What is the "conservative agenda"? Does it include taking away peoples rights?

Question

Right to abortion

Right to be gay in peoples lives?


I'm not going to make a big thing about this, I think abortion is murder but agree with Barry Goldwater that government can't make these decisions,

You Republicans remember Barry Goldwater? I suppose you can disagree with him.

And regarding gays, who cares if two gay men want to get married, how is that an affront on heterosexual marriage in america, the sky won't fall republicans, heterosexual marriage is filled with adultery and divorce, its not like its really all that "sanctity" currently, gay marriage won't destroy your heterosexual marriages

Answer 1

It all depends on which faction of conservative you speak. Social, christian, or family value. Goldwater was the last true "conservative" the GOP had if you discount Ron Paul which is what the GOP and its base are doing today. The one person who has a true conservative agenda they dismiss as a crackpot. That's how far conservatives have gotten from their roots.

Answer 2

When you look closely, you discover that what so many are calling the "conservative agenda" would be shocking and alien to historic conservatives like Republicans Teddy Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, and Barry Goldwater. It really has nothing to do with conservative or liberal, left or right, war or peace. It doesn't care about abortion, prayer, or flags, although these are useful props to bring in fringe groups to "fill the big tent." It's not even about liberty, freedom, or prosperity.

Today's so-called "conservative agenda" is, very simply, about ownership.

Specifically, ownership of the assets of the United States of America - things previously owned by "We, The People." And, ultimately, ownership of the United States government itself.

Answer 3

The conservative agenda is based on judeo-christian values and islamic values. You asked "Does it include taking away peoples rights?", a good question to explore.

What are rights? Is a right stronger than a privledge? Yes. How does one get "rights"? From an authority? What is the ultimate authority? The gov't? No...the gov't can be easily corrupted. It may be the immediate authority, but cannot be the ultimate authority on which we derive our human rights. The ultimate authority must be 100% perfect...what do you think that authority is?

So the conservative agenda is based on a book written by the ultimate authority. The Bible. The world's three major religions (the Abrahamic religions account for more than half of the world) call it the holy book, and have different versions.

Answer 4

So lets talk about the liberal agenda. Redistribution of wealth. Dumbing down the education system. Creating a class of slaves to the government.

Guess what, I'm a conservative who agrees with you on the matter of gay marriage. Abortion is another matter. If a person believes it is murder, then they are obligated to oppose it. Your position is equivalent to saying that it is not murder if the victim is not a member of your family but it is murder if they are. That position is not supportable. If one believes that abortion is murder, then they would be in favor of a government that treats it as a crime. Me, I feel that abortion is wrong, but not murder. Therefore, it should be an individual choice.

Answer 5

First,they're are plenty of non conservatives whom agree with conservative values.As far as a right to abortion,I dont think that should be used as a term of right to..,otherwise I should be given the same right to kill my neighbor because his stereos too loud( same principal ).As far as Gay marriage.most laws we have today are derived from Biblical sources(10 commandments etc).do I think Gay people should be married...NO! Marriage is a commitment for procreation of the species,but I do believe that gays should be able to form a legal partnership,that entitles the same practicalities of marriage. I beleive being gay is a choice and there should be no special rights(otherwise having green eyes should give me special rights...see my point) so a partnership is ok but dont cheapen the word marriage

Answer 6

Conservatives believe in a little list of rules and if you follow all the little list of rules you go to heaven or get rich or win elections or whatever. When something comes up that is not on the list, their brains short-circuit.

But seriouly to Otto D - gay marriage is about way more important things than benefits; my spouse can visit me in the hospital, your gay partner cannot; my spouse can inherit, your gay partner only inherits if it is in the will and if the parents and brothers and sisters don't take it to court; my spouse can live with me in a nursing home, your gay partner cannot. And on and on. If you want to keep the lawyers in business forever, by all means force gay couples to dance a very expensive and complex legal dance instead of simply allowing for a legal domestic partnership.

Like I said, cons want to live a black-and-white life in what is a very very gray world.

Answer 7

Gay men have the right to call themselves and treat themselves as married right now, but what they want is for the government to recognize their marriage so they can receive social security "widow's benefits" if one of them dies and can be grouped with the much-lower-risk heterosexual married couples for health insurance, thereby lowering their health insuranc premiums and passing on the cost of their more dangerous lifestyle to hetero marrieds, and so on and so on. It's all about money and about STEALING other people's money.

They'll steal money from social security that was meant for home-makers who raised families and lost the breadwinner's income, helping to bankrupt the already strained system, and they'll steal money in the form of higher premiums from married heterosexual couples. Now do you get it?

Answer 8

Actually, it's the liberals who want to take away your rights, such as your Rights to bear arms, which is a constitutional right. Conservatives have never tried to take away your constitutional rights. As far as abortion, it's not illegal until the women is so far along and a baby has formed, then it's called murder. You for murder? As far as gays, America is full of gays, has anybody tried to outlaw being gay? No, they just don' have a right to get married, that's not taking away a right. Typical liberal garbage, making stuff up when it is really the liberals trying to take away rights!.

Answer 9

What Rights? Those who take away Legal American Citizens rights are Liberal Democrats. They steal our hard earned money, and give it to others who will not work for it themselves.
Since when is it the right of the Government of the USA to give our money to anyone else, with out our expressed permission. If anyone else did this, they would be arrested for Larceny or Robbery!

Answer 10

The fundamental right to privacy, guaranteed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U. S. Constitution, protects against unwarranted invasions of privacy by federal or state entities, or arms thereof. As early as in Roe v. Wade, 410 U. S. 113 (1973), the U. S. Supreme Court acknowledged that the doctor-patient relationship is one which evokes constitutional rights of privacy. But even that right is not absolute and must be weighed against the state or federal interest at stake. For example, in Whalen v. Roe, 429 U.S. 589 (1977), a group of physicians joined patients in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a New York statute that required physicians to report to state authorities the identities of patients receiving Schedule II drugs (controlled substances). The physicians alleged that such information was protected by the doctor-patient confidentiality, while the patients alleged that such disclosure was an invasion of their constitutional right to privacy. The Supreme Court did not disagree with the lower court’s finding that “the intimate nature of a patient’s concern about his bodily ills and the medication he takes … are protected by the constitutional right to privacy.” However, the high court concluded (after balancing the state’s interests) that “Requiring such disclosures to representatives of the State having responsibility for the health of the community, does not automatically amount to an impermissible invasion of privacy.” - "Although studies suggest a link between mental illnesses and violence, the contribution of people with mental illnesses to overall rates of violence is small, and further, the magnitude of the relationship is greatly exaggerated in the minds of the general population (Institute of Medicine, 2006)." - "…the vast majority of people who are violent do not suffer from mental illnesses (American Psychiatric Association, 1994)." - "The absolute risk of violence among the mentally ill as a group is very small. . . only a small proportion of the violence in our society can be attributed to persons who are mentally ill (Mulvey, 1994)." -"People with psychiatric disabilities are far more likely to be victims than perpetrators of violent crime (Appleby, et al., 2001). People with severe mental illnesses, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or psychosis, are 2 ½ times more likely to be attacked, raped or mugged than the general population (Hiday, et al.,1999)." The second admendment gives citizens the right to defend themselves and you want to disarm a lot of victims of their rights for a few news clip stories. It's a scam to disarm anybody and everybody slowly. The definition of insanity is repeating the same thing repeatedly with the same results, prohibation of a product that have customers who don't care it's banned in mass never works. Obama has been accused twice of gun smuggling once with project gunrunner fast & furious in Mexico and Bengazi by foreignors which both countries have restrictive gun rights. Obama hails from Chicago where law enforcement is giving up or becoming violent themselves. Chicago has the most gun restrictions then everywhere but second admendment supporters are nuts for knowing the history of the yellow badge of shame.