Liberalism did not win this race

[sportage]

Do not get confused here.
Tacking the term liberal to human rights and advancent with America is not liberal.
Calling it liberal makes one believe there is a right and a wrong side to the issue(s).
Calling it liberal agenda makes one believe they must chose a side.

Women wanting equal pay protection IS NOT LIBERAL.
Women wanting the right to control,their own lives IS NOT LIBERAL.
Amending marriage to be more inclusive IS NOT LIBERAL.
Fair tax policy IS NOT LIBERAL.
Ending long costly war(s) IS NOT LIBERAL.
Seeking affordable healthcare for all US citizens IS NOT LIBERAL.

People confuse the term liberal with fairness and justice.
Fairness, protection, and justice for all people, as is stated in the US constitution, is not some liberal terminology.
To feel the issues above are liberal connected would be making a very bad mistake.

Liberalism did not win this race. Common ground won this race.
Something not liberal or conservative biased in any way.

[RabidMongoose]

I think that multiculturalism (women, blacks, hispanics, asians, gays, etc.) won the race.

[Steeplerot]

Originally Posted by sportage

Do not get confused here.
Tacking the term liberal to human rights and advancent with America is not liberal.
Calling it liberal makes one believe there is a right and a wrong side to the issue(s).
Calling it liberal agenda makes one believe they must chose a side.

Women wanting equal pay protection IS NOT LIBERAL.
Women wanting the right to control,their own lives IS NOT LIBERAL.
Amending marriage to be more inclusive IS NOT LIBERAL.
Fair tax policy IS NOT LIBERAL.
Ending long costly war(s) IS NOT LIBERAL.
Seeking affordable healthcare for all US citizens IS NOT LIBERAL.

People confuse the term liberal with fairness and justice.
Fairness, protection, and justice for all people, as is stated in the US constitution, is not some liberal terminology.
To feel the issues above are liberal connected would be making a very bad mistake.

Liberalism did not win this race. Common ground won this race.
Something not liberal or conservative biased in any way.

Of course its not Liberal to you now that Liberals fought so hard for it to be politically viable to even talk about this stuff without losing your job/life etc.

But you do have liberals to thank.

[nehalem256]

Originally Posted by sportage

Do not get confused here.
Tacking the term liberal to human rights and advancent with America is not liberal.
Calling it liberal makes one believe there is a right and a wrong side to the issue(s).
Calling it liberal agenda makes one believe they must chose a side.

Women wanting equal pay protection IS NOT LIBERAL.
Women wanting the right to control,their own lives IS NOT LIBERAL.
Amending marriage to be more inclusive IS NOT LIBERAL.
Fair tax policy IS NOT LIBERAL.
Ending long costly war(s) IS NOT LIBERAL.
Seeking affordable healthcare for all US citizens IS NOT LIBERAL.

People confuse the term liberal with fairness and justice.
Fairness, protection, and justice for all people, as is stated in the US constitution, is not some liberal terminology.
To feel the issues above are liberal connected would be making a very bad mistake.

Liberalism did not win this race. Common ground won this race.
Something not liberal or conservative biased in any way.

Liberals do not believe women have a right to control their own lives. They believe women have the right to control other people's lives.

[Agent11]

Funny thing is that the conservatives will actively oppose those things... Most individuals tend to dislike social conservatism, but you would be hard pressed for examples of representatives reaching across the aisle for these issues.

[Juror No. 8]

Of course liberalism won this race. Not classical liberalism, but modern liberalism.

Modern liberalism = Welfare/warfare statism

That's exactly what was elected and what we've had in America since that scumbag Teddy Roosevelt was in the Blight House.

[sigurros81]

Is there a point to this thread.

[IGBT]

obama will have to clean up the mess the country is in from the last four years of obama.

[Meghan54]

Originally Posted by sportage

Do not get confused here.
Tacking the term liberal to human rights and advancent with America is not liberal.
Calling it liberal makes one believe there is a right and a wrong side to the issue(s).
Calling it liberal agenda makes one believe they must chose a side.

Women wanting equal pay protection IS NOT LIBERAL.
Women wanting the right to control,their own lives IS NOT LIBERAL.
Amending marriage to be more inclusive IS NOT LIBERAL.
Fair tax policy IS NOT LIBERAL.
Ending long costly war(s) IS NOT LIBERAL.
Seeking affordable healthcare for all US citizens IS NOT LIBERAL.

Then why do Republicans vehemently oppose those ideas?

[Moonbeam]

Conservatives are brain dead. They can't even figure out they just got trounced in an election.

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally Posted by sportage

People confuse the term liberal with fairness and justice.

Actually they don't. But they should. The "liberal" label needs reforming from the derogatory term it's become in this country. Don't fight this. If people want to consider those things "liberal" then good.

[PingviN]

"Liberalism" in the US really is social democracy.

[shadow9d9]

There is only one person in the senate that is in a liberal party.. Bernie Sanders. The Democrats are a middle/right party. So no, liberalism doesn't actually exist in this country in any real capacity.

It is just a fallacy that the Republicans need to push. In their world there is only black and white. Their way, or the extreme opposite that just so happens not to exist here.

[zsdersw]

Originally Posted by nehalem256

Liberals do not believe women have a right to control their own lives. They believe women have the right to control other people's lives.

Social conservatives believe men have the right to control women's lives.

[nehalem256]

Originally Posted by zsdersw

Social conservatives believe men have the right to control women's lives.

Social conservatives believe society should control both men's and women's lives.

Originally Posted by Gonad the Barbarian

Actually they don't. But they should. The "liberal" label needs reforming from the derogatory term it's become in this country. Don't fight this. If people want to consider those things "liberal" then good.

Liberals believe in "equality" not fairness and justice.

[Juror No. 8]

Originally Posted by nehalem256

Social conservatives believe society should control both men's and women's lives.

Is that really what social conservatives believe? That society should control the lives of people?

What a bunch of wannabe petty tyrants.

[Rob M.]

Social Liberalism won the race.

I quote one woman voter who said: "Obama's tolerant, and is for women's rights".

In other words, people with no moral absolutes won the race, those who like to help the poor with OPM (other people's money), and those who think that those with a shred of morality have no place in the world.

Goodbye structure and standards and hello to chaos and moral intolerance.

[zsdersw]

Originally Posted by Rob M.

Social Liberalism won the race.

I quote one woman voter who said: "Obama's tolerant, and is for women's rights".

In other words, people with no moral absolutes won the race, those who like to help the poor with OPM (other people's money), and those who think that those with a shred of morality have no place in the world.

Goodbye structure and standards and hello to chaos and moral intolerance.

The bold in your post is nothing more than the typical judgementalism we expect from those like you who view government and law as a way of forcing people to accept your religious definition of morality.

[Rob M.]

Originally Posted by zsdersw

The bold in your post is nothing more than the typical judgementalism we expect from those like you who view government and law as a way of forcing people to accept your religious definition of morality.

What's my religious definiton of morality, then, since you know me better than I do?

[zsdersw]

Originally Posted by Rob M.

What's my religious definiton of morality, then, since you know me better than I do?

You're on the Christian conservative side on almost every social issue; believing that certain things should be legal or illegal simply because your religious beliefs say those things are virtuous (the things you think should be legal) or blasphemy (the things you think should be illegal).

[nehalem256]

Originally Posted by zsdersw

The bold in your post is nothing more than the typical judgementalism we expect from those like you who view government and law as a way of forcing people to accept your religious definition of morality.

And social liberalism is nothing more than forcing moral people to pay for people's immorality.

Maybe if you did not expect me to pay for your immoral behavior I would not be so interested in it?

[zsdersw]

Originally Posted by nehalem256

And social liberalism is nothing more than forcing moral people to pay for people's immorality.

Maybe if you did not expect me to pay for your immoral behavior I would not be so interested in it?

I don't expect anyone to pay for anyone else's anything. Libertarianism all the way.

You can call what I do immoral and I can call you a Leave-It-To-Beaver-trip-back-to-the-50s reactionary idiot... it's all good.

[Rob M.]

Originally Posted by zsdersw

You're on the Christian conservative side on almost every social issue; believing that certain things should be legal or illegal simply because your religious beliefs say those things are virtuous (the things you think should be legal) or blasphemy (the things you think should be illegal).

Let me simple and honest:

I simply believe people should have moral standards, and structure. Not saying that people don't, but that's just a personal thought.

Obvious, that has changed. Whether or not you think that's a good thing is up to you.

Let me ask you, since you're so big on "forcing beliefs", would you stand up for more convervatives that feel that other more liberal folks are forcing theirs (by making same-sex marriage and abortion into law in some places) on others who don't want them?

..or are you the typical biased liberal that have no issue with your beliefs being made law, while at the same time, ripping conservatives who also want theirs into law?

[zsdersw]

Originally Posted by Rob M.

Let me ask you, since you're so big on "forcing beliefs", would you stand up for more convervatives that feel that other more liberal folks are forcing theirs (by making same-sex marriage and abortion into law in some places) on others who don't want them?

Unless these liberal folks are forcing the conservative folks to be married to someone of the same sex or forcing them to have an abortion, there's no forcing of anything on anyone.

..or are you the typical biased liberal that have no issue with your beliefs being made law, while at the same time, ripping conservatives who also want theirs into law?

I'm on the side of advancing freedom, not curtailing it. I believe something should be illegal only if it directly impacts someone else's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Gay marriage and abortion affect only those who choose to have a same-sex marriage or are deciding whether or not to have an abortion, not anyone else.

Or, more plainly, offending someone else's moral standards is not sufficient reason to ban something or make it illegal.

[Rob M.]

Originally Posted by zsdersw

Unless these liberal folks are forcing the conservative folks to be married to someone of the same sex or forcing them to have an abortion, there's no forcing of anything on anyone.

I'm on the side of advancing freedom, not curtailing it. I believe something should be illegal only if it directly impacts someone else's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Gay marriage and abortion affect only those who choose to have a same-sex marriage or are deciding whether or not to have an abortion, not anyone else.

Or, more plainly, offending someone else's moral standards is not sufficient reason to ban something or make it illegal.

And this is why I say we're headed to social oblivion. You are gonna have some on one side and some on the other side.

Well, this is the world people wanted. Oh well.