What does it mean to be socially liberal?

[AVG-JOE]

For the textbook social liberal

Pro-choice, and doesnt beleive pro-life people even have a right to protest the point
Pro-gun control
Anti-death penalty
Pro gay marriage
In favor of public educaution (i.e. against home schooling and school vouchers)
In favor of some form of drug drecriminalization
Would vote yes for an ERA if it ever came up again
Usually in favor of lowering the voting age


If you then add in the traits of the fiscal liberal you also get:

Government funding for the above
Progressive taxation to fund the above

You also have some single issue items that can be added here and there:

Environmentalism
Animal Rights
Unionization
Liberal Immegration policies

and then add in some statist tendencies as well by:

Using government to coerce people into going along with some/all of the above.

Where are you kids getting this shit?

 

[AVG-JOE]

A socially liberal person would not believe the state should regulate who gives birth. There is no real difference between one government entity regulating abortion and another.

Nor is there when one government entity or another regulates health care. But you folks seem ok with that.

You can't have it both ways.

It's the Social Democrats that believe 'government' is the answer to all social issues, including providing health care to folks who can't pay for it.

Staunch liberals would let them rot in the street if they had no friends or family to clean them up.

This is one of those issues where a little social democracy may be called for.

Not the congressional lobbyists wet dream mis-named 'Obamacare', but We, The People should try to scrape the po' folk off the street when their bodies fail them - leaving them lie wouldn't look good for the tourists.

 

[AVG-JOE]

I believe thats called having your cake and eating it too

How so?

Just the tip of the iceberg as I see it could be. You want religious inst. to pay taxes, but then those taxes could be spent on lets say abortion, - which you are for as in states rights, so that the states that are for allowing abortion would be losing religious institutions?

The reason the republicans want abortion rights dealt with on the national level is the same reason the social democrats want it federal: both fear the voice of the people of the states. Both fear losing.

 

[JoReba]

I'm a hardcore fiscal conservative, pretty much every government program I want done away with and budgets slashed across the board. That being said I'm often called a social liberal because of my views, maybe I am, but sometimes when I think it out it seems like maybe the majority who define the term "socially liberal" may be incorrect.

I want government out of all marriage, which essentially gives gays the same capabilities as it does straights. I want churches, insurance companies, banks etc to make their decisions on who they deem to be married and how they want their policies to reflect that.

I want abortion to be a states right entirely. If you must know I'm pro-choice with limitations, but if my state (Ohio) passed pro-life legislation I would view it as democracy at work. If I have a future daughter who's raped and doesn't want to go through the pregnancy than I'll move or if possible have the procedure done elsewhere in another state.

I don't want government involved in religion whatsoever. No tax breaks for any religion, as this indirectly causes higher taxes for civilians who may or may not follow the religion. I don't want them telling schools how to or not to teach about religion, that should be up to the school and the school should inform the parents so they can decide if that's where they want their child to attend.

So to me getting government out of these issues seems like a conservative virtue, what say you?

Here yah go. This is the real answer to your question.

1.) Liberals do not know the difference between right and wrong, because any notion of right and wrong in their thinking always comes to place by means of chatty ideas, circumstances, and favored personal ideology.

2.) Liberals cannot bring themselves to either spank their children in order to gain control over them, and cannot bear the thought of any prison inmate actually being guilty of a crime.

3.) Liberals hold themselves entitled to happiness based upon their own personal terms and expectations just as illegal immigrants deserve either the same or superior social considerations as actual American citizens during their time here in America.

4.) Liberals think within their cognitive efforts they are "progressing" towards something of value.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I'm a hardcore fiscal conservative, pretty much every government program I want done away with and budgets slashed across the board. That being said I'm often called a social liberal because of my views, maybe I am, but sometimes when I think it out it seems like maybe the majority who define the term "socially liberal" may be incorrect.

I want government out of all marriage, which essentially gives gays the same capabilities as it does straights. I want churches, insurance companies, banks etc to make their decisions on who they deem to be married and how they want their policies to reflect that.

I want abortion to be a states right entirely. If you must know I'm pro-choice with limitations, but if my state (Ohio) passed pro-life legislation I would view it as democracy at work. If I have a future daughter who's raped and doesn't want to go through the pregnancy than I'll move or if possible have the procedure done elsewhere in another state.

I don't want government involved in religion whatsoever. No tax breaks for any religion, as this indirectly causes higher taxes for civilians who may or may not follow the religion. I don't want them telling schools how to or not to teach about religion, that should be up to the school and the school should inform the parents so they can decide if that's where they want their child to attend.

So to me getting government out of these issues seems like a conservative virtue, what say you?

Here yah go. This is the real answer to your question.

1.) Liberals do not know the difference between right and wrong, because any notion of right and wrong in their thinking always comes to place by means of chatty ideas, circumstances, and favored personal ideology.

2.) Liberals cannot bring themselves to either spank their children in order to gain control over them, and cannot bear the thought of any prison inmate actually being guilty of a crime.

3.) Liberals hold themselves entitled to happiness based upon their own personal terms and expectations just as illegal immigrants deserve either the same or superior social considerations during their time here in America.

4.) Liberals think within their cognitive efforts they are "progressing" towards something of value.

Wrong. I spank children here every day.

 

[Dr.Drock]

I believe thats called having your cake and eating it too

How so?

Just the tip of the iceberg as I see it could be. You want religious inst. to pay taxes, but then those taxes could be spent on lets say abortion, - which you are for as in states rights, so that the states that are for allowing abortion would be losing religious institutions?

You'll have to show me where I've ever said that I want tax dollars paying for abortions. I've never thought or said such a thing.

If a religious institution wants to leave a state because of the state's laws than that should be their choice.

 

[Dr.Drock]

I'm a hardcore fiscal conservative, pretty much every government program I want done away with and budgets slashed across the board. That being said I'm often called a social liberal because of my views, maybe I am, but sometimes when I think it out it seems like maybe the majority who define the term "socially liberal" may be incorrect.

Does that include tax incentives for industries and / or corporations? If it's fair and simple taxes you seek, you may be a liberal.

I want government out of all marriage, which essentially gives gays the same capabilities as it does straights. I want churches, insurance companies, banks etc to make their decisions on who they deem to be married and how they want their policies to reflect that.

That is a socially liberal statement. How do you feel about extending Social Security Spouse Benefits that you help pay for to same-sex couples?



I find this statement troubling. Not because of reliance on The People of any given state to 'do the right thing', liberals are all about states rights to decide, especially on social issues. The troubling part is the willingness to vote so ******* hypocritically. Do we really want a few of the states to become abortion mills for those fallen angels whose "daddy's" are rich enough to afford a bus ticket across the country?

How would you feel if The People of The Great State of Ohio passed legislation so pro-life that you'd be forbidden to take her?

How would you feel about a guy who voted in favor of keeping the county dry because it looked good at church and also because he lived only 7 miles from the county line?




This is a socially and fiscally liberal statement.

So to me getting government out of these issues seems like a conservative virtue, what say you?

I say 'Conservative', by definition, means to maintain the status quo of unfair taxes and a market place requiring a lawyer and an account to play in and you may be experiencing liberal feelings. Don't worry, everyone has them and you're not 'weird'.

Liberals typically came from the middle class –the commercial and industrial bourgeoisie, the professionals, and the intellectuals. Their chief opponents were the vested interests of traditional society – the aristocracy, the clergy, and the military – seeking to retain their favored positions. The peasantry was still generally conservative, strongly influenced by the clergy and sometimes by the aristocracy, and not very active in politics.

1.) Fair and simple low taxes yes

2.) As stated earlier I want most government funded programs done away with, including social security.

3.) Yes I want states to decide it. I don't want the biblical views of the minority forced on others through government regulation unless that's how the people vote it in.

4.) Than I'd live with the will of the people. However I would think it'd be hard for a law to be passed making it illegal to have an abortion in another state. What are they going to do? Send ohio state troopers to California to get me and her?

5.) Wouldn't have any problem with this either, I'd rather be "forced" to drive 15-30 minutes to the county over if I really wanted to drink than have the federal government over-ride the will of the people.

 

[beowolfe]

I'm a hardcore fiscal conservative, pretty much every government program I want done away with and budgets slashed across the board. That being said I'm often called a social liberal because of my views, maybe I am, but sometimes when I think it out it seems like maybe the majority who define the term "socially liberal" may be incorrect.

I want government out of all marriage, which essentially gives gays the same capabilities as it does straights. I want churches, insurance companies, banks etc to make their decisions on who they deem to be married and how they want their policies to reflect that.

I want abortion to be a states right entirely. If you must know I'm pro-choice with limitations, but if my state (Ohio) passed pro-life legislation I would view it as democracy at work. If I have a future daughter who's raped and doesn't want to go through the pregnancy than I'll move or if possible have the procedure done elsewhere in another state.

I don't want government involved in religion whatsoever. No tax breaks for any religion, as this indirectly causes higher taxes for civilians who may or may not follow the religion. I don't want them telling schools how to or not to teach about religion, that should be up to the school and the school should inform the parents so they can decide if that's where they want their child to attend.

So to me getting government out of these issues seems like a conservative virtue, what say you?

Socially liberal means that you allow others to live their lives and that you do not impose your morality on others. For instance, if you want to have 18 children because you don't believe in contraception and you don't believe in abortion; I think it's dumb, but more power to you.

 

[Dr.Drock]

I'm a hardcore fiscal conservative, pretty much every government program I want done away with and budgets slashed across the board. That being said I'm often called a social liberal because of my views, maybe I am, but sometimes when I think it out it seems like maybe the majority who define the term "socially liberal" may be incorrect.

I want government out of all marriage, which essentially gives gays the same capabilities as it does straights. I want churches, insurance companies, banks etc to make their decisions on who they deem to be married and how they want their policies to reflect that.

I want abortion to be a states right entirely. If you must know I'm pro-choice with limitations, but if my state (Ohio) passed pro-life legislation I would view it as democracy at work. If I have a future daughter who's raped and doesn't want to go through the pregnancy than I'll move or if possible have the procedure done elsewhere in another state.

I don't want government involved in religion whatsoever. No tax breaks for any religion, as this indirectly causes higher taxes for civilians who may or may not follow the religion. I don't want them telling schools how to or not to teach about religion, that should be up to the school and the school should inform the parents so they can decide if that's where they want their child to attend.

So to me getting government out of these issues seems like a conservative virtue, what say you?

Socially liberal means that you allow others to live their lives and that you do not impose your morality on others. For instance, if you want to have 18 children because you don't believe in contraception and you don't believe in abortion; I think it's dumb, but more power to you.

I agree, as long as I'm not forced to pay welfare on those kids.

 

[R.D.]

How so?

Just the tip of the iceberg as I see it could be. You want religious inst. to pay taxes, but then those taxes could be spent on lets say abortion, - which you are for as in states rights, so that the states that are for allowing abortion would be losing religious institutions?

You'll have to show me where I've ever said that I want tax dollars paying for abortions. I've never thought or said such a thing.

If a religious institution wants to leave a state because of the state's laws than that should be their choice.

You didn't say you didn't.

 

[editec]

Being a liberal is an approach to politics not a laundry list of beliefs.

Same with being conservative.

And what consitutues being liberal or conservative really depends on the state of affiars at the time and place, too.

Many of you are so fixated on today's debates you miss entirely the point of having the ADJECTIVES liberal and conservative.

What many self proclaiming conservatives believe today would be considered extremely liberal in another time and place.

Same with liberalism.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Just the tip of the iceberg as I see it could be. You want religious inst. to pay taxes, but then those taxes could be spent on lets say abortion, - which you are for as in states rights, so that the states that are for allowing abortion would be losing religious institutions?

You'll have to show me where I've ever said that I want tax dollars paying for abortions. I've never thought or said such a thing.

If a religious institution wants to leave a state because of the state's laws than that should be their choice.

You didn't say you didn't.

So I didn't say I did or didn't, yet you made a baseless assumption.

I've also never said I didn't believe in Santa Claus, that I didn't do 100 laps around my house this morning naked, doesn't mean you should assume the opposite because I haven't said it.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Being a liberal is an approach to politics not a laundry list of beliefs.

Same with being conservative.

And what consitutues being liberal or conservative really depends on the state of affiars at the time and place, too.

Many of you are so fixated on today's debates you miss entirely the point of having the ADJECTIVES liberal and conservative.

What many self proclaiming conservatives believe today would be considered extremely liberal in another time and place.

Same with liberalism.

Sadly with government being involved with all these social beliefs many things are brought into the political spectrum that shouldn't be.

Being pro or anti gay marriage shouldn't have the title liberal or conservative as government should have nothing to do with it imo.

 

[Two Thumbs]

I'm a hardcore fiscal conservative, pretty much every government program I want done away with and budgets slashed across the board. That being said I'm often called a social liberal because of my views, maybe I am, but sometimes when I think it out it seems like maybe the majority who define the term "socially liberal" may be incorrect.

I want government out of all marriage, which essentially gives gays the same capabilities as it does straights. I want churches, insurance companies, banks etc to make their decisions on who they deem to be married and how they want their policies to reflect that.

I want abortion to be a states right entirely. If you must know I'm pro-choice with limitations, but if my state (Ohio) passed pro-life legislation I would view it as democracy at work. If I have a future daughter who's raped and doesn't want to go through the pregnancy than I'll move or if possible have the procedure done elsewhere in another state.

I don't want government involved in religion whatsoever. No tax breaks for any religion, as this indirectly causes higher taxes for civilians who may or may not follow the religion. I don't want them telling schools how to or not to teach about religion, that should be up to the school and the school should inform the parents so they can decide if that's where they want their child to attend.

So to me getting government out of these issues seems like a conservative virtue, what say you?

The major come from this (imo)
Social conservatives support states rights to do everything you listed.
Social liberals want it done at the federal level. Leaving no one a place to move to if they disagree.

uh...no. A liberal believes no government entity should regulate any of the issues he brought up.

You, on the other hand, seem to think a state government has more rights over individuals than the federal government does...that makes you a social conservative.

Those are items liberals want the government involved in.

abortion is a federal law, no state can regulate it.
libs want churches taxed
libs tell schools what they can and can not teach

 

[Two Thumbs]

Being a liberal is an approach to politics not a laundry list of beliefs.

Same with being conservative.

And what consitutues being liberal or conservative really depends on the state of affiars at the time and place, too.

Many of you are so fixated on today's debates you miss entirely the point of having the ADJECTIVES liberal and conservative.

What many self proclaiming conservatives believe today would be considered extremely liberal in another time and place.

Same with liberalism.

The definitions are almost 180 away from what they used to believe.

 

[R.D.]

You'll have to show me where I've ever said that I want tax dollars paying for abortions. I've never thought or said such a thing.

If a religious institution wants to leave a state because of the state's laws than that should be their choice.

You didn't say you didn't.

So I didn't say I did or didn't, yet you made a baseless assumption.

I've also never said I didn't believe in Santa Claus, that I didn't do 100 laps around my house this morning naked, doesn't mean you should assume the opposite because I haven't said it.

No need for a hissy fit

You asked I answered. Go ahead play pretend with the laws to suit your needs and pretend you're conservative with liberal leanings if it makes you feel good.

 

[spectrumc01]

I consider my self a fiscal conservative, if you can't pay cash for it right now then obviously you don't need it. With a few exceptions i.e house and vehicle. The same should apply with the government spending.

I also consider myself a social liberal, do what you want as long as you aren't hurting, or infringing on anyone else. Basically keep your nose in your own business. Same approach with government, keep the religious out of government because they use it to enforce their morality on others.

 

[Dr.Drock]

You didn't say you didn't.

So I didn't say I did or didn't, yet you made a baseless assumption.

I've also never said I didn't believe in Santa Claus, that I didn't do 100 laps around my house this morning naked, doesn't mean you should assume the opposite because I haven't said it.

No need for a hissy fit

You asked I answered. Go ahead play pretend with the laws to suit your needs and pretend you're conservative with liberal leanings if it makes you feel good.

Lol didn't have a hissy fit, simply gave examples of why what you did was silly.

Isn't anytime anyone talks about wanting a law or budget changed on this forum "playing pretend"?

I don't care about the label, I just think wanting government out of these things sounds conservative and have no problem hearing other opinions on whether ppl agree or disagree.

I know I'm fiscally conservative, no doubt about that.

I don't know if I'm socially liberal or conservative, either label anyone gives me is of no personal insult.

 

[Bern80]

I generally consider myself socially liberal. To me it means essentially allowing people to do what they want as long as that doesn't infringe on another's rights. If the choices you make don't effect another human being, no matter how stupid said choice may be, you should be free to make them. Of the top of my head that would mean legalization of drugs, pro-choice until viability of the fetus, no seat belt laws, legalization of prostitution, drinking age to 18, government out of marriage. I'm sure there are a lot more.

 

[beowolfe]

Being a liberal is an approach to politics not a laundry list of beliefs.

Same with being conservative.

And what consitutues being liberal or conservative really depends on the state of affiars at the time and place, too.

Many of you are so fixated on today's debates you miss entirely the point of having the ADJECTIVES liberal and conservative.

What many self proclaiming conservatives believe today would be considered extremely liberal in another time and place.

Same with liberalism.

That may be true today of liberalism, but not conservativism. If you can't check off on the far right litmus test, today you are drummed out of the GOP. And don't even think about running for state or nation office! If you're not pro-life, pro-NRA, anti-taxes, etc.....you can't hold office as a republican in the vast majority of the states. They still refer to non-wingnust as Rinos and they actively try to expel them. Look at McCain. He had to give us his trusted Maverick label just to stay in the GOP.