The next RNC Chairman should...

Small "c" conservatives

The party must return to its roots of small government and personal freedom. The current platform of exclusion and moralism is unacceptable and will result in the destruction of the party.

The republican party should be full of fiscal conservatives of multiple religions, races, and sexual orientations, but the party excludes a majority of these people based on fake religious superiority.

In short, remove religious dogma from the party and many people my age will return. If you don't, we may be gone forever. Many voters 18-30 went to Obama in a landslide because of the religious right.

1,972 votes
Vote
Sign in
Check!
(thinking…)
Reset
or sign in with
  • facebook
  • google
    Password icon
    I agree to the terms of service
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    anonymousanonymous shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    245 comments

    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      I agree to the terms of service
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      Submitting...
      • salesninjasalesninja commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        No room for the sodomites and abortionists and spenders. They can all join the Democrats.

      • FreedomsTruthFreedomsTruth commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        "The republican party should be full of fiscal conservatives of multiple religions, races, and sexual orientations, but the party excludes a majority of these people based on fake religious superiority."

        This is what is known as a strawman argument.... from someone who was foolish enough to have voted for Obama no less. No conservative of any stripe is excluded from the Republican party.

        There is enormous fake moral superiority coming from the 'tolerance police'. Nobody is allowed to bring their faith to the table and base political beliefs on deep moral values? That's .... wrong. Our founders would be aghast at such dangerous and fallacious thinking, and one only need read George Washington's Farewell Address for a corrective.

        The Liberal Theocratic position is destroy the basic right to life of the unborn and assert the anti-scientific and anti-freedom-of-life position that preborn human life isnt human life. The Liberal Theocratic position to overturn 2000 years of tradition, common sense and the needs of our civilization and impose the radical folly of redefined marriage, to include homosexual couples (but not polygamists, which begs the question why are homosexual couples put in an unequal and superior position to polygamists - why the discrimination and unfairness, if "equality" is the pole star?) Destroying the Judeo-Christian foundation of our civilization just for gay marriage is like demolishing a historic building to build a parking lot. What a waste of a great civilized society.

        And to those bleating "I dont care about gay marriage" - I understand, the brainnumbing liberal MSM has dog-trained most of us to be reflexively anti-judgmental, that is the way liberals have greased the skids on their plans to social engineer the end of traditional values; I can only prescribe reading up on the founders, history, and Toynbee's works to understand How Civilizations Fall - we are on the slippery slope as it is, and the End of marriage will hasten it.

      • gaol orientedgaol oriented commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        "I love Freedom! Freedom before life!" *lives in a first world nation, has never known true privation*

      • censoredagaincensoredagain commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Gocatholic said "Without the right to life, all other rights are meaningless...."

        I disagree, without freedom even the right to life is meaningless. That is why so many risk their lives obtain freedom.

      • gaol orientedgaol oriented commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Hmm, you may want to read up on a fascinating new development in philosophy. It's called "logic", and maybe it will help you to see why a right to abortion does not allow one to "do anything".

      • gocatholicgocatholic commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Without the right to life, all other rights are meaningless. If you can kill a child in his mother's womb, you can do anything. Faith doesn't tell us when life begins. Science does. It is some kind of wacky faith belief that says otherwise. If we can't bother to protect babies in their wombs because it's too inconvenient for us, we are doomed. The "slippery slope" actually HAPPENED.

      • gaol orientedgaol oriented commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        "Aren't you coming to bed?"
        "Shhh baby, I'm trolling."
        "But I'm wearing your favorite lingerie and I thought we could..."
        "Yeah, hold on just let me finish typing this wicked burn..."
        "But I'm ready NOOWW."
        "Wait a second, I just got an idea. I'm gonna write this nonsensical story like I have dementia or something and the republicans will read it and be all WTF? haha"

      • gaol orientedgaol oriented commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Hmm, yes. Just let me prepare my 1600 word long reply full of platitudes and references to things I know next to nothing about then post it in four installments on this website full of trolls and idiots.

      • Charlie_LarkinCharlie_Larkin commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        (cont from below) To make my stance clearer, I personally think that abortion is something that should be left between the woman and her god, assuming she has any type of higher power in her life. I sincerely worry about any type of legislaiton that attempts to control what may or may not be done with your own body. I feel it's too slippery a slope. As bad as abortion is, what follows may be worse

      • Charlie_LarkinCharlie_Larkin commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Actually, Fricker, I think abortion is a horrible thing to do, especially if the fetus is at the stage of being viable. I do agree with your statements on Roe vs. Wade. It set a dangerous precendent of legislation from the bench. I'm no jurist, but I think a way should be found to return abortion to a state's rights issue, as it should be.

      • gaol orientedgaol oriented commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Alexander Hamilton was quite astute in recognizing the benefits of protectionism for developing nations, but he should have also embraced the principle that there should be NO WAR BUT CLASS WAR. If he had recognized that there could be NO WAR BUT CLASS WAR, the United States would be a much more equitable and responsible nation today.

      • gaol orientedgaol oriented commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        you disgust me you punk. Alexander Hamilton is one of the FATHERS of THIS NATION and here you accusing him of ABORTING HIS BABY like he was one of those filthy Marxist-abortionist welfare wh*res. I thought you were a good conservative, but this cannot stand. Pistols at dawn....this time I will be the Aaron Burr....and this time the Aaron Burr will be on the same side as Hamilton.

      • frickerfricker commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        (from below)
        A quick study of the Jefferson/Hamilton debates clearly shows that Hamilton's influence over the first W (George Washington) set the foundations for the meltdown we are currently experiencing.
        A true conservative must recognize that Jefferson was right; States rights over National rights. At least view abortion through this conservative prism, and see the damage Roe v. Wade has done

      • frickerfricker commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        (from below)
        Roe vs Wade: The court pulled a ruling completely out of its arse, just the SAME WAY the Dred Scott decision went down; not based on law, but on opinion of the Judges! That is tyranny or fascism, take your pick, when you toss law out by royal fiat.
        At any rate, the decision removes your right to redress, recall, or anything; because it is now a NATIONAL matter not a STATE matter.

      • frickerfricker commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        (from below) On abortion, however, you don't back down on murder, especially of the most innocent among us! Ok, so you don't view abortion as murder? Here is what SHOULD at least bother you:
        Roe vs. Wade was not based on the constitution in any way, and there had never been any legal right to "privacy" EVER! You sell nukes or make meth in the privacy of your own home, and you go to jail!

      • frickerfricker commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Charlie_Larkin
        You said "but our country has far more important things to worry about." I agree, so why fret over making legal changes to give gays something they already have in domestic partnerships but, in the process, alienating all the religious folks (who still actually believe in the Bible, that is a dwindling bunch, i tell ya)? Again, protecting traditional marriage is a political winner!

      • Charlie_LarkinCharlie_Larkin commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        (from below) especially if they could provide great allies when they realize the traditionally more liberal politicians they support will end up hurting and betraying them all together by probably causing more harm to the country than they EVER could? The Republican Party, as re-imagined here has the potential to be a great unifying party if it proceeds.

      • Charlie_LarkinCharlie_Larkin commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        (from below) encourage freedom. I'm not a huge fan of homosexual marriage, but our country has far more important things to worry about. Same with abortion. We have too many other problems than to chase after "minorities." Seriously, these people do no harm to you or anyone else, same for those that worship what you call a "false god," or none at all. No harm is done to you, why freeze them out

      • Charlie_LarkinCharlie_Larkin commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Reading Dem and Fricker's verbal sparring (great debate, guys, and I mean it,) I think we're all missing the point. Everyone deserves to be free from any kind of tyranny, whether minority or not. Fricker, I think that regardless of anyone's religious standing, I do agree with Dem on one thing: freedom means freedom, even if you don't like it. If no harm is done to you, leave them be. That will

      • bencook2bencook2 commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Most of you miss the point. The original point. Can't have a big tent if no one meets the criteria to get in... Actual conservative values put tolerance above religious idealism. Actual conservative values are accepting of all restraint based value systems. That is it. That is all. No caveats for sexual orientation. No caveats for race, sex, creed.

      ← Previous 1 3 4 5 12 13

      Feedback and Knowledge Base