English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

So it's alright for the government to intrude on our private lives with things like who we can marry, abortion, the Patriot Act, and where we can practice dissent (protest zones); but when the government intrudes on us to help the elderly and the least among us with things like health care, welfare and other social programs, that's not OK??

2007-06-21 10:16:53 · 27 answers · asked by shelly 4 in Politics & Government Politics

Thanks wolf...but I'm a grown woman who earns a decent paycheck...

2007-06-21 10:31:18 · update #1

Interesting, all the personal attacks when I don't say whether I'm for or against these programs. I'm actually rather fiscally conservative, I'm just trying understand Republicans in regards to legislating behavior, and Democrats being compassionate, yet at times inefficient.

And yes, I believe in freedom from corrupt government - which is why I'm against the Patriot Act. Many state that they may own firearms in order to form a militia against corrupt gov't, yet are OK with that same potentially corrupt gov't being able to spy on them. I'm a firm believer in the Constitution and think if there is sufficient evidence, they can spy on whomever they wish in order to capture terrorists.

2007-06-21 10:45:38 · update #2

27 answers

That's correct. We use the government to achieve our means, just like democrats use the government to achieve their means.

It works both ways :D

2007-06-21 10:20:56 · answer #1 · answered by Nickoo 5 · 3 8

Before I answer I want you to know first and formost I'm a conservative. As a conservative, the last thing we want to be involved in is government affairs whereas Liberals want to control the government, thats how they get thier power.
I believe in the soverienty of our nation, its well being, safety.

on Marriage (and Im sure your thinking about gay marriages)
let me put it to you like this: If a gay couple wants a kid who will the child know as the father figure. What morals will that child learn? My view is simple, live with who ever you want but keep the sanctity of marriage out of it.

Patriot Act: We have too many terrorist cells in this country as it stands now. They will be flooding in here like the plague if the amnesty bill passes. If you are of middle eastern decent or recently emmigrated here then your damn right I would want to know what you were up to. Have you forgotten about 911????

To your point:
We have the best health care in the world. The canadian health plan is failing miserably, they are even coming here for treatment. Its the Democrats who want to control what health plan you should get. They think that the average american is "Incapable" of making that kind of a descision. They want more people on the welfare train for this is where they get thier power. They will go and raise taxes to the highest we have ever had. They will want to tax the upper class heavier than they pay now so as to re-distribute the wealth. Money of which isn't the democrats/governments.
You have fell victim to the liberal bias. Its not the Republicans that will force these programs on you. Liberals want socialism brought to this country

2007-06-21 10:49:12 · answer #2 · answered by 7th generation 2 · 1 1

I don't care who you marry. It does peeve me off that the federal government wastes time on my dime talking about it instead of addressing something that matters. Leave it to the states. If a state wants gay marriage, put it to a referendum. If you're gay and want to get married, move to one of the states where it passes...

Pay for as many abortions as you want, I don't care. If you aren't smart enough to keep from getting pregnant, chances are you aren't smart and responsible enough to raise a child properly. You obviously won't be smart enough to teach them that reckless actions have consequences.

Patriot Act? Don't call international jihadists. Problem solved.

There are places set aside to protest sometimes... deal with it. Not happy that you can't inconvenience those that disagree with you enough? Too bad. We all live here in a limited amount of space. It's called society. It's called civility. It's called courtesy. It's hard to believe, but some people don't agree with your point of view and don't want to listen to your screaming.

In this wealthy country, those that are unable to provide for themselves due to physical and/or mental deficiencies most certainly should and do receive government assistance. If you start to look closely at the welfare rolls, observe the people who collect welfare checks, you will begin to see that many do not fit the above "unable" description. This is where most Republicans begin to have problems. Why positively reward non-productive and sometimes negative behavior? It don't make sense.

2007-06-21 10:57:39 · answer #3 · answered by floatingbloatedcorpse 4 · 0 1

You found a hive of seriously dysfunctional conservatives to poke with the truth.

The propaganda they barfed up about universal health care in several of the posts above....priceless how you got them to expose that they understand nothing about universal health care save for the insurance industry corporate propaganda they consume as the Borg collective would. What silly, senseless people......too stupid to be ashamed of their stupidity...

Conservatives believe the government can only function as an agent of the super wealthy, the haves need protecting. That is the primary function of government in the impaired mind of the conservative.

Government can't be concerned that millions of Americans are without health insurance, or millions are living below the poverty line even while working multiple jobs. Government must concern itself with protecting and advancing the wealth of those who provide the bribes/campaign contributions that keep the politicians in office........working for the betterment of the financial elites ....and to squash all attempts at economic justice in the country with the widest economic gap between haves and have-nots on the planet.

Your question is perfect. Their venomous hatred at you and your question proves you cut em near their tiny little deformed hearts

2007-06-21 11:02:03 · answer #4 · answered by Peace Warrior 4 · 1 1

You can marry anyone you want. Just don't expect me to recognize 2 men and a horse as a family. Also, don't expect me to allow you near my children.

The Democrats voted for the Patriot Act too. Not that they should have but everyone wanted to be able to say "look, we're doing something." It was a knee-jerk reaction and shoud be repealed.

And as far as I'm concerned you have the right to protest wherever you want as long as it's peaceful and does not prevent other citizens from going about their lives.

Murder is wrong not because it deprives another of their life. It is wrong because it deprives them of their future. Abortion does the same thing. Whether you believe the fetus is alive or not, abortion is depriving the fetus of their future. Also, abortion is just a way of escaping personal responsibility. "Oh no. I was an idiot. I misbehaved. I acted irresponsibly. Oh well, I'll just have an abortion and pretend it never happened. That way I don't have to pay the consequences of my actions and I'll never have to learn personal responsibility."

Now then, It is time for a lesson in history and economics.

In the early 1900s Argentina was the 5th wealthiest nation on the planet. Then Evita comes along and says, "Let's take all the money from these filthy rich people and give it to the poor." She raised taxes and the business owners could no longer afford to pay their employees so they went out of business and left the country. The country never recovered.

If a politician wants to increase government aid a very important question must be considered: Where are they going to get the money? The answer is obvious. Raise taxes. But here's the problem with that.

Let's take a family getting by comfortably on Mr. Smith's $50,000/yr salary. Now let's raise taxes by 5% to pay for all the new government programs. The government just cut their take home pay by a little over $200/month. Think about your finances. Can you afford to lose $200/mo of income? Of course not. So now Mrs. Smith has to get a job to cover the taxes. This may not seem like much, after all any part time job will make over $200/mo. Ah but will it cover the child care for their 2 kids while mom's working?

So now mom is working full time and there are no athority figures around when Junior and little Sally get home from school. Kids being what kids are they of course go out and behave like kids with no athority figures.

And naturally in order to combat the raising tide of child delinquency a politician will come along and say, "We need a government program to give these kids something to do after school." But again we need to ask, "Where are you going to get the money?" To which he replies, "Raise taxes."

And now all the democrats are saying, "Surely you're not suggeting that we cut government aid programs! All those drains on society will starve if the government doesn't baby them."

So are you liberals telling me that if we cut government programs and let you keep and extra 25% of your income (average US citzen pays 40% in some kind of tax: property, income, sales...) that you wouldn't give any more to charities? If your take home pay increased by 25% you wouldn't help out your elderly retired parents? If you had an extra $500/mo you whouldn't help your sister that can't work?

If that's true why would you vote liberals like you into office?

Oh, and I'm sorry, I didn't realize that all churches had been abolished. And what happened to all the other nonprofit organizations? And don't these people have family that are willing to help out? And correct me if I'm wrong, but I have never been in a Wal-Mart or a McDonalds that didn't have a "Now Hiring" sign. If you cut government programs all those poor, starving, unemployable people will find a way to feed their kids. If my neices suddenly lost their Medicaid I guarantee that my unemployable sister would have a job by the end of the week.

2007-06-21 10:32:00 · answer #5 · answered by Nianque 4 · 3 4

Apparently not. Watch CNN less.

Republicans are not against ALL government. It should serve some purpose - like protecting us from other countries, murderers, etc.

FYI, abortions kill babies, that one's obvious.

The Patriot act is there to defend us from terrorists, you know, those lovely guys who just so happen want to KILL everyone in America. Although people like you probably don't even believe exist....

Marriage has always been between a man and a woman. It's nature. This was WAY before our government came along.

Socialism does not work. Forcing the successful and hard-working in America to give up their hard-earned money to pay for lazy freeloaders and hippies is NOT smart economic policy.

2007-06-21 10:31:31 · answer #6 · answered by Sleeck 3 · 2 4

You make it hard to answer when you put your questions in garbled perspective. Also, you leave very little room for adequate answers when you put the state and federal governments in the same questions. An example of your confusion about government intruding on our private lives with things like who we can marry.... I'm pretty sure you can marry who ever you want!

The big factor that gets me about you, you are part of the system that denies you those same rights, when you vote for the same people (Democrat or Republican) every election and then complain about your rights being violated.

2007-06-21 10:34:23 · answer #7 · answered by ggraves1724 7 · 3 3

The Dems?
You mean like:
Raise my Taxes?
Try to strip a storm warning station in Florida of their contract because the play Rush Limbaugh?
Harry Reid advocating censoring what can be said on Talk Radio?
Allowed Clinton to strip the Social Security surplus in 1996?
Vote for it before they vote against it?

Not to burst your bubble:
The largest increase in History in Social Security, Medi-care , and Prescription benefits for the elderly? George W. Bush www.aarp.com......
Largest funding for AIDS by any President George W. Bush.
Lowest Middle Class Tax Rate ??? George W. Bush. www.irs.com/taxfacts...
Please.....

2007-06-21 10:37:10 · answer #8 · answered by Ken C 6 · 2 2

The federal government has a charter to protect you from foreign threats, to make trade treaties, etc.

Welfare programs (though currently ran by the federal government) are the rights of the states.

You have a right to peaceably assemble, but not necessarily wherever you wish to, such as in the middle of the interstate. Nor do you have a right to protest say on the white house lawn, as this would be a security threat if a terrorist were to use it to gain access.

2007-06-21 10:23:13 · answer #9 · answered by John T 6 · 6 4

Yup that's right. Universal Health Care means a HUGE tax increase and a lower quality of care. Welfare keeps the poor dependent. Helping those in need is one thing but causing them to be dependent and re-enforcing laziness is another. You want to see social programs at their best...come to Louisiana.

2007-06-21 10:29:00 · answer #10 · answered by Jasmine 5 · 6 3

Republicans believe in legislating everyone else's behavior, while Democrats believe in legislating no one's behavior.

Oops! Here come the thumbs down. But it's true. Dems don't legislate behavior - they legislate to expand options, which expands freedom, which expands quality of life as each individual determines best for himself or herself.

2007-06-21 10:35:45 · answer #11 · answered by ? 6 · 2 3

fedest.com, questions and answers