follow the Bible to be Christian?
August 9th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
“Scandinavian pig-skinners”??
August 9th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
#118, here is polling for the country as a whole. http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=548
August 9th, 2008 at 11:43 pm
#185.
Well hell, if the pig-skinners want to believe that, good for them. I think you understand the point. Not everything needs to be proven, no one will PROVE God exists NOR will they PROVE he does not exist.
August 9th, 2008 at 11:44 pm
Abortion: 10
Business Regulation: 9
Death Penalty: 8
Drugs: 8
Environment: 8
Gay Marriage: 10
Gun Control: 8
Health Care: 7
Immigration: 9
Judges: 10
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 9
School Prayer: 9
Social Security: 8
Taxes: 9
Trade: 8
The War Against Jihadism: 10
August 9th, 2008 at 11:45 pm
189. Actually JAson Bonham is a drummer, son of John Bonham, the drummer from Led Zeplin. We even share the same middle name.
No, I really don’t spend much time thing about DNA, it is pretty boring, and I am not going to hang up myself over a science that is new and it’s beginnings.
But I am sure for your son it would be interesting and a good scientific learning experience.
August 9th, 2008 at 11:49 pm
$195, Yeah, I am going for it, I am just worried the mitochondrial DNA will show I am a decendent of Scandinavian pig-skinners.
August 9th, 2008 at 11:55 pm
David #193,
And no one will PROVE faeries exists NOR will they PROVE they do not exist.
Just as no one will PROVE Zeus exists NOR will they PROVE he does not exist.
Or Vishnu.
Or the Great Juju of the Mountain.
Or the celestial teapot.
August 9th, 2008 at 11:55 pm
Careful or you might wake up one day to your lands being raided and your home being pillaged by us Scandinavians…
August 10th, 2008 at 12:00 am
Josiah
ding,ding,ding!
We have a winner!
Thanks for making my point.
August 10th, 2008 at 12:02 am
be careful guys, we discovered water on Mars….some answers may come quicker than you expect.
August 10th, 2008 at 12:02 am
Although, I can prove Zeus exists…
August 10th, 2008 at 12:02 am
#197, I don’t know of many men in middle life that wake up one morning and believe in Zeus. I know of quite a few former atheists.
August 10th, 2008 at 12:15 am
#202 Doug,
Go back a couple millenia or so.
August 10th, 2008 at 12:33 am
I’m not aware that mid-life conversion to Zeus worship was common then either. I think when a reasonable person converts you ought not to respond with arrogance and a superior attitude. Alex may not associate with the Brights movement but I see the same attitude among the young atheists like him.
Atheists of an earlier generation didn’t start at smugness and move onto insults while attempting conversion to that opinion.
August 10th, 2008 at 12:46 am
#204 Doug,
The fact that American men having mid-life crises often fall on Christianity as a crutch has no bearing whatsoever on the question of whether God exists. God’s existence being more desirable does NOT = God’s existence being more real.
Arrogance and a superior attitude? Isn’t that the essence of religion? “I know how to talk to God and you don’t”? “I’m going to heaven and you’re going to hell”? “I know far more about the mysteries of the cosmos than those silly little scientists could ever discover”?
August 10th, 2008 at 1:08 am
Josiah
I can see where your coming from. There are people that want to put themselves on a higher level, people who want to profit financially, and others that want to be seen by others as spiritual or chosen.
For every one of those people, there is another who truly tries to help others and to become a better person. Not because of what others will think, but because they believe in God and that everyone is of great worth. That is the essence of religion.
August 10th, 2008 at 1:12 am
#206 David,
I’m not questioning that religion causes some people to do good deeds. I’m just saying that that doesn’t make the proposition “God exists” any more true.
August 10th, 2008 at 1:16 am
I love how atheists are called smug and arrogant, while Doug is proclaiming, at the same time, that he knows what the infinite truth of the universe is and that his god has already determined the entire fate of my life. To belittle a lack of faith is perfectly acceptable, to tell someone that their love is sinful is acceptable, but to suggest that faith — belief without evidence — is inherently irrational, is arrogant? Why?
August 10th, 2008 at 1:17 am
I’m not aware that mid-life conversion to Zeus worship was common then either.
What in hell does that have to do with the validity of the proposition?
August 10th, 2008 at 1:22 am
What do Mormons and OJ Simpson jurors have in common? They’re the only people on the planet who refuse to accept a little thing called “DNA evidence”.
August 10th, 2008 at 1:32 am
#210 sampo,
Since 1978, they can both become LDS priests!
August 10th, 2008 at 2:20 am
Alex: “I love how atheists are called smug and arrogant, while Doug is proclaiming, at the same time, that he knows what the infinite truth of the universe is and that his god has already determined the entire fate of my life.”
Alex, I’d prefer if you stop lying about me. I’ve not proclaimed that I know what the infinite truth of the Universe is. I don’t know that tidbit. I also haven’t proclaimed that God has determined the entire fate of your life. That’s not information that I possess. I’d prefer if you’d ask me questions instead of assuming something and then lying about me.
Alex, your lying is making it hard for me to take what you write seriously.
August 10th, 2008 at 2:23 am
Sampo,
When did this thread get to be about Mormons? Perhaps you should ask what you and Josiah have in common? Doesn’t look like its anything good.
August 10th, 2008 at 2:50 am
Actually Jason Bonham brought it up. Unfortunately it’s past his bed time.
August 10th, 2008 at 3:06 am
#213 Mcon,
We’re both anti-racism?
Besides, since when is Mormonism above a little ribbing?
August 10th, 2008 at 8:19 am
Actually Sampo,
You missed my comment here where I note there is now some DNA evidence in favor of the BOM.
What does Sampo and John Edwards have in common? Neither are honest with themselves.
And Actually, it was Alex who brought Mormons into this. I never mentioned it.
What do Sampo and 4 year-olds in common? Neither can read.
August 10th, 2008 at 9:39 am
Abortion:9
Business Regulation:9
Death Penalty:9
Drugs:6
Environment:8
Gay Marriage:10
Gun Control:10
Health Care:9
Immigration:10
Judges:10
Right to Die/Euthanasia:6
School Prayer:8
Social Security:9
Taxes:10
Trade:9
August 10th, 2008 at 10:05 am
#210.
Sampo I like playing childish games too…
Guess who else doesn’t believe in DNA evidence…
<<>>
Oh…
Next week we can play your momma is so fat games.
August 10th, 2008 at 10:59 am
Alex and other new atheists don’t seem to understand that Christians in general don’t view the Bible with the same narrow-minded fanaticism as they do. Sure, there are some crazy groups, but what movement doesn’t have it’s share of morons? Some Muslims, IIRC, believe that Mohammed got word-by-word instructions from God when he wrote the Koran. Christians have never viewed it that way. The Bible is not a detailed step-by-step operations manual which you have to follow to the letter, without interpreting anything. You say your mother believes in Amyism because her opinions on what a Christian should think doesn’t match yours. But who made you the ultimate arbiter of what Christianity is? One might as well say that what you are criticising is not Christianity, but rather Alexism.
August 10th, 2008 at 11:34 am
David,
What’s funny, is that people use the DNA argument against the BoM are generally the same people who never agree to it when used on their own religion. Even the people who paid for the initial studies into DNA linkages to the BoM are the same group of people that bash DNA evidence for evolution.
It’s a convenient sword, as demonstrated by the fact that everyone here seems to ignore the Hopewell Indians (again I am not using this as evidence of a link, just a wrench in the works for people who use DNA evidence to discount the BoM). But then this is a political blog, not an academic blog, what can one expect?
August 10th, 2008 at 11:36 am
Abortion: 4
Business Regulation: 9
Death Penalty: 7
Drugs: 5
Environment: 8
Gay Marriage: 6
Gun Control: 8
Health Care: 8
Immigration: 7
Judges: 7
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 1
School Prayer: 1
Social Security: 8
Taxes: 9
Trade: 9
The War Against Jihadism: 10+
August 10th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
Abortion: 3
Business Regulation: 10
Death Penalty: 10
Drugs: 1
Environment: 5
Gay Marriage: 1
Gun Control: 8
Health Care: 10
Immigration: 7
Judges: 7
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 3
School Prayer: 1
Social Security: 10
Taxes: 10
Trade: 10 (conservatives are for free trade, right?)
The War Against Jihadism: 10
August 10th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
“Trade: 10 (conservatives are for free trade, right?)”
These days, the answer frequently seems to be “Yes, but …”
August 10th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Abortion: 3
Business Regulation: 8
Death Penalty: 7
Drugs: 2
Environment: 10
Gay Marriage: 3
Gun Control: 9
Health Care: 9
Immigration: 6
Judges: 9
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 6
School Prayer: 3
Social Security: 10
Taxes: 9
Trade: 10
The War Against Jihadism: 10
August 10th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
I agree a lot with #11. Double that order.
August 10th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Abortion: 3
Business Regulation: 9
Death Penalty: 6
Drugs: 1
Environment: 7
Gay Marriage: 2
Gun Control: 9
Health Care: 9
Immigration: 5
Judges: 6
Right-to-Die: 3
School Prayer: 2
Taxes: 10
Trade: 9
War On Jihadism: 7
August 10th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
Missed one above:
Social Security: 10
August 12th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Abortion: 4
Business Regulation: 8
Death Penalty: 8
Drugs: 3
Environment: 8
Gay Marriage: 3
Gun Control: 8
Health Care: 8
Immigration: 7
Judges: 7
Right to Die/Euthanasia: 2
School Prayer: 3
Social Security: 7
Taxes: 8
Trade: 8
The War Against Jihadism: 7