Moral Majority the Cancer of the Republican Party

@dark_joev (3034)
United States
July 4, 2011 12:35am CST
Okay well its time to attack the fundamental anti-conservative movement within the Republican party this is the "Moral Majority" ( the Churches and other organizations that infected the Republicans in the 1950s) This Moral Majority is what makes the Republicans massive Social Government where they want the Government to be only as small as to watch your every move to make sure that you remain moral and not just to the laws they want to be everywhere to be their to make your decisions for you. Well this right here is very anti-conservative which I mean conservatism when applied to the Federal Government would mean in pretty much all cases where the Constitution doesn't support the Feds controlling that or being involved in that they shouldn't be. The Republican Party use to be this they where the balance to the Democrats that wanted a bigger government. But since about the 1950s they have lost this as a cancer has been growing inside the Republican Party that would at this point in time wouldn't pick Ronald Reagan if he was running. They are the reason that Social Conservative is associated with laws prohibiting free will and liberty. I mean they are for building a Police State just like the Democrats. I hope that within my life time that what Ron Paul is doing today is acting like a Radiation shot on a Cancer tumor that will slowly kill the Tumor off. I mean really the Republicans need to get rid of this moral right or at least need to push them back so that true Conservatism can step up and people will pick this over what the Democrats are pushing why because it would allow the States the most power to set the rules within their borders. And if the Republicans where like we are going to pull out of the Middle East and bring the budget in to balance as a minimum. The people would flock to them. As a Republican I hope to become the change I want to see in the party by pushing my own majority. I want to see this become a bigger part of the Republican party rather than just a fringe as well it use to be a Republican Platform not all that long ago http://www.rlc.org/about/statement-of-principles/ So what do you think?
1 person likes this
5 responses
@andy77e (5156)
• United States
4 Jul 11
If we lose our morals, for the sake of some fake 'liberty', then America is doomed. It was those morals, and belief in God, that made America great.
1 person likes this
@dark_joev (3034)
• United States
4 Jul 11
I have never heard of this Fake Liberty what is it? I am being serious. I mean what is the difference between the two. I didn't think that something like having the freedom to marry who you choose within as long as they are consenting adults would be something that would be a "Fake Liberty". Also God and Liberty don't often mix to well you don't have to go that far back to see how well that worked out something called the Dark Ages existed when God and its morals ruled the world or at least the Western World. Where people where burning people at the stake or throwing people in rivers with rocks tide to their feet to see if they where a witch or not. What makes our country great is the Idea that a person is free to say what they want and believe what they want. That is what makes our country great. We where the first country to understand personal freedom is the real true freedom of the universe and the one thing that needs to be preserved. The Left wing in this country currently against that idea as is the majority of the Republican Party.
@andy77e (5156)
• United States
4 Jul 11
Fake liberty is the idea that being free involves no rules. True liberty can only be found within the confines of moral conduct. I'll give you a simple example. Freedom is you being allowed to have whatever you want. So the guy next door wants a 5,000 gallon drum of Sarin. Sarin is of course a nerve agent that can wipe out a mid-size town in a matter of hours. So is that real freedom, to know your neighbor could kill off the entire town? Or should there be limits on freedom? Further, I don't believe that being able to say anything they want is all that great. Take Larry Flynt, and Jerry Falwell. I wager you wouldn't be too happy if someone ran around fabricating all kinds of horrible things about you. Yeah, freedom of speech is great, until someone uses it against you. And I think you are being a bit selective in your historical accounts. The end of slavery was a Christian ideal. Equality was a Christian ideal. Freedom of religion, was a Christian ideal. Treating women like people instead of property, was a Christian ideal. In fact, nearly everything we have today is due exclusively to our Judeo-christian heritage. Further I think you'd have a hard time claiming that society is getting 'better' by moving away from Christian beliefs.
@andy77e (5156)
• United States
5 Jul 11
"Well lets see here limiting freedom to where it causes physical harm sure." What about emotional, and relational harm? What about the husband neglecting his wife and or kids, because he wastes his time smoking wead? Or the gambler who bankrupts his family? And how many other ways can people hurt each other in the name of personal freedom? "Freedom of Religion is a Christian idea yeah right." Yeah, right. Jesus Christ routinely made it clear that people were welcome to come, but were not required too. When the disciples asked if those that turned away from him, should be killed, he said very explicitly 'no'. Freedom of Religion is a clearly a Christian ideal. Name one other world view that has this? Name one. Atheism? What, Stalin and Hitler didn't persecute the church enough? Buddhist? Taoist? Confucianism? All have a history of violence against other belief systems. None believe in freedom of religion in their own writings and 'holy books'. "People can say what ever they want about me I mean I really don't care" I don't believe you. Pretty easy to say here now. A bit different when you lose your job, your girlfriend, your family and kids, because people spread lies and garbage about you. But of course you are pretty safe. Its generally the anti-moral people who spit in peoples faces, and call them names. I know, I had a person accuse me of starting the crusades, and few weeks later I was let go from the company. Oddly the person screaming at me on the company floor, was not let go. "Equality is a Christian Idea really crusades, Mass Genocide of Jews all very well supported by Christian Ideas." Romans 2:11 'For there is no respect of persons with God.' Further, Jesus Christ was a Jew. You think Christianity supports genocide of Jews when Jesus Christ (who created Christianity) was a Jew? "Treating Women like Property very Christian." Women were treated like property at the time Jesus Christ lived. They were treated that way everywhere in the world. Galatians 3:28 "There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus." Ephesians 5:28 "In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself." And there are numerous other examples of giving honor, not to be bitter, to care for, to respect and nurture, even die for. No, women were property under the worlds system. A Greek husband, could get rid of his wife just by saying she was not wanted. He could have multiple women for servitude, traveling companions, and just for fun when they were bored, and these women had no recourse whatsoever. The only reason women have any status at all today, is because of Jesus Christ and his disciples. "Larry Flynt is probably one of the greatest defenders of the freedom of expression we have right now." Do you know how many women Flynt has ruined, lives destroyed, emotional and relationship damage he done in the name of your precious freedom of expression? But you don't care because it isn't 'physical harm', right?
• United States
4 Jul 11
I say you are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Republicans need that far right to win elections because of the money they bring in, and the power they have in the south. But, you are 100% correct that their principals are the complete opposite of conservatives, and it does hurt the whole. It is sad that a party is concerned over a candidates religion, instead of his merits. It may be time for there to be a third party, and it being the conservative party of America. It would hurt republicans in present, but may help to do what you want to do in the end.
1 person likes this
@irisheyes (4370)
• United States
16 Jul 11
Alleluia! Finally, a Republican who at least semi-sees what I see. This is not the Republican party of Christi Whitman or Tom Keane or Nelson Rockefeller or even DDE. Personally, I see the current crop of Republicans as a direct result of Divide & Conquer. "Divide & Conquer " is an ugly litle business. They used it in Ireland when they told the poor poor protestants that they were somehow better than the poor Catholics. They used it in the South when they told the poor whites that they were somehow better than the poor blacks. It was a way to keep people with common interests from uniting and forcing change and the big losers were always those who bought into it. Then, the Republicans used "divide & Conquer" again in the sixties to let "middle America" (eg moral America) feel that they were s0mehow better than those on the streets marching for civil rights, gay rights, womens's rights, etc. They convinced these unprotesting Americans that the moral high ground was worth sacrificing their own children in a hopeless & unwinable war war. I would like to think that there is a viable Republican party left standng here but I've got my doubts. All I see is the moral right remnants. I can honestly say that I think not only would Abe Lincoln be a Democrat in today's world but Bill Buckley would probably also be a Democrat. Fine by me, since I am already a Democrat but I would welcome a party that I considered a worthy opponent and this Right Wing Republican party is not one.
@EvanHunter (4026)
• United States
7 Jul 11
I am sorry but you are missing a very important part that is the "majority". It might not be what you like but the fact is the majority means what sets the standards. If the minority controlled everything than would we really be free? It seems that because you oppose the majority and their beliefs you feel they have no right to representation. Politicians are suppose to represent the people who voted them in. In this case the majority. Those churches are made up of people and they can choose to do what they believe is right in the voting booth or not. Cancer is not the majority its the minority trying to force its will onto the majority.
@dark_joev (3034)
• United States
7 Jul 11
Well conservatism is being morphed into funding and setting up a police state yeah I would call something a cancer to freedom. Yeah they have a right to vote how they want at the box and the people who they vote for need to try and represent them. But the Majority in the republican party is destroying the republic they are all for having massive federal government forget the 9th and 10th amendments those don't matter. They have turned the Republican Party into the Police State Creation Builders. I mean really they want the government to control free will of others and to control to an absolute what people do in their personal lives. Which is something the Democrats are also doing. They just want to build a Police State that watches and controls the economy of the entire country by regulating business as heavy as they can. Well with out a minority we wouldn't be a independent nation. It wasn't a Majority that wanted to be independent it was a minority of the entire population. That really only started to become a majority when it was easy to see that we where going to win.
• United States
6 Jul 11
Well it's about time somebody tried to stand up to the "crazy religious right". I see this going all the way back to anti-reconstruction of the South and revving up in the McCarthy era, festering in an anti-Civil Rights 60's Party stance to its epitome in the Reagan years. It stems from an evil level of control that has no business in any government. While I don't agree that big government equals Big Brother, I know that "Christian" governance WOULD mean Big Brother, and then some. If much of the Republican Party insists on fighting for big governments that just differ on the finer details from their across the aisle counterparts, America will have no choice but to turn to a third party. I know that has to be why so many people are interested in the "tea party" concepts. Unfortunately, this process would take longer than the Republican Party just getting their act together and it is not really safe to leave the Democrats with so much power while the country sorts this out. No matter what else you hear me say, the only thing worse than a broken two party system is a one party system, no matter which party that is.