Conservatives and Religion

Posted by Herb7734 6 years, 10 months ago to Philosophy
65 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

What usually is left out when talking about the difference between conservatives and liberals is religion and it's collateral effects.Conservatives say that they are for the Constitution's "original intent", in other words, strict construction. Actually the Constitution was was constructed to protect individual liberty. But then, they favor anti abortion laws, prayer in schools, and seek to impose religious morality by force of law. They do favor, however, reduced government intervention in the economy.The liberals favor a "loose construction when interpreting the Constitution.It means they can "update it and change it from its original intent to ruling by whim. The question is, is there a moral justification for capitalism? Miss Rand in her various writings makes this very clear, and is way too long to go into here.As to religion? I needn't say more. than she attributes all heavenly folks as ghosts. In all discussions relative to liberal v conservative the deep underpinnings of of both sides are never realized. Instead, we get extreme liberal lack of laws and restraints with conservatives touting adherence to laws and a basic interpretation of the Constitution.


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 3.
  • Posted by 6 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Individual thought versus group think..One of my favorite tales:
    When wandering through the student center one day, I encountered a group arguing over the type of nonsense, I love to be part of. One fellow with an outrageous southern accent was arguing with a increasingly angry city boy that opossums fornicate through their noses.In order to keep things from escalating into something physical, I suggested that we come back tomorrow with proof to our particular claims. I went to a professor who was a zoologist who was, after hearing my story, was kind enough to be amused and took the time to explain that it was not possible, for opossums to have sex with their noses.he signed his name, including all his degrees which were numerous. The next day we met back at the student center. Confidently, I showed him my letter from the prof.and it even showed that because they copulated face to face it didn't mean that the nose was in any way involved. With a Hah! He said, "I got you beat" and he produced a letter stating his belief and signed by 25 or 30 of his friends, and the argument started all over again.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by bsmith51 6 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Strict rationality serves the few truly thinking people but church, with its inherent flaws, generally sets the standards for the masses. Those standards should not automatically be rejected due to their origins.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by mia767ca 6 years, 10 months ago
    "conservatives and socialists are on a different moral spectrum than objectivists...they are altruists...anti-freedom and anti-liberty....we are pro-individual...freedom,...and liberty...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 6 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Liberals are approaching the most dangerous of all philosophies which is Anarchy. The only way anarchy works is with a population of totally rational persons. Please let me know when that happens.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 6 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I would "take" nothing away from anyone, so long as whatever it is will not hurt me or others. You can be a Zarathustrian Tree Worshiper for all I care. If you annoy me or try to harass me, just leave me alone and MYOB.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by bsudell 6 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I think those thoughts and beliefs still satisfy people. Who is someone else to take that away from them? Not good. Let people be. Anything that makes them be moral and have concerns about others is good. It is not nonsense; it is belief.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 6 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Plus, it's so easy to prove that they don't care.Once the 7th veil is removed, you see a drooling beast chasing after power and money ala Maxine Waters.
    Hey, Max, where did you get the money to pay for your palatial manor?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 6 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I like your last sentence.
    Religion(s) have some good things, moral principles that satisfied people 2 or 3 hundred years ago, and certainly a couple of thousand years ago. But most of it is pure nonsense and one doesn't have to be a scientist to recognize it.For people living in the 21st century to fashion their lives around religious stories and rituals is irrational. There is no other way to say it. Running your life by witch-doctor rituals and the repeating
    of pleadings to the "king of the universe" throws all knowledge and scientific achievement away. and shows that the worshiper has no concept of what the universe really is.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 6 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I agree completely..
    I started writing a reply whe I realized that I was pretty much duplicating what you had already posted. I gotta start taking Prevagen.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by bsudell 6 years, 10 months ago
    "they favor anti abortion laws, prayer in schools, and seek to impose religious morality by force..." is the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. People have the right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." You disguise murder by using abortion, so why don't you say they are anti-murder, which is what they are. How do you support that sentence? People were educated using the torah and the bible. I think it would be good to learn about all religions in school. It's learning about what people believe. That's extremely interesting. And, how do you teach morality? Talking and teaching morality is now "force of law." I don't think so. America is great because Americans are good. We don't want to lose that.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by jimjamesjames 6 years, 10 months ago
    The Constitution was created on the values stated in the Declaration of Independence. Times change, things change but core values are timeless. My issue is that liberal values are so flimsy that they have no foundation other than "We care, you don't." The irrational reason, IMHO, that they have become so virulent, is one, they cannot define their values and, two, like petulant children, they lash out.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 6 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    To the extent the words still have meaning, I see "conservative" as supporting time-tested practices simply because of they're history. "Liberal" is the opposite, supporting new practices just because they're new. These definitions are consistent with what you said about liberals loosely interpreting the Constitution.

    It's irrational to do something simply because it's old or new. The word doesn't mean conservatives and liberals are totally irrational but rather they have an irrational bias: all things being equal they lean toward the old and new respectively.

    All my life the words seem to be losing their meaning. They were confusing when I first learned them because conservative can also mean cautious (e.g. a conservative investment approach) and liberal can mean classical liberalism.

    I see them becoming even more meaningless, just epithets for people who like to be mean but don't have any real things to be mean about. It's not like one word represents gov't being less expensive and intrusive while the other represents the idea that well-managed gov't can solve many problems. It's just an excuse for people to act like idiots.

    BTW, I think I understand you're saying: Using the old definitions, conservatives support free capitalism except they support trade barriers and immigration restrictions because that's the way it was historically. Liberals are distrustful of capitalism for the same reason. Ayn Rand says who cares what people did in the past. There's a rational basis for capitalism unrelated to appeal to antiquity.

    I completely agree if this is what you're saying. It's sad that by the new definitions conservatives act like angry children who need food and sleep and liberals act the exact same way. I'm with Melania Trump: "I don't care [about the angry tantrums]. Do you?"
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 6 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Trying to dilineate the commonly accepted version of the difference between left and right. The usually unspoken aspect of conservative ithought the insertion of religion as part of their input. To an Objectivist this voids much of the conservative viewpoint, stepping away, as it does, from strict rationality.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 6 years, 10 months ago
    "liberal lack of laws and restraints with conservatives touting adherence to laws"
    Liberals and conservatives both tout adherence to laws but say legal institutions conspire against them.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 6 years, 10 months ago
    Can you re-state the last two or three sentences? I think I'm missing something b/c of the way it's worded.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo