I do not know why the same-sex couple would want to give their business to someone who does not even believe they should get married in the first place. There are probably enough bakers out there that believe in marriage equality.

(12-07-2014 02:25 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I want a party that will allow people to make their own decisions, even if they are bad... and concentrate more on merely limiting/eliminating the negative impact those decisions make on other citizens.

A government that protects people, rather than one that tries to 're-educate' them/beat them into submission... and parties that merely argue over which list of items need to be re-taught.

Touching on two hot-buttons... If people want to take drugs, then take drugs. If you die, you die. If you get behind the wheel, NOW you're putting others at risk... but the CRIME is putting others at risk, not potentially harming yourself. Same with the same sex wedding bakery issue. You can't be open for business and deny someone an 'off the shelf' service. You can't not sell them a cake in the window. You can't not serve them lunch off your menu. You CAN decline to make them a custom cake just like a chef can decline to prepare a meal 'in the way' that the customer wants. If this becomes their reputation and they lose busniess, not only from the 'custom' people but from those who don't want to support such 'rigid' artists

I think we spend far too much time, energy and money arguing about what people should be allowed to do. That should NEVER be the argument in this country. The arguments should be about how we can limit the impact of those decisions on others. Protect people from other people... NOT protect people from themselves

Neither of the two republicans who are generally accepted as defining conservatism--Goldwater and Reagan--were particularly conservative socially. Reagan was a divorcee who signed the most liberal abortion law at the time while governor of California, and Goldwater has supported some gay rights positions, as a couple of examples. Goldwater famously said that it would be a huge mistake for republicans to let the religious right take over the party.

I get very upset when neocons co-opt Reagan and Goldwater. Sean Hannity, in particular, is fond of saying "Ronald Reagan would have ___" or "Ronald Reagan would never have "____," when in fact Reagan was much more likely to do, and did do, exactly the opposite of what Hannity claims.

(12-08-2014 09:48 PM)75src Wrote:  I do not know why the same-sex couple would want to give their business to someone who does not even believe they should get married in the first place. There are probably enough bakers out there that believe in marriage equality.

and i wouldn't think finding a 'gay friendly' pastry chef would be that tough either, but that is somewhat the point. I suspect at least once, someone has 'sought out' a situation where someone would deny them service because that is how our government currently works. If instead the government said, so take your business to the guy down the street who will do whatever you want, or buy a cake out of his 'book' (just as it looks) and have someone else 'customize' the words or the two grooms or two brides or whatever else.... but your choices are not HIS obligation.

(12-08-2014 09:54 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Neither of the two republicans who are generally accepted as defining conservatism--Goldwater and Reagan--were particularly conservative socially. Reagan was a divorcee who signed the most liberal abortion law at the time while governor of California, and Goldwater has supported some gay rights positions, as a couple of examples. Goldwater famously said that it would be a huge mistake for republicans to let the religious right take over the party.

I get very upset when neocons co-opt Reagan and Goldwater. Sean Hannity, in particular, is fond of saying "Ronald Reagan would have ___" or "Ronald Reagan would never have "____," when in fact Reagan was much more likely to do, and did do, exactly the opposite of what Hannity claims.

Started a thread with some interesting video on the effects of some of this. In the other room on this. Don't want to re-post all the info here, so go there and read the info I posted in first 7 posts and then comment on it in either forum if you wish. Thanks:
http://csnbbs.com/thread-718239.html

(12-08-2014 09:40 PM)75src Wrote:  I never considered Nixon to be very conservative. One example is that Nixon imposed price controls. Bush 43 was not that much of an economic conservative, but he felt like he had to play along with the social conservatives to get elected. One way to show how the liberals have moved further to the left is to note how much further left they are than JFK was. On the other side, Ronald Reagan was not really a social conservative even though now they venerate him.

"The Professor and the President"

http://www.npr.org/2014/12/08/369398013/...ed-welfare

(12-08-2014 09:54 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Neither of the two republicans who are generally accepted as defining conservatism--Goldwater and Reagan--were particularly conservative socially. Reagan was a divorcee who signed the most liberal abortion law at the time while governor of California....

It should be noted that in later years Reagan said on several occasions that this was the biggest mistake he made as governor of California and was one action he wished he could've taken back.

I'd also quibble with your characterization of Goldwater and Reagan "defining conservatism". Politicians do not define political philosophies. A more accurate statement would be that Goldwater and Reagan are two of the politicians that conservatives consider to be among the most amenable to their philosophical preferences.