C
cheese_sdc
Guest
Realist.
- Status
P
Peregrino
Guest
Not enough choices.
O
Orionthehunter
Guest
Can’t fit a square peg in a round hole.
I am an economic libertarian
I am a civil libertarian
I am a social order/natural rights conservative
Essentially, I adhere to basic and historical American principles embodied in the Preamble of the Constitution and Declaration of Independance.
Preamble: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility , provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare , and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity , do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Declaration of Independance: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
I am an economic libertarian
I am a civil libertarian
I am a social order/natural rights conservative
Essentially, I adhere to basic and historical American principles embodied in the Preamble of the Constitution and Declaration of Independance.
Preamble: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility , provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare , and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity , do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Declaration of Independance: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
S
StevenFrancis
Guest
With as many people as there are in the world, I can’t be as unique as I seem. But actually none of political groupings you’ve listed approximates very closesly my political beliefs.
I favor:
WAY LESS Federal Government in most sectors.
WAY MORE Federal Government in Health Care - (Single Payor for everybody)
No more 1st Strike War. Ever. Period. We must STOP attacking nations.
War is the very last act of nation. Every possible diplomatic angle must have been tried and failed, and it must be declared by Congress.
No foreign War unless invited, needed, and declared as War by the U.S. Congress. If it is deemed this important even by Congress, then the entire U.S. people should be involved on a daily basis, (a la WWII). This shouldn’t happen very often. Nothing has qualified since WWIIS.
No to Free Trade
Yes to FAIR Trade
Capitalism allowed supported and encouraged, (except in Health Care and certain public safety requirements shared by all Americans)
No Government suppression of Religion
No Federally protected, funded, supported abortion. (reverse Roe v. Wade - throwing back to States)
That’s about it. I believe we overuse the death penalty in several states, so perhaps the Feds may need to step in there sometime.
We could use some additional safeguards to keep the power swing that happened in the Government to the Executive branch from ever occuring again. We need STRONG checks and balances between the Judiciary, the Legislature and the Executive branches. It SHOULD be VERY hard to pass a bill or a law. There should be vigorous debate, vetoes, veto overrides, impeachments, challenges, so that when we end up with a piece of law it has been well vetted and argued, agreed to in principle by more people than not, enforceable within our means, funded and finally legal in the eyes of the court.
I THINK I’m Libertarian on most things, a Socialist on Healthcare, I’m looking for some kind of perfect balance between a big Government in areas where we could really use them, for things we ALL must have in order to enjoy our right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I guess I would add our right to health in there. (physical, dental and mental - preventative and symptomatic, along with a wide formulary of pharmaceuticals).
I want a lot more emphasis also, on the first right. The right to life. The right of a human being to exist. We’re forgetting about that one a lot these days.
I guess I’m not an “ist” and don’t fully subscribe to any “ism”. (except Catholicism). I’m probably not very helpful to your poll, however I’m beginning to believe that more and more people are not “ists”, if they really look close at their souls. There are good and bad points to all the “isms” and they need to be redistributed into one really good one. It can happen!!!
Peace to all,
Steven
I favor:
WAY LESS Federal Government in most sectors.
WAY MORE Federal Government in Health Care - (Single Payor for everybody)
No more 1st Strike War. Ever. Period. We must STOP attacking nations.
War is the very last act of nation. Every possible diplomatic angle must have been tried and failed, and it must be declared by Congress.
No foreign War unless invited, needed, and declared as War by the U.S. Congress. If it is deemed this important even by Congress, then the entire U.S. people should be involved on a daily basis, (a la WWII). This shouldn’t happen very often. Nothing has qualified since WWIIS.
No to Free Trade
Yes to FAIR Trade
Capitalism allowed supported and encouraged, (except in Health Care and certain public safety requirements shared by all Americans)
No Government suppression of Religion
No Federally protected, funded, supported abortion. (reverse Roe v. Wade - throwing back to States)
That’s about it. I believe we overuse the death penalty in several states, so perhaps the Feds may need to step in there sometime.
We could use some additional safeguards to keep the power swing that happened in the Government to the Executive branch from ever occuring again. We need STRONG checks and balances between the Judiciary, the Legislature and the Executive branches. It SHOULD be VERY hard to pass a bill or a law. There should be vigorous debate, vetoes, veto overrides, impeachments, challenges, so that when we end up with a piece of law it has been well vetted and argued, agreed to in principle by more people than not, enforceable within our means, funded and finally legal in the eyes of the court.
I THINK I’m Libertarian on most things, a Socialist on Healthcare, I’m looking for some kind of perfect balance between a big Government in areas where we could really use them, for things we ALL must have in order to enjoy our right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I guess I would add our right to health in there. (physical, dental and mental - preventative and symptomatic, along with a wide formulary of pharmaceuticals).
I want a lot more emphasis also, on the first right. The right to life. The right of a human being to exist. We’re forgetting about that one a lot these days.
I guess I’m not an “ist” and don’t fully subscribe to any “ism”. (except Catholicism). I’m probably not very helpful to your poll, however I’m beginning to believe that more and more people are not “ists”, if they really look close at their souls. There are good and bad points to all the “isms” and they need to be redistributed into one really good one. It can happen!!!
Peace to all,
Steven
C
consumedconvert
Guest
If, as has often been said, “A neocon is a liberal who’s been mugged,” then what do you call a neocon who’s been mugged?
BTW, you left out “distributist.”
I’m not sure who said it, but I absolutely agree that what we are trying to do–by way of choosing a political philosophy–is find the best way to apply Catholic principles to our society. Sometimes these socio-political threads get pretty heated; but lets remember we’re after the same basic thing.
Matthew was a tax-collector for the Romans, and Simon was a Zealot, who we might call today a Zionist. These two would probably have never come together–had it not been for Jesus.
Can we assume that after His ascension they agreed in political philosophy? No reason to think so. Yet they were united in caring for the Spiritual needs of a foundling Church.
Digression, but just a thought I’m developing.
BTW, you left out “distributist.”
I’m not sure who said it, but I absolutely agree that what we are trying to do–by way of choosing a political philosophy–is find the best way to apply Catholic principles to our society. Sometimes these socio-political threads get pretty heated; but lets remember we’re after the same basic thing.
Matthew was a tax-collector for the Romans, and Simon was a Zealot, who we might call today a Zionist. These two would probably have never come together–had it not been for Jesus.
Can we assume that after His ascension they agreed in political philosophy? No reason to think so. Yet they were united in caring for the Spiritual needs of a foundling Church.
Digression, but just a thought I’m developing.
S
StevenFrancis
Guest
I like your thought here. It’s something that’s been going through my mind a lot too. There’s something in this idea that may be the seed to ending the horrid polarization we’ve found ourselves in. It’s probably why Jesus didn’t want us focusing that much on politics. Just the care of each other, and spreading the good news. Like you’ve said. There’s something just developing here. Coffee is still perculating.
Peace to you,
Steven
N
Neil_Anthony
Guest
You forgot to put geolibertarianism in your poll, so I couldn’t answer.
S
SpiritMeadow
Guest
Yeah the choices are not broad enough for me either. I rather like that welfare/liberal…lol…now if that one’s not perjorative!
I too bemoan the lack of consensus on anything on this forum. Everyone seems aligned into two camps and greet everything with suspicion from the other side. Surely Jesus did not intend this. I don’t know how to fix it. I’ve tried a couple of times on various threads but just get hooted down, cuz after all, I’m just that pretend-Catholic to some, here to undermine and destroy the church. Heck I’m just trying to get dinner on the table every day, keep my hubby happy, and keep my brain active. Ecumenism seems dead as many here see it, and I don’t see much interest in learning to get along among ouselves either. It’s depressing for sure.Thank God we all have our respective parishes where some sanity still exists. Glad I don’t have to fight these fights on Sunday.
I too bemoan the lack of consensus on anything on this forum. Everyone seems aligned into two camps and greet everything with suspicion from the other side. Surely Jesus did not intend this. I don’t know how to fix it. I’ve tried a couple of times on various threads but just get hooted down, cuz after all, I’m just that pretend-Catholic to some, here to undermine and destroy the church. Heck I’m just trying to get dinner on the table every day, keep my hubby happy, and keep my brain active. Ecumenism seems dead as many here see it, and I don’t see much interest in learning to get along among ouselves either. It’s depressing for sure.Thank God we all have our respective parishes where some sanity still exists. Glad I don’t have to fight these fights on Sunday.
F
freesoulhope
Guest
I am a non-conformist.
I oppose any political philosophy or system which doesn’t lead to the greater good and prosperity of all indivisuals–material and spiritual.
I oppose any competitive market that will ultimately cuase harm to the dignity and value of human beings.
I oppose the competitive marketing of lifes essentials; things that are neccessary for the presevation of human life.
I oppose the aquisition of land if it means the displacment and homelessness of a human person.
I oppose “absolute indivisualism” of the economic market.
I oppose nationalism; for i believe that human beings are citizens of the “Planet Earth” rather then any particulor country; especailly if you are a Christian.
I oppose the destruction of nature for the sake of profit.
I oppose any economic system that is based on competition rather then united effort; i believe a competitive market ultimately leads to the majority of people living in barley liveable circumstances, leaving a small minority with most of the wealth of Gods creation; while millions starve. A competitive society surley leads to selfishness and the demoralising of human society.
I oppose anything which opposes Christianity and Christian Moral law.
I oppose any political philosophy or system which doesn’t lead to the greater good and prosperity of all indivisuals–material and spiritual.
I oppose any competitive market that will ultimately cuase harm to the dignity and value of human beings.
I oppose the competitive marketing of lifes essentials; things that are neccessary for the presevation of human life.
I oppose the aquisition of land if it means the displacment and homelessness of a human person.
I oppose “absolute indivisualism” of the economic market.
I oppose nationalism; for i believe that human beings are citizens of the “Planet Earth” rather then any particulor country; especailly if you are a Christian.
I oppose the destruction of nature for the sake of profit.
I oppose any economic system that is based on competition rather then united effort; i believe a competitive market ultimately leads to the majority of people living in barley liveable circumstances, leaving a small minority with most of the wealth of Gods creation; while millions starve. A competitive society surley leads to selfishness and the demoralising of human society.
I oppose anything which opposes Christianity and Christian Moral law.
M
mary_bobo
Guest
M
mary_bobo
Guest
Amen. And I find that terminology as offensive as our Democratic posters find being called a member of the Democrat party.
A
Arnobius
Guest
I just try to be an orthodox Catholic and vote what seems to be best fitting for this.
But since some issues are non-negotiable (such as abortion), parties and candidates who support them must be rejected.
But since some issues are non-negotiable (such as abortion), parties and candidates who support them must be rejected.
E
estesbob
Guest
Kumbaya, my friend.
L
Leopard
Guest
Rational Anarchy, as per Professor Bernardo de la Paz.
- Status