Comments on: Point 4 update http://deanesmay.com/2008/11/06/point-4-update/ Defending the liberal tradition in history, science, and philosophy. Wed, 23 May 2012 12:36:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: jrogge http://deanesmay.com/2008/11/06/point-4-update/#comment-165126 jrogge Sun, 09 Nov 2008 16:46:25 +0000 http://deanesmay.com/2008/11/06/point-4-update/#comment-165126 I agree with everything here. Freedom from legislation should not only be limited to the markets, but also to the individual. Spirituality is a personal thing and everyone has their own sense of self and the universe, regardless of religious doctrine. Legislation of morality is also big government. The Neo-Conservative movement has made many mistakes and it is time for a commitment to the ideal of freedom and a government that does not hinder the American from becoming what they can become. I am hoping that the Republican party becomes the very thing that made me want to be a Republican when I was younger, and strays away from what made me stop liking the Republican party. This has been a long time comin' and there's good times ahead for America. I agree with everything here. Freedom from legislation should not only be limited to the markets, but also to the individual. Spirituality is a personal thing and everyone has their own sense of self and the universe, regardless of religious doctrine. Legislation of morality is also big government. The Neo-Conservative movement has made many mistakes and it is time for a commitment to the ideal of freedom and a government that does not hinder the American from becoming what they can become. I am hoping that the Republican party becomes the very thing that made me want to be a Republican when I was younger, and strays away from what made me stop liking the Republican party.

This has been a long time comin’ and there’s good times ahead for America.

]]> By: Keith Stauffer http://deanesmay.com/2008/11/06/point-4-update/#comment-165013 Keith Stauffer Fri, 07 Nov 2008 14:53:11 +0000 http://deanesmay.com/2008/11/06/point-4-update/#comment-165013 Aziz, I didn't say all members were keen to impose their values, but a sizable number of them would legislate their doctrine into law, and they have been the bread and butter of the party as a whole.  What I'm saying is that the party needs to quit pandering to that group; it's just bad for them politically.  They would do better to be agnostic to faith.  Their image is one of exclusion to people who are not conservative Christians, and that has to change.  They must distance themselves from that wing of the party if they want to change their image.  Mind you, that's not a small task and it will take a few cycles to do it, but I believe it must be done. That said, there is absolutely nothing wrong with Christian conservatives being members of either party.  I'm certainly not advocating a form of religious discrimination against Christians or any other faith by any party.  I simply believe that the focus on that group by the Republican party seems exclusive to people from all walks who may not share some or all of the Christian conservative values. I believe a commitment to smaller government, personal freedom, fair taxation and protection of The People's right to worship as they see fit (personal freedom) is more attractive than what we've seen over the last several years, which often has the appearance of pandering to a segment of the religious spectrum.  In short, yes, more Libertarian. Aziz,

I didn’t say all members were keen to impose their values, but a sizable number of them would legislate their doctrine into law, and they have been the bread and butter of the party as a whole.  What I’m saying is that the party needs to quit pandering to that group; it’s just bad for them politically.  They would do better to be agnostic to faith.  Their image is one of exclusion to people who are not conservative Christians, and that has to change.  They must distance themselves from that wing of the party if they want to change their image.  Mind you, that’s not a small task and it will take a few cycles to do it, but I believe it must be done.

That said, there is absolutely nothing wrong with Christian conservatives being members of either party.  I’m certainly not advocating a form of religious discrimination against Christians or any other faith by any party.  I simply believe that the focus on that group by the Republican party seems exclusive to people from all walks who may not share some or all of the Christian conservative values.

I believe a commitment to smaller government, personal freedom, fair taxation and protection of The People’s right to worship as they see fit (personal freedom) is more attractive than what we’ve seen over the last several years, which often has the appearance of pandering to a segment of the religious spectrum.  In short, yes, more Libertarian.

]]> By: Bryan Lovely http://deanesmay.com/2008/11/06/point-4-update/#comment-165007 Bryan Lovely Fri, 07 Nov 2008 09:28:48 +0000 http://deanesmay.com/2008/11/06/point-4-update/#comment-165007 Keith, I made pretty much the same point in my (brand new) <a href="http://www.lovelys.com/blog" rel="nofollow">blog</a>. The GOP needs to shift away from the social cons and toward the libertarians -- not fully, as I think pretty much everyone agrees that *some* government will always be necessary. The social cons scare centrist voters (especially women like my wife) with their inferred desire to impose their values on everyone, especially on abortion but also on freedom of religion and sexual mores. I think the GOP can and should make the case that economic and personal liberty coupled with a smaller government focused on its proper tasks will increase prosperity across the board; and while GOP politicians might privately agree with the social cons, they will renounce as a matter of policy any attempt to legislate their values against those who disagree. The social cons will be free to make their case to the public to *deplore* those things they don't like and if they are successful to delegitimize those things, but the Republican Party will no longer be in the business of legislating morality. <em>Bryan Lovely's last blog post..<a href='http://lovelys.com/blog/2008/11/musings-on-the-election/' rel="nofollow">Musings on the Election</a></em> Keith, I made pretty much the same point in my (brand new) blog. The GOP needs to shift away from the social cons and toward the libertarians — not fully, as I think pretty much everyone agrees that *some* government will always be necessary. The social cons scare centrist voters (especially women like my wife) with their inferred desire to impose their values on everyone, especially on abortion but also on freedom of religion and sexual mores. I think the GOP can and should make the case that economic and personal liberty coupled with a smaller government focused on its proper tasks will increase prosperity across the board; and while GOP politicians might privately agree with the social cons, they will renounce as a matter of policy any attempt to legislate their values against those who disagree. The social cons will be free to make their case to the public to *deplore* those things they don’t like and if they are successful to delegitimize those things, but the Republican Party will no longer be in the business of legislating morality.

Bryan Lovely’s last blog post..Musings on the Election

]]> By: Aziz Poonawalla http://deanesmay.com/2008/11/06/point-4-update/#comment-164984 Aziz Poonawalla Thu, 06 Nov 2008 23:37:21 +0000 http://deanesmay.com/2008/11/06/point-4-update/#comment-164984 I think you're being <strike>a bit</strike> unfair to the Christian Right here. Not all members of the Christian Right, or the Religious Right, are keen to impose their values on others. It's true that there is a cadre of political social conservative extremists like Falwell, Dobson, etc but they don't speak for the entirety of the religious conservative movement. In fact <a href="http://blog.beliefnet.com/cityofbrass/2008/10/brian-mclaren-endorses-obama.html" rel="nofollow">here's just one example</a>. I think you’re being a bit unfair to the Christian Right here. Not all members of the Christian Right, or the Religious Right, are keen to impose their values on others. It’s true that there is a cadre of political social conservative extremists like Falwell, Dobson, etc but they don’t speak for the entirety of the religious conservative movement. In fact here’s just one example.

]]> By: Keith Stauffer http://deanesmay.com/2008/11/06/point-4-update/#comment-164981 Keith Stauffer Thu, 06 Nov 2008 22:41:25 +0000 http://deanesmay.com/2008/11/06/point-4-update/#comment-164981 I'd like to hear a commitment to get out of the business of policing people's personal lives and would instead like to see the Republicans champion personal liberties.  Defense of gun rights, choice and other personal freedoms would go a long way with me.  I think it's time to stop pandering to the Christian Right.  The Christian Right can support Republican or Democratic candidates that support their beliefs or form their own party.  But I think the tide has shifted in America on many of those social issues.  A majority of Americans believe their social liberties should be protected, not dictated by thumpers.  At the very least, those not expressly protected by the Constitution should be left to the states, not prohibited through an amendment. I also think a real strategy for energy independence that includes renewable sources alongside more traditional ones,  along with embracing technology would endear the Republican party to younger voters.  Get out of people's lives and pocket books and defend the country by eliminating our dependencies on others.  But keep that big stick, and don't give up the leverage we've one on the world stage by taking an isolationist attitude in the face of authoritarian regimes. I’d like to hear a commitment to get out of the business of policing people’s personal lives and would instead like to see the Republicans champion personal liberties.  Defense of gun rights, choice and other personal freedoms would go a long way with me.  I think it’s time to stop pandering to the Christian Right. 

The Christian Right can support Republican or Democratic candidates that support their beliefs or form their own party.  But I think the tide has shifted in America on many of those social issues.  A majority of Americans believe their social liberties should be protected, not dictated by thumpers.  At the very least, those not expressly protected by the Constitution should be left to the states, not prohibited through an amendment.

I also think a real strategy for energy independence that includes renewable sources alongside more traditional ones,  along with embracing technology would endear the Republican party to younger voters.  Get out of people’s lives and pocket books and defend the country by eliminating our dependencies on others.  But keep that big stick, and don’t give up the leverage we’ve one on the world stage by taking an isolationist attitude in the face of authoritarian regimes.

]]>