I'm still working on my definition of liberal vs. conservative. But one of the definite differences is that liberals believe in giving the individual as much freedom as possible so long as it doesn't interfere with the welfare of others. Conservatives believe in passing laws imposing their morality in order to acheive what they view as a "moral" (i.e. repressive) society and reducing the freedom of individuals.
Givens from my point of view:
Morality is quite often oppression in disguise.
Welfare does not equal morality
-Kevin
>where does it stop then?
>
>We are going to become a law-less society, so everyone can be happy.
>
>If that's where we're going then so be it.
>
>I'll still be a conservative, Christian, republican.
>
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jochem van Dieten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 6:59 PM
>To: CF-Community
>Subject: Re: Senate rejects move to ban same-sex marriage
>
>
>Monique Boea wrote:
>>
>> But if a group of people can change laws (and PLEASE don't compare this
>> to the black human rights issue) then what is to stop other groups from
>> changing the laws to further change marriage, age limits, sex limits,
>> crime, etc. Like a man wanting to marry his daughter. Do we further
>> change the laws to accommodate him? Or a woman who wants to sleep with a
>> 14 year old.
>
>How do you think we got the current laws?
>
>That's right, we got the current laws because groups of people could
>convince sufficient people to change the existing law to their views. That
>is a continuous proces and has served over hundreds of years to produce the
>laws that are currently in place.
>Are you seriously suggesting we stop changing law, send the entire
>legislative body home and live with the current laws forever?
>
>Jochem
> _____
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
