Why I'm no longer a Republican

[ImAnOgre]

I grew up a Republican, I first started getting into politics when I was just a lad in middle school and Reagan was President. I like that America would flex it’s muscle at what I perceived to be the injustices of the world. Where the saying “Hi, I’m from the government, and I’m here to help” put fear into the hearts and minds of the citizenry.

But lately…. Hell since the late 90s, I’ve became disenfranchised with the Republican party. It’s basically 3 points:

1) Religion: Let me start with I’m a Christian. I believe Jesus died for my sins. I believe that God exist and I also believe I fall very short of his glory. I also believe that the government has no right to tell me or somebody else who or who not to worship, and should not make social policy based on religion, or predominantly religious views. Case in point, gay marriage…. If two homosexuals want to marry, let them. Who the fuck am I or the government to tell somebody else what to do with their life.
2) This whole gays in the military, don’t ask don’t tell policy…. Is every leader in the Republican party so ass backwards that they think our military is going to be worse if gays are allowed to be open about their personal lives? Even the beloved John McCain is flip flopping on the issue. Some people are gay, whether they were born that way, or chose to be that way is not the issue…. just accept the fact they are, and if they love this country enough to give their lives for it…. All the better.
3) Abortion. Good Fucking God… I abhor abortion, I think it’s wrong, and I think it’s immoral, but who the fuck is the government to tell a woman what she can or cannot do with her body.

I’m all for limited government, but with as much as the government grew under Dubya, I can’t find any reason to continue to support the ReFuckYouPublicans any longer. I have totally converted to the libertarian party.

Why am I posting this… because all that bullshit about gays in the military hogwash that’s been in the media lately. They start to gain some momentum because of the senatorial seat gained from Massachusetts, and start acting like the fucktards they have always been. Losers.

I can’t stand the Democratic leadership either, but that’s another post for another time…. And now that it looks like universal healthcare has stalled (thankfully), I thinking my hatred of the Republicans is just a bit more right now.

[Hazir]

But what does this mean in reality? Does it mean next time you're going to vote for a third-party candidate? Or a Democrat? Or not vote at all? Maybe what you really need to do is let your voice be heard inside the Republican Party, rather than abandoning it to the extremists.

[Timbuk2]

... or just forget about it all and have a beer.

Voting for one party is much of a sameness as voting for the next. Life continues along the same vein regardless of pre-election promises.

[EyeKhan]

But what does this mean in reality? Does it mean next time you're going to vote for a third-party candidate? Or a Democrat? Or not vote at all? Maybe what you really need to do is let your voice be heard inside the Republican Party, rather than abandoning it to the extremists.

The Republican party's been fucked up for years (IMHO it started with Reagan, but whatever). I'd actually expected it to get less fucked up after the catastrophe of the Bush Administration but it seems to be chugging along as normal, if not worse. They've effectively adopted a policy of "stop all legislation, blame the lack of governance on the Democrats, and use our smear machine to get control of Congress in miderms, rinse and repeat for the next presidential election." God I hope it doesn't work, but by most indications.... fuck.

[Hazir]

The Republican party's been fucked up for years (IMHO it started with Reagan, but whatever). I'd actually expected it to get less fucked up after the catastrophe of the Bush Administration but it seems to be chugging along as normal, if not worse. They've effectively adopted a policy of "stop all legislation, blame the lack of governance on the Democrats, and use our smear machine to get control of Congress in miderms, rinse and repeat for the next presidential election." God I hope it doesn't work, but by most indications.... fuck.

Well the Democrats are handing it to them on a silver platter, talking about super-majorities needed (eh really?) let the Republicans show themselves to be complete asses with their filibuster threath, let's see how good that makes them look on national TV.

Or let them accept the Senate bill in the House and be done with this nonsense.

The Democrats are just as much to blame for not calling the bluff of the obstructionists that control the GOP right now. Because they let their fear bind their hands in a situation where they hold both chambers of Congress and the White House. Sometimes all it takes is 5 minutes of political courage. Too bad for you political courage is a very sparse commodity inside the Beltway.

[GGT]

Sounds like an overall condemnation of our two party system.

[Hazir]

Sounds like an overall condemnation of our two party system.

If you are talking about my post, you are wrong. I talk about Democrats and Republicans because this is a thread started by somebody abandoning the Republican Party. I feel the same about politicians in Holland and on a wider scale in the EU. The vast majority of them is only interested in being (re-)elected. It doesn't just happen in two party systems.

[Loki]

If you are talking about my post, you are wrong. I talk about Democrats and Republicans because this is a thread started by somebody abandoning the Republican Party. I feel the same about politicians in Holland and on a wider scale in the EU. The vast majority of them is only interested in being (re-)elected. It doesn't just happen in two party systems.

Is there any rational reason why politicians should strive for another goal?

[Hazir]

Yes, civic duty, wanting to be a positive force in society. It is something different than wanting to be elected for no other reason than holding a seat for a number of years. We (all modern nations) have too many politicians of the second kind these days, and way too few of the first kind.

[Loki]

Yes, civic duty, wanting to be a positive force in society. It is something different than wanting to be elected for no other reason than holding a seat for a number of years. We (all modern nations) have too many politicians of the second kind these days, and way too few of the first kind.

A) The kind of people who want that are unlikely to run for political office in today's world.
B) Even if one wants to be a positive force in society, that entails being elected and reelected first. Even the most noble of politicians justify taking politically popular measures on the grounds that it will help them stay in power, and therefore allow them to pursue the noble agenda.

[Hazir]

A) The kind of people who want that are unlikely to run for political office in today's world.
B) Even if one wants to be a positive force in society, that entails being elected and reelected first. Even the most noble of politicians justify taking politically popular measures on the grounds that it will help them stay in power, and therefore allow them to pursue the noble agenda.

ad A; that is what I already said
ad B; yes, one needs to be elected. What is needed after that is using the vote to achieve what one stands for, or standing down if one fails to do so. Hanging in isn't going to help anybody, as is so aptly shown by our present predicament.

[EyeKhan]

Well the Democrats are handing it to them on a silver platter, talking about super-majorities needed (eh really?) let the Republicans show themselves to be complete asses with their filibuster threath, let's see how good that makes them look on national TV.

Or let them accept the Senate bill in the House and be done with this nonsense.

The Democrats are just as much to blame for not calling the bluff of the obstructionists that control the GOP right now. Because they let their fear bind their hands in a situation where they hold both chambers of Congress and the White House. Sometimes all it takes is 5 minutes of political courage. Too bad for you political courage is a very sparse commodity inside the Beltway.

I don't disagree at all. The only thing worse than a Democrat Controled Government that doesn't have the party cohesion to get anything done is a Republican Controled Government that does. So where's that leave us?

[EyeKhan]

Is there any rational reason why politicians should strive for another goal?

Its arguably irrational to substitute governance for single-minded electioneering. In the end you risk ruining your nation.

[Loki]

ad A; that is what I already said
ad B; yes, one needs to be elected. What is needed after that is using the vote to achieve what one stands for, or standing down if one fails to do so. Hanging in isn't going to help anybody, as is so aptly shown by our present predicament.

Or they take the popular position on issues that are of secondary importance to them and stick to their own position on the main issues (unless those issues become highly politicized, in which case they'll take the popular stance on those during election years). Cognitive dissonance and all that. This is just how politics (in democracies) works and how it's always worked.

Its arguably irrational to substitute governance for single-minded electioneering. In the end you risk ruining your nation.

By the time you ruin your nation, you'll be long gone from power, so why care? And of course they'd argue that their populist positions would only have a minor negative effect.

[EyeKhan]

By the time you ruin your nation, you'll be long gone from power, so why care? And of course they'd argue that their populist positions would only have a minor negative effect.

[Aimless]

an aside: i can't figure out how one can both abhor abortion and think it's wrong and still think it should be okay. i mean, like,if one thinks abortion is tantamount to murder, i mean.

[ImAnOgre]

an aside: i can't figure out how one can both abhor abortion and think it's wrong and still think it should be okay. i mean, like,if one thinks abortion is tantamount to murder, i mean.

I did not say it is ok, I simply said that who the hell am I (or you) to have the right to tell a woman what she can or cannot do with her body.

[EyeKhan]

In my current mind I would probably not choose an abortion in my family, preferring adoption instead. But that's for me and my family, not for you and yours. Or anyone else's. I value personal freedom over the abhorance of killing a fetal human.

[Aimless]

I did not say it is ok, I simply said that who the hell am I (or you) to have the right to tell a woman what she can or cannot do with her body.

no what i'm saying is that if abortion is tantamount to murder then we have every right (or obligation, perhaps) to oppose it in the same way we oppose murder. i don't believe abortion is tantamount to murder, but neither do i abhor it or thing it's morally wrong in any way! I can't think of many reasons to abhor abortion besides believing that it's murder tbh.

what's your thinking, here?

[EyeKhan]

no what i'm saying is that if abortion is tantamount to murder then we have every right (or obligation, perhaps) to oppose it in the same way we oppose murder. i don't believe abortion is tantamount to murder, but neither do i abhor it or thing it's morally wrong in any way! I can't think of many reasons to abhor abortion besides believing that it's murder tbh.

what's your thinking, here?

Ever hold a sweet little baby package close to your chest? Aw, children are so <sigh> magical, especailly when its your own. How sad to kill it. Are you suggesting its not possible to feel that way but also feel that killing it is not murder? And also feel that you wouldn't make the choice to terminate a pregnancy and simultaneously believe that its not right to try and make that choice for everyone else? Come on Aim, you're much smarter than this. What gives?

[Aimless]

for starters a fetus is clearly not as cute nor as tangible as a baby outside the womb. further, being unwilling to terminate a pregnancy is not the same as abhorring abortion, at least not in my view. that's why i'm wondering what ogre's views are in this matter, even though i suppose this thread is primarily about the suckage of american politics.

[EyeKhan]

for starters a fetus is clearly not as cute nor as tangible as a baby outside the womb. further, being unwilling to terminate a pregnancy is not the same as abhorring abortion, at least not in my view. that's why i'm wondering what ogre's views are in this matter, even though i suppose this thread is primarily about the suckage of american politics.

<sigh> Have you no imagination? When a woman's pregnant and you terminate that pregnancy, you're snuffing that little-baby-to-be. You're snuffing a toddler/first day of school/sweet 16/going off to college-to-be too. And an old-man-to-be. If you have experience with any of these things its not hard to imagine a connection between the goober fetus and all the things it could be if you just didn't kill it. And its easy to abhor something like that and still think its not your job to tell everyone else they can't do what they want vis a vis their own pregnancies.

[Tempus Vernum]

an aside: i can't figure out how one can both abhor abortion and think it's wrong and still think it should be okay. i mean, like,if one thinks abortion is tantamount to murder, i mean.

The evidence so far shows that banning abortion has no affect on the abortion rate but does raise the mortality rate for the women involved. Clearly the risk of a horrific death isn't enough to deter women, there must be a reason they're having abortions that goes further than just "I don't want this baby" and I can certainly think of a couple beyond the obvious medical reasons.

Given this, it feels like a complete waste of time to make abortion illegal. I'd rather we focused on addressing the reasons women have them in the first place and in improving the alternatives like adoption. But even then, if you manage make abortion rare it's never going to go away completely and a safe abortion is still better than an unsafe one.

[Tempus Vernum]

In my current mind I would probably not choose an abortion in my family, preferring adoption instead. But that's for me and my family, not for you and yours. Or anyone else's. I value personal freedom over the abhorance of killing a fetal human.

I have a question: Do you currently or, if your not ready for a family yet, are you planning on ever adopting a child? I've been wondering if it could be argued that people who oppose abortion have a moral obligation to include adopted children in their family unit in order to encourage that alternative.

[EyeKhan]

I have a question: Do you currently or, if your not ready for a family yet, are you planning on ever adopting a child? I've been wondering if it could be argued that people who oppose abortion have a moral obligation to include adopted children in their family unit in order to encourage that alternative.

I have not and don't plan to adopt children. But I think if anyone supports making abortion illegal they ought to be obligated to adopt unwanted children. Not sure how you legislate that, seems like an unwelcome invasion of someone's private life, but if you're forcing women to have unwanted babies, why stop there? Hell, if you're going draconian, why not force all women onto implanted birth control when they aquire breeding ability and make them get a permit to go off it to have children. No more unwanted pregnancies and you're all set to start controlling population growth. Better yet, for the moral majority crowd, lets force women to wear chastity belts so they can't have sex at all. Better make them wear ball gags too to make sure there's no felatio. Not sure how you stop a hand job.

[Tempus Vernum]

I don't think it should be legislated at all but it could become a cultural thing, that it would be considered bad form not to adopt a child. Because standing outside a clinic shouting at people doesn't seem to work.

[Lewkowski]

3) Abortion. Good Fucking God… I abhor abortion, I think it’s wrong, and I think it’s immoral, but who the fuck is the government to tell a woman what she can or cannot do with her body.

And one could also say.

"Baby Murdering. Good Fucking God... I abhor baby killing, I think it's wrong, and I think it's immoral, but what he fuck is the government to tell a woman that she can or cannot do with her own child."

If it is wrong to murder a premature newborn then why is it not wrong to murder a fetus that has just as much brain activity developed in an 8 month pregnancy?

[Ziggy Stardust]

If it is wrong to murder a premature newborn then why is it not wrong to murder a fetus that has just as much brain activity developed in an 8 month pregnancy?

It's just as wrong in my opinion. But I agree with you about using brain activity as a guideline. Do you agree that it should be allowed to abort a 20 week old fetus, when it's know that the Cerebral Cortex has not developed yet? Meaning the fetus is unaware?

[LittleFuzzy]

But the Bush administration couldn't have been a catastrophe, the Republicans were the ones in power. Right?

Seriously, the way the party as an institution evaluates things is by whether or not it's the one in power. It needs to be out of power for longer before that will be the impetus for change, or alternatively needs a new cohort of leaders, apparatchiks, etc. to move in and oust the old guard, which just isn't all that predictable, it's something that can happen in response to catastrophes or good-times complacency.

[EyeKhan]

And one could also say.

"Baby Murdering. Good Fucking God... I abhor baby killing, I think it's wrong, and I think it's immoral, but what he fuck is the government to tell a woman that she can or cannot do with her own child."

If it is wrong to murder a premature newborn then why is it not wrong to murder a fetus that has just as much brain activity developed in an 8 month pregnancy?

Abortions at 8 months are illegal, except for medical concerns, arn't they?

Also - do you oppose birth control? Are you an abstinance only kind of guy?