Soggy in NOLA
Diamond Member
- Jul 31, 2009
- 40,565
- 5,359
- 1,830
Common sense. Will you honestly tell me that Republicans are the champions of gay and minority affairs?
Republicans, like Democrats, are the champions of advancing the power and dominance of the party to which they belong.
Conservatives are the champions of all individual rights whether they be Democrats or Republicans. If you view Gays and Minorities as individuals, then Conservatives are thier champions. If you view Gays and Minorities as voting blocks, then Liberals are their champions.
Liberals veiw every group and every issue only in terms of us vs. them. Liberals identify groups in terms of wealth, race, gendre, religion, geography, education and you name it in order to pit one group against another. In this way, every person is both de-humanized and catagorized. Injustice is attacked, but justice is never sought.
For Liberals, there are no individuals, only demographics. Within the society, all demographics are either better or worse, richer or poorer, dominant or oppressed. Nobody is responsible for himself. Only groups can be granted rights and only members of groups can enjoy those rights.
So if you think that by segmenting and disecting society into component groups and then pitting one group against another we can establish justice, then you will be quite comfortable self-identifying as a Liberal.
If you feel that according all individuals equal rights and equal oppotunity and then allowing each individual to function as a free agent within the society, then you will be quite comfortable self-identifying as a Conservative.
If you see a person and then find it only interesting in passing that he is Gay, you are probably a Conservative. If you see a Gay and understand prima facia that he is oppressed, you are probably a Liberal.
By establishing rights for all individuals, the need for propping up or tearing down certain groups is diminished. By propping up or tearing down certain groups, the integrity and value of the individual is diminished. If the rights of all people to marry the person they love is guarenteed, the need for a law to "allow" gay civil unions is suddenly moot.
Group rights are by definition discriminatory. If one group is empowered, unnamed groups are disenfranchised.
I disagree. The modern Con movement has been more about dismantling programs that were meant to create an equalizing effect on opportunity - Not an equal end-result, but an equality of opportunity for all. They do this all in the name of "Freedom," but unfortunately the end result of laissez-faire economics is the establishment of a caste system and ultimately class revolution. You get so caught up in principle that you ignore ultimate results.