"Progressives" no longer have a choice...

FSSL

Well-known member
Staff member
Administrator
Doctor
Joined
Jan 31, 2012
Messages
7,968
Reaction score
798
Points
113
Location
Gulf Shores, Alabama
In the spirit of mutual toleration and cooperation, the current DNC Chairman dictates that...

?Every Democrat, like every American, should support a woman?s right to make her own choices about her body and her health. That is not negotiable and should not change city by city or state by state. At a time when women?s rights are under assault from the White House, the Republican Congress, and in states across the country, we must speak up for this principle as loudly as ever and with one voice.?

If you are a Democrat who is against abortion, you are no longer able to sit at the seat of sinners. You are no longer welcome.

So, at least one sine-qua-non for a Democrat is:

A belief that women have the right to inject poison into, chemically burn, dismember and sell off her unborn baby parts, even when they have been born.
 
The Democratic Party in 2017

Waterboarding-bad-Partial-Birth-abortions-fine.jpg


sanger+and+LBJ.jpg
 
FSSL said:
In the spirit of mutual toleration and cooperation, the current DNC Chairman dictates that...

?Every Democrat, like every American, should support a woman?s right to make her own choices about her body and her health. That is not negotiable and should not change city by city or state by state. At a time when women?s rights are under assault from the White House, the Republican Congress, and in states across the country, we must speak up for this principle as loudly as ever and with one voice.?

If you are a Democrat who is against abortion, you are no longer able to sit at the seat of sinners. You are no longer welcome.

So, at least one sine-qua-non for a Democrat is:

A belief that women have the right to inject poison into, chemically burn, dismember and sell off her unborn baby parts, even when they have been born.

No Democrat has to agree with every stand their party makes and no Republican needs to either. I have a hard time understanding how anyone who voted for Trump thinks they can take a moral high ground.
 
LongGone said:
FSSL said:
In the spirit of mutual toleration and cooperation, the current DNC Chairman dictates that...

?Every Democrat, like every American, should support a woman?s right to make her own choices about her body and her health. That is not negotiable and should not change city by city or state by state. At a time when women?s rights are under assault from the White House, the Republican Congress, and in states across the country, we must speak up for this principle as loudly as ever and with one voice.?

If you are a Democrat who is against abortion, you are no longer able to sit at the seat of sinners. You are no longer welcome.

So, at least one sine-qua-non for a Democrat is:

A belief that women have the right to inject poison into, chemically burn, dismember and sell off her unborn baby parts, even when they have been born.

No Democrat has to agree with every stand their party makes and no Republican needs to either. I have a hard time understanding how anyone who voted for Trump thinks they can take a moral high ground.

Very substantive retort Goner...;)
 
LongGone said:
No Democrat has to agree with every stand their party makes and no Republican needs to either.

I agree. The problem is that the Democrat leaders do not agree with you, in the slightest.

Tom Perez, the DNC Chairman is expecting that every single Democrat goose steps into the belief that chopping up infants must be accepted. Dick Durbin is also calling for constrained unanimity on infanticide as well.

The barbarism of infanticide is now a sine-qua-non of the Democrat party.

Why add Republicans to this? Are you trying to use a red herring fallacy to move away from the obvious problem? Logical fallacies are too easy!
 
LongGone said:
No Democrat has to agree with every stand their party makes and no Republican needs to either.

Technically true, but if you want to run for office as a Democrat, it's a different matter when it comes to baby murder.

Junior Trudeau has done the same with the Liberal Party of Canada. If you are a Liberal pro-lifer, don't expect to be nominated as a candidate in a national election.
 
Tarheel Baptist said:
LongGone said:
FSSL said:
In the spirit of mutual toleration and cooperation, the current DNC Chairman dictates that...

?Every Democrat, like every American, should support a woman?s right to make her own choices about her body and her health. That is not negotiable and should not change city by city or state by state. At a time when women?s rights are under assault from the White House, the Republican Congress, and in states across the country, we must speak up for this principle as loudly as ever and with one voice.?

If you are a Democrat who is against abortion, you are no longer able to sit at the seat of sinners. You are no longer welcome.

So, at least one sine-qua-non for a Democrat is:

A belief that women have the right to inject poison into, chemically burn, dismember and sell off her unborn baby parts, even when they have been born.

No Democrat has to agree with every stand their party makes and no Republican needs to either. I have a hard time understanding how anyone who voted for Trump thinks they can take a moral high ground.

Very substantive retort Goner...;)

Tarheel...in all seriousness it is a substantial post. I can't image that anybody agrees with their party on everything. Parties to be electable have to be fairly large umbrellas. I understand why Republicans don't agree with the Democratic Party on abortion. There are Democrats who are pro-life. It is hard to take the moral high ground when you just voted for a President who has openly ignored his marriage vows and has welcome and promoted racism. The subject of the thread is "Progressives no longer have a choice".  That is not true...everyone disagrees with their party on some issue. It continues to surprise me how many Evangelicals cling to the Republican Party based on the abortion issue. It doesn't matter how many Republican you elect Row vs Wade is is not being over turned. There are also a fair amount of pro-choice people that are Republicans.
 
Ransom said:
LongGone said:
No Democrat has to agree with every stand their party makes and no Republican needs to either.

Technically true, but if you want to run for office as a Democrat, it's a different matter when it comes to baby murder.

Junior Trudeau has done the same with the Liberal Party of Canada. If you are a Liberal pro-lifer, don't expect to be nominated as a candidate in a national election.

Are you saying a pro-life democrat can't get a nomination for President or Vice-President? I agree with you that it would be difficult but there are pro-life democrats in congress, senate and governors. It would be hard to be a pro-choice Republican and get the nomination for President or Vice-President. (Although Trump has been pro-life and pro-choice at various times in his life). IMHO it doesn't matter who we elect that Roe vs. Wade is not changing. Part of it is that if you are a conservative judge precedent plays a large part in how you look at an issue. Trump said just putting conservative judges in the court will "automatically" reverse Roe vs Wade. I don't think that is even remotely correct.
 
LongGone said:
Tarheel Baptist said:
LongGone said:
FSSL said:
In the spirit of mutual toleration and cooperation, the current DNC Chairman dictates that...

?Every Democrat, like every American, should support a woman?s right to make her own choices about her body and her health. That is not negotiable and should not change city by city or state by state. At a time when women?s rights are under assault from the White House, the Republican Congress, and in states across the country, we must speak up for this principle as loudly as ever and with one voice.?

If you are a Democrat who is against abortion, you are no longer able to sit at the seat of sinners. You are no longer welcome.

So, at least one sine-qua-non for a Democrat is:

A belief that women have the right to inject poison into, chemically burn, dismember and sell off her unborn baby parts, even when they have been born.

No Democrat has to agree with every stand their party makes and no Republican needs to either. I have a hard time understanding how anyone who voted for Trump thinks they can take a moral high ground.

Very substantive retort Goner...;)

Tarheel...in all seriousness it is a substantial post. I can't image that anybody agrees with their party on everything. Parties to be electable have to be fairly large umbrellas. I understand why Republicans don't agree with the Democratic Party on abortion. There are Democrats who are pro-life. It is hard to take the moral high ground when you just voted for a President who has openly ignored his marriage vows and has welcome and promoted racism. The subject of the thread is "Progressives no longer have a choice".  That is not true...everyone disagrees with their party on some issue. It continues to surprise me how many Evangelicals cling to the Republican Party based on the abortion issue. It doesn't matter how many Republican you elect Row vs Wade is is not being over turned. There are also a fair amount of pro-choice people that are Republicans.

I know it was substantive Goner, because you posted it!
And, you socialist liberal democrat chairman says pro life people are not really democrats. Personally, I'm absolutely good with that fact! 
His exact words could have been that pro life people are full of s*it!  ;)
 
Tarheel Baptist said:
LongGone said:
Tarheel Baptist said:
LongGone said:
FSSL said:
In the spirit of mutual toleration and cooperation, the current DNC Chairman dictates that...

?Every Democrat, like every American, should support a woman?s right to make her own choices about her body and her health. That is not negotiable and should not change city by city or state by state. At a time when women?s rights are under assault from the White House, the Republican Congress, and in states across the country, we must speak up for this principle as loudly as ever and with one voice.?

If you are a Democrat who is against abortion, you are no longer able to sit at the seat of sinners. You are no longer welcome.

So, at least one sine-qua-non for a Democrat is:

A belief that women have the right to inject poison into, chemically burn, dismember and sell off her unborn baby parts, even when they have been born.

No Democrat has to agree with every stand their party makes and no Republican needs to either. I have a hard time understanding how anyone who voted for Trump thinks they can take a moral high ground.

Very substantive retort Goner...;)

Tarheel...in all seriousness it is a substantial post. I can't image that anybody agrees with their party on everything. Parties to be electable have to be fairly large umbrellas. I understand why Republicans don't agree with the Democratic Party on abortion. There are Democrats who are pro-life. It is hard to take the moral high ground when you just voted for a President who has openly ignored his marriage vows and has welcome and promoted racism. The subject of the thread is "Progressives no longer have a choice".  That is not true...everyone disagrees with their party on some issue. It continues to surprise me how many Evangelicals cling to the Republican Party based on the abortion issue. It doesn't matter how many Republican you elect Row vs Wade is is not being over turned. There are also a fair amount of pro-choice people that are Republicans.

I know it was substantive Goner, because you posted it!
And, you socialist liberal democrat chairman says pro life people are not really democrats. Personally, I'm absolutely good with that fact! 
His exact words could have been that pro life people are full of s*it!  ;)

Did you notice that both Sanders and Pelozi have come out and said that pro-life Democrats are welcome in the party. Since you are a Republican why would it matter if you are good with that fact?
 
FSSL said:
LongGone said:
No Democrat has to agree with every stand their party makes and no Republican needs to either.

I agree. The problem is that the Democrat leaders do not agree with you, in the slightest.

Tom Perez, the DNC Chairman is expecting that every single Democrat goose steps into the belief that chopping up infants must be accepted. Dick Durbin is also calling for constrained unanimity on infanticide as well.

The barbarism of infanticide is now a sine-qua-non of the Democrat party.

Why add Republicans to this? Are you trying to use a red herring fallacy to move away from the obvious problem? Logical fallacies are too easy!

Adding the Republicans to the conversation just puts it in perspective. That no matter which party you are in you are not going to agree with everything the leadership of your party states. In all seriousness no one can always agree with Trump unless you change your mind as frequently as he does. That doesn't mean you can't be in the Republican Party.

To me the obvious problem is that Roe vs Wade is not going to be overturned by either party. Republicans believe they will always of the Evangelical vote because of the abortion issue. The issue is always phased in if you vote for Democrats you are pro-abortion is the fallacy. Evangelicals have been voting for Republicans for years and nothing has changed except the number of abortions continued in drop during the Obama administration.
 
I disagree completely that Roe V Wade is what ties evangelicals to the Republican party. It is one of many issues that draw Christians to the GOP.

Evangelicals tend to be conservative by nature, so they tend to side with the Republicans on many issues such as the following:

* Budget: Conservative Christians tend to support less govt. spending
* Economy : tend to support free market solutions to economic problems
* Crime: tend to support ?Law and order policies and the death penalty. 
* Drugs: tend to oppose legalization of drugs
* Education: tend to prefer local control of school and education
* Energy & Oil: tend to support wide range energy policy.
* Environment: tend to be pro-environment but question man made climate change.
* Families & Children: tend to encourage pro family policies 
* Government Reform: tend to favor smaller govt. and states? rights 
* Gun Control: tend to be pro 2nd amendment
* Homeland Security: tend to be strong border advocates 
* Jobs: prefer jobs expansion over social programs
* Principles & Values: tend to prefer conservative values
* Tax Reform: tend to be for reduction in taxes
* War: tend to be hawkish
* Welfare & Poverty : prefer putting people to work & expanding economy to modern social programs

I?m Still looking for a Democrat who shares these views.
 
sword said:
I disagree completely that Roe V Wade is what ties evangelicals to the Republican party. It is one of many issues that draw Christians to the GOP.

Evangelicals tend to be conservative by nature, so they tend to side with the Republicans on many issues such as the following:

* Budget: Conservative Christians tend to support less govt. spending
* Economy : tend to support free market solutions to economic problems
* Crime: tend to support ?Law and order policies and the death penalty. 
* Drugs: tend to oppose legalization of drugs
* Education: tend to prefer local control of school and education
* Energy & Oil: tend to support wide range energy policy.
* Environment: tend to be pro-environment but question man made climate change.
* Families & Children: tend to encourage pro family policies 
* Government Reform: tend to favor smaller govt. and states? rights 
* Gun Control: tend to be pro 2nd amendment
* Homeland Security: tend to be strong border advocates 
* Jobs: prefer jobs expansion over social programs
* Principles & Values: tend to prefer conservative values
* Tax Reform: tend to be for reduction in taxes
* War: tend to be hawkish
* Welfare & Poverty : prefer putting people to work & expanding economy to modern social programs

I?m Still looking for a Democrat who shares these views.

When you put up what is basically the conservative platform you are not going to get a Democrat who share all those views you would have a Republican.

IMHO opinion you "dressed up" some of what I perceive as Republicans views.

*Republicans like less spending unless it is something they like such as military, law enforcement or military. When Republicans become seniors you do not see them wanting cuts in Social Security or Medicaid. When a Republican has a child with a drug problem they want there to be a program to help that child with their addiction.

*Republicans are happy with free market solutions until they lose their job and then they are a happy with the government to help restore their business or provide them with training and/or schooling. Some Republicans are happy with the government punishing companies that send jobs overseas instead of understanding it is part of the free market.

*Supporting law and order policies means additional police and prisons which is more government and less fiscal constraint.

*Republicans love to say they are against the legalization of drugs. First there is only one drug that is up for discussion and that is marijuana. So Republicans want MORE government to criminalize marijuana that is similar to alcohol and want to spend the money needed for law enforcement and prisons to aid their larger government.

*Republicans tend to support families if they look like my family. They also tend to say the government doesn't belong in family issues which can lead to both abuse and in the case of some home schoolers children that are uneducated (not implying this applies to most home schoolers but it does happen).

Government reform: This may be true generally but in reality Republicans want federal dollars spent in their state the same as Democrats do.

Gun Control: Republicans may want less gun control but we all believe in the second amendment and we all believe their should be some restrictions. I assume that you don't believe prisoners should be able to buy guns so you do believe in some form of gun control.

Homeland Security-Are you saying here that you want the government to build a giant wall at a huge expense. Doesn't that contradict less government spending?

Education: Local control in education sound good and noble but you are also saying that you are willing for areas that do not have the needed tax base that a sup-par education is good for those children.

Environment: My viewpoint is many Republicans tend to be just anti-regulation and it doesn't matter what happens to the environment. It is much broader than just climate change.

Energy and Oil: It appears that Republican politicians support any wide range energy source that is making money no matter what it is doing to the environment. You don't see much support from Republicans on green energy solutions.

Prefer job expansion over social programs: It is hard to find a Republican or Democrat than doesn't believe a good job is preferred to a social program. Bill Clinton signed Welfare Reform into law. Providing safety nets for people is a good idea whether you are a Republican or Democrat.

Principles and Values: It looks many times like Republicans like their principles and values in spite of the fact all Americans pay taxes and deserve the same rights.

Tax Reform: Nobody wants to pay more taxes but we do need to pay for the additional police, military, prisons and the wall Republicans want to build.

War: So are you really saying the Republicans want us to get involved in war. I think there are differences of opinion but I think both parties want war to be the last resort. Wars really are budget breakers that you said Republicans don't like spending money.

Welfare and Poverty:Same issue as jobs.

I am a Democrat but we have had Republican controlled WH and Congress and we have had Democratic controlled WH and Congress and we have had a different parties controlling either. I actually think that government works better when the control of power is split between parties generally cause neither side can go too far.  If either party had all the answers they would never leave power.

 
When I examine the stated positions from each of the two parties the answer to me is clear. For the Bible believing Christian the contrast is unmistakable.

In nearly every case the position in the Republican platform and the general direction on their votes is more scriptural in direction then the democrat votes and positions. This is do in part to the high number of evangelical involved in crafting the party platform.

This is not to say Republicans always make the right choices, nor am I saying their positions are as far right as I would like, I'm just saying they are much closer to where I stand then most elected Democrats.
 
What is the Democratic parties stated positions on the following topics?

* Budget: Tend to oppose budget cuts in nearly every area of government.
* Economy: Tend to support higher taxes and regulations on businesses.
* Crime: tend to oppose death penalty or mandatory sentencing rules & soft on crime.
* Drugs: tend to support legalization of drugs
* Education: tend to prefer national control of school and education & oppose choice.
* Energy & Oil: tend to restrict wide range energy policy
* Environment: strong on new environmental laws and regulation & strong climate change position. 
* Government Reform: tend to oppose smaller govt. and states? rights 
* Gun Control: tend to be anti-2nd amendment
* Homeland Security: tend to be weak border advocates and resist enforcing emigration laws 
* Jobs: Strong supporters of social programs and oppose job growth policies
* Principles & Values: tend to prefer liberal values
* Tax Reform: tend to support increased in taxes on upper middle class, the rich and businesses
* War: tend to be weaker on defense than most Republicans (subjective)
* Welfare & Poverty : tend to be supporters of modern social programs and long term safety nets


 
sword said:
When I examine the stated positions from each of the two parties the answer to me is clear. For the Bible believing Christian the contrast is unmistakable.

In nearly every case the position in the Republican platform and the general direction on their votes is more scriptural in direction then the democrat votes and positions. This is do in part to the high number of evangelical involved in crafting the party platform.

This is not to say Republicans always make the right choices, nor am I saying their positions are as far right as I would like, I'm just saying they are much closer to where I stand then most elected Democrats.

It is clear to you because you are a Republican. Conservative and progressive stances for the most part are not driven by scripture. The other part that you leave out is that you do not live in a Theocracy so you the fact that something is scriptural does not mean that you should make everyone adopt your belief.
 
sword said:
What is the Democratic parties stated positions on the following topics?

* Budget: Tend to oppose budget cuts in nearly every area of government.
* Economy: Tend to support higher taxes and regulations on businesses.
* Crime: tend to oppose death penalty or mandatory sentencing rules & soft on crime.
* Drugs: tend to support legalization of drugs
* Education: tend to prefer national control of school and education & oppose choice.
* Energy & Oil: tend to restrict wide range energy policy
* Environment: strong on new environmental laws and regulation & strong climate change position. 
* Government Reform: tend to oppose smaller govt. and states? rights 
* Gun Control: tend to be anti-2nd amendment
* Homeland Security: tend to be weak border advocates and resist enforcing emigration laws 
* Jobs: Strong supporters of social programs and oppose job growth policies
* Principles & Values: tend to prefer liberal values
* Tax Reform: tend to support increased in taxes on upper middle class, the rich and businesses
* War: tend to be weaker on defense than most Republicans (subjective)
* Welfare & Poverty : tend to be supporters of modern social programs and long term safety nets

I have already gone through your list and told you where I thought you misrepresented what progressives stand for  on issues. The problem is that you are trying to make these issues in into Christian or non-Christian stands. The budget is not a Christian or non-Christian stand. Everyone has opinions about what should be in the budget or not. I would argue that Republicans take the non-Christian stand in that they want tax cuts but never want to explain how the tax cuts will be paid for to balance a budget. Revenue does not increase by the amount that taxes are cut. There was much to like about Reagan but he was never able to balance a budget but cutting taxes. Clinton raised taxes, had a good economy and balanced the budget two years after he raised taxes. These are economical issues not Christian or non-Christian issues.
 
LongGone said:
Ransom said:
LongGone said:
No Democrat has to agree with every stand their party makes and no Republican needs to either.
Technically true, but if you want to run for office as a Democrat, it's a different matter when it comes to baby murder.
Junior Trudeau has done the same with the Liberal Party of Canada. If you are a Liberal pro-lifer, don't expect to be nominated as a candidate in a national election.
Are you saying a pro-life democrat can't get a nomination for President or Vice-President? I agree with you that it would be difficult but there are pro-life democrats in congress, senate and governors. It would be hard to be a pro-choice Republican and get the nomination for President or Vice-President. (Although Trump has been pro-life and pro-choice at various times in his life). IMHO it doesn't matter who we elect that Roe vs. Wade is not changing. Part of it is that if you are a conservative judge precedent plays a large part in how you look at an issue. Trump said just putting conservative judges in the court will "automatically" reverse Roe vs Wade. I don't think that is even remotely correct.
I can only come up with 1 pro life Dem. Governor (out of 16), John Edward, Governor of Louisiana. plus 2 congressman out of 193 and 1 senator out of 44. So yes they are well represented in their party.
 
sword said:
LongGone said:
Ransom said:
LongGone said:
No Democrat has to agree with every stand their party makes and no Republican needs to either.
Technically true, but if you want to run for office as a Democrat, it's a different matter when it comes to baby murder.
Junior Trudeau has done the same with the Liberal Party of Canada. If you are a Liberal pro-lifer, don't expect to be nominated as a candidate in a national election.
Are you saying a pro-life democrat can't get a nomination for President or Vice-President? I agree with you that it would be difficult but there are pro-life democrats in congress, senate and governors. It would be hard to be a pro-choice Republican and get the nomination for President or Vice-President. (Although Trump has been pro-life and pro-choice at various times in his life). IMHO it doesn't matter who we elect that Roe vs. Wade is not changing. Part of it is that if you are a conservative judge precedent plays a large part in how you look at an issue. Trump said just putting conservative judges in the court will "automatically" reverse Roe vs Wade. I don't think that is even remotely correct.
I can only come up with 1 pro life Dem. Governor (out of 16), John Edward, Governor of Louisiana. plus 2 congressman out of 193 and 1 senator out of 44. So yes they are well represented in their party.

While I think your numbers are slightly low and don't include about 120 elected state office holders I also think you are trying to change the conversation. The conversation was can someone be pro-life and a democrat. I did not see where anyone was trying to say that pro-life elected Democrats were well represented. I did see where about 33% of Democrats considered themselves pro-life.
 
sword said:
What is the Democratic parties stated positions on the following topics?

* Budget: Tend to oppose budget cuts in nearly every area of government.
* Economy: Tend to support higher taxes and regulations on businesses.
* Crime: tend to oppose death penalty or mandatory sentencing rules & soft on crime.
* Drugs: tend to support legalization of drugs
* Education: tend to prefer national control of school and education & oppose choice.
* Energy & Oil: tend to restrict wide range energy policy
* Environment: strong on new environmental laws and regulation & strong climate change position. 
* Government Reform: tend to oppose smaller govt. and states? rights 
* Gun Control: tend to be anti-2nd amendment
* Homeland Security: tend to be weak border advocates and resist enforcing emigration laws 
* Jobs: Strong supporters of social programs and oppose job growth policies
* Principles & Values: tend to prefer liberal values
* Tax Reform: tend to support increased in taxes on upper middle class, the rich and businesses
* War: tend to be weaker on defense than most Republicans (subjective)
* Welfare & Poverty : tend to be supporters of modern social programs and long term safety nets

Your number two was tend higher taxes and regulations on business. I would argue that it not always about higher taxes but actually making sure that there is a safety net for the poor or that the earth we live on is preserved. Like the first one I don't believe it is a Christian or non-Christian stance but I don't know why someone who loves God would not be interested in making sure the poor are taken care of and we are good stewards of the resources on the earth that God has given us.  There are good and bad regulations. Less regulation does not constitute good. People should be able to work in safe environments and I don't think God is displeased with that. We had to bail out the banks because of deregulation. As a country we would have been better served to keep the regulations in place. Fair regulations that keep the environment healthy are good things and I think honor the God that gave us the resources.
 
Back
Top