'Here is the difference. Conservatives believe in Morality even though some of us are going to fall.

[Bluebear]

"Here is the difference. Conservatives believe in Morality even though some of us are going to fall. Oh and by the way we take the LUMPS when we fall. Liberals on the other hand have ZERO morality and aggressively support and DEFEND orginizations like N A M B L A."

"What LIBERALS are really saying here is that there should be ZERO morality in the world... that is should all just be a free for all like #### and Gomorrah. We all know that men are flawed and that men will fall. At least conservatives know that we need morality in the world...even if they cannot live up to the standard. Wipe morality from the world and we will plunge into anarchy. Remember Being a Liberal means NEVER having to say you are SORRY."

=====

The assorted ramblings of a basement warrior:

http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/comments?type=user&loginCode={E6851B02-6E7B-4CB7-8022-9E5751D1AF0C}

You can practically see the Skoal flying all over the keyboard as he types.

[More Than A Feeling]

1. What a jackass.

"Liberals don't accept my authority based on imagined super-beings, so they must be pure evil!" Oy.

[sinkingfeeling]

2. Morality, like bombing tens of thousands of innocent people to death?

[MatrixEscape]

13. I have seen ...

many freepie and religious items on the Net that indicate a misunderstanding of the more liberal concept whereby it is understood that you cannot legislate morality.

morality (Webster's English Dictionary)

mo.ral.i.ty \m*-'ral-*t-e-, mo.-\ n 1a: a moral discourse, statement, or
lesson 1b: a literary or other imaginative work teaching a moral lesson
2a: a doctrine or system of morals pl 2b: particular moral principles or
rules of conduct 3: conformity to ideals of right human conduct 4: moral
conduct : VIRTUE

And so, we see that the word and its context are often victimized by ignorance.

The question of morality relates to the personal, or group beliefs about conduct and virtue that people subscribe to. Creating laws that force people to be "good", (whatever your definition of good is, and it varies widely from person to person, culture to culture, and era to era) but the intent of the phrase is that it will not MAKE THEM GOOD.

When Liberals who understand that bring it forward as a talking point concerning law-making, they intend to point out that morality is an issue of teaching, proclivity, and consensus, but there is a demonstrable and reasonable line between laws that are enacted for the common good and various understandings, intuitions, and definitions of morality.

For example: in my opinion, if the above reasoning is cast aside, and one group, )be it political, philosophical, or religious) is allowed to transform its narrow ideas and notions of morality into law, that can easily be seen as a certain transition into theocracy and tyranny. A few, dogmatic moralists would be appeased, but we have already seen the end result and suffering that is inflicted in the name of the brutal and unforgiving enforcement of said morality as law. See the history of the Catholic Church, as only one of the many examples of morality as law in action.

The thoughtful and cogent amongst us are obliged to hold those issues out in the open and present them in contrast to those who feel righteously obliged to enforce their brand of values on an entire population, if it were possible. The road to hell is STILL being paved with good intentions. They are cheap and effective and that road is turning into a highway into an abyss of ignorance.

The kind of morality that others would impose upon us, in the context of a Constitutional, representational, (ah enjoy the aromatic wisps of that as it diffuses into the air) Republic is not one of the common good, nor is it, largely, an issue of governmental decree. That kind of morality is a personal choice or a relationship to a community. More so, it is, to me, more about a personal choice and discipline whereby one behaves and acts as an example and beacon unto others, thereby influencing, in one way or another, others, and maybe even the legal sphere of legislation and prohibitions. It is NOT the other way around!

[unpossibles]

3. they take their lumps...

...by crying to jesus and entering rehab....

[BOSSHOG]

4. Obviously taking responsibility (for anything) is not a conservative value

and david vitter saying I take full responsibility for (something he doesn't admit to doing) does not count.

[kevinbgoode]

5. And what con-servatives are saying that, despite claims to having

a special moral compass, they not only believe their own immoral activity is a private matter, but apparently breaking the LAW is as well. Is soliciting a prostitute a private matter not covered by the PUBLIC laws? And is Senator Vitter perhaps guilty of an intentional coverup of criminal behavior by claiming it is a matter between God and his wife and NOT the public's law? After all, didn't he WILLFULLY withhold that information about his own apparent CRIMINAL behavior until the statute of limitations ran out?

[hfojvt]

6. "take the lumps when we fall"

just like Scooter Libby. And Richard Nixon.

That's what I like about Bush and Cheney. They always apologize when there wrong. Okay, they apparently haven't been wrong yet, but I am sure if they ever were wrong about something, like, say how we could cut taxes and still balance the budget, or about whether Saddam had WMD, or about whether the Iraq war would be a cakewalk, or if somebody leaked the name of a covert agent, or about how their tax-cuts were not aimed at the rich...If they were ever wrong about things like that, I just know that they would step right up and admit it and apologize and do everything they could to fix the problem. I just know it. I mean, Bush would have to, since he is such a man of sterling character. If he didn't then he would be something else, something more like a lying sack of excrement.

[Richard Steele]

7. They "take the LUMPS" when they fall? What a delusional asshat.

Where are all these RWers "taking lumps" for their hypocrisy?

Scooter, Vitter, Foley, Haggard....the list of RW "Lump-Duckers"
who spin their crimes into more attacks on Liberals is just
about fucking endless.

Their entire philosophy is based on propaganda and PRIVELEDGE;
"Truth" and "accountability" to them are just buzzwords that
generate a Pavlovian response from their followers.

[MatrixEscape]

16. They are also doing an important and excellent job ...

To support and expand the prevailing growth of plutocracy via corporatocracy!

While the powerful propaganda machine of corporate media continues to allow the people to think they are still living in some form of Constitutional democracy with legitimate representation, the entire game board has been changed and those charming notions, to some of us, seem rather quaint and blatantly false simply by observing the course of events and the results.

The mask will eventually come off when the full union of wedded bliss between government and corporations is finalized and lobbying no longer is an essential prop for the illusion of self government. That, of course, evokes the "F" word, and I don't be carnal knowledge.

It is vital that this issue stand tall in the public eye, or the money and power that is rapidly concentrating in the hands of a few, along with the technology to enforce their paradigm and agendas, will constitute a form of what I would call, corporate anarchy where, without any violent revolution or military takeover, (though those issues stand as well) will completely captivate and take over the zeitgeist. Sadly, that won't be clear until the facade we are seeng is no longer profitable and is pulled away. Unfortunately, it is then that freedom and individuality will be subject to nothing more than corporate policy.

[MrSlayer]

8. Who's defending NAMBLA?

Where do they grow these people?

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

15. Well, you know, Democratic Party = ACLU = Black Panthers = PETA = NAMBLA.

Therefore, you defend NAMBLA. :crazy:

[Bitwit1234]

9. Well if we, the dems, could only stop the republicans

with their perverted sex, adultery, and child abuse then maybe there would be a lot more morality in this country. Seems like every day or two another republican pops up in the news because of one of their sexual indiscretions.

[kimmylavin]

10. We defend NAMBLA?

Wow, my whole liberal ideology was just rocked. :)

As for a "ZERO morality" world, I think the conservatives are doing just fine at demonstrating what one of those looks like. I'll stick with my kooky liberal morality, free from hypocrisy.

[baby_mouse]

11. Morality, dear, is for fortune cookies. We on the Left have Ethics...

...they're based on reasoning, not wibbly superstition, and they work better...

Oh, and, darling? We on the left DO live up to our standards. Just you people are a bunch of useless, babyish hypocrites doesn't mean everybody else is.

Yours sincerely,

An Ex-Christian.

[baby_mouse]

12. "Oh and by the way we take the LUMPS when we fall..."

Dear, oh dear, oh dear...

Yeah, providing they are lumps you feel comfortable with, darling. Nice, easy, conservative-friendly lumps.

[The Cleaner]

14. "You can practically see the Skoal flying all over the keyboard as he types."

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl: