The Future of the Republican Party

Remove all ads!

No, I was hoping to get an answer to my question, which up to now, hadn't been provided...

Thank you. The first sentence is what was missing from your previous responses. The rest of your comment helps explain the first part. I can't say the logic makes a lot of sense to me (not your logic, but the rationale in general), but then again, I've never claimed to understand religion.

Anyway, my question has now finally been answered. I can die a happy man.

 

Nobody wants you dead, Splunge, stick around and keep the party interesting!

I think that we can all agree that as long as there are people in the US who believe in traditional morality, as represented by Judeo-Christian values such as self control, responsibility, and adherence to long-standing societal mores and conventions, the Republican party will have a base.

I would argue that the Democrats went and embraced a lot of radical ideas (radical not used in its purely pejorative sense but in the sense of "promoting rapid, widespread change" sense) and as a result the Republicans backlashed and polarized the other way. Hopefully a middle ground can be found, but the idea (hope?) that the Republicans are forever gone from US political life is an empty one.

 

Whatever, LKD. Or perhaps you were being ironic, and I just failed to pickup on it? Maybe you are saying that Republicans believe that everyone else, besides themselves, should have those values?

Nevertheless, one of the reasons the Republicans are gone from power is because of their corruption and the large amount of various scandals in which they were involved in over the last 8 years.

Yeah, if those "values" include bribery, child molestation and lying under oath as well.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/29/us/politics/29repubs.html

http://www.slate.com/id/2165783/

http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2005/01/18/scandal/

And don't get me wrong on this, because the Dems have their share of problems to. But to think that after the last 8 years anyone would take that kind of statement even remotley serious, is well, "scandalous."

 

Chandos: There are criminal elements in every walk of life and every political spectrum. Listing a few criminals who believe in a philosophy does not make the philosophy wrong.

IMO the individual scandals had very little bearing on the overall election. The price of gas had a greater affect, and now look where it is. People saw an administration they did not like -- torture, indefinite imprisonment, war, slow to respond to the financial crisis, slow to respond to an oil crisis (many felt Bush was in oil's back pocket), etc. -- and voted against the party of the administration. Period.

I really hope the republican party can move away from the religious right.

 

I'm not sure what you mean here. I don't know which "philosophy" is wrong in this instance. I've never thought of crime as a philosophy, but I suppose it can be one.

This is from the 2006 election:

http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/mostert/061108

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/08/AR2006110800623.html


And before anyone starts about sources, this is from FOX NEWS on the 2008 Senate election:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,296208,00.html

 

Amen to that

And I think Gnarff is wrong. A returning emphasis on the side of the GOP towards the religious right will continue to drive away the centrists. That will be even more so when they 'purify' the GOP. It was the centrists that did not vote GOP lost the GOP the election. The flock did turn out to vote and reliably cast their vote but they were obviously insufficient in number to get Palin ... ahem .... McCain elected.

 

Yes, it is a covenant. By disregarding it and not honouring it, they are condemning the marriage to failure. You and DR both talk about what successful couples have done in marriage. I call that honouring the covenants made at the wedding. Whether they admit it--or even care--or not is irrelevent. They succeed because they honour the covenants to love, honour and cherish one another. They do not let their pride or wrath override their judgement in a dispute. If you insist that it is not sacred, then insist that the state separate itself from the church and use words other than marriage to reflect this separation from the religious ordinance of the same name.

As for the alternative Vegas weddings, while we still oppose the same sex unions, the alternative dress styles, the dress of the authority performing the ceremony is fair game. But if you mean to tell me that the requirements for a sucessful marriage varies with the authority performing the union, I will disagree.

Not any time soon, I hope...

And they gain power when these people feel ignored by the Democrats. What I don't like about the two party system is that the Democrats understand better what God wants us to do, but they don't protect the baseline morality, or the "thou shalt not" side of the coin. As long as there are people that equate the Democrats with a lack of morality, the Republicans will still reach out to the religious right for easier support. Were it not for the economic crisis and a real candidate representing the Democrats, they could have won some of the key battleground states.

When I was a kid, we actually recited the Lord's prayer at the begining of the school day. Up until grade 8, we even had a representative of a local church come in and teach us a lesson on religion. When I was in High school, the lord's prayer was stopped. We had to lose that because some aetheists got pissed off. We were told that our beliefs had no place in the school.

These teachings are an obvious defiance of many religions in general. It is the values of another segment of the population thrust into the classroom when our beliefs are not welcome. It uses the state's authority to sow contradictory seeds within the minds of our children in a deliberate attempt to undermine out beliefs. The Gay Marriage issue proves that the gay rights activists are not seeking a peaceful coexistence with religion, but instead seek to change it to suit their lifestyle or destroy it completely. They believe they can use the courts to enforce their values on the rest of society. This is what we fight against with Proposition 8.

 

Oh, you did not say that, but that is the ultimate consequence of the dominance of purists within the GOP.

When you speak of 'including the centrists more in party decisions' you are aware that you imply/concede that the purists i.e. the Religious Right now (tongue in cheek) own the GOP and dominate it?

 

Chandos: Basically, philosophies are beliefs. Each political party has its own philosophy. There have been many criminals in both parties -- the existance of these criminals do not make the overlying beliefs (philosophy) of the parties wrong. For every criminal you list in the republican party we can easily find one in the democratic party.

That those criminals were voted out is normal -- we see it every election. I disagree the overall election was greatly influenced by these scandals. The election of the individuals were certainly affected by their own actions (as they should be).

 

You really should take the time to read my posts. My point is that people don't TREAT it as sacred. For me, yes it is, but if people can get married by Captain Kirk, or Elvis, I don't see how anyone can take the notion that people are serious about marriage in the "traditional sense" that you are proposing. For a lot of people it's just a legal formality or a social arrangement, and sometimes not a very serious one at that. I'm not saying it is right or wrong, only that it's the reality.

Frankly, I don't see the big fuss about gays getting married. I think it's a far better choice for them to craft their relationships within a framework that allows both themselves and their relationships to experience Jesus Christ in a much fuller way, rather than those relationships being marginalized and away from the Salvation of Christ. And before you get started with what a "big sin" it is, I really don't care if people are gay or not; there are far worse things a person can become, IMO. The real meaning of Chirstianity is Salvation, not bigotry. Gnarff, I don't believe you are a bigot by nature, but following the kinds of political policies which you are in favor of leads to exactly that, whether that is your intention or not.

 

Did anyone see Boston Legal last night?

Spoiler

James Spader and William Shatner got married, and their characters aren't even gay!

It was quite well done.


Also:

The Proposition 8 Hollywood extravaganza

 

You mean like this T2Bruno
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/na...ch-corruption-probe,0,4700757.story?track=rss

(this came from the marketwatch site but i cant get the link to work so i posted another article about it.)

OOPS

 

Great chart: What would happen if gays married?

I strongly agree with BTA on school prayer - except for one thing: Religious schools are a different matter (I went to a catholic kindergarten and primary school). In that case you know what you're getting your kid into, and indeed, it might the the very point of sending your kid there.

In any other school, if there are Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Zoroastrians, or Jews in school, would you be for speaking their prayers before school as well? You'd spend hours of taxpayer funded time to pray in school to treat everyone equally. In that sense insisting on prayer in school is a problem, unless, of course, it's only Christian prayer that you want - after all America is a country with a Judaeo-Christian tradition. Now that moves Christianity in the direction of an official or state religion. Curious result.

That problem does not occur when you accept the separation of church and state - because then that tradition and the state can then coexist in parallel, in their respective separate spheres. Iirc, without claiming to posses deeper knowledge of American history, the founders, even though more or less religious themselves (which in their case meant protestant), consciously decided for the state to be neutral in religious matters, which is one of the things that made America so religious, religiously diverse, and religiously liberal - after all the first settlers were dissidents who fled such religious tutelage. That past certainly informed the founders.

The experiences the Mormons made with changes to their faith imposed by the state and the law and implemented through revelation have far more to do with the remarkable peculiarities of Mormon faith rather than actual 'state oppression'. But perhaps that does feel different when you're Mormon. I presume the long march to Utah and hostility they experienced during that period and afterwards have certainly influenced the Mormon self image in that regard.

 

You said:

But I said:

So I have to believe that you are agreeing with me. My point was that there was no difference, despite the comment that Republicans represented "moral values." They don't. In fact, it is quite the reverse.

Perhaps we can have a Pagan-Judaeo-Christian tradition was well, since we celebrate both Christmas and Easter, our two most holy days, on "traditionally" pagan holidays. Tradition can mean any number of things, I guess....

 

I certainly agree there is no difference in the criminal aspect of the parties -- both have their share of unethical individuals. The entire "moral values" debate is relative, IMO the fact that the republicans have set themselves up as representing the "moral majority" (i.e., the far right zealots) makes their falls more spectacular. But I wouldn't go so far as to say they lead in amoral behaviour (it's not "quite the reverse" but more like equal status here).

Also: Now, now don't start confusing the Christian right with facts and history. Christmas and Easter were both condoned by the Pope and made into solid features of Christianity. It really doesn't matter the holidays were made sacred when the church was trying to sway more Pagans to join. Easter was easily determined from the Jewish calender (that it coincides with a Pagan holiday was fortuitous). The date of birth of Jesus was unknown and so the pope chose a major Pagan holiday and, as a result, converted a lot of Pagans (celebrations were important to these guys).

 

Chandos, I know where you want to go, but T2 is right

 

Ragusa - T2 is almost always right. And as he points out, I just like to confuse things.

How could I forget this, since it illustrates my point so well:

The Republican governor Rod replaced in still serving time in prison for corruption....