My own political leanings

[Amethyst]

I am a liberal because all my life, I have been surrounded by fundy types who are neo-cons who constantly rammed their religion and political opinions down my throat.

 

Granted, I'm a moderate liberal. You'll never see me carrying a PETA card or something like that. On Internet quizzes, I usually get around 50%, but liberal-leaning.

 

But I have met very few Christians (outside of a Unitarian church) who weren't conservative, who weren't bigoted against gay people, non-Christians, liberal types, and anyone who wasn't exactly like them.

 

I don't want to even remotely associate myself with Christianity because to me Christianity = bigotry. It also = Republican. (And yes, I know that not all Republicans are total a**holes, but bear with me.)

 

My primary exposure to conservatives outside of my own family has been fundy types. These days, with Dubya in power, voting Republican basically means you are voting for the religious right's agenda.

 

I will not vote for a Republican for any major public office because I don't want to do anything that will promote the religious right-wing agenda. I'll vote for anyone else, be it Libertarian, Independent, or what have you, as long as they aren't an extremist. But not Republican. Not until the Republicans with brains take back the political party that was hijacked by the religious fanatics when Bush took the oath of office.

[Taphophilia]

Yes Amethyst I can understand exactly what you are saying.

 

I don't like labels. However, I can tell you that I have been a single working mother way too long to ever be Republican.

[Chad3232132]

I am a liberal because all my life, I have been surrounded by fundy types who are neo-cons who constantly rammed their religion and political opinions down my throat.

 

Granted, I'm a moderate liberal. You'll never see me carrying a PETA card or something like that. On Internet quizzes, I usually get around 50%, but liberal-leaning.

 

But I have met very few Christians (outside of a Unitarian church) who weren't conservative, who weren't bigoted against gay people, non-Christians, liberal types, and anyone who wasn't exactly like them.

 

I don't want to even remotely associate myself with Christianity because to me Christianity = bigotry. It also = Republican. (And yes, I know that not all Republicans are total a**holes, but bear with me.)

 

My primary exposure to conservatives outside of my own family has been fundy types. These days, with Dubya in power, voting Republican basically means you are voting for the religious right's agenda.

 

I will not vote for a Republican for any major public office because I don't want to do anything that will promote the religious right-wing agenda. I'll vote for anyone else, be it Libertarian, Independent, or what have you, as long as they aren't an extremist. But not Republican. Not until the Republicans with brains take back the political party that was hijacked by the religious fanatics when Bush took the oath of office.

 

Lack of inclusiveness has been my argument for a long time now as to why I believe the downfall of the Republican Party as a majority is inevitable in the very near future- we may already be seeing it break apart as I speak. The Republican platform is so ideologically rigid that it cannot hold onto power for very long. Republicans are even starting to lose their strangleholds on Evangelicals if you look at their approval ratings of Bush and Congressional Republicans. In fact coworker of mine was a lifelong Republican and self-described Evangelical told me she recently switched her affiliation to Democrat. More and more the few voices of moderation in the Republican Party like McCain, Guiliani, Specter, Chafee, etc. are being silenced by the fringe religious right.

[nightflight]

The big myth on this board is that the fundys are all of the conservative Republican variety. That is not so. There are many left-leaners who believe the most awful things. Take Jim Wallis for example. He edits a liberal magazine called Sojourners, which promotes a liberal agenda. He is a christian. He wrote an essay titled "The Logic of Hell" in which he defended that most obscene doctrine. And my web surfings has revealed to me that there are many hell-believing xtians who are left-leaning; however, they are not sexy enough to register on the radar (i.e., the media).

 

So don't go believing that fundyism and Republicans exclusively go hand in hand. I know that's not so.

 

 

I know that's not so.

[Taphophilia]

The big myth on this board is that the fundys are all of the conservative Republican variety. That is not so. There are many left-leaners who believe the most awful things. Take Jim Wallis for example. He edits a liberal magazine called Sojourners, which promotes a liberal agenda. He is a christian. He wrote an essay titled "The Logic of Hell" in which he defended that most obscene doctrine. And my web surfings has revealed to me that there are many hell-believing xtians who are left-leaning; however, they are not sexy enough to register on the radar (i.e., the media).

 

So don't go believing that fundyism and Republicans exclusively go hand in hand. I know that's not so.

 

 

I know that's not so.

 

Thanks Nightflight.

It's just that, like me, our experiences with fundyism is that they are extreme right wing (over) zealots and have never met a leftist Fundy, but just because we never met them doesn't mean they don't exist.

I think if you go too far one way or the other, reality goes out the window.

[Chad3232132]

The big myth on this board is that the fundys are all of the conservative Republican variety. That is not so. There are many left-leaners who believe the most awful things. Take Jim Wallis for example. He edits a liberal magazine called Sojourners, which promotes a liberal agenda. He is a christian. He wrote an essay titled "The Logic of Hell" in which he defended that most obscene doctrine. And my web surfings has revealed to me that there are many hell-believing xtians who are left-leaning; however, they are not sexy enough to register on the radar (i.e., the media).

 

So don't go believing that fundyism and Republicans exclusively go hand in hand. I know that's not so.

 

 

I know that's not so.

 

 

Not all fundies are conservative Republicans, but 78% of Evangelical voters did vote for Bush last year. That should tell ya something.

 

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/res...0/epolls.0.html

[Amethyst]

The big myth on this board is that the fundys are all of the conservative Republican variety. That is not so. There are many left-leaners who believe the most awful things. Take Jim Wallis for example. He edits a liberal magazine called Sojourners, which promotes a liberal agenda. He is a christian. He wrote an essay titled "The Logic of Hell" in which he defended that most obscene doctrine. And my web surfings has revealed to me that there are many hell-believing xtians who are left-leaning; however, they are not sexy enough to register on the radar (i.e., the media).

 

So don't go believing that fundyism and Republicans exclusively go hand in hand. I know that's not so.

 

Did I say EVERY Republican was a fundy? No. What I said was the vast majority of Republicans I have met in RL happened to be fundies.

 

I know not ALL Republicans are fundy, but you gotta admit, there certainly are a lot of them around. They are the reason why Bush was elected again.

 

What the country needs is a new political party, one that isn't exclusive and doesn't pander to the religious fanatics, and is more in the center than either Republicans or Democrats, IMHO.

[Stormwarden]

I think a spending cap on political campaigns would be a great place to start. It would be based on the campaign type. I am still working out a system for it.

 

I am sorry, but 20 million on a city mayoral race is far too much to be spending. I think a spending cap on elections might take away some of the influence the two parties have.

[Chad3232132]

I think a spending cap on political campaigns would be a great place to start. It would be based on the campaign type. I am still working out a system for it.

 

I am sorry, but 20 million on a city mayoral race is far too much to be spending. I think a spending cap on elections might take away some of the influence the two parties have.

 

There are caps on contributions to candidates for office. BUT, people can get around that by donating to special interest groups who run their own ads for certain candidates. For example, George Soros started his own group Moveon.org last year and spent millions of dollars to run ads in favor of Democrats and bashing Republicans, and Republicans have their own groups (such as religious, anti-abortion, Swift Boat Vets, etc.) who do the same bashing Democrats. This is why donations to candidates mean almost nothing. It' easy to place limits on donations to candidates, however it's almost impossible to limit contributions to special interest groups who run ads in favor or opposed to certain candidates.

 

I know how you feel though... I live in little Daytona Beach, FL (population only about 60,000), and even here candidates raise and spend ridiculous amounts of cash for local races. The incumbant mayor raised something like $200,000 to get re-elected this year- it's just crazy for an office paying about $18,000 per year.