Any Difference Between Republicans and Democrats?

[Courtneyjo]

Several years ago I decided that there was essentially no difference between Reublicans and Democrats but had trouble articulating why. In the Sept. 15, 2005 issue of The Wanderer thewandererpress.com/ , Joseph Sobran sobran.com/wanderer/ states it very well. He refutes the claim that America has moved to the right in recent years.

“As the Democrats have moved left of liberalism, the Republicans have occupied the space they’ve abandoned, pretending that the old liberalism is conservatism. … The Republicans are doing most of the things that wre once called liberal. They spend recklessly, ignore constitutional limitations, increase government power, create nw federal programs, you name it—only now they call these liberal sins conservative virtues.”

Comments?

 

[TPJCatholic]

Republicans stand against abortion, while dems embrace it as
their sacrament.

Republicans think it is okay to have the ten commandments on public display, while dems work to eradicate any image of God from the public view.

Republicans stand against gay marriage, while dems embrace it as a God given civil right.

Republicans believe that when terrorists strike we should respond, while dems think we should appease everyone.

Republicans believe that lower taxes helps the economy grow, while dems think higher taxes help their careers grow.

Republicans believe in school prayer, while dems fight to keep it out of schools.

Republicans think that sex education belongs in the hands of parents, while dems think it should be crammed into our kids minds against the will of parents and while also handing out condoms to boot.

The list goes on-and-on…

 

[wabrams]

TPJCatholic:

Republicans stand against abortion, while dems embrace it as
their sacrament.

Republicans aren’t against it out right; Dems want it wholesale.

Republicans think it is okay to have the ten commandments on public display, while dems work to eradicate any image of God from the public view.

True.

Republicans stand against gay marriage, while dems embrace it as a God given civil right.

True.

Republicans believe that when terrorists strike we should respond, while dems think we should appease everyone.

Not necessarly true.

Republicans believe that lower taxes helps the economy grow, while dems think higher taxes help their careers grow.

Republicans believe in school prayer, while dems fight to keep it out of schools.

True.

Republicans think that sex education belongs in the hands of parents, while dems think it should be crammed into our kids minds against the will of parents and while also handing out condoms to boot.

If every Republican felt that sex ed should NOT be in schools, why is there no bill or anything else to change that? Though I do agree the Dems shove it down everyone’s thoat.

The list goes on-and-on…

Share some more.

 

[b_justb]

TPJCatholic:

Republicans stand against abortion, while dems embrace it as their sacrament.

No exactly. Conservatives are against judicial activism, which is how abortion on demand become synonymous with a Constitutional Right. Conservatives believe it is a matter that should be left up to the States to decide by legislation not a Federal decision made by the S. Court.

TPJCatholic:

Republicans think it is okay to have the ten commandments on public display, while dems work to eradicate any image of God from the public view.

The problem here is rather small. Conservatives feel that because the Judean-Christian ethic is historical to the USA it should stand. Liberals feel that since the founding fathers, although mostly very Christian, set up the Constitution so that the Gov’t cannot embrace or endorse any religious sentiment. If anyone really stopped to think about it the 10 commandments are antithetical to the US Constitution. We can discuss that in more detail maybe in another thread.

TPJCatholic:

Republicans stand against gay marriage, while dems embrace it as a God given civil right.

Again, this is a States rights issue where the Republicans flip flop. They want States Rights for abortion but not “gay-marriage.” This is rather inconsistent. If Republicans want to be consistent they should be so here.

TPJCatholic:

Republicans believe that when terrorists strike we should respond, while dems think we should appease everyone.

I think this is unfair. There are idealistic and rational thoughts that make the differences in which the Conservatives and the Liberals think the correct response to any situation should be.

TPJCatholic:

Republicans believe that lower taxes helps the economy grow, while dems think higher taxes help their careers grow.

Liberals think the large Federal Gov’t is good for Social Programs. Conservatives think just the opposite.

TPJCatholic:

Republicans believe in school prayer, while dems fight to keep it out of schools.

Again, the idea that no Gov’t agency promotes any religious ideology is correct. The issue isn’t prayer in school the issue is the School sponsoring any prayer. If one wishes their child to have school sponsored prayer they are free to enroll the child into the private religious school of their choice.

TPJCatholic:

Republicans think that sex education belongs in the hands of parents, while dems think it should be crammed into our kids minds against the will of parents and while also handing out condoms to boot.

All sex education has to have parental permission. If any person, no matter what their political affiliation is, wished to teach their child about human reproduction they are free to do so. If they wish the public school not to, they make their wishes known and they must be followed.

I am a card carrying Conservative.

 

[Della]

Again, this is a States rights issue where the Republicans flip flop. They want States Rights for abortion but not “gay-marriage.” This is rather inconsistent. If Republicans want to be consistent they should be so here.

I don’t know if the Republican party has stated that “gay marriage” ought to be a state or federal matter in any formal way. But, apart from that, no one, Republican or Democrat has the right to redefine marriage. While marriages are recognized by civil authorities for legal purposes (property rights and inheritance and that sort of thing), marriage itself is not an institution of any government and so cannot be redefined by any government.

 

[b_justb]

Della:

I don’t know if the Republican party has stated that “gay marriage” ought to be a state or federal matter in any formal way. But, apart from that, no one, Republican or Democrat has the right to redefine marriage. While marriages are recognized by civil authorities for legal purposes (property rights and inheritance and that sort of thing), marriage itself is not an institution of any government and so cannot be redefined by any government.

I totally agree! I go one step farther. “Marriage” is a religious term and the gov’t has no business in it at all. No Marriage licenses, no Justice of the Peace performing marriage ceremonies. The gov’t should only be involved with regard to CIVIL CONTRACTS if the parties cannot come to a mutual agreement upon dissolution. That is it. I say get the Gov’t OUT of marriage all together. (Of course I say get the gov’t out of all sorts of other things all together too.

 

[Courtneyjo]

Democrats spent lots of money on the Great Society in the 1960’s. We are still paying for it today. Republicans approved a Medicare prescription drug plan that will cost billions in the early 2000’s. Additionally, Republicans have spent us into a budget deficit and the President has proposed massive federal spending to pay for hurricane damage, with others in the GOP mumbling about this, wanting the private sector to pay for more of this rebuilding.

 

[wabrams]

b_justb:

I totally agree! I go one step farther. **“Marriage” is a religious term **and the gov’t has no business in it at all. No Marriage licenses, no Justice of the Peace performing marriage ceremonies. The gov’t should only be involved with regard to CIVIL CONTRACTS if the parties cannot come to a mutual agreement upon dissolution. That is it. I say get the Gov’t OUT of marriage all together. (Of course I say get the gov’t out of all sorts of other things all together too.

But who’s religion? Marriage is apart of all societies, present and past. It can get real sticky.

 

[TPJCatholic]

Conservatives believe it is a matter that should be left up to the States to decide by legislation not a Federal decision made by the S. Court.

==> That is merely their plan to make abortion illegal. They are smart enough to know it has to be done one step at a time.

If anyone really stopped to think about it the 10 commandments are antithetical to the US Constitution. We can discuss that in more detail maybe in another thread.

==> The commandments do not belong to any one religion. In fact, there are thousands of different separate religious bodies that use them, which means posting them is an accurate reflection of ur civil culture. It poses no threat since it does not establish religion…liberals tend to forget that word “establish.”

Again, this is a States rights issue where the Republicans flip flop. They want States Rights for abortion but not “gay-marriage.” This is rather inconsistent. If Republicans want to be consistent they should be so here.

==> Again, abortion is a planned approached because it is such a well entrenched practice in this nation. Gay marriage (no such thing btw) is fairl new, so repubs are trying to stop it from being legal so that they do not have to spend decades trying to reverse it. The dems want all of those sinful practices upheld and celebrated.

I think this is unfair. There are idealistic and rational thoughts that make the differences in which the Conservatives and the Liberals think the correct response to any situation should be.

==> I do not think it is unfair. The dems praised Clinto as if he were some sort of god, yet Clinton did nothing to stop terrorism.

Liberals think the large Federal Gov’t is good for Social Programs. Conservatives think just the opposite.

==> Wrong, Bush and his gang have spent more on the poor then Clinton did.

Again, the idea that no Gov’t agency promotes any religious ideology is correct. The issue isn’t prayer in school the issue is the School sponsoring any prayer. If one wishes their child to have school sponsored prayer they are free to enroll the child into the private religious school of their choice.

==> Read the constitution…the congress is prohibited from establishing a religion…it says nothing about haveing a few minutes in school for quiet personal prayer of whatever variety a student desires (or not to pray for that matter). Allowing time to pray privately in school is NOT establishing religion, it is merely respecting the faith value of 95% of this nations citizens.

All sex education has to have parental permission. If any person, no matter what their political affiliation is, wished to teach their child about human reproduction they are free to do so. If they wish the public school not to, they make their wishes known and they must be followed.

==> Not true. Public schools do not change their policies based on parental disapproval…not when it comes to sex ed.

 

[Della]

wabrams:

But who’s religion? Marriage is apart of all societies, present and past. It can get real sticky.

Exactly. Which is why it is not the business of government to define marriage.

 

[b_justb]

TPJCatholic:

That is merely their plan to make abortion illegal. They are smart enough to know it has to be done one step at a time.

If the citizens of a particular state vote on a referendum, or if the elected legislators of any state make abortion legal or otherwise, at least it is done according to a democratic process, not by 9 non-elected justices.

TPJCatholic:

The commandments do not belong to any one religion. In fact, there are thousands of different separate religious bodies that use them, which means posting them is an accurate reflection of ur civil culture. It poses no threat since it does not establish religion…liberals tend to forget that word “establish.”

The 10 Commandments are a specific Covent between God (YHVH) and the people of Israel. The fact that other peoples might use them for whatever reason is irrelevant.

TPJCatholic:

Again, abortion is a planned approached because it is such a well entrenched practice in this nation. Gay marriage (no such thing btw) is fairl new, so repubs are trying to stop it from being legal so that they do not have to spend decades trying to reverse it. The dems want all of those sinful practices upheld and celebrated.

I agree there is no such thing as “gay marriage,” that’s why I put it in quotes. “Sinful” is not a term to be used in legislation.

TPJCatholic:

I do not think it is unfair. The dems praised Clinton as if he were some sort of god, yet Clinton did nothing to stop terrorism.

What former President Clinton did or did not do to thwart terrorism is a non-issue. We are talking about ideology, not any individual practice, actions, or lack there of.

TPJCatholic:

Wrong, Bush and his gang have spent more on the poor then Clinton did.

What President Bush has done to help the poor is a non-issue. We are talking about ideology, not any individual practice, actions, or lack there of.

TPJCatholic:

Read the constitution…the congress is prohibited from establishing a religion…it says nothing about haveing a few minutes in school for quiet personal prayer of whatever variety a student desires (or not to pray for that matter). Allowing time to pray privately in school is NOT establishing religion, it is merely respecting the faith value of 95% of this nations citizens.

I have read the Constitution, don’t be like this …
I already said the issue is NOT prayer in school but the school, a public gov’t institution sponsoring any said prayer. I would not want my child being influenced by a public school to participate in Hindu prayers. If a school sponsored prayer, in order to be on the up and up on the equal opportunity front then each day a different type or style of prayer would have to be sanctioned.

TPJCatholic:

Not true. Public schools do not change their policies based on parental disapproval…not when it comes to sex ed.

If a parent doesn’t want his child to be in reproductive ed, then the child doesn’t have to be in it. But the child better know the plumbing, taught by someone.

 

[b_justb]

wabrams:

But who’s religion? Marriage is apart of all societies, present and past. It can get real sticky.

It’s not sticky if the gov’t is OUT of marriage all together.

 

[TPJCatholic]

If the citizens of a particular state vote on a referendum, or if the elected legislators of any state make abortion legal or otherwise, at least it is done according to a democratic process, not by 9 non-elected justices.

==> I agree and that is the plan that the repubs have the dems fight like it is a battle over their very lives.

The 10 Commandments are a specific Covent between God (YHVH) and the people of Israel. The fact that other peoples might use them for whatever reason is irrelevant.

==> I agree and those commandments are used by over 30,000 Protestant denoms, the Roman Catholic Church, the Easstern Orthodox Churches, Jews and Muslims…that comprises about 97-98% of the nation and it does not establish any of those religions…the commandments is one of the rare documents that touches nearly 70% of humanity and all in a different way and use. The repubs want to honor all of those faith systems, the dems wish to act as if they do not exist in our history.

I agree there is no such thing as “gay marriage,” that’s why I put it in quotes. “Sinful” is not a term to be used in legislation.

==> I agree, yet murder is sinful and we have laws against that wtihout using the word sinful. The repubs do not want gay marriage, the dems fight for it…

What former President Clinton did or did not do to thwart terrorism is a non-issue. We are talking about ideology, not any individual practice, actions, or lack there of.

==> I disagree. The question centers on differences between the repubs and the dems and Clinton continues to hold a banner for democrat thought…what he has done, or not done, matters in this conversation.

I have read the Constitution, don’t be like this …
I already said the issue is NOT prayer in school but the school, a public gov’t institution sponsoring any said prayer.

==> Read the constitution and note the word “establish” and then tell me how reserving a few minutes for private prayer estabishes religion? It does not and I think you know it does not. Dems do not want anyone thinking about God in any faith system because faith includes rules and those rules are not supposed to be broken by humans. It is an obvious tactic for dems to try to get kids to not think about God at the beginning of their school day…very sad and very satanic imo.

I would not want my child being influenced by a public school to participate in Hindu prayers.

==> Repubs do not advocate Christian prayer, they advocate time for prayer…quiet, private time for kids to pray in a way that adheres to their own faith tradition. I would not want kids forced to say Hundu or Christian prayers, or any other for that matter. But, it is not unreasonable for kids to be given five minutes of personal time to pray, or not pray, in any manner that respects their own faith tradtion–that does not establish religion, it simply respects that fact that people have faith.

If a parent doesn’t want his child to be in reproductive ed, then the child doesn’t have to be in it. But the child better know the plumbing, taught by someone.

==> Parents have tried for years to get sex ed and condoms out of school…they have failed because the democrat bulldog aclu fights them back everytime.

 

[TPJCatholic]

bjustb,

BTW, this thread is about differences between the repubs and dems…it is really not about our views about these issues. The list I have given accurately reflects many issues that the repubs and the dems disagree on…it is that simple.

 

[b_justb]

TPJCatholic I think we see things very similarly. Minor differences, I think anyway.

 

[Jay74]

b_justb:

Again, this is a States rights issue where the Republicans flip flop. They want States Rights for abortion but not “gay-marriage.” This is rather inconsistent. If Republicans want to be consistent they should be so here.

The Republicans have flip-flopped too much, but I don’t think its fair to say they flopped here. If the States were allowed to decide marriage, I think they would leave it to the States. However, leftist judges keep overturning marriage laws.

I think a constitutional amendment defining marriage would be allowing it to b e defined by the States. After all, it would have to not only pass with 2/3 of the State’s elected representatives, but it would have to receive a majority vote in 3/4 of the States. A constitutional amendment would allow not only the State’s representatives, but their citizenry to define marriage. It is certainly more “state’s rights” than a handful of activist judges.

Blessings.

 

[thestickman]

Jay74:

The Republicans have flip-flopped too much, but I don’t think its fair to say they flopped here. If the States were allowed to decide marriage, I think they would leave it to the States. However, leftist judges keep overturning marriage laws.

I think a constitutional amendment defining marriage would be allowing it to b e defined by the States. After all, it would have to not only pass with 2/3 of the State’s elected representatives, but it would have to receive a majority vote in 3/4 of the States. A constitutional amendment would allow not only the State’s representatives, but their citizenry to define marriage. It is certainly more “state’s rights” than a handful of activist judges.

Blessings.

I concur!

 

[wabrams]

Della:

Exactly. Which is why it is not the business of government to define marriage.

Exactly.

I love what a comdeian said not too long ago about gov’t defined marriage: "In a thousand years from now, archeologists will be digging through libraries that used to be part of the United States and will find this thing called a *constitution, *and when they find the amendment about marriage, they’ll think ‘Boy! Those Americans were so dumb that they had to write down the meaning of marriage so they wouldn’t forget!’ "

 

[Jay74]

wabrams:

Exactly.

I love what a comdeian said not too long ago about gov’t defined marriage: "In a thousand years from now, archeologists will be digging through libraries that used to be part of the United States and will find this thing called a *constitution, *and when they find the amendment about marriage, they’ll think ‘Boy! Those Americans were so dumb that they had to write down the meaning of marriage so they wouldn’t forget!’ "

Very true. It’s absurd it might have to be defined. Of course, getting laughed at because we had to define marriage may be better than getting laughed at when they see same-sex wedding photos because a judge defined it.

Blessings