What beliefs define a 21st Century American conservative?

[Wry Catcher]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

"Belief in God, or some form of transcendent Real, has been assumed in virtually every culture throughout human history. The issue of the reasonableness or rationality of belief in God or particular beliefs about God typically arises when a religion is confronted with religious competitors or the rise of atheism or agnosticism. In the West, belief in God was assumed in the dominant Jewish, Christian and Islamic religions. God, in this tradition, is the omnipotent, omniscient, perfectly good and all-loving Creator of the universe (such a doctrine is sometimes called ‘bare theism&#8217. This article considers the following epistemological issues: reasonableness of belief in the Judeo-Christian-Muslim God (“God,” for short), the nature of reason, the claim that belief in God is not rational, defenses that it is rational, and approaches that recommend groundless belief in God or philosophical fideism."

Link: Religious Epistemology [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]

I think, therefore, I am agnostic.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The Founders were classical liberals, not modern day American liberals. The United States of America and its Constitution were founded on classical liberal principles, not modern day ones. If you don't know the difference you won't ever see the truth of that.

There is no difference in principle between the two. Those conservatives who think there is are confusing ends and means. Liberalism is now and always has been about equality, about serving the interests of the many instead of the few, about protecting the liberty of ordinary people against oppression by the rich and powerful. "Classical" liberals as you call them often focused on the government as the main tool by which the rich and powerful oppressed ordinary people, hence your confusion.

Actually, liberals still oppose oppression by the government. But there is now a greater willingness to use government itself to restrain oppression by private power. And yet even back then, this was not unheard of among liberals; I refer you to Jefferson's letter to Madison while he was serving as ambassador to France, in which he spoke movingly of the great inequality of wealth he saw, and certain taxation and free-land measures that he thought might prevent its occurrence in the United States.

No it hasn't. All you have to do is look back to the 60s to see the error in your argument. Liberals than fought long and hard for the good of the few over the good of the many, what do you think the civil rights movement was all about? If, as you assert, liberals were for the good of the many we would never have allowed MLK to say the things he did.

It looks to me like you are the one that is confused.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

"Belief in God, or some form of transcendent Real, has been assumed in virtually every culture throughout human history. The issue of the reasonableness or rationality of belief in God or particular beliefs about God typically arises when a religion is confronted with religious competitors or the rise of atheism or agnosticism. In the West, belief in God was assumed in the dominant Jewish, Christian and Islamic religions. God, in this tradition, is the omnipotent, omniscient, perfectly good and all-loving Creator of the universe (such a doctrine is sometimes called ‘bare theism’). This article considers the following epistemological issues: reasonableness of belief in the Judeo-Christian-Muslim God (“God,” for short), the nature of reason, the claim that belief in God is not rational, defenses that it is rational, and approaches that recommend groundless belief in God or philosophical fideism."

Link: Religious Epistemology*[Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]

I think, therefore, I am agnostic.

I have no evidence you think, you respond like a chatbot. when you pass the Turing test you can claim to be an agnostic.

 

[Wry Catcher]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

"Belief in God, or some form of transcendent Real, has been assumed in virtually every culture throughout human history. The issue of the reasonableness or rationality of belief in God or particular beliefs about God typically arises when a religion is confronted with religious competitors or the rise of atheism or agnosticism. In the West, belief in God was assumed in the dominant Jewish, Christian and Islamic religions. God, in this tradition, is the omnipotent, omniscient, perfectly good and all-loving Creator of the universe (such a doctrine is sometimes called ‘bare theism’). This article considers the following epistemological issues: reasonableness of belief in the Judeo-Christian-Muslim God (“God,” for short), the nature of reason, the claim that belief in God is not rational, defenses that it is rational, and approaches that recommend groundless belief in God or philosophical fideism."

Link: Religious Epistemology*[Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]

I think, therefore, I am agnostic.

I have no evidence you think, you respond like a chatbot. when you pass the Turing test you can claim to be an agnostic.

Evidence? What evidence do you need? I don't know if a Supreme Being exist. Therefore, I don't behave because I'm afraid some Supreme Being will punish me, I treat others the way I would like to be treated.

 

[Foxfyre]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

"Belief in God, or some form of transcendent Real, has been assumed in virtually every culture throughout human history. The issue of the reasonableness or rationality of belief in God or particular beliefs about God typically arises when a religion is confronted with religious competitors or the rise of atheism or agnosticism. In the West, belief in God was assumed in the dominant Jewish, Christian and Islamic religions. God, in this tradition, is the omnipotent, omniscient, perfectly good and all-loving Creator of the universe (such a doctrine is sometimes called ‘bare theism’). This article considers the following epistemological issues: reasonableness of belief in the Judeo-Christian-Muslim God (“God,” for short), the nature of reason, the claim that belief in God is not rational, defenses that it is rational, and approaches that recommend groundless belief in God or philosophical fideism."

Link: Religious Epistemology*[Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]

I think, therefore, I am agnostic.

I certainly hope you aren't attempting to derail your own thread here by changing it to Atheism/agnosticism versus belief in God or someting similar. Surely there are enough threads on that subject to post in, or start a new one. Some are interesting discussions.

But pertinent to your thesis of this thread:

The Founders and their mentors, to a man, even those who were agnostic or Atheists, believed and supported a concept of unalienable rights as coming from God; i.e. that exist apart and separate from the 'thoughts' of humankind and therefore must be inviolate. Some were Christian. Some may have supported some other beliefs. Some were agnostic and/or Atheist. But they all thought alike on that issue.

And here we have the disconnect between 21st Century liberals and 21st Century conservatives. You cannot be a modern American conservative and not understand the concept of unalienable rights that translate to a concept of personal liberty and self governance. The liberals dance around that with the wildest stretches to avoid seeing it, discussing, it, understanding it, and above all embracing it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

"Belief in God, or some form of transcendent Real, has been assumed in virtually every culture throughout human history. The issue of the reasonableness or rationality of belief in God or particular beliefs about God typically arises when a religion is confronted with religious competitors or the rise of atheism or agnosticism. In the West, belief in God was assumed in the dominant Jewish, Christian and Islamic religions. God, in this tradition, is the omnipotent, omniscient, perfectly good and all-loving Creator of the universe (such a doctrine is sometimes called ‘bare theism’). This article considers the following epistemological issues: reasonableness of belief in the Judeo-Christian-Muslim God (“God,” for short), the nature of reason, the claim that belief in God is not rational, defenses that it is rational, and approaches that recommend groundless belief in God or philosophical fideism."

Link: Religious Epistemology*[Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]

I think, therefore, I am agnostic.

I have no evidence you think, you respond like a chatbot. when you pass the Turing test you can claim to be an agnostic.

Evidence? What evidence do you need? I don't know if a Supreme Being exist. Therefore, I don't behave because I'm afraid some Supreme Being will punish me, I treat others the way I would like to be treated.

I told you what evidence I need, you need to pass a Turing test.

 

[candycorn]

STFU, Mary

My my...so bitter....so unimportant.

Is Perry still in the race?

Yeah. And he'll be the next nominee. So start packing, tinkerbell.

I think you have nothing to say. Not nothing intelligent. That's a given. Just nothing at all.
Buh bye.

You were saying?

I LOVE IT!!!​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

What beliefs define a 21st Century American conservative?

Torturing Gay sons & daughters.​

"North Carolina Pastor, Sean Harris, is making his way around the blogosphere for his horrific rant about how parents should treat their children if little boys act a bit “girly”. He urges parents to hit their kids and even break their bones to avoid losing them to homosexuality."

Christian Torture​

Better watch-OUT for the ones who have friends, who can.....

....KICK YOUR ASS....

....though!!​