This is so well-written and eye opening for someone like me who was completely ignorant of the ethos liberal temperance. I guess the big question is whether liberal temperance will yield a politically palatable outcome and what cost. Otherwise it is an exercise in acadamic “skulduggery”?
Not sure what you mean by "politically palatable outcome." If it means "my policy preferences" then obviously a liberal democratic polity where these preferences are contested at every level can't guarantee such an outcome. If it means holding political actors like the former president and his mob accountable to the rule of law then of course liberal temperance does not preclude that. But it does mean that we do so not in the spirit of revenge but accountability.
Classical Liberals were against war and big government. Something has changed, and it's not me. The far left like to think they are Classical Liberals but history tells a different story. And the ideology of the Far Left is unsound. It eventually turns on itself.
Only after the fact and not on any fundamental grounds since the mystical collectivism of Christianity cannot condemn the mystical collectivism of Nazism, Fascism, Communism and Socialism (all of which are collectivist and therefore far-LEFT ideologies.)
Overall, they all agree on far more than they disagree.
There's no baby involved with abortion but even if you pretend it's a full-grown adult, with all associated rights, abortion would still not be a rights violation. No one has the right to be carried to term.
On the flip side, banning abortion turns people into incubators. The only rights violation worse than this would be literal slavery and/or death camps.
So, I don't think there's anything "pro-life" about the anti-abortion position.
But I think the even bigger issue is the sheer political illiteracy and topsy turvy mental gymnastics of anti-abortions.
It certainly feels like a far left forum sometimes and this piece reads like a religious essay on how not to stray from your one true religion. The facts are clear that Liberals do well at some things and Conservatives do well at others and that for a thriving democracy you need BOTH to function together.
I don't understand your point. To a Left Winger everything is right. lol You're assuming I'm far right?
I was a classic Liberal my entire life but classic Liberals have been captured by the FAR LEFT. They are making decisions based on illogical, faulty ideology and it's wrapping around and biting them in the behind.
The ONLY correct answer is being somewhere near the centre. That's the only way to move forward. Being too far left or right will just set on a course of destruction that will eventually oppose itself.
I'm not sure about Church during Nazi era. Certainly many Priests did but many did not condemn Nazis. Pius was weak on the topic..I think there's some question about the Church's role...and I was a long time Catholic.
This is so well-written and eye opening for someone like me who was completely ignorant of the ethos liberal temperance. I guess the big question is whether liberal temperance will yield a politically palatable outcome and what cost. Otherwise it is an exercise in acadamic “skulduggery”?
Not sure what you mean by "politically palatable outcome." If it means "my policy preferences" then obviously a liberal democratic polity where these preferences are contested at every level can't guarantee such an outcome. If it means holding political actors like the former president and his mob accountable to the rule of law then of course liberal temperance does not preclude that. But it does mean that we do so not in the spirit of revenge but accountability.
Thanks for proving my perfectly.
Classical Liberals were against war and big government. Something has changed, and it's not me. The far left like to think they are Classical Liberals but history tells a different story. And the ideology of the Far Left is unsound. It eventually turns on itself.
Only after the fact and not on any fundamental grounds since the mystical collectivism of Christianity cannot condemn the mystical collectivism of Nazism, Fascism, Communism and Socialism (all of which are collectivist and therefore far-LEFT ideologies.)
Overall, they all agree on far more than they disagree.
So?
I would argue that pro-abortion is the individualist and therefore the right-wing position.
Anti-abortion is anti-individual rights, collectivist and therefore a left-wing position.
In short, progressives are more right-wing on abortion than conservatives.
I think these kinds of fundamental confusions are why the conservative movement is where it is and why MAGA happened.
There's no baby involved with abortion but even if you pretend it's a full-grown adult, with all associated rights, abortion would still not be a rights violation. No one has the right to be carried to term.
On the flip side, banning abortion turns people into incubators. The only rights violation worse than this would be literal slavery and/or death camps.
So, I don't think there's anything "pro-life" about the anti-abortion position.
But I think the even bigger issue is the sheer political illiteracy and topsy turvy mental gymnastics of anti-abortions.
This is a classical liberal forum though not "far left".
I don't believe the essay had anything to do with Catholicism...but if that is your lodestar...fair enough.
It certainly feels like a far left forum sometimes and this piece reads like a religious essay on how not to stray from your one true religion. The facts are clear that Liberals do well at some things and Conservatives do well at others and that for a thriving democracy you need BOTH to function together.
To a far right winger everything is "left".
I don't understand your point. To a Left Winger everything is right. lol You're assuming I'm far right?
I was a classic Liberal my entire life but classic Liberals have been captured by the FAR LEFT. They are making decisions based on illogical, faulty ideology and it's wrapping around and biting them in the behind.
The ONLY correct answer is being somewhere near the centre. That's the only way to move forward. Being too far left or right will just set on a course of destruction that will eventually oppose itself.
I'm not sure about Church during Nazi era. Certainly many Priests did but many did not condemn Nazis. Pius was weak on the topic..I think there's some question about the Church's role...and I was a long time Catholic.
Well we can stipulate all of them are disgusting.
Did Church condemn Mussolini?