Gallup: Social conservatism bounces up, economic conservatism steady

posted at 6:31 pm on May 25, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Interestingly, Gallup didn’t lead with the finding on social conservatism from its latest survey, but that may be because the bounce upward followed two straight declines in the same series.  The focus on economic conservatism is a little more dramatic, if consistent:

Americans are more than twice as likely to identify themselves as conservative rather than liberal on economic issues, 46% to 20%. The gap is narrower on social issues, but conservatives still outnumber liberals, 38% to 28%. …

In the same poll, on Gallup’s standard measure of ideology — not asked in reference to any set of issues — 41% identified themselves as conservatives, 33% as moderates, and 23% as liberals. Those figures are similar to what Gallup typically finds when it asks people to identify their ideology.

Thus, compared with the standard measure of ideology, slightly more Americans say they are economically conservative and slightly fewer say they are socially conservative. Also, significantly more Americans say they are socially liberal than identify their basic ideology as liberal.

Why might that be?  Perhaps because to be seen as socially liberal is more “cool.”  It may also provide a bit of social cover for economic conservatism; I’ve heard people say, “Yes, I’m a fiscal conservative, but I’m socially liberal” on a number of occasions.  However, the actual breakout shows that people don’t actually think of themselves in that way.  Of the 46% who claim to be economic conservatives, only 3% also claim in this study to be social liberals, with 11% identifying as social moderates.

This is the same survey, however, that found a majority of respondents identifying as “pro-life,” with pro-choice identification dropping to 41%, a new low.  That indicates that either more social moderates are crossing over to pro-life, or social moderates might be disappearing.  This graph from the survey suggests it might be more of the latter:

It’s interesting to note that while social conservatism peaked and slid, social liberalism dipped and rose, with moderates benefiting briefly.  This looks more like a slight trend toward polarization, and moderates may end up at the bottom of the split in subsequent polls.  That’s also the trend with economics, but the difference between moderates and liberals is still large enough that there is little danger of economic liberals overtaking the moderates, while economic conservatives remain near the majority.

What does that mean for the 2012 election?  The model suggests that Barack Obama and Democrats will have a tough time, although not as tough as in 2010, given that the election will almost entirely hinge on economic policies.  The split for C/M/L on economics in 2008 was 40/38/19, and Obama at that time got a lot of support from moderates who thought he was one of them.  In 2010, it was 51/33/15, which drove the midterm victories for the GOP.  Now we’re back at 46/32/20, still a much more significant gap than in 2010, plus Obama will have a tough time selling himself as a moderate.  To the extent that social issues come into play at all, the chart above doesn’t suggest that it will be very helpful to Obama — except perhaps as a distraction from economics.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Radical leftists in the White House tend to make people think more seriously about what they value. Apparently socialism and control freak environmentalism isn’t valued by much of the population.

darwin on May 25, 2012 at 6:38 PM

What is “Social Conservatism”?

listens2glenn on May 25, 2012 at 6:38 PM

What is “Social Conservatism”?

listens2glenn on May 25, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Living your life as a free and independent American, provided you do it our way. :-P

ThePrez on May 25, 2012 at 6:41 PM

Now call me gay or something. lol

ThePrez on May 25, 2012 at 6:42 PM

So apparently Americans aren’t rolling out the welcome mat to the Progressive Wing of the Leftard party…water is wet…sun sets to the west tonight..

hillsoftx on May 25, 2012 at 6:42 PM

Cue the gnashing of teeth about those hated socons.

Mitch Rapp on May 25, 2012 at 6:47 PM

So apparently Americans aren’t rolling out the welcome mat to the Progressive Wing of the LeftardLibertarian and Paulestinian party…water is wet…sun sets to the west tonight..

hillsoftx on May 25, 2012 at 6:42 PM

FTFY

oldroy on May 25, 2012 at 6:47 PM

Radical leftists in the White House tend to make people think more seriously about what they value. Apparently socialism and control freak environmentalism isn’t valued by much of the population.

darwin on May 25, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Sometimes a wake up call is needed.

Strange the breakdown of the poll considering in almost all political polls the Ds outnumber the Rs. Indies make up the difference I guess?

CW on May 25, 2012 at 6:48 PM

Now call me gay or something. lol

ThePrez on May 25, 2012 at 6:42 PM

Well you do like to point out Chris Mathew’s tingly leg.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 6:48 PM

CW on May 25, 2012 at 6:48 PM

When have I done that?

ThePrez on May 25, 2012 at 6:49 PM

All that blah blah about social conservatism being dead, Santorum sucks etc. Yes Santorum wasn’t a good messanger, and he went over the top. But to think that the majority of America doesn’t have a moral compass guided by millennia of Judeo-Christian values, is just willful ignorance.

To think BO was the right messenger…..

oldroy on May 25, 2012 at 6:52 PM

In the meanwhile

Or, he might go back to Obama’s Springfield kick-off in 2007 and his 2004 DNC and 2008 Iowa speeches. It turns out Obama’s most egregious broken promise has not been his failure to go “line by line” through the budget or to cut the deficit in half or to make the U.S. more respected in the world; it is his reversion to a politics of negativity, cynicism and divisiveness. He has become what he abhorred: A small and petty politician.

Schadenfreude on May 25, 2012 at 6:53 PM

When have I done that?

ThePrez on May 25, 2012 at 6:49 PM

It was a joke. I guess you missed yesterday’s post(here) where Mathews pretty much said that about right wingers.

Link to the story at yahoo.

http://news.yahoo.com/testy-chris-matthews-responds-thrill-leg-horse-winger-131416725.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 6:55 PM

What is “Social Conservatism”?

listens2glenn on May 25, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Forcing everyone to live by your morals which are taken from a 2000 year old collection of random ramblings based on a hate-driven, violent, genocidal and even older set of rambling.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 6:58 PM

CW on May 25, 2012 at 6:55 PM

Oh, I forgot about the Chrissy-fit. :)

ThePrez on May 25, 2012 at 6:59 PM

Yes Santorum wasn’t a good messanger, and he went over the top. But to think that the majority of America doesn’t have a moral compass guided by millennia of Judeo-Christian values, is just willful ignorance.

oldroy on May 25, 2012 at 6:52 PM

Santorum, much as I like some of his socially conservative positions really was the wrong candidate for this election. While there may be an upswing in social conservatism, this election really is an economy/jobs election.

Happy Nomad on May 25, 2012 at 6:59 PM

I’d say if anyone considers themselves liberal, they should be embarrassed, but then being aware isn’t a liberal trait.

Kini on May 25, 2012 at 7:00 PM

So apparently Americans aren’t rolling out the welcome mat to the Progressive Wing of the LeftardLibertarian and Paulestinian party…water is wet…sun sets to the west tonight..

hillsoftx on May 25, 2012 at 6:42 PM

FTFY

oldroy on May 25, 2012 at 6:47 PM

LOL uh-huh, that’s exactly what this poll says. You fixed it alright. Good work!

thirtyandseven on May 25, 2012 at 7:01 PM

But politifact says mostly true!

taternuggets on May 25, 2012 at 4:45 PM

Yes. They revisit it today – refuse to revise their judgment – and even get in a Haliburton jab!

Bias? What bias?

Go RBNY on May 25, 2012 at 7:01 PM

hate-driven
lester on May 25, 2012 at 6:58 PM

The irony.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:02 PM

Oops. Wrong thread :p

Go RBNY on May 25, 2012 at 7:03 PM

And as soon as some in Washington decide that bewbz on the internet are What’s Wrong With America and pop music is Satan’s Soundtrack, the pendulum will swing back and the polls show everyone is a Libertine.

Seriously, social conservatism is nothing more than the Church Lady telling me what to, whereas Progessivism is George Clooney telling me what to do.

MunDane68 on May 25, 2012 at 7:03 PM

Living your life as a free and independent American, provided you do it our way. :-P

ThePrez on May 25, 2012 at 6:41 PM

Nope…Me as a social con means I don’t want Massachusetts pushing their morals on me as a Tenneseean and I won’t do the same. Communities should decide what the place they want to live should be like, and the federal government should be into as little as possible.

melle1228 on May 25, 2012 at 7:03 PM

Lester seriously little one you need some new material. Look up an old saying about a broken record or ask your mommy what it means.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:03 PM

hate-driven
lester on May 25, 2012 at 6:58 PM

The irony.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:02 PM

The ignorant are never aware that the are ignorant.

melle1228 on May 25, 2012 at 7:04 PM

Forcing everyone to live by your morals which are taken from a 2000 year old collection of random ramblings based on a hate-driven, violent, genocidal and even older set of rambling.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 6:58 PM

The Koran?

squint on May 25, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Forcing everyone to live by your morals which are taken from a 2000 year old collection of random ramblings based on a hate-driven, violent, genocidal and even older set of rambling.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 6:58 PM

Ah, you mean like dictating the minutest details of a person’s life, such as, say, what type of light bulbs they use, what how much salt and fat they are allowed to eat/sell and where, how they ought to sacrifice their car’s safety for modest mpg gains, and how they have an obligation to surrender an ever-increasing number of hours of their life working so that they can shoulder an immoral tax burden and still eat?

Yea dude, I hate that crap.

thirtyandseven on May 25, 2012 at 7:07 PM

The ignorant are never aware that the are ignorant.

melle1228 on May 25, 2012 at 7:04 PM

That one is particularly ignorant, angry, nasty, and hateful. As I posted on the “gay NFL” thread I find it interesting that many of those who detest make broad generalizations make them themselves. (right Lester?)

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:08 PM

What is “Social Conservatism”?

listens2glenn on May 25, 2012 at 6:38 PM

A political philosophy that seeks to achieve both justice and virtue through public policy that stems from a set of values founded in the concepts of either natural or divine law, in which a set of universal moral principles is appealed to. As such, it focuses on issues like:

- Mass murder (by either dictators or by legal individual practices such as abortion)

- Other bioethical issues (e.g. genetic engineering, designer defect babies, in-vitro fertilization mixups and reckless acts such as Octomom, euthanasia, etc)

- Law & order (particularly murder, theft, and rape, and more recently illegal immigration)

- The family unit as the basis of society (particularly the definition of marriage, the divorce rate, but also tangential issues that relate to the family such as obscene entertainment)

- Other issues where justice or virtue may be at stake (i.e. Michael Vick, the Westboro Baptist Church’s harassment of military funerals)

Does that answer your question?

Stoic Patriot on May 25, 2012 at 7:08 PM

Yea dude, I hate that crap.

thirtyandseven on May 25, 2012 at 7:07 PM

Nicely done.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:08 PM

Forcing everyone to live by your morals which are taken from a 2000 year old collection of random ramblings based on a hate-driven, violent, genocidal and even older set of rambling.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 6:58 PM

You are not forced to live by any morals. Do whatever you want. If there are no morals and no god, what is stopping you from doing whatever you want?

oldroy on May 25, 2012 at 7:11 PM

What is “Social Conservatism”?

listens2glenn on May 25, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Forcing everyone to live by your morals which are taken from a 2000 year old collection of random ramblings based on a hate-driven, violent, genocidal and even older set of rambling.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 6:58 PM

“Lester! Time for your violin lessons!”

Just curious, Less-what book or books do your “morals come from? “Mein Kampf”, or Mao’s Little Red Book?

L-

Del Dolemonte on May 25, 2012 at 7:13 PM

The irony.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:02 PM

Can you explain where the irony is? It would be irony if I call for violence against individuals, murder of whole civilizations, burning masses in fire, etc. etc. As it stands I haven’t, your holy books do though and so do its true followers.

And so do your preachers:

http://www.newsy.com/videos/baptist-pastor-calls-for-concentration-camps-for-gay-people/

Charles Worley goes on to his plan for “getting rid of all the lesbians and queers”: internment camps with electrified fences.
“And you know what, in a few years they’ll die off. You know why? They can’t reproduce.”

hat was in mid-May — on Mother’s Day — days after President Obama personally endorsed gay marriage. But CNN has video of another, decades-old rant.

ANCHOR: “Here’s part of a sermon he gave back in 1978.”

WORLEY: “Blessed God, forty years ago, they’d of hung ‘em, blessed God, from a white oak tree.’”

Get a clue for a change.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:16 PM

You are not forced to live by any morals. Do whatever you want. If there are no morals and no god, what is stopping you from doing whatever you want?

oldroy on May 25, 2012 at 7:11 PM

For some reason, I don’t feel like going around killing people because there’s no god. I hope you don’t either.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:18 PM

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:16 PM

Question: do you think that Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, or Sarah Palin harbor similar sentiments?

For some reason, I don’t feel like going around killing people because there’s no god. I hope you don’t either.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:18 PM

But is there specifically a reason that you think people shouldn’t?

Stoic Patriot on May 25, 2012 at 7:19 PM

“Lester! Time for your violin lessons!”

Just curious, Less-what book or books do your “morals come from? “Mein Kampf”, or Mao’s Little Red Book?

L-

Del Dolemonte on May 25, 2012 at 7:13 PM

No and no. By the way, author of Mein Kampf was a devout Christian. It’s much harder to make up things in 20th century, we actually have recordings.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:19 PM

The Koran?

squint on May 25, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Mohammad was 6 centuries late to the game. He had to make up for it too so he added his own sick stuff.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:21 PM

lester on May 25, 2012 at 6:58 PM

Yeah, wanting little black female children to live versus being ripped from the womb is really hate driven .

Gatekeeper on May 25, 2012 at 7:24 PM

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:16 PM

You’re the hateful one. That is the irony. You went to school right?

BTW churches advocating violence are in fact a rare thing but you keep living in your twisted little world. While your at it ignore all of the good churches have done. Forget all of the people churches have fed, clothed, and cured. Forget the fact that the Catholic church is the largest provider of AIDS hospice care . Forget all of the religious hospitals . I know the hate is much easier to hold onto but you should try to let it go.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:28 PM

Just curious, Less-what book or books do your “morals come from? “Mein Kampf”, or Mao’s Little Red Book?

L-

Del Dolemonte on May 25, 2012 at 7:13 PM

No and no.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:19 PM

Translated: “I’m afraid to answer Del’s question!”

F-

And please don’t insult our vastly superior intelligence with lies about Hitler being a “Christian”. All he did was use Christianity as a desperate excuse to somehow “justify” the horrible things he did.

And what about this?

In 1999 Julie Seltzer Mandel, while researching documents for the “Nuremberg Project”, discovered 150 bound volumes collected by Gen. William Donovan as part of his work on documenting Nazi war crimes. Donovan was a senior member of the U.S. prosecution team and had compiled large amounts of evidence that Nazis persecuted Christian Churches.

F-

By the way, that’s a hot looking anchor babe in that silly Occupy Video you posted earlier. Is she your mother?

Del Dolemonte on May 25, 2012 at 7:28 PM

The future belongs to Social Conservatism.

Norwegian on May 25, 2012 at 7:30 PM

Is she your mother?

Del Dolemonte on May 25, 2012 at 7:28 PM

He should ask her the meaning of irony.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Mohammad was 6 centuries late to the game. He had to make up for it too so he added his own sick stuff.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:21 PM

The important things is, we’ve all moved on with our lives.

squint on May 25, 2012 at 7:35 PM

Question: do you think that Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, or Sarah Palin harbor similar sentiments?

They’re mainstream so by definition unless societal norms change significantly, they can’t act/talk like the preacher. Huckabee is “kind Christian”, can’t see him harm anyone. Santorum is more devout and honest about his religion (and that didn’t help him). Palin goes with the wind and mostly the windfall.

For some reason, I don’t feel like going around killing people because there’s no god. I hope you don’t either.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:18 PM

But is there specifically a reason that you think people shouldn’t?

Stoic Patriot on May 25, 2012 at 7:19 PM

Maybe we evolved that way. A naturally homicidal species would never survive.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:36 PM

Is she your mother?

Del Dolemonte on May 25, 2012 at 7:28 PM

He should ask her the meaning of irony.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:31 PM

The President of the “news blog” that Less snagged that Occupy Video from was formerly a bigwig at MSNBC.

And when you go to their Links Page, it’s full of links from Leftist news sources and Leftist blogs, including Puffington Host and Talking Points Memo. But they have absolutely no comparable blog links from the other side of the aisle, like Hot Gas or Power Line.

That alone makes their false claim of being “non-partisan” as big of a Joke as Less here.

Del Dolemonte on May 25, 2012 at 7:38 PM

The irony.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:02 PM

Can you explain where the irony is? It would be irony if I call for violence against individuals, murder of whole civilizations, burning masses in fire, etc. etc. As it stands I haven’t, your holy books do though and so do its true followers.

************

Funny how you admitted the “hate-driven”. That is a pretty dishonest debate technique .

And so do your preachers:

http://www.newsy.com/videos/baptist-pastor-calls-for-concentration-camps-for-gay-people/

That is a pretty dishonest debate technique . So if I can find 1000 links to stories about preachers calling for us to love our neighbors do I win?

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:39 PM

For some reason, I don’t feel like going around killing people because there’s no god. I hope you don’t either.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:18 PM

So I’m guilty by your association of someone else’s crime to me? Hmm…but if there are no morals, how do you judge this? You are a part of humanity, so I arbitrarily assign the guilt of all crime on you. This is my opinion. If there is no morals, and no individual responsibility, then my opinion is just as valid as yours.

oldroy on May 25, 2012 at 7:41 PM

http://www.livefaithfull.com/category/love-your-neighbor-as-yourself/

There you go Lester. We’re even.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:41 PM

Morality brings jobs and freedom and prosperity. This is not hard.
Any prisoner can get a job in prison. In fact, I think most of them are employed doing something. Hey.. everybody had a job in the old Soviet Union!

America is about so much more than just getting a job! People have not risked their fortunes and their lives coming to America just for a job! They came here for her liberty and the promise to create their own destiny! Freedom from tyranny! Freedom to worship as they pleased! Freedom to build their own dreams and govern themselves!
The American dream and the American ideal cannot be allowed to crumble into nothing more than just getting a job!

JellyToast on May 25, 2012 at 7:44 PM

Translated: “I’m afraid to answer Del’s question!”

F-

And please don’t insult our vastly superior intelligence with lies about Hitler being a “Christian”. All he did was use Christianity as a desperate excuse to somehow “justify” the horrible things he did.

And what about this?

Often hear Muslims say it too, “Not a TRUE muslim”. Also, thanks for getting personal and again proving you’ve lost the argument.

F-

By the way, that’s a hot looking anchor babe in that silly Occupy Video you posted earlier. Is she your mother?

Del Dolemonte on May 25, 2012 at 7:28 PM

Firstly, read above. Secondly, which occupy video? I posted such video? Are you making things on the go now? Is this your attempt to deflect? Any link?

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:44 PM

And if we are all guilty by your association, why aren’t you? If there really isn’t anything moral or amoral, what makes you any different for not stopping a murder in your city? Apparently, wildly disconnected events are my responsibility, why aren’t they yours?

oldroy on May 25, 2012 at 7:45 PM

So I’m guilty by your association of someone else’s crime to me?

oldroy on May 25, 2012 at 7:41 PM

It seems to be a common theme tonight. Those that supposedly detest such thought are the worst at doing the things they do not like.

Lester:

http://www.outcrybookreview.com/Pope2.htm

2-1

This could go on all night.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:46 PM

And so do your preachers
 
lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:16 PM

 

Also, thanks for getting personal and again proving you’ve lost the argument.
 
lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:44 PM

 
Well played.

rogerb on May 25, 2012 at 7:48 PM

So I’m guilty by your association of someone else’s crime to me? Hmm…but if there are no morals, how do you judge this? You are a part of humanity, so I arbitrarily assign the guilt of all crime on you. This is my opinion. If there is no morals, and no individual responsibility, then my opinion is just as valid as yours.

oldroy on May 25, 2012 at 7:41 PM

There are morals. They’re just not of supernatural origin.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:48 PM

And so do your preachers

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:16 PM

Also, thanks for getting personal and again proving you’ve lost the argument.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:44 PM

Well played.

rogerb on May 25, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Unless he’s his own preacher, I don’t see your point.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:49 PM

Well played.

rogerb on May 25, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Leave it to roger to remind the fool just who the fool really is.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:49 PM

Unless he’s his own preacher, I don’t see your point.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:49 PM

“YOUR PREACHERS”

Yes that is personal. Nice try though.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:50 PM

lester on May 25, 2012 at 6:58 PM

…oh boy!…another thread…with more insight from your host… lester the festering jester!
…what a waste of body mass!

KOOLAID2 on May 25, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Maybe we evolved that way. A naturally homicidal species would never survive.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:36 PM

I asked if there is specifically a reason that people shouldn’t go around killing each other. That’s not a reason. That’s chance circumstance and not a rationale on which to base one’s actions.

Stoic Patriot on May 25, 2012 at 7:51 PM

It seems to be a common theme tonight. Those that supposedly detest such thought are the worst at doing the things they do not like.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:46 PM

It must be a terrible inner conflict. And yet as you drift off to sleep, if you know there are no divinely inspired morals, aren’t you both completely free and very lonely at the same time?

oldroy on May 25, 2012 at 7:52 PM

Translated: “I’m afraid to answer Del’s question!”

F-

And please don’t insult our vastly superior intelligence with lies about Hitler being a “Christian”. All he did was use Christianity as a desperate excuse to somehow “justify” the horrible things he did.

And what about this?

Often hear Muslims say it too, “Not a TRUE muslim”. Also, Also, thanks for getting personal and again proving you’ve lost the argument.

-snip-

which occupy video? I posted such video? Are you making things on the go now? Is this your attempt to deflect? Any link?

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:44 PM

Translated: “I am still afraid to answer Del’s simple question!”

F-

As for your second silly question, I went to your posted link of the video of the preacher condoning the concentration camps. Which you got from a Far-Left “news” site that falsely claims to be “non-partisan”.

From there, I went to the actual youtube video that said site linked from, and got the name of the organization that posted it. They are associated with the Occupy movement, something you could have easily discovered by yourself if you had the intellectual curiosity to do so. But you were too lazy to stray beyond your favorite talking points.

What’s so hypocritical about High School Democrats like you, Less, is that you still worship a Democrat President who actually did throw 110,000 people into concentration camps, solely because of their race.

FDR-

You’re making this too easy, Kid. Keep shoveling.

Oh, and you still haven’t named the books you get your “morals” from. What’s the matter?

Del Dolemonte on May 25, 2012 at 7:54 PM

There are morals. They’re just not of supernatural origin.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Really? List them.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:54 PM

This could go on all night.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:46 PM

…ahhhhhhh no…(you have to call Dr. Tesla for all nighters…lesters lights burn out quicker!)

KOOLAID2 on May 25, 2012 at 7:54 PM

http://www.livefaithfull.com/category/love-your-neighbor-as-yourself/

There you go Lester. We’re even.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:41 PM

Not a true™ Christian.

http://www.outcrybookreview.com/Pope2.htm

2-1

This could go on all night.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:46 PM

Taqiyya mode engaged.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:55 PM

There are morals. They’re just not of supernatural origin.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Please define “morals” for us.

And also tell us why all of the definitions of the word, not to mention the various wiki entries on the word, never once mention the words “supernatural origin”.

F-

Del Dolemonte on May 25, 2012 at 7:58 PM

Taqiyya mode engaged.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Did you bring enough taquitos for everyone?

squint on May 25, 2012 at 7:58 PM

The country really is center-right socially. It only took Doobie Obample to remind us.

Dinner….good night all….

oldroy on May 25, 2012 at 7:59 PM

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:46 PM

Taqiyya mode engaged.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Translated: “I’m having my getalife kicked to the Equator and back!”

Great entertainment.

Del Dolemonte on May 25, 2012 at 7:59 PM

Lester never gets personal. Oh wait….

Another rustic savage redneck posting whatever rustic savage rednecks post here.

How does that sound? And FYI, Labour is what every English speaking country but the US uses. Now sod off!

lester on May 1, 2012 at 5:37 PM

lester on May 25, 2012 at 7:55 PM

In other words you were shown to be the lame debater you are. You’re as dishonest as they come and even in your 7:55 post you exhibited your usual use of the most common fallacious arguments.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 8:03 PM

Translated: “I am still afraid to answer Del’s simple question!”

F-

As for your second silly question, I went to your posted link of the video of the preacher condoning the concentration camps. Which you got from a Far-Left “news” site that falsely claims to be “non-partisan”.

From there, I went to the actual youtube video that said site linked from, and got the name of the organization that posted it. They are associated with the Occupy movement, something you could have easily discovered by yourself if you had the intellectual curiosity to do so. But you were too lazy to stray beyond your favorite talking points.

I’m looking for a video, I Google it and post a link. I don’t investigate its ancestry.

What’s so hypocritical about High School Democrats like you, Less, is that you still worship a Democrat President who actually did throw 110,000 people into concentration camps, solely because of their race.

FDR-

Actually, I’m not in the business of worship, be it god or man.

You’re making this too easy, Kid. Keep shoveling.

Oh, and you still haven’t named the books you get your “morals” from. What’s the matter?

Del Dolemonte on May 25, 2012 at 7:54 PM

That’s because I got my morals from my parents. Your next question? Where did they get it? Their parents. And if you continue on this track you’ll get to the point before man invented god and there would still be morals.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 8:03 PM

In other words you were shown to be the lame debater you are. You’re as dishonest as they come and even in your 7:55 post you exhibited your usual use of the most common fallacious arguments.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 8:03 PM

If you had an shred of honesty you would have posted the link instead of picking out the comment so you’d notice this was parody of an earlier comment to prove a point.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 8:05 PM

Really? List them.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:54 PM

Read the thread yet? How about not randomly killing people? That’s a necessity for species to survive and not of supernatural origin.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 8:10 PM

lester on May 25, 2012

What are you even talking about? You use the same tired techniques consistently. i don’t think you know what a parody is . Hmmm parody no irony no. Back to school little one.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 8:11 PM

From there, I went to the actual youtube video that said site linked from, and got the name of the organization that posted it. They are associated with the Occupy movement, something you could have easily discovered by yourself if you had the intellectual curiosity to do so. But you were too lazy to stray beyond your favorite talking points.

I’m looking for a video, I Google it and post a link. I don’t investigate its ancestry.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 8:03 PM

Translated: “If I find a video that I like that denigrates Christians, I will post it without determining its authenticity or the motives of those posting it!” Breathtaking stupidity on your part.

F-

Oh, and you still haven’t named the books you get your “morals” from. What’s the matter?

Del Dolemonte on May 25, 2012 at 7:54 PM

That’s because I got my morals from my parents. Your next question? Where did they get it? Their parents. And if you continue on this track you’ll get to the point before man invented god and there would still be morals.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 8:03 PM

Translated: “I’m still afraid to answer Del’s question!”

Let me make the original question even simpler, because you’re obviously an extremely simply mind.

What books did your parents, and their parents, base their “morals” on?

And also, you still haven’t defined “morals” for us. Afraid to do that too?

Shovel-Ready…

Del Dolemonte on May 25, 2012 at 8:12 PM

Read the thread yet? How about not randomly killing people? That’s a necessity for species to survive and not of supernatural origin.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 8:10 PM

In other words you don’t know.

That was your response? Really?

I am glad your parents taught you not to kill people. Yeh.
What skills.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 8:13 PM

Really? List them.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 7:54 PM

Sorry, I can’t. Because I made it up.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 8:10 PM

Del Dolemonte on May 25, 2012 at 8:14 PM

If you had an shred of honesty you would have posted the link instead of picking out the comment so you’d notice this was parody of an earlier comment to prove a point.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 8:05 PM

Oh so you didn’t get personal?

Word of the day number three: Personal

Wow you have a lot of homework.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 8:14 PM

Lester now about your 755 post. I see how you avoided dealing with it.

even in your 7:55 post you exhibited your usual use of the most common fallacious arguments.

CW on May 25, 2012 at 8:03 PM

It is interesting how lame posters like yourself love to pick and choose. At least you’re consistent in your dishonest and hateful ways. Did your parents teach you that?

CW on May 25, 2012 at 8:19 PM

Lester – I forgot. In the future when I attack you personally remember it is just a “parody”. K?

CW on May 25, 2012 at 8:21 PM

What is “Social Conservatism”?

listens2glenn on May 25, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Forcing everyone to live by your morals which are taken from a 2000 year old collection of random ramblings based on a hate-driven, violent, genocidal and even older set of rambling.

lester on May 25, 2012 at 6:58 PM

I note that your comment literally ended with “rambling” and made no sense. The irony.

On the plus side, you do provide a certain entertainment value.

tom on May 25, 2012 at 9:31 PM

The future belongs to Social Conservatism.

Norwegian on May 25, 2012 at 7:30 PM

Yes, and the future belongs to slave owners!
What the hell dude?

thuja on May 25, 2012 at 10:26 PM

I asked if there is specifically a reason that people shouldn’t go around killing each other. That’s not a reason. That’s chance circumstance and not a rationale on which to base one’s actions.

Stoic Patriot on May 25, 2012 at 7:51 PM

I see someone has no clue about the meaning of conservatism as a political philosophy. I’m not surprised.

thuja on May 25, 2012 at 10:29 PM

The future belongs to Social Conservatism.

Norwegian on May 25, 2012 at 7:30 PM

Yes, and the future belongs to slave owners!
What the hell dude?

thuja on May 25, 2012 at 10:26 PM

Yeah because they are exactly the same thing..

Drama queen aisle 7!

melle1228 on May 25, 2012 at 10:30 PM

Translated: “I’m still afraid to answer Del’s question!”

Let me make the original question even simpler, because you’re obviously an extremely simply mind.

What books did your parents, and their parents, base their “morals” on?

And also, you still haven’t defined “morals” for us. Afraid to do that too?

Shovel-Ready…

Del Dolemonte on May 25, 2012 at 8:12 PM

This has to be the most moronic of many moronic response to Lester here. Extremely simple minded would be an improvement. People base their morals on their life experiences and the golden rule. There is no need to bring in the primitive and evil superstitions of the social conservatives.

thuja on May 25, 2012 at 10:33 PM

Yeah because they are exactly the same thing..

Drama queen aisle 7!

melle1228 on May 25, 2012 at 10:30 PM

Supporting slavery and opposing the dignity of gay people are the same political nadir. The evil of slavery was in fact matched by how gays were treated in those days when slavery existed in America. That’s not drama.

thuja on May 25, 2012 at 10:36 PM

Obama has tried to make socialism cool. Remember when people were embarrassed to call themselves even a liberal and stayed away from the term? Hopefully November will bring that back to them.

Christian Conservative on May 25, 2012 at 11:20 PM

Supporting slavery and opposing the dignity of gay people are the same political nadir. The evil of slavery was in fact matched by how gays were treated in those days when slavery existed in America. That’s not drama.

thuja on May 25, 2012 at 10:36 PM

Yes because gays are kept in chains and whipped.. Like I said Drama queen…

melle1228 on May 25, 2012 at 11:37 PM

Don’t we face a fiscal crisis?

AshleyTKing on May 25, 2012 at 11:42 PM

Yes because gays are kept in chains and whipped.. Like I said Drama queen…

melle1228 on May 25, 2012 at 11:37 PM

You are truly human scum to be making this argument. Yes, the imprisonment and castration of gays were as bad they were they were treating slaves in those days. Yes, I stand by this one thousand percent. Maybe you need to consider what it means to a morally decent human being.

thuja on May 26, 2012 at 12:01 AM

The average voter claiming to be conservative couldn’t define “conservative” if their lives depended on it

Cleombrotus on May 26, 2012 at 12:26 AM

Don’t we face a fiscal crisis?
AshleyTKing on May 25, 2012 at 11:42 PM

Fiscal AND social.

They’re intricately dependent upon one another.

Forget sound monetary practices if the citizenry isn’t morally sound.

Cleombrotus on May 26, 2012 at 12:29 AM

Wow, I own preachers!? They better start giving me a cut from the plate, or I’ll toss ‘em in my castrated gay concentration camp./

S. D. on May 26, 2012 at 1:31 AM

Yes because gays are kept in chains and whipped.. Like I said Drama queen…

melle1228 on May 25, 2012 at 11:37 PM

You are truly human scum to be making this argument. Yes, the imprisonment and castration of gays were as bad they were they were treating slaves in those days. Yes, I stand by this one thousand percent. Maybe you need to consider what it means to a morally decent human being.

thuja on May 26, 2012 at 12:01 AM

No you are scum and you certainly aren’t conservative. You belong more in the vapid victimhood that is liberalism. YOU made the case that TODAYS gays are equivalent to slave and social conservatives are equivalent to slave master idiot. You are ridiculous and hysterical and can’t be taken seriously at all.

melle1228 on May 26, 2012 at 1:34 AM

The future belongs to Social Conservatism.

Norwegian on May 25, 2012 at 7:30 PM

Yes, and the future belongs to slave owners!
What the hell dude?

thuja on May 25, 2012 at 10:26 PM

Supporting slavery and opposing the dignity of gay people are the same political nadir. The evil of slavery was in fact matched by how gays were treated in those days when slavery existed in America. That’s not drama.

thuja on May 25, 2012 at 10:36 PM

Just a reminder to your idiotic a$$ that we weren’t talking about how gays were treated in “slavery” days. We were talking about you equivacating social conservatism with slaveholding you piece of crap..

melle1228 on May 26, 2012 at 1:37 AM

Seriously, social conservatism is nothing more than the Church Lady telling me what to, whereas Progessivism is George Clooney telling me what to do.

MunDane68 on May 25, 2012 at 7:03 PM

You could be more wrong … wait, no, you couldn’t.

Social conservatives believe in moral absolutes, among the first of which is that individual liberty is never trumped by political expediency. The progs love to rant about how Santorum would have “forced” this or that on the populace, but there isn’t a shred of honest evidence behind that demagoguery. He said what he personally believed, and somehow that was always automatically translated as what he would put into law, as if a President ever wrote laws. But the lemmings bought the left’s lies.

Agreed that Santorum didn’t handle the message well, but that doesn’t damage the truth. Social conservatives don’t want to force anything on anyone. But they will fight to the teeth to prevent having something forced on them, as well.

Freelancer on May 26, 2012 at 1:59 AM

It may also provide a bit of social cover for economic conservatism; I’ve heard people say, “Yes, I’m a fiscal conservative, but I’m socially liberal” on a number of occasions.

Every time I’ve heard someone say that, it turns out “socially liberal” means full-on nanny state, and “economic conservative” means they’re happy to tax you to death to pay for it. This is opposed to the economic leftists that believe in fairy dust to pay for everything, so they’re slightly more honest (though still dishonest in the marketing department).

JSchuler on May 26, 2012 at 2:08 AM

I see someone has no clue about the meaning of conservatism as a political philosophy. I’m not surprised.

thuja on May 25, 2012 at 10:29 PM

You looked in the mirror? Good for you!

My response was to someone who claimed that the only reason for not killing another person was that we “evolved” that way. You honestly think that’s the reason conservatism would oppose murder?

Stoic Patriot on May 26, 2012 at 5:27 AM

Look closely, ladies and gentlemen, for now the evil leftist propaganda organ Gallup will turn into a 110% reliable source of information!

Abracacoulter! *poof!*

What is “Social Conservatism”?

listens2glenn on May 25, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Right-wing nanny statism, often (but not always) taking a theocratic form.

MelonCollie on May 26, 2012 at 6:56 AM

My response was to someone who claimed that the only reason for not killing another person was that we “evolved” that way. You honestly think that’s the reason conservatism would oppose murder?

Stoic Patriot on May 26, 2012 at 5:27 AM</blockquote

As a political philosophy, Conservatism looks for successful behaviors in the past and seeks to conserve them. Conservatism appreciates the argument against murder based on evolving that way. Obviously, it would reject the notion that evolving that way is the only reason–as would any sane world view. Are you sure that the person you responded argued it was the only reason? If that were true, you would be right. I just have my doubts that anyone would make such a stupid argument. You should be careful to argue against what people actually say.

thuja on May 26, 2012 at 9:05 AM

Thuja please quit with the ridiculous attempt to equate the treatment of gays with slavery. It does you no good in your argument.

CW on May 26, 2012 at 9:27 AM

Comment pages: 1 2