Conservatives: Do Social Conservatives ("Values" Voters, e. g. people Like, Tony Perkins, Dr Dobson, More)-

Question

- Speak for you?

So, Like other Groups, Not Monolithic.

Answer 1

Of course he they do. These men are obsessed with gay people and will not rest as long as gay people continue to walk around free. They are nothing more than the frauds.

They are making killing of gays. The so-called "Family Research Council" and "Focus on the Family" spew out a phony studied once every few years that isn't a study at all. Scientific studies let the data lead to a conclusion. These frauds try to make made up "facts" fit a made up conclusion.

But hey, they are making hundreds millions off these social con suckers. Last year along FOF took in over $150 milion.

Answer 2

For some things, yes, for some things no. I don't know of anyone who agrees perfectly with anyone else. I'm not planning on voting for a third party if for some reason Rudy gets the nomination, for the sheer fact that splitting the conservative vote will guarantee a lib win.

Answer 3

I regularly listen to Dr. Dobson's podcast and have read his book "Bringing Up Boys".

Given the degradation of families in the last 30 or so year, I find him invaluable.

Answer 4

you have your information slightly mixed up. Richard Nixon replaced into no Conservative. It replaced into Nixon who created the EPA, positioned salary and value controls in place and notably lots replaced into in contract with maximum Liberals. The Democrats in simple terms did no longer like him for my area. the only philosophy that helps an originalist attitude to the form is Conservative. that's strictly what Conservative potential. that's Liberals that view the form as a "residing rfile" or some thing that is bent or interpreted in any potential mandatory to enable regardless of they opt to enable. No Conservative broadcasts or maybe thinks he has a precise to violate the form. you have been offered a invoice of products via the Liberal who unquestionably do subvert the form. All this nonsense touching directly to the Patriot Act violating our precise to privateness is a phony. All that it did replaced into grant the Federal brokers the skill to video exhibit distant places telephone calls finding for key phrases. different than that, it in simple terms granted rights already deemed constituional which comprise cord tapping somebody fairly than a particular telephone. The police and FBI have been already granted that skill years previous to handle prepared crime. The Patriot Act in simple terms extra desirable that means so intelligence companies ought to apply them, too. you relatively could ask why absolutely everyone may be so lifeless set against thwarting terrorist attack that they might make up lies touching directly to the kit used to do exactly that. As early because of the fact the Civil warfare, it replaced into recoginzed and generic via the Courts that in the process marvelous situations the powers of secure practices Forces can enhance particularly. that's widly generic and offered for that the form isn't a suicide p.c... If its provisions ought to bring about attack upon the rustic then those provisions could be overriden to guard the Union. How do you think of Lincoln replaced into waiting to arrest and detention center Congressmen who have been attempting to subvert our efforts? On 9/11 the President could have declared a state of emergency and declared martial regulation. He did no longer because of the fact he did no longer deem that to be mandatory. in spite of the indisputable fact that, some provisions of the form ought to be suspended especially situations with the intention to maintain u.s. look after. i'm no longer stunned in case you never heard any of this. national secure practices isn't the Democrats' sturdy adventure. *

Answer 5

No one speaks for me, except me. I agree with some things some say, and I disagree with some things some say. I analyze ideas and situations independently, and make up my own mind.

:-o

Answer 6

Not at all. I believe in freedom of choice above all else; my personal morals should not dictate anyone elses.

However, I do not carry this as far as murder (early abortions are not scientifically murder), rape... general violence, and total absurdity (indescent exposure and junk). There are certain limits you need to keep the society calm, but there are other practices which do no harm to anyone else, and should not be deemed illegal.

Answer 7

I prefer to speak for myself. There are very few out there who I agree 100% with........

Answer 8

No, they don't. As a fiscal conservative, what they believe often opposes my beliefs.

Answer 9

Of course not. I abhor the Taliban whether they're muslim or Christian.