In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 2530
Online now 1543 Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)
We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.
Where the madness isn't just in March.
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Liberalism ruins countries? Now before all of you nancy's get upset lets think about this. I will admit that for a little bit liberalism is good(providing rights to minorities, etc.) But throughout history as the great societies became more liberal in their policies these countries start to crumble from the inside out and eventually fall(Rome is a great example).
So my question is, where does the line need to.be drawn between healthy liberalism and unhealthy. A clear example is when you go from being.a civil rights advocate to someone who is for the legalization of drugs. Or maybe from helping the poor, to giving people who are unemployed a crutch for life(our current system in America) Just a good topic to think about. We need to stand and fight against the liberals, and their heinous beliefs(some of them anyway)
University of Alabama: The high mark of college football since 1892
Why does the American Republican Party want to get government out of the economy but more into my personal life?
Gary Johnson 2012
We can discuss the Republican party another time, but ITT we stay on topic and that is the great issue of American liberalism
The issue is too many political parties that want all up in my business. Quit taking people's money, quit telling people who they can or can't marry, quit being so involved.
Taking money? Every government. Taking money and giving it to people who leach society? Libs.
Also by default most conservatives favor less federal government involvement, so I'm not sure you understand the argument here.
Stay ob track Mister
The argument is that I see people post on here all day saying on the one hand how they want the government to get out of their pocketbooks and leave them alone but on the other hand go around telling people who they can or can't marry, if I may use that example again. One is kicking the government out, the other is letting the government in. I don't see anyone on this board seriously post about less government intervention and more personal freedoms as a whole, they either want it when it comes to the economy or when it comes to social issues, rarely both.
You want to know what's ruining this great country? Separatism. We're supposed to take pride in being the United States of America, a people born from all walks of life who worked and built together this great nation. But all I see these days is separatism. Tell me, what's the difference between an over-reaching state government and an over-reaching federal government? Nothing, it's still a governing body telling you what to do with your own life, stepping on your freedoms. But this nation is full of people that want one or the other; we are sadly strained on people who want to ask why so much government is needed at all. Sure, we do need it; but taxing us at nearly 40%? Being able to legislate morality? Are these really the kinds of things the Founding Fathers had in mind when they created our government? I don't think so, but apparently a lot of Americans do. Which is why we have separation. People that want to build geographic castles by state and keep the "heathens" out. People that want to be called Democrats or Republicans, Conservatives or Liberals, and turn every election into a "my team vs. your team" fiasco. Tell me, how on earth is all of this division amongst the population good for this country? How is it "united?" How is it American?
Could it not be the best policy in America, could it even ruin America? Sure.
But I think the Norwegians, Swedes, Swiss, Danes, Finns, and Germans will tell you that they're doing just fine. Those are certainly among the most "liberal" countries in the world, yet also happen to have the highest quality of life by various measurements as well as crime rates that are shockingly low. That said, those countries are very different from America, as are their economic dynamics. I -don't- think that a very liberal ideology is good for America, in fact I'm a Republican. but the idea that it's ruining countries around the world is simply absurd, much less ignorant. It simply doesn't reflect statistics, rationality, or reality.
In regards to America, extreme liberalism or conservatism are both bad. I think ideally, best case is slightly right.
As far as looking at places that are very liberal, simply look at California. California is very liberal and democratic. I'm not even sure a Republican even lives in that state - ok, there are a few.
California has a Democratic Governor, both Senators, and 33 of their 52 Reps are Democratic. So, they're pretty Democratic.
Yet, California's economy is nothing to be jealous of. For quite a few years now, they've actually handed out IOU's for state tax returns. State employees salaries are being slashed to minimum wage all over the state, and have been for years.
The liberal is about like the wolf that comes dressed up as a sheep. Portrays itself as a friend, but in reality is an enemy.
So you portrayed yourself as someone wanting to have a political discussion, but in reality were just trolling.
But, it's about proportion regarding people, income, need for government.
You can't spend and grow government beyond the means you have.
Nope, i am so opposed to liberal view points i would never willingly unite with them ti form a more "unified" America. That is like putting some puddy in a crack and cement and hoping it'll hold together and become unified. There is a reason we are divided so strongly, and pretending to be unified(which is either a dUrect lie, or people are lying to themselves and thinking 2 polar opposite view points can get along). I dont hate a liberal, but I am opposed to them until I die.
Though you do realize that using the government to legislate morality, such as making gay marriage illegal (or legal), is liberal, right? Not in the dictionary sense but in the American sense of liberalism equating more government intervention in the lives of the people.
I don't know why public spending would equal the entire market value of all officially recognized final goods and services produced (GDP).
The SBE (State budget expenditures) should ideally be slightly BELOW, or at least even with, tax revenue - if that's what you're asking?
Is marriage a civil right? And if it is not then how could trying to keep it illegal be liberal?
You want the government to stay out of YOUR business, but not the business of people you don't agree with. Got it.
It is? serious question btw. I was under the impression that it is not a civil right.
This post was edited by James Moriarty 18 months ago
I don't know legally if it's a civil right or not, though I have a feeling it isn't, but should it be? Most certainly. Because if not, who gets to make the rules on what constitutes marriage? The go-to answer for a lot of Americans is the religious majority but the problem is marriage isn't only tied to one religion. Christianity, Judaism, Islam, et al have their own marriage laws rooted in their religions. Hell, even paganism technically has marriage. But does that mean atheists or agnostics can't get married? Not in the slightest. Hell, you can be wed in a courtroom that has zero religious overtones at all. We may have a Christian majority (of which I am a part of) but we are not a Theocracy, therefore a legal wedding is just that. Legal. Nothing more. So, considering how ambiguous the idea of marriage really is, who gets to decide the "rules?"
Not to nit-pick, but wasn't that technically over race-related marital issues?
Ah yes, i had forgotten about that. My mistake. Hrrmmmm....i still think it would be "liberal" to go against what society wants in this case, which is certainly not gay marriage. Maybe not in the jurisdictional sense of liberalism though.
Yeah it was, but i guess i agree that it does apply here
I do.disagree with it morally and religiously(Very important, but not key thing for why i think it should be illegal). Buy my main problem is that i see it unnatural.
Not to sound like an ass, but at one point in time society wanted to enslave people, too. There's a line, which is pretty well defined at least IMO, where what the majority wants goes from democracy into, well, the realm of things like slavery, bigotry, squashing civil rights, etc.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports