EPTEdit: Might be a dumb question, but I could see an argument for both sides, so I'm just curious.
Debate a Conservative - Page 2
| Blogs > Try |
|
Lemonwalrus
United States5465 Posts
Edit: Might be a dumb question, but I could see an argument for both sides, so I'm just curious. | ||
|
Try
United States1293 Posts
On March 08 2008 10:14 Ancestral wrote: This is a common problem, for humans, not conservatives. You sound like you're not interested in facts unless they vindicate opinions you already have. You should seek the truth, not something you believe for fun. That being said, what's wrong with liberalism? Most people agree, property rights, democracy, civil rights and liberties are pretty good. Not that there is much democracy in the United States, but we're still pretty good about it. I meant don't tell me I should be a liberal. This is a debate, not a missionary service. Civil Rights completely smears itself with movements like the Black Panthers and violent movements, as well as things like affirmative action. Without these, yes, it was a great movement, but there was no need for such things. Plus, conservatism protects your rights much, much more than liberalism does. Right to bear arms, right to keep your hard earned money, right to stay free from the government's grasp (whose only purpose should be to protect you, not to provide for you). | ||
|
Try
United States1293 Posts
On March 08 2008 10:47 Lemonwalrus wrote: Do you make a distinction between the war on terror and the war in Iraq? Yes. WoT=Afghanistan, hunting down Osama bin Laden. Although we are doing a good thing for the people of Iraq, its not worth 3000 American lives. | ||
|
Hippopotamus
1914 Posts
| ||
|
Ancestral
United States3230 Posts
Countries with very strict gun control have fewer gun deaths. What's so great about guns? I know it's the whole "liberty" thing, and people should be trusted, but they can't be always. I am on the fence on the issue, but how do you justify lax gun laws? | ||
|
Try
United States1293 Posts
On March 08 2008 10:46 Caller wrote: If you are a fiscal conservative, why do you support the War on Terror as it is racking up billions if not trillions of government spending a year? Because I believe, like most conservatives, the only role of the government is to defend us. As a fiscal conservative, I dont believe in federal welfare systems, porkbarrel spending, or Social Security. | ||
|
Try
United States1293 Posts
On March 08 2008 10:50 Ancestral wrote: Ok, right to bear arms. Countries with very strict gun control have fewer gun deaths. What's so great about guns? I know it's the whole "liberty" thing, and people should be trusted, but they can't be always. I am on the fence on the issue, but how do you justify lax gun laws? Correlation does not mean causation, my friend. I imagine if you legalized guns in those strict gun countries, crime would not go up at all (they're Europeans). Also, obviously less guns=less gun deaths and more knife deaths. A 20/20 study on a town who required each household to hold a gun actually saw that crime went down, because burglars would think twice before robbing a house when they knew a gun was in it. Also, attaining a gun illegally is incredibly easy (as easy as getting drugs), so the "bad guys" and gangsters who want the guns for the wrong reasons would be able to get ahold of them easily, while us everyday people would not be able to defend ourselves. | ||
|
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
| ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
 Free weapons for everyone ! What do you think of UN ? http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution#Creation_Scientists_Tend_to_Win_the_Creation-Evolution_Debates hahha conservatism = win | ||
|
Ancestral
United States3230 Posts
[/pure speculation] | ||
|
Caller
Poland8075 Posts
On March 08 2008 10:56 Ancestral wrote: It depends on how easy illegal guns are to get. If they're very easy, any petty criminal will get them. If not, only criminals who are going to kill anyway would get them. If every home in the US had guns, I bet gun deaths would go up. Because people would be more likely to use them in situations where they see it as reasonable, but might not have if they didn't have a gun. [/pure speculation] In Switzerland, every citizen has an assault rifle at home. Yet for some reason, why haven't the Swiss gone around butchering each other? Hint: It's not because of video games. | ||
|
Caller
Poland8075 Posts
On March 08 2008 10:47 Ancestral wrote: Caller, I was under the impression neoliberalism = strict philosophy of free trade, which is something I advocate. For a point of reference as to where I'm coming from, the best classification for my views is libertarian socialism. What is your interpretation (and perhaps the right interpretation) of neoliberalism? As for conservatism, what's you interpretation of it, try? I need more information as to what you mean by conseravive. Free trade is NOT neoliberalism. Neoliberalism is pro-economy, but it relies on government influences to open up markets. It's different than a laissez-faire approach. What I meant to criticize was contemporary liberalism, which is anti-free market. My apologies. Conservatism is a person that A) Believes in Individual Liberties B) Believes in weak government C) A person that is traditionalist socially. I am A and B, but not C, thus I am not a conservative. | ||
|
Try
United States1293 Posts
On March 08 2008 10:25 Hippopotamus wrote: 1. Why do you not (or perhaps you do?) support fascism? 2. Do you honestly associate yourself with these retards? 3. Got an opinion on net neutrality? 4. Do you think rape victims should be allowed to have an abortion? If yes, explain how their babies' lives are worth any less than the lives of regularly conceived babies. If you think their suffering outweighs the baby's life, tell explain why can you so arbitrarily draw a line as to when a life is sacred and when it is not. If your answer is no, explain how you can be such a callous person? 5. Neo-nazis, do they have freedom of speech or freedom of STFU? 6. Homosexuals: death penalty or life imprisonment? 7. Do you subscribe to intelligent design and intelligent falling movements? 8. How realistic do you think laissez faire economics is in the 21st century? 1. I don't support liberal fascism, because I believe in freedom. 2. No (I take a slightly more unprejudiced stance), do you associate youself with http://www.liberapedia.com/index.php?title=Main_Page these? 3. Haven't really researched the issue, so I cannot give an intelligent arguement either way. 4. No. It is, of course, a difficult choice, but it is the morally right thing to do to let the child live. How can we scientifically determine when life begins? We say about 3 months, but why not 3 months and 1 day or 2 months and 30 days? Why can't we just take out the baby and stab it to death? Its just not the right thing to do, the child's life is sacred, I would apologize to the mother for her suffering, but just because a life (or a person, you probably know quite a few) is inconvenient or annoying doesn't mean you can end it. 5. Freedom of speech as long as noninterfering with public 6. Neither, just don't defile the sacred entity of marriage. 7. No. 8. With the oppression and overburdening of taxes that governments lay down on our people nowadays, it is a grand goal to strive for, but an unrealistic goal to acheive. I prefer taking it step by step, slowly lowering tarriffs between nations and such. | ||
|
Caller
Poland8075 Posts
On March 08 2008 10:56 Boblion wrote: This blog is funny Free weapons for everyone ! What do you think of UN ? http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution#Creation_Scientists_Tend_to_Win_the_Creation-Evolution_Debates hahha conservatism = win Weapons aren't free, you have to pay money for them. That's property. The UN is a beauracratic paperweight that doesn't do anything. Their job is to pursue pop culture politics, instead of making intelligent decisions. I would suggest abolishing it because they also want to tax the United States for being too rich. That's not conservatism that's called idiocracy. Creationism is ridiculous. | ||
|
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
| ||
|
Try
United States1293 Posts
On March 08 2008 10:56 Ancestral wrote: It depends on how easy illegal guns are to get. If they're very easy, any petty criminal will get them. If not, only criminals who are going to kill anyway would get them. If every home in the US had guns, I bet gun deaths would go up. Because people would be more likely to use them in situations where they see it as reasonable, but might not have if they didn't have a gun. [/pure speculation] Any "Reasonable" person would not shoot someone else. There are very few cases where, if someone was angry or passionate enough to want to kill someone, that they would not want to go through the trouble of getting a gun. | ||
|
Try
United States1293 Posts
On March 08 2008 10:56 Boblion wrote: This blog is funny Free weapons for everyone ! What do you think of UN ? http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution#Creation_Scientists_Tend_to_Win_the_Creation-Evolution_Debates hahha conservatism = win UN are a bunch of ineffective morons who sit around, have no power, and talk alot but do absolutely nothing. And creationism=stupidity, not all conservatives are extreme fundamentalist Christians. | ||
|
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
On March 08 2008 11:17 Try wrote: UN are a bunch of ineffective morons who sit around, have no power, and talk alot but do absolutely nothing. And creationism=stupidity, not all conservatives are extreme fundamentalist Christians. Isn't talking what the UN is supposed to do? Is the UN supposed to have power? Would you prefer that it were a supranational organization? | ||
|
Try
United States1293 Posts
On March 08 2008 11:20 Mindcrime wrote: Isn't talking what the UN is supposed to do? Is the UN supposed to have power? Would you prefer that it were a supranational organization? No, I would prefer if it were not there. Its pointless. | ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
What should be US foreign policy ? | ||
| ||
