Explain Conservatism

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
So you believe in conserving the teachings of God (the role of government, legislating His moral laws, etc.) as seen in Holy Scripture? Congratulations, you're a conservative!

Stoned any homos lately?

And add more bodies to the LGBTQ culture of death?

Besides, Jesus rescinded the death penalty for sexual sins in the New Testament.

Islam is another story...
 

drbrumley

Well-known member
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
So you believe in conserving the teachings of God (the role of government, legislating His moral laws, etc.) as seen in Holy Scripture? Congratulations, you're a conservative!



And add more bodies to the LGBTQ culture of death?

Besides, Jesus rescinded the death penalty for sexual sins in the New Testament.

Islam is another story...
Ok, then please explain how you intend to not add to the body count..

I agree that homosexuality is a sin. An abomination..

You want the government to arrest, convict, and throw in jail anyone who goes against Gods moral law.

Murder is already on the books. Theft (unless your the government) is already on the books.. countless other crimes that goes against Gods moral law are on the books..



Sent from my SM-G920V using TOL mobile app
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Explain Conservatism.

I did. How about you try and rebut that...

Asking a Libertarian to explain conservativism?

I found your explanation a few pages back:

Quote: Originally posted by drbrumley:

A Conservative is one who believes the Supreme Court, the president, the House, the Senate, governors, mayors and everybody else strictly follows the Constitution.

I can point out many a democrat who believe in the above.

A Conservative rejects wars, except in defense of the land and the people. War is to be declared by both houses of Congress. Fighting an undeclared war is wrong, even if we fight to liberate them from bad guys.

So those that don't acknowledge the Muslim threat against western civilization and refuse to address it through force aren't true conservatives. Thanks for acknowledging that.

A Conservative rejects Foreign aid. The Constitution does not provide for such arraignments.

The Constitution doesn't address a lot of issues, like Ron Paul embracing kiddy porn.

http://ronpaulquotes.com/concordance/pornography.html

A Conservative doesn't believe the Constitution is a living document. A conservative believes it is a contract between the States and the Federal Government. The States are the leaders, not the Federal Government. Under this heading, we have the issues of morality and justice. It is the states responsibility to legislate what is permitted in their own territory. Liberals and other authoritarians tend to see this as "states right's" vs. "Federal jurisdiction." So called "social conservatives" as our good friend ACW here, do not believe this to be the case.


So slavery, buggery, murdering unborn children, etc. etc. etc. should be a "states rights issue"?

A Conservative does not believe the federal government is authorized to provide welfare, health care, housing or education.

I love it when you Libertarians borrow off of Judeo/Christian doctrine.

A Conservative believes in traditional values.

Hence the reason Libertarians can NEVER call themselves "conservative".
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
And add more bodies to the LGBTQ culture of death?

Besides, Jesus rescinded the death penalty for sexual sins in the New Testament.

Islam is another story...


Ok, then please explain how you intend to not add to the body count..

Already done in a 4 part thread on the recriminalization of homosexuality.

I agree that homosexuality is a sin. An abomination..

You want the government to arrest, convict, and throw in jail anyone who goes against Gods moral law.

In other words you want no laws against sexual perversion. Does that make you a anarchist drbumley?

What about this post?
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ized!-Part-4&p=4417560&viewfull=1#post4417560

You believe that homosexuals should be put to death.

Murder is already on the books.

60 million unborn babies that were murdered in the womb in a 44 year period here in the US would disagree with you.

Theft (unless your the government) is already on the books..

Back to the subject of the government providing housing, healthcare, etc. etc. for those who engage in homosexuality and need government services because of it.

Where's your compassion for the people that Libertarian godless ideology helps destroy?
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
So slavery, buggery, murdering unborn children, etc. etc. etc. should be a state's rights issue?.

It already is. Or do you deny that?

The Founding Fathers never even came close to uttering words that immoral behavior is a "states rights issue".

Besides, Roe v Wade, Lawrence v Texas and Obergefell v Hodges says differently.
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
The Founding Fathers never even came close to uttering words that immoral behavior is a "states rights issue".

That just shows your naive.

Yeah, I must have misinterpreted John Adams' quote:

"Our Constitution is made only for a moral and religious people".

On that note: You've once again trounced me in debate, so I'm going to run off with my tail between my legs.
 

ClimateSanity

New member
There are still conservatives, but they no longer have a place in the republican party. Jeff Flake has a 97% rating from the American Conservative Union. He's unelectable in Trump's party.

If conservatives want a party, they have to either revolt and remove Trump, or they need to leave and start a new one.
Matt Schlapp , president of the American conservative union had this to say about Jeff Flake:

The former political director for George W. Bush went on to discuss what he believes to be the devolvement of the conservative credentials of Senator Flake.

“I would say to these guys, Jeff Flake started out with a really strong American Conservative Union Congressional rating when he was in the House. He moved to the Senate, it started to lower. Now he’s in the 70’s,” Schlapp pointed out.

“He is really off his game. I think it’s inappropriate for him to say that he speaks for conservatives with this new book.”
 

Lon

Well-known member
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
What values would those be? That innocent life is sacred? No, he signed legislation 3 times in his first 9 months in office to fund Planned Parenthood. Marriage? No, in his first weeks in office he said that "Obergefell v Hodges is the laws of the land" and hired a Supreme Court Justice that said the same thing.
Trump has surrounded himself with lifelong democrats and pseudo conservatives.



What exactly is the flip flopper conserving and what good is it if he can't get the basics of conservatism right?

But he wasn't Hillary, right?
Planned Parenthood Funded because no Federal $ goes to abortion
yet Federal money withheld from abortion providers
AND a package that helps hurricane victims




Except that you said this in an earlier post, which sounds like an endorsement to me
WHICH 'sounds like' you'd rather have Hilary than Trump :think: That's all we are talking about at this point.



Clinton and Trump are both LGBTQ flag wavers who agree on redefining marriage and allowing openly homosexual men and women in the US Military as well funding the baby butchers at Planned Parenthood, could you point out some "conservative bills" that Donald Trump has signed that separates him from the democrats?
:think: Clinton repealed Obama's Transgender in military and bathrooms...


I was in dozens of political threads here on TOL during the Presidential primaries and I swear I didn't see you endorsing Ted Cruz. Could you pull up an old post of yours showing that?
No. Do your own TOL search.

What exactly does "then went Tennessee" mean?
All Presidential candidates 2016 election

Oh and Lon: "Explain Conservatism".
No.
 

jgarden

BANNED
Banned
b3fd6e8d12885252845a5e3748c730c6.jpg


One who deceives will always find those who allow themselves to be deceived.
- Niccolo Machiavelli

In politics stupidity is not a handicap.
- Napoleon Bonaparte

A conservative believes nothing should be done for the first time.
- Thomas Fuller

The point is that you can't be too greedy.
- Donald Trump

The first method for estimating the intelligence of a ruler is to look at the men he has around him.
- Niccolo Machiavelli

If you wish to be a success in the world, promise everything, deliver nothing.
- Napoleon Bonaparte

The conspicuously wealthy turn up urging the character building values of the privation of the poor.
- John Kenneth Galbraith

Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.
- John Maynard Keynes

https://www.brainyquote.com/topics/conservative
 
Last edited:

Lon

Well-known member
Anti-rich? What if you won the lottery? I think I could have been rich, wasn't on my agenda. About anybody in Haiti or the Philippines would trade places with the poorest American. Mexicans too, come to think of it. :think:
One who deceives will always find those who allow themselves to be deceived.
- Niccolo Machiavelli
What is he telling us we didn't already know? :idunno:

In politics stupidity is not a handicap.
- Napoleon Bonaparte
Is stupidity ever a handicap when 'learn' is the cure? :idunno:
A conservative believes nothing should be done for the first time.
- Thomas Fuller
Right. It is a taxpayer cost risk. Show me it works, THEN use taxpayer money some of mine, a LOT someone elses.
The point is that you can't be too greedy.
- Donald Trump
You probably mean it different than he did. He meant you shouldn't be too greedy. :think:

The first method for estimating the intelligence of a ruler is to look at the men he has around him.
- Niccolo Machiavelli
:think: Most with degrees? Yeah, the 'liberal' side always tries to do the 'smarter' comparison. We really don't care about it until a liberal tries to taut that he is smarter than the average bear.
If you wish to be a success in the world, promise everything, deliver nothing.
- Napoleon Bonaparte
So be a politician, any kind? :think:

The conspicuously wealthy turn up urging the character building values of the privation of the poor.
- John Kenneth Galbraith
Canadian, dead now. Have no idea which 'character building values' quotes he is referring to, but I'm pretty sure, being dead since 2006, this is a dated and unusable quote any longer.

Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.
- John Maynard Keynes
English. Dead since 1946. Capitalism is supply/demand and benefitting both with 'have.' I'll take it over Communism and Socialism any day, especially when any of those entrepreneurs give back, what most of them already gained fairly and mutually.

I wonder 'who' actually collated this section. :think:
It is easier to address without worrying about offense to you in particular though, Jg. :e4e: -Lon
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Clinton and Trump are both LGBTQ flag wavers who agree on redefining marriage and allowing openly homosexual men and women in the US Military as well funding the baby butchers at Planned Parenthood, could you point out some "conservative bills" that Donald Trump has signed that separates him from the democrats?

Clinton repealed Obama's Transgender in military and bathrooms...

Yet Trump is still allowing the LGB of the LGBT acronym in the US Military. Besides, I pointed out in my WHMBR! Part 4 thread that it was a financial decision (genital mutilation surgery is costly) not a moral one.

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
I was in dozens of political threads here on TOL during the Presidential primaries and I swear I didn't see you endorsing Ted Cruz. Could you pull up an old post of yours showing that?

No. Do your own TOL search.

Caught in yet another lie?

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Oh and Lon: "Explain Conservatism".


Because you don't know what it is. I admire you for knowing your limitations Lon.
 

Lon

Well-known member
Caught in yet another lie?
Not 'again' even :plain: Do you just like alienating people or offending them unnecessarily?
SURLEY you don't think I lied either time. Why the accusation then? Can't you carry on a normal conversation
with people who have generally been friendly to you in the past?


Because you don't know what it is. I admire you for knowing your limitations Lon.
Thanks, AC

False charges
Thanks, CS
 

Gary K

New member
Banned
I love how people will quote someone like John Maynard Keynes as an authoritative moral source. I don't think I can up with someone who might possibly more immoral than Keynes. The man was a moral slimeball.

The quotes come from Murray Rothbard's book, Keynes the Man, that is available from Mises.org as a free download. It is published under the Creative Commons License.

In our opinion, one of the greatest advantages of his [Moore’s] religion was that it made morals unnecessary. … We entirely repudiated a personal liability on us to obey general rules. We claimed the right to judge every individual case on its merits, and the wisdom to do so successfully. This was a very important part of our faith, violently and aggressively held, and for the outer world it was our most obvious and dangerous characteristic. We repudiated entirely customary morals, conventions and traditional wisdom. We were, that is to say, in the strict sense of the term, immoralists. (Keynes [1951] 1972, pp. 142–43)

I remain and always will remain an immoralist” (Harrod 1951, pp. 76–81; Skidelsky 1983, pp. 145–46; Welch 1986, p. 43).

One striking illustration of Maynard Keynes’s unjustified arrogance and intellectual irresponsibility was his reaction to Ludwig von Mises’s brilliant and pioneering Treatise on Money and Credit, published in German in 1912. Keynes had recently been made the editor of Britain’s leading scholarly economic periodical, Cambridge University’s Economic Journal. He reviewed Mises’s book, giving it short shrift. The book, he wrote condescendingly, had “considerable merit” and was “enlightened,” and its author was definitely “widely read,” but Keynes expressed his disappointment that the book was neither “constructive” nor “original” (Keynes 1914). This brusque reaction managed to kill any interest in Mises’s book in Great Britain, and Money and Credit remained untranslated for two fateful decades.
The peculiar point about Keynes’s review is that Mises’s book was highly constructive and systematic, as well as remarkably original. How could Keynes not have seen that? This puzzle was cleared up a decade and a half later, when, in a footnote to his own Treatise on Money, Keynes impishly admitted that “in German, I can only clearly understand what I already know—so that new ideas are apt to be veiled from me by the difficulties of the language” (Keynes 1930a: I, p. 199 n.2). Such unmitigated gall. This was Keynes to the hilt: to review a book in a language where he was incapable of grasping new ideas, and then to attack that book for not containing anything new, is the height of arrogance and irresponsibility.4 (quoted from Murray Rothbard's Keynes the Man)

“I find economics increasingly satisfactory, and I think I am rather good at it. I want to manage a railroad or organise a Trust or at least swindle the investing public” (Harrod 1951, p. 111). This was written to a friend of Keynes in a letter in 1905

Where did Keynes stand on overt fascism? From the scattered information now available, it should come as no surprise that Keynes was an enthusiastic advocate of the “enterprising spirit” of Sir Oswald Mosley, the founder and leader of British fascism, in calling for a comprehensive “national economic plan” in late 1930. By 1933, Virginia Woolf was writing to a close friend that she feared Keynes was in the process of converting her to “a form of fascism” In the same year, in calling for national self-sufficiency through state control, Keynes opined that “Mussolini, perhaps, is acquiring wisdom teeth” (Keynes 1930b, 1933, p. 766; Johnson and Johnson 1978, p. 22; on the relationship between Keynes and Mosley, see Skidelsky 1975, pp. 241, 305–6; Mosley 1968, pp. 178, 207, 237–38, 253; Cross 1963, pp. 35–36).
But the most convincing evidence of Keynes’s strong fascist bent was the special foreword he prepared for the German edition of The General Theory. This German translation, published in late 1936, included a special introduction for the benefit of Keynes’s German readers and for the Nazi regime under which it was published. Not surprisingly, Harrod’s idolatrous Life of Keynes makes no mention of this introduction, although it was included two decades later in volume seven of the Collected Writings along with forewords to the Japanese and French editions.
The German introduction, which has scarcely received the benefit of extensive commentary by Keynesian exegetes, includes the following statements by Keynes:
Nevertheless the theory of output as a whole, which is what the following book purports to provide, is much more easily adapted to the conditions of a totalitarian state, than is the theory of production and distribution of a given output produced under conditions of free competition and a lance measure of laissez-faire. (Keynes 1973 [1936], p. xxvi. Cf. Martin 1971, pp. 200–5; Hazlitt [1959] 1973, p. 277; Brunner 1987, pp. 38ff.) (quoted from Murray Rothbard's Keynes the Man)

The following is especially for you, ACW. Since you quote him as an authority on wickedness I thought this was very appropriate for you to read.

The first two chapters of Murray Rothbard's book speak to Keynes' morality. He held that homosexuality was far superior heterosexuality. And he actively pursued a life of bi-sexuality. The Apostolic confrontation in the second paragraph that follows is a reference to a secret society that Keynes belonged to called The Apostles. They were a group from Kings and Trinity Colleges, mostly, that considered themselves far above the rest of the world. They basically despised anyone not of their group. Keynes said the following about it in a letter to another friend.

“Is it monomania—this colossal moral superiority that we feel? I get the feeling that most of the rest [of the world outside the Apostles] never see anything at all—too stupid or too wicked” (Skidelsky 1983, p. 118).2

Now a paragraph each from the first two chapters on Keynes' morality.

Two basic attitudes dominated this hermetic group under the aegis of Keynes and Strachey. The first was their overriding belief in the importance of personal love and friendship, while scorning any general rules or principles that might limit their own egos; and the second, their animosity toward and contempt for middle-class values and morality. The Apostolic confrontation with bourgeois values included praise for avant-garde aesthetics, holding homosexuality to be morally superior (with bisexuality a distant second3), and hatred for such traditional family values as thrift or any emphasis on the future or long run, as compared to the present. (“In the long run,” as Keynes would later intone in his famous phrase, “we are all dead.”)
The 3 seen in the parenthetical above is a link to a footnote. I include it in the following quote.
3 Bertrand Russell, who was a decade older than Keynes, did not like the Keynes/ Strachey group that dominated undergraduate members during the first decade of the 20th century, largely because of their conviction that homosexuality was morally superior to heterosexuality.

Bloomsbury’s values and attitudes were similar to those of the Cambridge Apostles, albeit with more of an artistic twist. With a major emphasis on rebellion against Victorian values, it is no wonder that Maynard Keynes was a distinguished Bloomsbury member. One particular emphasis was pursuit of avant-garde and formalistic art—pushed by art critic and Cambridge Apostle Roger Fry, who later returned to Cambridge as Professor of Art. Virginia Stephen Woolf would become a prominent exponent of formalistic fiction. And all of them energetically pursued a lifestyle of promiscuous bisexuality, as was brought to light in Michael Holroyd’s (1967) biography of Strachey.
As members of the Cambridge cultural coterie, the Bloomsbury Group enjoyed inherited, although modest, wealth. But, as time went on, most of the financing for the various Bloomsbury exhibits and projects came from their loyal member Maynard Keynes. As Skidelsky writes, Keynes “came to give Bloomsbury financial muscle, not just by making a great deal of money himself [largely through investment and financial speculation], which he spent lavishly on Bloomsbury causes, but by his ability to organize financial backing for their enterprises.” Indeed, from the first World War onwards it was almost impossible to find any enterprise, cultural or domestic, in which members of Bloomsbury were involved, which did not benefit in some way from his largesse, his financial acumen, or his contacts. (1983, p. 250; see also pp. 242–51).
 

ClimateSanity

New member
Anti-rich? What if you won the lottery? I think I could have been rich, wasn't on my agenda. About anybody in Haiti or the Philippines would trade places with the poorest American. Mexicans too, come to think of it. :think:

What is he telling us we didn't already know? :idunno:


Is stupidity ever a handicap when 'learn' is the cure? :idunno:

Right. It is a taxpayer cost risk. Show me it works, THEN use taxpayer money some of mine, a LOT someone elses.
You probably mean it different than he did. He meant you shouldn't be too greedy. :think:

:think: Most with degrees? Yeah, the 'liberal' side always tries to do the 'smarter' comparison. We really don't care about it until a liberal tries to taut that he is smarter than the average bear.

So be a politician, any kind? :think:

Canadian, dead now. Have no idea which 'character building values' quotes he is referring to, but I'm pretty sure, being dead since 2006, this is a dated and unusable quote any longer.

English. Dead since 1946. Capitalism is supply/demand and benefitting both with 'have.' I'll take it over Communism and Socialism any day, especially when any of those entrepreneurs give back, what most of them already gained fairly and mutually.


I wonder 'who' actually collated this section. :think:
It is easier to address without worrying about offense to you in particular though, Jg. :e4e: -Lon

Anybody in sub Saharan Africa would trade places with the poorest American. I adopted a whole family from there. 1 in 12 children don't make it to the age of 12 in their country and they recently upgraded to middle class status as an African country.
 
Top