The Next Generation of Conservatives

[pudljumpr4]

I'm finding through my experiences on this site that my conservative values are different than those of the generation before me. As a young conservative, when discussing law I refuse to stray from how the laws in question are written and interpreted. When discussing tax issues I'm stubborn to allowing tax increases because I feel we've taxed enough and then overspent. When speaking of religion, I argue that it and government should in no way be related. Our founding fathers knew what they were doing when including the "Establishment Clause" in the Bill of Rights.

Many on this site speak with great conviction in regard to God and faith-based topics. I can respect their faith and expression, but I cannot respect these people when they are expressing faith in an intolerant and un-American way. Your church can put limits on its membership that our goverment cannot put on its citizens. It seems God and government are seldom agreed on and little understood.

American conservativism is evolving, and it will not be defined by the conservative figures of yesterday. I am a component of the future conservative movement, and I am deeply offended by the crude remarks of so many on this site, especially those that justify their hostility by their misinterpretation of the Word of God. Any person of true faith shouldn't need to refer to a book to know what is right or wrong in any situation. You needn't look any further than your own soul and being if you know God. Knowing some catch phrases from the Bible is by no means familiarity with God.

I'm young and may not know every aspect of any issue, but I do understand the positive correlation between intolerance and hate. Only through tolerance of others will you find who they are and why they express themselves in the manner that they do. This should be a site where open minds grow from the perspective of others. We all know what conservative values are, so let's not debate that. What should be debated is the legal merit of issues and why they should or should not be reformed from the conservative standpoint.

I've witnessed my fair share of bashing in only a few short days here, and it disgusts me that conservatives have grown so far apart that they must scream for others to hear them. Grow up, grow together, and learn to transmute your exposure to the perspectives of others into personal awareness. Worry less about what other communities are doing around us. I feel our primary concern should be unification as conservatives, especially to bridge the generational gap. And please, when posting, don't intimidate others for expressing who they are or what they feel. Accept them for who they are and what they've posted and respond with your feelings and interpretation of the law. You know if and when you've been unreasonable in open discussion.

Most of the participants of this site have already discredited themselves politically to me as they don't understand the nature of America. Clean up your act, and I could be in agreement with you more often. Don't bring religion into a political discussion, the two don't seem related. Religion is to be practiced, it is not supposed to be a tool used to declare moral superiority. Perhaps if some contributors practiced their faith moreso than preaching it they could better discover the truths of existence.

Pass the torch and what knowledge you have to us. We need direction, not threats. We need your perspective as youths, not an extension of your hatrid. I'd appreciate the blessing of your God, not fear of Him. He is welcome in my community and Government, but His influence should be over individuals, not over legislation.

I won't debate religion, faith, or existence.
I know living in and leaving this world gracefully are what really matters.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

I'm finding through my experiences on this site that my conservative values are different than those of the generation before me. As a young conservative, when discussing law I refuse to stray from how the laws in question are written and interpreted. When discussing tax issues I'm stubborn to allowing tax increases because I feel we've taxed enough and then overspent. When speaking of religion, I argue that it and government should in no way be related. Our founding fathers knew what they were doing when including the "Establishment Clause" in the Bill of Rights.

That's the beauty of conservatism ... we believe in rugged individualism, even within the definitions of our ideology. You won't find that sort of philosophical freedom within that other body politick.

Many on this site speak with great conviction in regard to God and faith-based topics. I can respect their faith and expression, but I cannot respect these people when they are expressing faith in an intolerant and un-American way. Your church can put limits on its membership that our goverment cannot put on its citizens. It seems God and government are seldom agreed on and little understood.

Respect is a two way street -- it is not given or granted, but earned. I can respect someone of conviction, as well, but I find I have a hard time respecting someone who comes into my house and after a short visit begins telling me how to run my household. Because YOU believe an action to be intolerant and un-American doesn't exactly make it truth.

American conservativism is evolving, and it will not be defined by the conservative figures of yesterday. I am a component of the future conservative movement, and I am deeply offended by the crude remarks of so many on this site, especially those that justify their hostility by their misinterpretation of the Word of God. Any person of true faith shouldn't need to refer to a book to know what is right or wrong in any situation. You needn't look any further than your own soul and being if you know God. Knowing some catch phrases from the Bible is by no means familiarity with God.

First off, conservatism is about conserving the fundamental principles and values this country was founded on -- you want evolution, join the liberals in the democrat party. You may think yourself part of the "future conservative movement," but you better learn from the past bucko, or you'll be destined to repeat the failures from it. You have no "right" NOT to be offended. We are a body of mainly grown-ups, and if you don't like the way we speak, I suggest you take your ball and go play elsewhere.

As for the interpretation, or misinterpretation, of God's Word, until the day you prove to me that YOU are God, your "opinion" is on the same level as everyone else's around here, your individual property and that doesn't make it Divine Truth. That "Book" you refer to IS God's Holy Word, and we most certainly SHOULD be seeking and searching in it; that was the reason It was provided. A soul can be led astray, which is why we are admonished to study to show ourselves approved and to try everything by the Word that we may be found in line with His Way, and His Path. Your petty greivance doesn't exactly prove your familiarity with The Father, either.

I'm young and may not know every aspect of any issue, but I do understand the positive correlation between intolerance and hate. Only through tolerance of others will you find who they are and why they express themselves in the manner that they do. This should be a site where open minds grow from the perspective of others. We all know what conservative values are, so let's not debate that. What should be debated is the legal merit of issues and why they should or should not be reformed from the conservative standpoint.

Well if you "know" how a site like this should be run, I suggest you purchase the domain and start your own ... in the meantime we'd appreciate if you'd stop telling us how to run this one. This is a privately owned website, and we aren't here to fulfill your "dream". If you'd like to know more about this site, it's administration and running, I suggest you contact the owner. As for intolerance and hate, I don't believe you know us well enough to pass such judgement. Again, you are entitled to your opinion, but that doesn't make it right, true, or accurate.

I've witnessed my fair share of bashing in only a few short days here, and it disgusts me that conservatives have grown so far apart that they must scream for others to hear them. Grow up, grow together, and learn to transmute your exposure to the perspectives of others into personal awareness. Worry less about what other communities are doing around us. I feel our primary concern should be unification as conservatives, especially to bridge the generational gap. And please, when posting, don't intimidate others for expressing who they are or what they feel. Accept them for who they are and what they've posted and respond with your feelings and interpretation of the law. You know if and when you've been unreasonable in open discussion.

YOU aren't part of the administration. YOU aren't the owner. YOU, by your own admission (and evidenced by your post count), haven't even been here all that long. How dare you come in here telling US how to behave. This isn't your house, you don't dictate the rules to us. You don't like it, leave.

Most of the participants of this site have already discredited themselves politically to me as they don't understand the nature of America. Clean up your act, and I could be in agreement with you more often.

Gee, and I was so worried you wouldn't like us. You lecture us, and yet you can't see the irony of one who has barely been inside the door of this place long enough to wipe your feet telling US to clean up OUR act? You have discredited YOURSELF completely in my estimation by your arrogant address.

Don't bring religion into a political discussion, the two don't seem related. Religion is to be practiced, it is not supposed to be a tool used to declare moral superiority. Perhaps if some contributors practiced their faith moreso than preaching it they could better discover the truths of existence.

You can believe in your almighty "Establishment Clause," however it was only meant to keep government OUT of religion, not the other way around. Religion is not supposed to be "practiced," faith is supposed to be part of one's very essence, part of who they are. I do not separate my faith like an egg yolk from the white when I am making decisions or casting a vote. For one so young claiming to be so learned, you are ignorant of the truths of faith, and much less existence.

Pass the torch and what knowledge you have to us. We need direction, not threats. We need your perspective as youths, not an extension of your hatrid. I'd appreciate the blessing of your God, not fear of Him. He is welcome in my community and Government, but His influence should be over individuals, not over legislation.

For us to pass the torch, you have to reach for it, not reach out and slap us in the face, which is EXACTLY what you did with this post. Our God is THE God, there is but One. Whether He is welcome in your community or government doesn't negate the fact that He Is over all.

I won't debate religion, faith, or existence.
I know living in and leaving this world gracefully are what really matters.

Maybe that's all that matters to you, but you aren't us. If you don't want to debate religion, faith, or existence, I suggest you stay out of the Religion and Evolution Forums. If you wish to discuss conservative issues, feel free to join in any of the threads within any of the the forums, but I suggest you stop telling US how to participate or run this board.

[Eagle1]

ok, we get it, you are a fiscal conservative and you dont like religion. why do you feel it is necessary to come out and state it?? your post reads just like that of a gay who comes on the site and says how we should stop talking about gays but then assure us that they are "conservative".
yes, government sucks, but it is necessary and must be as small as possible


Only through tolerance of others will you find who they are and why they express themselves in the manner that they do. .

and we do understand liberals, all too well. that is why we are so strongly against them

[Riverboat]

it disgusts me that conservatives have grown so far apart that they must scream for others to hear them.

Who's screaming at whom? I don't hear any screaming, unless it's maniacal laughter. I certainly laughed last night when I looked at the pictures at the pro-Tookie rally. Who needs to scream when we have the internet?

Oh, 10-15 years ago we'd scream in frustration at the full-tilt slant of the mainstream media. But imagine my gloating satisfaction, shared my thousands of other conservatives like me, when bloggers unraveled the case built up by Dan Rather against George Bush just weeks before the election.

[Wyatt_Junker]

Whose the blowhard? Apparently we need to 'pass the torch' and shit. Next thing you know, he's gonna do '4 score and 7 years ago' on all uz us, polish his musket and sign the Homestead Act. Gotta love a noob.

[Little Bit Farm]

If this kid don't frighten you for the future, I don't know what will!!! Gosh he sounds like he got his politics from Big Bird!


Little Bit Farm

[DoctorDoom]

<table align="center" bgcolor="black" bordercolor="#CCCCCC" border="4" cellpadding="8"><tr><td><div align="center"><img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Troll_01.jpg"><br><br><font face="Verdana" color="F3D4B5" size="6"><b>DO NOT FEED<br>THE TROLL!<font size="4"><br></font></b></font></div></td></tr></table>

[Republican_Legion]

If this kid don't frighten you for the future, I don't know what will!!! Gosh he sounds like he got his politics from Big Bird!


Little Bit Farm

I would agree . He sounds like a hypotarian who believes the goverment should be out of our bedroom and paychecks but thinks the goverment/courts should invade states rights and establish a 'right to abortion' and REMOVE 'freedom of religion' and change it to 'freedom from religion' .

Big Bird ?

[Republican_Legion]

For us to pass the torch, you have to reach for it, not reach out and slap us in the face, which is EXACTLY what you did with this post.

Homes, the kid resembles Barry Goldwater .
Barry Goldwaters fits and slaps at religion and about conservativism lost him the torch and it was handed to Ronald Reagan in 1980. Barry Goldwater proved in his later years proved he was a liberal all along with his BIG GOVERMENT support of 'Roe Vs Wade' and his anti-god, anti-religous, anti-christian rhetoric.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldwater

[Wolfcounsel]

Football 56
Monkey 0

[jag]

I'm young and may not know every aspect of any issue...
Correct

Clean up your act, and I could be in agreement with you more often. Pass the torch and what knowledge you have to us. We need direction, not threats.
You admited your young and but expect us to bend to your will so you will agree with us? Knowledge is the gift, if you agree or not is a personal problem
We need your perspective as youths, not an extension of your hatrid.
One perspective - use spell check. Just kidding :licky:
I'd appreciate the blessing of your God, not fear of Him. He is welcome in my community and Government
Thats not your call, kiddo. The bigger issue is are you welcome in his community??

[Little Bit Farm]

.

Big Bird ?

Yeah, have you ever sat down and listened to Sesame Street with an eye to the politically correct messages being spewed at children. Better yet, go down to your local elementary school and have a look at their social studies curriculum. Heck, this kid's language could have come out of the Liberal's Guide to the Galaxy!

but I do understand the positive correlation between intolerance and hate
For crying out loud, can intolerance and hate be positive????

You needn't look any further than your own soul and being if you know God.

]John 8:18-20
<SUP id=en-KJV-26400> 18</SUP>I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me. <SUP id=en-KJV-26401>19</SUP>Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also.[/[/COLOR]QUOTE]

[QUOTE]Grow up, grow together, and learn to transmute your exposure to the perspectives of others into personal awareness.

Ohhhhhhmmmmmmmm!

I feel our primary concern should be unification as conservatives, especially to bridge the generational gap.

Oh PUHLEASE!!!! I'm sure the bridging you are talking about means for us all to cross the bridge to your side!!! I'd sooner blow up the bridge!!! If you were conservative I might actually be able to decide what the heck it means to unify with you!!!:hahaha:

We need your perspective as youths, not an extension of your hatrid.

No, what you just spent a LOT of time saying is that you don't want our perspective. You want us to have your perspective!!! Perhaps you just might consider that since you haven't been on this earth nearly long enough to know your nose from your toes, it might be wise to seek the experience of your elders, and find out just WHY they believe as they do!!! Ahhh, but that would require you admitting that you don't know everything, and THAT might lead to you realizing that you NEED God, and that might make it so that you can't do just everything that comes in your brain to do. Because after all THAT is the real problem isn't it? God only fits into your village when you get to do anything you want, right? Only when he fits into your plan rather than yourself fitting into his plan.

Little Bit Farm

[Teenager]

First off, welcome to FC.

I'm finding through my experiences on this site that my conservative values are different than those of the generation before me. As a young conservative, when discussing law I refuse to stray from how the laws in question are written and interpreted. When discussing tax issues I'm stubborn to allowing tax increases because I feel we've taxed enough and then overspent. When speaking of religion, I argue that it and government should in no way be related. Our founding fathers knew what they were doing when including the "Establishment Clause" in the Bill of Rights.


(1) Yes, conservative values are different among our generation than they were 30 years ago.
(2) It is very clear you have no idea what the original intentions of the founding fathers(particulary Jefferson and Madison) regarding Separation of Church and State.

Many on this site speak with great conviction in regard to God and faith-based topics. I can respect their faith and expression, but I cannot respect these people when they are expressing faith in an intolerant and un-American way. Your church can put limits on its membership that our goverment cannot put on its citizens. It seems God and government are seldom agreed on and little understood.

Whether you respect someone or not is your choice. The so-called "Tolerance" is farce. If you haven't figured that out I suggest you live a little longer in the real world before you post and preach about tolerance.

BTW, what church are you referring to? The Baptist church? The Anglican Church? The Mormon church? The Islamic church? Please specify.


American conservativism is evolving, and it will not be defined by the conservative figures of yesterday. I am a component of the future conservative movement, and I am deeply offended by the crude remarks of so many on this site, especially those that justify their hostility by their misinterpretation of the Word of God. Any person of true faith shouldn't need to refer to a book to know what is right or wrong in any situation. You needn't look any further than your own soul and being if you know God. Knowing some catch phrases from the Bible is by no means familiarity with God.

(1)I'm sure you'd like to think that you're a component of the future conservative movement... and yet so would I. BTW, if you're offended by "crude remarks" by those on this forum I suggest you grow some skin. This forum isn't for those too young to handle it.

(2) If you don't like religion why bother preaching about how others should practice their faith? I thought you wanted tolerance?:question:

I'm young and may not know every aspect of any issue, but I do understand the positive correlation between intolerance and hate. Only through tolerance of others will you find who they are and why they express themselves in the manner that they do. This should be a site where open minds grow from the perspective of others. We all know what conservative values are, so let's not debate that. What should be debated is the legal merit of issues and why they should or should not be reformed from the conservative standpoint.

(1)Oh please, enough of the tolerance speach dude. You being intolerant of my intolerance in order so we can all be tolerant. Riight.

(2) This site is owned by Warlady and she does as she pleases. This is America. The owners do whatever they want with their goods. Consumers, such as you and me, have no right tell her have to arrange her store(forum).


I've witnessed my fair share of bashing in only a few short days here, and it disgusts me that conservatives have grown so far apart that they must scream for others to hear them. Grow up, grow together, and learn to transmute your exposure to the perspectives of others into personal awareness. Worry less about what other communities are doing around us. I feel our primary concern should be unification as conservatives, especially to bridge the generational gap. And please, when posting, don't intimidate others for expressing who they are or what they feel. Accept them for who they are and what they've posted and respond with your feelings and interpretation of the law. You know if and when you've been unreasonable in open discussion.

(1) A young lil kid trying to everyone to grow up?:hahaha:

(2) You say we should worry less what other communities are doing around us. Why don't you preach to yourself, O Almighty Tolerance Preacher? Yes, accept us for who are. Riight.


Most of the participants of this site have already discredited themselves politically to me as they don't understand the nature of America. Clean up your act, and I could be in agreement with you more often. Don't bring religion into a political discussion, the two don't seem related. Religion is to be practiced, it is not supposed to be a tool used to declare moral superiority. Perhaps if some contributors practiced their faith moreso than preaching it they could better discover the truths of existence.

Yes, I agree. You have discredited yourself too many times already. Why don't you go play in the playground with the other kids? Oh, and don't forget to clean up your shoes on the way out.

Pass the torch and what knowledge you have to us. We need direction, not threats. We need your perspective as youths, not an extension of your hatrid. I'd appreciate the blessing of your God, not fear of Him. He is welcome in my community and Government, but His influence should be over individuals, not over legislation.

(1) Thanks for admitting that you're lost.
(2) I thought you said you didn't believe in God? If so, why do our blessing or fearmongering matter to you?

I won't debate religion, faith, or existence.
I know living in and leaving this world gracefully are what really matters.

(1) You've already been debating religion, Mister.
(2) Then you better grow up FAST.

[Teenager]

ok, we get it, you are a fiscal conservative and you dont like religion. why do you feel it is necessary to come out and state it?? your post reads just like that of a gay who comes on the site and says how we should stop talking about gays but then assure us that they are "conservative".
yes, government sucks, but it is necessary and must be as small as possible


It's all too strange(not really) that a lil' dude like him doesn't know he's really a liberterian.:rolleyes:

[aaron11]

Football 56
Monkey 0


:ditto:

[USPatriot8320]

Cut the guy some slack... You guys weren't this cruel to me when I posted my philosophy, granted I didn't attack your beliefs, but still :-p

[DoctorDoom]

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/monkeypoint.gif" /><img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/football.gif" />

[DoctorDoom]

Cut the guy some slack... You guys weren't this cruel to me when I posted my philosophy, granted I didn't attack your beliefs, but still :-pTrolls receive no honeymoon period.

[USPatriot8320]

Alright alright, just thought I'd try, can't blame a guy can ya?

[Teenager]

Cut the guy some slack... You guys weren't this cruel to me when I posted my philosophy, granted I didn't attack your beliefs, but still :-p



We're just eeeeeeviill....:whistle:


http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b171/mountainboy965/hell.jpg

[USPatriot8320]

HAHAHA That's why I enjoy this forum sooo much

[pudljumpr4]

I am impressed with your responses. I've seen some constructive criticism on this site. First and foremost, I am a person of faith... I just don't force it onto anybody. I want the distinction between law and faith to be made. I'll argue a legal issue and have scripture used to argue against it. I'm not arguing against scripture, I'm just saying it isn't law. I don't feel the the "Establishment Clause" should keep people of faith out of government, I'm saying we can't establish our faith through law. I'm a law student, and any professor of mine will keep me in line if I argue law with scripture.

I'm not trying to change your site, and I do host my own which you'll find on my profile. It's a local public forum and one of the biggest things in my community. Alot of voices that would normally not be heard are heard because of us.

As for my sounding like a liberal, it's intentional. I put out the liberal defenses so you can argue against them. Common ground politically is generally found in agreement to disagree with a philosophy, law, or proposal.

Keep up the debates. Just remember, we have to argue against extreme liberalism as conservatives. I'm putting the liberalism out there to argue against. It seems this site was established for people to argue against those ideas. Without those ideas to argue against, we're just bickering with one another as conservatives.

To all those who look to the Bible to find God, it's a great method, but it's only part of the search for Him. Once you've found God, you'll find him everywhere, even behind closed eyes. The Bible is just a road sign on the path to righteousness. The destination is my focus. Once you're there, do what He'd like to have you do in your life situation.

And one more thing, I feel Roe v. Wade is a gross application of the right to privacy, but it sadly holds up in court. I don't even support the idea of applied judge-made law, but it exists despite my disapproval. I just thought I should put out the arguments I hear against my ideals personally, and pass them onto you and ruffle your feathers. You can expect more of this type of behavior from me, I like to see what you guys write while red in the face.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

I am impressed with your responses.

I'm not, with yours.

I've seen some constructive criticism on this site.

Good for you, now apply it.

First and foremost, I am a person of faith...

Could have fooled me ... guess your fruit hasn't fully developed yet.

I just don't force it onto anybody.

Are you insinuating that we do?


I want the distinction between law and faith to be made.

I want the distinction between right and wrong, justice and injustice, law and judicial fiat to be made.

I'll argue a legal issue and have scripture used to argue against it. I'm not arguing against scripture, I'm just saying it isn't law. I don't feel the the "Establishment Clause" should keep people of faith out of government, I'm saying we can't establish our faith through law. I'm a law student, and any professor of mine will keep me in line if I argue law with scripture.

"The keystone of our system of popular sovereignty is the recognition, as the Declaration [of Independence] acknowledges, that 'all men are crated equal' and 'endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.' Religion and God are not alien to our system of government, they're integral to it.
The intensive and concerted effort to exclude references to religion or God from public places is an attack on our founding principles. It's an attempt to bolster a growing reliance on the government -- especially the judiciary -- as the source of our rights. But if our rights are not unalienable, if they don't come froma source higher than ourselves, then they're malleable at the will of the state. This is a prescription for tyranny."
Mark R. Levin, Men In Black: How the Supreme Court is Destroying America*

* I highly suggest you read it.

I'm not trying to change your site,

The words of your initial post belie that assertion.

and I do host my own which you'll find on my profile. It's a local public forum and one of the biggest things in my community. Alot of voices that would normally not be heard are heard because of us.

And so, why are you HERE, and not on THERE?

As for my sounding like a liberal, it's intentional. I put out the liberal defenses so you can argue against them. Common ground politically is generally found in agreement to disagree with a philosophy, law, or proposal.

We have enough liberal trash that blows in, we certainly don't need those of the so-called "future conservative movement" masquerading as libiots. You want to find out where we stand, ask us -- no one here is shy about sharing an opinion, philosophy, or interpretation.

Keep up the debates.

Gee, thanks for the permission, :uhh: .

Just remember, we have to argue against extreme liberalism as conservatives.

Most of us have been doing just that since before you were born, we don't need a reminder.

I'm putting the liberalism out there to argue against.

We don't need you for that, there's enough out there to argue against without your "well-intentioned" help.

It seems this site was established for people to argue against those ideas.

Instead of hypothesizing on the origins of the site, why don't you just ask Warlady why she established it.

Without those ideas to argue against, we're just bickering with one another as conservatives.

Is THAT what we were doing before you came along? Thanks for the enlightenment.

To all those who look to the Bible to find God, it's a great method, but it's only part of the search for Him. Once you've found God, you'll find him everywhere, even behind closed eyes. The Bible is just a road sign on the path to righteousness.

The Bible is not a "method" to finding God, it's His Holy Word, His Direction for our lives, our answer key. BTW, WE don't find Him, He finds us, through GRACE we are saved not of ourselves or works lest any man should boast. For someone who does NOT want to discuss religion, you sure keep bringing up the faith, bud.

The destination is my focus.

Great, you worry about the destination, sounds like yours might be in question.

Once you're there,

My destination is not here on earth, I am but a traveler here.

do what He'd like to have you do in your life situation.

Are you asserting that I am not?

And one more thing, I feel Roe v. Wade is a gross application of the right to privacy, but it sadly holds up in court. I don't even support the idea of applied judge-made law, but it exists despite my disapproval.

Again, I refer you to Mark R. Levin's book Men In Black, Chapter Four - Death By Privacy, page 58.

"The Court talks about a constitutional 'right to privacy' as though there is some constitutional provision or provisions forbidding any law ever to be passed which might abridge the 'privacy' of individuals. But there is not. There are, of course, guarantees in certain specific constitutional provisions which are designed in part to protect privacy at certain times and places with respect to certain activities. Justice Hugo Black

(read the WHOLE page)

I just thought I should put out the arguments I hear against my ideals personally,

How kind of you.

and pass them onto you and ruffle your feathers.

I'm not a bird, but you've been rather fowl.

You can expect more of this type of behavior from me,

Thanks for the advanced warning.

I like to see what you guys write while red in the face.

You can see me? Nah, no way, I'm not wearing make-up tonight, nor am I of Native-American descent. :smirky:

[Teenager]

I am impressed with your responses. I've seen some constructive criticism on this site.

Like Homes, I'm not impressed with yours either.

First and foremost, I am a person of faith... I just don't force it onto anybody. I want the distinction between law and faith to be made. I'll argue a legal issue and have scripture used to argue against it. I'm not arguing against scripture, I'm just saying it isn't law. I don't feel the the "Establishment Clause" should keep people of faith out of government, I'm saying we can't establish our faith through law. I'm a law student, and any professor of mine will keep me in line if I argue law with scripture.

And all the while you were telling us how we should behave., and you don't force your values on anyone, riiight:rolleyes:. If you want some more info on the original meaning of Separation of Church and State, read this. (http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/showthread.php?t=30072&highlight=separation+church+state)

I'm not trying to change your site, and I do host my own which you'll find on my profile. It's a local public forum and one of the biggest things in my community. Alot of voices that would normally not be heard are heard because of us.

Good for you. However, I'm sure you're glad I don't come over there just to tell you how to manage the thing.

As for my sounding like a liberal, it's intentional. I put out the liberal defenses so you can argue against them. Common ground politically is generally found in agreement to disagree with a philosophy, law, or proposal.

:rolleyes:

If you you sound like one, and smell like one, and you look like one, and you type like one, and you act like one, 95% of the people here will treat you like one. Please don't act like one if you're not.

Keep up the debates. Just remember, we have to argue against extreme liberalism as conservatives. I'm putting the liberalism out there to argue against. It seems this site was established for people to argue against those ideas. Without those ideas to argue against, we're just bickering with one another as conservatives.

(1)Like we need any cheerleading from you.

(2)We get plenty of liberals here, so we don't need one EXTRA. If you wanna know what this site is for, why don't you read the FAQ's first?

To all those who look to the Bible to find God, it's a great method, but it's only part of the search for Him. Once you've found God, you'll find him everywhere, even behind closed eyes. The Bible is just a road sign on the path to righteousness. The destination is my focus. Once you're there, do what He'd like to have you do in your life situation.

Good.

And one more thing, I feel Roe v. Wade is a gross application of the right to privacy, but it sadly holds up in court. I don't even support the idea of applied judge-made law, but it exists despite my disapproval. I just thought I should put out the arguments I hear against my ideals personally, and pass them onto you and ruffle your feathers. You can expect more of this type of behavior from me, I like to see what you guys write while red in the face.

(1)It's nice to hear that you abhorr abortion. However, don't think for a minute that's it right.
(2) I've already said if you continue to act like a liberal you will be treated as such and you won't be welcome here. We don't need any extra numb-nuts around.

[Republican_Legion]

It's all too strange(not really) that a lil' dude like him doesn't know he's really a liberterian.:rolleyes:

I think hes actually more of a Hypotarian .

Hypotarian: a person who says they are for small goverment. Supports limited goverment on taxes and all economic & labor issues .........but supports the FEDERAL GOVERMENTS INVASION OF STATES RIGHTS as in the case of ROE V.S WADE.
SUPPORTS FEDERAL LAW BANNING ALL STATE LAWS REGARDING ANAL SEX, ABORTION, SODOMY.

They are actually BIG GOVERMENT Advocates. They cry about us pushing our beliefs on them but they aint any better by pushing their beliefs on us.

[washoeconservative]

pudljumpr4,

I am also a YOUNG CONSERVATIVE (well I'm only 26) and I totally disagree with your approach.

With all due respect, it is this new way of thinking that is creating RINO's in record numbers. How do I know? I am in the heat of the action on a DAILY basis. I run www.nvconservatives.com, www.conservatown.com, www.battlebornnews.com, I work on several campaigns here in Nevada, I stood up against the school board last Tuesday over an issue with them not teaching pre-civil war History, and I will be Blogging the entire 2007 Legislative session.

Where were the kind of conservatives that you claim to be? Where are they? I didn't see any. I was alone, I always have been.

I've heard your message from the Young Republicans of Nevada. I sat down with a NATHAN TAYLOR who was in charge of the Young Republican National COnvention in Las Vegas and listened to him tell me that the GOP should drop the gay marriage and abortion debate. EXCUSE ME!!! DROP THE DEBATE?

I'm sorry mate, but you need to choose another label. Conservatism is an ideology, if you don't like it, then please go create a new ideology, don't try and change the exisiting one.

THAT, is what will tear conservatives apart.

[Republican_Legion]

The 'young republican group' in california is the same way .
Its a group for snobby Rich kids who dont care about morals/life and all they care about is keeping their dollars so they can spend it on Porno/Drugs. They preach limited goverment in a Immoral way.

The real young conservatives i new of were church going youth group kids.
Heck, the youth group scene in my area is big and they should hijack that RINO young republican BS .

Hell i am only 20 and i voted as a 'Republican' in 2004 for GWB .
I really wonder if its the DNC/ACLU that is funding the 'young republican' group.

[Teenager]

I think hes actually more of a Hypotarian .

Hypotarian: a person who says they are for small goverment. Supports limited goverment on taxes and all economic & labor issues .........but supports the FEDERAL GOVERMENTS INVASION OF STATES RIGHTS as in the case of ROE V.S WADE.
SUPPORTS FEDERAL LAW BANNING ALL STATE LAWS REGARDING ANAL SEX, ABORTION, SODOMY.

They are actually BIG GOVERMENT Advocates. They cry about us pushing our beliefs on them but they aint any better by pushing their beliefs on us.

Hypotarian? Hah! This dude's political party keeps growing smaller by the second. First it was the Republicans, then the Libertarians, now Hypotarians. :D

[Teenager]

pudljumpr4,

I am also a YOUNG CONSERVATIVE (well I'm only 26) and I totally disagree with your approach.

With all due respect, it is this new way of thinking that is creating RINO's in record numbers. How do I know? I am in the heat of the action on a DAILY basis. I run www.nvconservatives.com (http://www.nvconservatives.com), www.conservatown.com (http://www.conservatown.com), www.battlebornnews.com (http://www.battlebornnews.com), I work on several campaigns here in Nevada, I stood up against the school board last Tuesday over an issue with them not teaching pre-civil war History, and I will be Blogging the entire 2007 Legislative session.

Where were the kind of conservatives that you claim to be? Where are they? I didn't see any. I was alone, I always have been.

I've heard your message from the Young Republicans of Nevada. I sat down with a NATHAN TAYLOR who was in charge of the Young Republican National COnvention in Las Vegas and listened to him tell me that the GOP should drop the gay marriage and abortion debate. EXCUSE ME!!! DROP THE DEBATE?

I'm sorry mate, but you need to choose another label. Conservatism is an ideology, if you don't like it, then please go create a new ideology, don't try and change the exisiting one.

Wow. Kids arguing that we need DROP those debates? What's wrong with them?

THAT, is what will tear conservatives apart.


There's nothing closer to the truth.

[pudljumpr4]

I'm here looking for conservative definition. I'm a student and find that as I become more knowledgable of the law, I find it disagrees with the beliefs and practices of many. With the ACLU representing the far left most of the time I find that some conservative influence within the organization could be helpful. That's why I'm going to school. Honestly, I don't believe in half the crap I'm taught, and to know what Americans really feel I go to them. I do that here, and I visit other sites also.

I've regurgitated some of the prevailing ideas expressed in state-run schools, and I'll stop posting the arguments I need ground on which to stand against if it really annoys you. I'm tired of hearing it myself, but I'd like something to throw back when I do hear it. I'm just looking for some sound legal arguments, even if just a simple reference to our foundation or a legal case. Try going to a state-run law school and not being as annoyed as I am by what they teach and how it goes against what you feel to be right. It's hard to find legal common ground among conservatives sometimes. That's what I'm trying to identify. I'm going to be a civil liberties attorney, and in a world of extreme liberalism among civil liberties advocates my conservatism is exaggerated.

I can't take most ideas expressed around here and have them realistically applied to the law. I'd simply like to find methods by which these ideas can be protected under the law. I don't want to censor anyone or limit what they say, I'm just asking for more legal arguments because that's why I'm here. Give me where you stand legally. Somebody referred to the Declaration of Independence and applied it to an ideology. That's the kind of position I need to here; correlations between our foundation, our laws, and our ideology. If conservatives want to influence the ACLU, it would help to recruit law students with their eyes on it.

[Teenager]

I'm here looking for conservative definition. I'm a student and find that as I become more knowledgable of the law, I find it disagrees with the beliefs and practices of many. With the ACLU representing the far left most of the time I find that some conservative influence within the organization could be helpful. That's why I'm going to school. Honestly, I don't believe in half the crap I'm taught, and to know what Americans really feel I go to them. I do that here, and I visit other sites also.
I'll stop posting the arguments I need ground on which to stand against if it really annoys you. I'm tired of hearing it myself, but I'd like something to throw back when I do hear it. I'm just looking for some sound legal arguments, even if just a simple reference to our foundation or a legal case. Try going to a state-run law school and not being as annoyed as I am by the fact that while most have an opinion on these issues few are proposing sound legislation, reform, or new interpretations or applications of the law. It's hard to find legal common ground among conservatives sometimes. That's what I'm trying to identify. I'm going to be a civil liberties attorney, and in a world of extreme liberalism among civil liberties advocates my conservatism is exaggerated. I can't take most ideas expressed around here and have them realistically applied to the law. I'd like to find methods by which these ideas can be protected under the law. I don't want to censor anyone or limit what they say, I'm just asking for more legal arguments because that's why I'm here. Give me where you stand legally. Somebody referred to the Declaration of Independence and applied it to an ideology. That's the kind of position I need to here; correlations between our foundation, our laws, and our ideology. If conservatives want influence in the ACLU, you've got to recruit law students with their eyes on it.

We don't want influence in the ACLU. We want the ACLU DEAD! Why don't you just try working for the ACLJ?

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

I'm here looking for conservative definition. I'm a student and find that as I become more knowledgable of the law, I find it disagrees with the beliefs and practices of many. With the ACLU representing the far left most of the time I find that some conservative influence within the organization could be helpful. That's why I'm going to school. Honestly, I don't believe in half the crap I'm taught, and to know what Americans really feel I go to them. I do that here, and I visit other sites also.
I'll stop posting the arguments I need ground on which to stand against if it really annoys you. I'm tired of hearing it myself, but I'd like something to throw back when I do hear it. I'm just looking for some sound legal arguments, even if just a simple reference to our foundation or a legal case. Try going to a state-run law school and not being as annoyed as I am by what they teach and how it goes against what you feel to be right. It's hard to find legal common ground among conservatives sometimes. That's what I'm trying to identify. I'm going to be a civil liberties attorney, and in a world of extreme liberalism among civil liberties advocates my conservatism is exaggerated. I can't take most ideas expressed around here and have them realistically applied to the law. I'd simply like to find methods by which these ideas can be protected under the law. I don't want to censor anyone or limit what they say, I'm just asking for more legal arguments because that's why I'm here. Give me where you stand legally. Somebody referred to the Declaration of Independence and applied it to an ideology. That's the kind of position I need to here; correlations between our foundation, our laws, and our ideology. If conservatives want to influence the ACLU, it would help to recruit law students with their eyes on it.

You would have received a hearty welcome if THIS would have been your first post. You don't gain friends by throwing acid in their faces and saying, I just wanted to see how you would react to the kind of people who would throw acid in your face.

Again, I suggest reading Mark Levin's book The Men In Black.

You want to know where we stand, post questions in threads or start one. There's plenty here to cover you, all you have to do is seek, find, and ask. As for all the other, this is NOT a policy-making board, it is a conservative posting board -- most of the dialogue is conversational, a lot of it is confrontational, but all of it is conditionally cooperational. There is a give and take here -- you give us ca-ca, you'll take ca-ca, you want to be treated with deference and respect, give it an you'll receive it.

Instead of making generalized sweeping statements, post a question, start a thread on a specific topic. We will be happy to oblige you with opinion, information, and documentation (where applicable, with links).

[pudljumpr4]

The ACLU represented Rush, they aren't all liberal whackos. They have alot of influence to go around among those active in the organization. They aren't exclusively liberal, but it's the lack of conservative involvement that makes them so imbalanced in my opinion. If you feel I'd be more useful elsewhere, make suggestions. I've just intended to fight for civil liberties, and I don't think the ACLU will dissolve any time soon.
I'll look into the ACLJ.

[pudljumpr4]

I'm sorry for throwing out arguments against our ideology again. Still, these are the things I need stances against. I didn't want to come out and announce myself as a future lawyer and then be shunned. I didn't want to put out too much about myself, I want to hear from you guys, and I guess I should say a bit more of what I'm thinking if I don't want hostile reactions to arguments that limit what we can do or label something we believe to be wrong as a right.
I have started some threads with questions by the way. I've found reactions on hot topics are heated, so I'll look for ideas rather than provoking hostile arguments.

[Teenager]

The ACLU represented Rush, they aren't all liberal whackos. They have alot of influence to go around among those active in the organization. They aren't exclusively liberal, but it's the lack of conservative involvement that makes them so imbalanced in my opinion. If you feel I'd be more useful elsewhere, make suggestions. I've just intended to fight for civil liberties, and I don't think the ACLU will dissolve any time soon.

My friend, the ACLU will always be unbalanced. They are funded evil rich people like George Soros.

[queue]

I'm finding through my experiences on this site that my conservative values are different than those of the generation before me.Really? Are you sure that the values that you have are conservative then?
As a young conservative, when discussing law I refuse to stray from how the laws in question are written and interpreted. That is your choice but others may discuss differently. When discussing tax issues I'm stubborn to allowing tax increases because I feel we've taxed enough and then overspent.That is also your choice. When speaking of religion, I argue that it and government should in no way be related. Our founding fathers knew what they were doing when including the "Establishment Clause" in the Bill of Rights.I would hope they knew what they were doing. The question is whether people today understand why the founding fathers included it or if people today are interpreting it differently than what the founding fathers intended.Many on this site speak with great conviction in regard to God and faith-based topics. I can respect their faith and expression, but I cannot respect these people when they are expressing faith in an intolerant and un-American way.So what, exactly, is the American way of expressing faith and is it really the American way or just your opinion of what the American way of expressing faith should be? Your church can put limits on its membership that our goverment cannot put on its citizens. It seems God and government are seldom agreed on and little understood.People have different opinions. They can discuss or, at least, express those differences a myriad of ways including discussion boards.American conservativism is evolving, and it will not be defined by the conservative figures of yesterday. Is it really conservatism or is it something different like libertarianism (http://www.lp.org/)? .I am a component of the future conservative movement, and I am deeply offended by the crude remarks of so many on this site, especially those that justify their hostility by their misinterpretation of the Word of God. Is it really a misinterpretation or is it just different from your interpretation? Any person of true faith shouldn't need to refer to a book to know what is right or wrong in any situation. You needn't look any further than your own soul and being if you know God. Knowing some catch phrases from the Bible is by no means familiarity with God.It is also not an indication that there is not a familiarity with God.I'm young and may not know every aspect of any issue, but I do understand the positive correlation between intolerance and hate. Do you also understand the correlation between tolerance and being walked all over (or if you prefer, being taken advantage of)? Only through tolerance of others will you find who they are and why they express themselves in the manner that they do.That is a two way street. Others also need to be tolerant of you to find out who you are and why you express yourself in the manner that you do. Without the tolerance on ALL sides (which seldom happens), some will be walked over by the others. This should be a site where open minds grow from the perspective of others.This site should be what the owners of this site want it to be. We all know what conservative values are, so let's not debate that. ??? You said earlier that your conservative values were different from the generation before you. Why not debate them if there are differences? What should be debated is the legal merit of issues and why they should or should not be reformed from the conservative standpoint.What should be debated is whatever the owners of this site want debated.I've witnessed my fair share of bashing in only a few short days here, and it disgusts me that conservatives have grown so far apart that they must scream for others to hear them.I have seen several discussion forums and all of them have bashing of one kind or another. Who receives the bashing, as well as who does the bashing, depends on the participants of the forum and the owners of the discussion board. Grow up, grow together, and learn to transmute your exposure to the perspectives of others into personal awareness.This is the type of insulting phrasing that makes it very hard to be tolerant. You are implying that the people you are talking to are juvenile (you can replace juvenile with childish) close-minded people and that you are superior to them.Worry less about what other communities are doing around us.When what other communities around us are doing affects us, I think it is fine to worry about them and let others know what those communities are doing. I feel our primary concern should be unification as conservatives, especially to bridge the generational gap.The, so-called, generational gap has been in existence for as long as I can remember. From what I have seen, the younger generation changes their perspective to what the generation before them had when they get older and the new young people complain about the generational gap. You might want to remember that the people who are moms and dads and business owners today who seem so conservative and out of touch include people who were protesters and hippies in the 1960's and 1970's. And please, when posting, don't intimidate others for expressing who they are or what they feel. Accept them for who they are and what they've posted and respond with your feelings and interpretation of the law. You know if and when you've been unreasonable in open discussion.As you are doing with this entire post?Most of the participants of this site have already discredited themselves politically to me as they don't understand the nature of America. Is it that they do not understand the nature of America or is it that their understanding of the nature of America is different from your understanding?Clean up your act, and I could be in agreement with you more often.You are again using phrasing that implies that you are superior to the people you are talking to. I will assume that you have heard the sayings about glass houses and removing the plank from your eye first.Don't bring religion into a political discussion, the two don't seem related.Religion and politics are related.Religion is to be practiced, it is not supposed to be a tool used to declare moral superiority. Perhaps if some contributors practiced their faith moreso than preaching it they could better discover the truths of existence.There are religions that require it's followers to preach it's words to others and is a part of practicing their religion.Pass the torch and what knowledge you have to us.Why should people pass the torch to people that have different conservative values, a different understanding of the nature of America, and a different interpretation of God, government, and the laws (as you have stated above)? The knowledge can be acquired by reading what people say and asking questions.We need direction, not threats. We need your perspective as youths, not an extension of your hatrid. I'd appreciate the blessing of your God, not fear of Him. He is welcome in my community and Government, but His influence should be over individuals, not over legislation.

I won't debate religion, faith, or existence.
I know living in and leaving this world gracefully are what really matters.What you are willing to debate and believe are your choices, but other people may choose differently than you.

Have a nice day.

[washoeconservative]

So a pervert saves a cat from a tree, does that mean he is not a pervert?

Come on man, we all know what the ACLU is up to. There is no debating that.

"I'm a student and find that as I become more knowledgable of the law, I find it disagrees with the beliefs and practices of many."

So let them leave! Our country was CLEARLY founded on Christian beliefs. Now I'm not a practicing Christian and my wife is downright athiest, but I will say that I do achnowledge what our country was founded on and to deny that is ludacris. Our laws were not created so people could fall in love with them, they were created to protect us as a free society.

How am I free if I cannot say Merry Christmas? How am I free if my mother KILLS ME before I get to taste air? How am I free if I cant say "under God" because YOU or someone ELSE does not agree with it?

Taxes and regulation is a good cause, one that I am at the reigns of here in Nevada. BUT, we cannot just forget about everything else we have bled and died for over the years.

What good is paying lower taxes if we live in a society where minority rules and culture is demolished?

(forgive my spelling. life goes on.)

[pudljumpr4]

That's the critical analysis I'm looking for. I'm not offended by conservative arguments, I get bothered by hearing arguments that people outside of conservative circles wouldn't understand though. I'm not going to alter what I wrote previously, but I misspoke on a few occassions. I didn't mean for anyone to think I wanted to limit their discussions, I wanted legal arguments, and I should have said that rather than stating how I felt in the face of hearing responses that weren't what I had hoped for. It's not that I disagree with what was said, it's that it doesn't hold up in court without legality to back it up. My interests are legal, and those of this site are conservative in general. I should expect alot of responses that aren't legal in nature, but I still hope for that. Anyway, the more I hear from you the more I know about individual conservatives. I'll start being a bit more open about where I stand when I bring up liberal arguments. I've just felt that my agreement or disagreement on an issue was relatively unimportant, my interest is in maintaining our foundation in the face of new issues.

[DoctorDoom]

IMO, the kid is doing research for a paper. He's feigning playing the devil's advocate, but gut instinct tells me that he's a liberal posing as a conservative. That's what one would expect from any of today's leftist lawyer mills, and it's tediously common here IAC. We've had a long line of libs claiming to be conservatives but exposing their fictions in a matter of a few posts.

[DesertFox]

"I don't this, I don't that, you guys suck."

Great first post, newmeat.

[pudljumpr4]

I put the meat out there and you guys chew it raw. That's good. My perspective is expanded with your reactions. I'm a local guy with local ideas, I need to broaden my horizons to understand national influence of local issues. Anyway, like I said, I'm young and my beliefs haven't been cemented. I'm reading your responses and open to their influence. I'll transcend messages I hear abroad, and I appreciate your reactions, that's why I post them. Anyway, I only know of myself that I agree mostly with conservative values. I don't disagree with any basic conservative idea, but I don't understand how many can be accepted given our current legal climate. I'll put out why others don't accept our arguments if they can legally be applied, but I'm starting to separate myself from them and expressing where I stand.

I didn't want to get too personal because on my local site I'm very passive to encourage the expression of opposing views. Being on a conservative site I should worry more about being viewed as a liberal in disguise moreso than being crucified for being an outspoken conservative. This is a different type of forum than I'm accustomed to. I normally have to adress liberal arguments and respect their legality if they have it. Here we express ourselves differently, and I like that we can openly be conservative, but when a young conservative puts out liberal ideas it's proabably to find out if and why conservatives disagree with them as I have done.

[DesertFox]

Most liberal "ideas" are bad ideas. We old farts have lived long enough to see them tried and fail more than once.

The principle on which I oppose most things is that failure ought not be reinforced again and again and again, and it certainly ought not be funded in the multiple billions.

[pudljumpr4]

I'll provide some of my basic political interests to do away with some confusion here. My passion is in education reform. I want private schools to have a real opportunity to succeed. I think schools receiving public funds should be more concerned with failing uneducated kids rather than allowing uneducated kids to graduate. We tend to dumb-down standards to conform to less than mediocre academic performance. Raise the bar and makes these facilities a proving ground to separate the cream of the crop from the crap.

Social welfare should serve to do away with the need for its own existence above all other purposes. Give a hand-up, not a hand-out.

I have a solid stance against most judge-made laws as I believe in reading a law and applying it. A judgment in court is made specifically to cater to the case at hand and may not apply to others, but they are applied in ways that don't reflect the intentions of the judges.

I'm not big on politics, I'm very interested in government however. I don't see the two as being the same, but their relation is undeniable. Anyway, those are only a few reasons I consider myself to be conservative. It seems many in my generation who think outside the box want focus on government, not politics. I've tried to steer some of you in that direction, but this is a political site and I was misguided. You guys have directions of your own and I'm here to observe that. I got from this thread what I was looking for, and that was your interest in influencing myself and other youngsters on the site.

[Teenager]

IMO, the kid is doing research for a paper. He's feigning playing the devil's advocate, but gut instinct tells me that he's a liberal posing as a conservative. That's what one would expect from any of today's leftist lawyer mills, and it's tediously common here IAC. We've had a long line of libs claiming to be conservatives but exposing their fictions in a matter of a few posts.

My thoughts exactly. Even when he isn't acting he still types like a liberal.
:bdh:

[Teenager]

I put the meat out there and you guys chew it raw. That's good. My perspective is expanded with your reactions. I'm a local guy with local ideas, I need to broaden my horizons to understand national influence of local issues. Anyway, like I said, I'm young and my beliefs haven't been cemented. I'm reading your responses and open to their influence. I'll transcend messages I hear abroad, and I appreciate your reactions, that's why I post them. Anyway, I only know of myself that I agree mostly with conservative values. I don't disagree with any basic conservative idea, but I don't understand how many can be accepted given our current legal climate. I'll put out why others don't accept our arguments if they can legally be applied, but I'm starting to separate myself from them and expressing where I stand.

I didn't want to get too personal because on my local site I'm very passive to encourage the expression of opposing views. Being on a conservative site I should worry more about being viewed as a liberal in disguise moreso than being crucified for being an outspoken conservative. This is a different type of forum than I'm accustomed to. I normally have to adress liberal arguments and respect their legality if they have it. Here we express ourselves differently, and I like that we can openly be conservative, but when a young conservative puts out liberal ideas it's proabably to find out if and why conservatives disagree with them as I have done.

Why don't you respond to any of our posts. So far you haven't responded to any of them except "I'm really a conservative disguised as a liberal."

Sorry, it ain't gonna pass.

[pudljumpr4]

From what I've read so far this really will be worth my while. Thanks for the suggestion. I'll get back to you when I've finished, but I just thought you should know I've started reading it. I also looked into the ACLJ, and I had unknowingly met a few involved in the organization in the past while lobbying in Albany. That was a good year. This reflection on past acquaintances reminded me of the NYCLU which I had nearly forgotten. That group seems as if their agenda reflects my own better than that of the ACLU. Perhaps my ambitions should be more like my vision, near-sighted. Maybe a more local organization could serve as a proving ground and stepping stone for me. Hopefully FC will still be popular among all of you then and we can keep in contact. Time will tell.

Anyway, I am considering your suggestions and as things develop I'll post. Some criticism can be hard to digest, but I've long been an advocate of taking it in stride and growing from it. If you keep making valid points and good suggestions you may take this libertarian/hypotarian and mold him into an undeniable conservative yet. Until then, I'm gonna go crack a beer and enjoy some good reading. Thanks again for suggesting the book, it really has been enjoyable. Something I don't disagree with much for a change.