The Importance of Social Conservatism as it relates to the GOP

[BorisTheAnimal]

GOP Needs Social Conservatives More Than Economic Conservatives, Study Suggests

I would like everyone interested to read the full article before commenting. This supports what I have been saying all along. Alienate Social Conservatives such as myself and you effectively destroy the party.

 

[FA_Q2]

Interesting. If true, then really, the party is already doomed. Social issues lose every time – period. Should the base hold dear to that ideal, the republican party will indeed cease to exist.

 

[BorisTheAnimal]

Interesting. If true, then really, the party is already doomed. Social issues lose every time – period. Should the base hold dear to that ideal, the republican party will indeed cease to exist.

Says who? Social conservatives make up nearly half the GOP as it is. So, if the GOP becomes Democrat-Lyte, where would Conservatives go to have their voices heard? Surely not the Communist Democrats.

 

[Mr Natural]

Interesting. If true, then really, the party is already doomed. Social issues lose every time – period. Should the base hold dear to that ideal, the republican party will indeed cease to exist.

Says who? Social conservatives make up nearly half the GOP as it is. So, if the GOP becomes Democrat-Lyte, where would Conservatives go to have their voices heard? Surely not the Communist Democrats.

Go to Saudi Arabia.

It doesn't get more socially conservative than that.

 

[FA_Q2]

Interesting. If true, then really, the party is already doomed. Social issues lose every time – period. Should the base hold dear to that ideal, the republican party will indeed cease to exist.

Says who? Social conservatives make up nearly half the GOP as it is. So, if the GOP becomes Democrat-Lyte, where would Conservatives go to have their voices heard? Surely not the Communist Democrats.

They have already left because the Republicans have totally and utterly abandoned the fiscal conservatives. Bush proved unequivocally that the republicans now back big government, big spending and more government intrusion in our rights. Now, the republicans can’t win a presidential election for the life of them. Sorry but again social issues are losing issues. No one is winning elections by running against gay marriage and abortion. If you can’t see what is actually happening then I don’t know what to tell you.

 

[Asclepias]

Is that not the reason they keep losing? One of the main reasons I would never vote Republican is because of their social agenda.

 

[BorisTheAnimal]

Is that not the reason they keep losing? One of the main reasons I would never vote Republican is because of their social agenda.

So you see a problem with protecting the most innocent among us and the correct and only definition of marriage?

 

[Asclepias]

Is that not the reason they keep losing? One of the main reasons I would never vote Republican is because of their social agenda.

So you see a problem with protecting the most innocent among us and the correct and only definition of marriage?

Yes. Protecting those innocents depends solely on voiding the rights of the mother to choose to not have the baby using her body to grow. Definitions of words change all the time. If you choose to narrowly define marriage then have at it. Dont attempt to force others to adopt your stance. Do you see the parallel here? Your party is attempting to force compliance in individuals. The very thing they say they are against. Its hypocritical and very unethical. Thats why they keep losing.

 

[BorisTheAnimal]

Is that not the reason they keep losing? One of the main reasons I would never vote Republican is because of their social agenda.

So you see a problem with protecting the most innocent among us and the correct and only definition of marriage?

Yes. Protecting those innocents depends solely on voiding the rights of the mother to choose to not have the baby using her body to grow. Definitions of words change all the time. If you choose to narrowly define marriage then have at it. Dont attempt to force others to adopt your stance. Do you see the parallel here? Your party is attempting to force compliance in individuals. The very thing they say they are against. Its hypocritical and very unethical. Thats why they keep losing.

OK, then let's go all out and "redefine" murder, theft, arson, rape, and all other crimes. Hell, let's just go ahead and throw out all criminal and civil laws because after all, that's "freedom" in the eyes of the Liberal.

 

[Asclepias]

So you see a problem with protecting the most innocent among us and the correct and only definition of marriage?

Yes. Protecting those innocents depends solely on voiding the rights of the mother to choose to not have the baby using her body to grow. Definitions of words change all the time. If you choose to narrowly define marriage then have at it. Dont attempt to force others to adopt your stance. Do you see the parallel here? Your party is attempting to force compliance in individuals. The very thing they say they are against. Its hypocritical and very unethical. Thats why they keep losing.

OK, then let's go all out and "redefine" murder, theft, arson, rape, and all other crimes. Hell, let's just go ahead and throw out all criminal and civil laws because after all, that's "freedom" in the eyes of the Liberal.

Its fine if you chose to redefine those words for yourself. However, marriage does not affect you or anyone else except the parties getting married. Those words you listed do. For those words there needs to be a general consensus so we agree on the appropriate punishment as a society. Right now murder and abortion are not the same thing legally. Why do you currently feel the need to redefine a word or words that everyone pretty much understands as meaning an illegal act? Which one would you redefine if you had the chance?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Interesting. If true, then really, the party is already doomed. Social issues lose every time – period. Should the base hold dear to that ideal, the republican party will indeed cease to exist.

Social issues actually win every time. If they didn't, Obama wouldn't be using them to make his points for him, he would be using facts. The problem is that the Republican leadership is afraid of the social issues because they believe, like you, that they are losers.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Is that not the reason they keep losing? One of the main reasons I would never vote Republican is because of their social agenda.

I am willing to bet you, without knowing a thing about you, that I can convince you that a conservative social agenda makes more sense than you think. Care to take me up on it?

 

[Asclepias]

Is that not the reason they keep losing? One of the main reasons I would never vote Republican is because of their social agenda.

I am willing to bet you, without knowing a thing about you, that I can convince you that a conservative social agenda makes more sense than you think. Care to take me up on it?

Sure. What do you have in mind?

 

[Defer09]

So you think it is a good idea to alienate Libertarians and socially liberal Republicans?
Libertarians and Social Liberals can always vote for Democrats but Social Conservatives do not really have any other reasonable options.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Is that not the reason they keep losing? One of the main reasons I would never vote Republican is because of their social agenda.

I am willing to bet you, without knowing a thing about you, that I can convince you that a conservative social agenda makes more sense than you think. Care to take me up on it?

Sure. What do you have in mind?

How about teen pregnancy?

If that one scares you, we could try something else.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

From the cited article:

Conservatives can’t win without social conservatives, but increasingly, at least at the national level, they cannot win with them.

Indeed, as time goes on, for younger voters who might have conservative leanings, the hate and ignorance expressed by social conservatives will drive them away from the GOP.

The bane of social conservatism will eventually be the undoing of republicans.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Is that not the reason they keep losing? One of the main reasons I would never vote Republican is because of their social agenda.

Agreed.

I’d have no problem voting for a republican candidate who supports privacy rights with regard to abortion, the equal protection rights of same-sex couples, and the due process rights of all immigrants, regardless immigration status – none of which conflict with traditional conservative ideology prior to the advent of the disastrous Faustian bargain struck with the social right.

 

[Dot Com]

Establishment Repubs would love nothing more than be able to cut the SOCONs loose BUT they can't win elections w/o them. They are more interested in Repubs in Washington helping them to secret their money away than they are about installing cameras in people's bedrooms.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Is that not the reason they keep losing? One of the main reasons I would never vote Republican is because of their social agenda.

Agreed.

I’d have no problem voting for a republican candidate who supports privacy rights with regard to abortion, the equal protection rights of same-sex couples, and the due process rights of all immigrants, regardless immigration status – none of which conflict with traditional conservative ideology prior to the advent of the disastrous Faustian bargain struck with the social right.

Social conservatives are a lot more important to the fabric of this country than you want to believe.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Is that not the reason they keep losing? One of the main reasons I would never vote Republican is because of their social agenda.

So you see a problem with protecting the most innocent among us and the correct and only definition of marriage?

The problem is not respecting the privacy rights of Americans to make personal decisions in good faith free from interference by the government, where restricting government authority is supposed to be a fundamental tenet of conservative dogma.

And where the problem is not respecting the equal protection rights of same-sex couples to access their state’s marriage law in accordance with 14th Amendment jurisprudence, another example of restricting the authority of government also once a fundamental tenet of conservative dogma.

The irony of this is no one is asking conservatives to ‘change,’ simply return to who they once were before they succumbed to the madness of social conservatism.

Last, no one is asking conservatives to stop believing abortion is wrong or that marriage is between a man and woman only, but conservatives need to stop attempting to codify these subjective beliefs in to secular law all must obey, giving greater, unwarranted authority to the state in violation of conservative dogma.