I would say liberal, especially considering the health care part.
Liberalism means the government does more, conservative means less.
Gay marriage and abortion are social issues. Social liberals would agree with your statements.
Modern day politics, the war is not so liberal, but it's a tricky issue.
I'd pin you as an average Democrat.
2007-08-24 12:49:45
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
im for gay marriage- liberal
im for the war. (but dont agree with the way its being fought)- conservative
im for abortion-liberal
i think free/universal health care should be available-liberal
You are more of a liberal with a conservative twist. That is normal though because most people don't agree with everything that a liberal or conservative does. Just because you may agree with liberals/conservatives on most issues, does not mean you must agree with them on all issues.
2007-08-24 13:08:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by greencoke 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Liberal ideology is a theory which holds forth beliefs that have no basis in reality.
They are Advocates of a policy that empowers a strong government to enslave its people with a high tax burden incident to the support of extravagant and unnecessary social programs destructive to both the work ethic among the lower class, and the incentive to innovate and succeed among the working class.
The problems we face today are because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.
A democracy will continue to exist up until
the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous
gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority
always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from
the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally
collapse over loose fiscal policy
2014-12-21 05:43:45
·
answer #3
·
answered by Arnie 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
You are a liberal in all but the war part. Being a conservative and liberal has changed. Traditionally being a liberal means more government while a conservative means less. Neo-cons believe that bigger government should be allowed if necessary. New liberals believe that government should be much more into people's lives. In truth though you should go look up the difference on your own and from your opinions there.
2007-08-24 13:12:46
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
why are you asking? you're obviously not too young to know where you stand on these issues, so i highly doubt that you dont understand the difference between liberal and conservative. and if you really don't.... wow.
2007-08-24 12:59:16
·
answer #5
·
answered by kujigafy 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Try these political placement quizs to find out. So far you sound to be liberal, but there are more aspects to politics.
http://www.quiz2d.com/
http://www.okcupid.com/politics
2007-08-24 12:50:58
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Forget your current political leanings. The good news is, you're inquisitive, and not giving into cynicism is the path to real knowledge.
Stephen Colbert of Comedy Central is a very smart guy. Last year he gave a commencement speech at Knox College. This is what he said:
"Remember, you cannot be both young and wise. Young people who pretend to be wise to the ways of the world are mostly just cynics.
Cynicism masquerades as wisdom, but it is the farthest thing from it. Because cynics don't learn anything. Because cynicism is a self-imposed blindness, a rejection of the world because we are afraid it will hurt us or disappoint us. Cynics always say no. But saying "yes" begins things.
Saying "yes" is how things grow. Saying "yes" leads to knowledge. "Yes" is for young people. So for as long as you have the strength to, say "yes."
So, as you see, you're already on your way to wisdom. You aren't some Liberal cynic who just mocks the people who are trying to make the world a better place. You're not the backseat driver who whines about every petty little thing.
Forget about the narrow-minded people who oppose gay marriage on religious grounds. Here's the real reason gay marriage cannot work:
There is a tricky and unfortunate part of our legal system called "equal protection under the law". That innocuous sounding phrase is the answer to your question.
If we allowed the legal definition of marriage to be anything other than between one man and one woman, then every group could invoke the "equal protection under the law" clause and demand that their definition be given equal status.
This means that perverted old men from NAMBLA could sue for the right to marry young boys. Men could demand the right to marry multiple wives. Real sickos could demand that they be allowed to marry an animal (yes, there are people that perverted).
This is not some far-fetched doomsday fantasy. This is exactly what lawyers are warning will happen. The same problem derailed the 1970's Equal Rights Amendment, because, "equal protection under the law" means that "separate, but equal" is not good enough. Girls could have demanded to join the boys football team, or join the boy scouts. Separate restrooms could not be enforced.
In the reverse, a man could demand the right to work as the towel man in a woman's gym. Any crazy, whiny demand would have to be addressed. It would have disrupted society and made the commonplace impossible.
The intelligent way around this problem is to create a recognized "legal union" between same sex couples, and define it as such. This would let same sex couples share health insurance, have each other in their wills, etc.
So, forget about the minority of gay marriage opponents who do so on religious grounds. The only important consideration is how changing the legal definition of marriage would turn our already beleagured courts into an absolute nightmare of endless lawsuits.
I'm also for supporting Iraq until it can stand on its own. To leave now would be a catastrophic mistake.
Regarding Universal health care:,think about it this way: 85% of Americans are responsible enough to have adequate health insurance. Most of the people who don't have it do so by choice. There are relatively few people who can't afford it. To prove my point, think back to the images you saw of the residents of New Orleans who made the bad decisionto stay put in New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina. Did you notice that most of the women had fancy salon hairdos and elaborate nail jobs? How about the guys in their Fubu duds and gold chains. Think they spent their money wisely, or could they have used that cash to purchase health insurance like responsible people?
Universal Health Care will mean a drastic reduction in quality of health care. Trust me about this. I recently moved to Europe, and the socialized medicine here borders on primitive. Why should the 85% of responsible people have to suffer for the irresponsible 15%, most of whom irrefutably can afford health insurance if they manage their money properly. Bush just proposed legislation directing money at truly poor children, and tax cuts for those people purchasing private health insurance. That is the sensible route to take.
Thinking logically and rationally about a problem makes you Conservative. Just turning off your brain and hopping from one ill-conceived "feel good" idea makes you a Liberal.
2007-08-24 13:05:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by pachl@sbcglobal.net 7
·
0⤊
4⤋