I can identify with Dr. Hsieh. I thought this was interesting and lays out a good argument as to why the GOP is having trouble with real conservatives.

=================================================


Why The Republicans Lost My Vote
by Paul Hsieh, MD (November 14, 2008)

After a resounding electoral defeat, in which voters in this once-red state rejected Republicans McCain, Schaffer, and Musgrave, the Colorado Republican Party will undoubtedly be asking themselves, "Why did we lose?"

I want to let them know that they lost the vote of many former supporters (including myself) because they have chosen to embrace the Religious Right.

I voted Republican in 1996, 2000, and 2004. I believe in limited government, individual rights, free market capitalism, a strong national defense, and the right to keep and bear arms - positions that one normally associates with Republicans.

But I didn't vote for a single Republican in 2008. I've become increasingly alienated by the Republicans" embrace of the religious "social conservative" agenda, including attempts to ban abortion, embryonic stem cell research, and gay marriage.

The Founding Fathers correctly recognized that the proper function of government is to protect individual rights, such as freedom of speech and freedom of religion. But freedom of religion also implies freedom from religion. As Thomas Jefferson famously put it, there should be a "wall of separation" between church and state. Public policy should not be based on religious doctrines.

Instead, the government's role is to protect each person's right to practice his or her religion as a private matter and to forbid them from forcibly imposing their particular views on others. And this is precisely why I find the Republican Party's embrace of the Religious Right so dangerous.

If a woman chooses not to have an abortion for reasons of personal faith, then I completely respect her right to do so. But she cannot impose her particular religious views on others. Other women must have the same right to decide that deeply personal issue for themselves.

The Religious Right's goal of outlawing abortions would violate that important right, and sacrifice the lives of actual women for clumps of cells that are only potential (but not yet actual) human beings, based on religious dogma. As a physician, I find that position abhorrent and deeply anti-life.


In his October 24, 2008 radio broadcast, Rush Limbaugh told pro-choice secular supporters of limited government such as myself that we should leave the Republican Party. Many of us have already taken his advice and changed our affiliation to "independent."

The Republican Party stands at an important crossroads. The Republican Party could choose to follow the principles of the American Founding Fathers and promote a limited government that protected individual rights but otherwise left people alone to live their lives.

This includes affirming the principle of the separation of church and state. If they did so, I would happily support it.

Or the Republican Party could instead choose to become the party of the Religious Right and seek to forcibly impose the religious values of one particular constituency over others (thus violating everyone else's rights).

In that case, it will continue to alienate many voters and lose elections -- and deservedly so.

Even though I no longer regard myself as a Republican, I definitely regard myself as a loyal American.

My parents immigrated legally from Taiwan to America over 40 years ago. They had very little money, but they worked hard, sent two children to college and medical school, and are now enjoying a well-earned and comfortable retirement.

Their life has been a real-life embodiment of the American dream. America is a beacon of hope to millions of people around the world precisely because our system of government allows honest, hard-working people to prosper and thrive.

Our system is a testament to the genius of the Founding Fathers, who recognized that the proper function of government is to protect individual rights, such as our rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Hence, I believe the Republican Party should choose the first path - the path of limited government, separation of church and state, and protection of individual rights.

This is the America that brought my parents from a ocean away in hopes of a better life for themselves and their children. This is the America I want to live in. And this is the America I want the Republican Party to stand for.


Paul S. Hsieh, MD, is a physician in practice in the south Denver metro region and he is a founding member of the Colorado group "Freedom and Individual Rights in Medicine" (WeStandFIRM.org).

Link to CapMag.
Original Post
quote:
Originally posted by 8I:
I can identify with Dr. Hsieh. I thought this was interesting and lays out a good argument as to why the GOP is having trouble with real conservatives.

=================================================


Why The Republicans Lost My Vote
by Paul Hsieh, MD (November 14, 2008)

After a resounding electoral defeat, in which voters in this once-red state rejected Republicans McCain, Schaffer, and Musgrave, the Colorado Republican Party will undoubtedly be asking themselves, "Why did we lose?"


I voted Republican in 1996, 2000, and 2004. I believe in limited government, individual rights, free market capitalism, a strong national defense, and the right to keep and bear arms - positions that one normally associates with Republicans.

Paul S. Hsieh, MD, is a physician in practice in the south Denver metro region and he is a founding member of the Colorado group "Freedom and Individual Rights in Medicine" (WeStandFIRM.org).

Link to CapMag.


So, Dr. Hsieh had rather a Democrat win who believes in more controlling government, a reduction in individual rights, government controlled markets, a weaker national defense if one at all, and doing away with the individual right to keep and bear arms and freedom of speech.

Makes no sense. But I do agree the Republican party needs to get their act together.
It is very obvious that the Republican party has forgotten that freedom of religion is our constitutional right.
quote:
Originally posted by DILLY:
It is very obvious that the Republican party has forgotten that freedom of religion is our constitutional right.


You know I didn't realize it until last Sunday when Bush's Secret Police came and forced me to go to a Baptist church.You liberals need to understand freedom of religion is not freedom from religion.
Killing unborn children is not a religious issue, it is a moral one. It seems that the last vestiges of morality in this country seems to be with those who are the "Religious Right".For that reason, many confuse this issue with religion.
The same people are also confused on the issue of gay marriage. The purpose of the legalisation of same sex marriages has nothing to do with gays being partnered for life, this rarely happens. A few years ago a very good study was done and showed that gays as a rule are not monogomous, but by average have hundreds of partners in their lifetime. The real purpose of gay marriage is two fold: First is to force acceptance on an equal basis with heterosexual marriage for the purpose of removing the shame and stigma of that lifestyle. Second is to gain acceptace of access to America's children. The gay family cannot pro-create, thus it cannot reproduce itself except by the reqruitment of new people to this lifestyle. They know that the only way to reqruit is to expose children to this lifestyle at younger ages before the stigma can be learned by chilren and adolescents. In the gay lifestyle, youth is worshiped, when gays become older they are not wanted any longer by youthful homosexuals. This creates a viscious cycle that creates a very strong demand for new homosexual parners, especially with men. So in the final analysis, it is about unbridled access to America's children.

This is not a religious issue, but a moral one. If we go down the road that the gay lobby wants us to go down, it will mean the soon collapse of our nation.
quote:
Originally posted by skymaster:

So, Dr. Hsieh had rather a Democrat win who believes in more controlling government, a reduction in individual rights, government controlled markets, a weaker national defense if one at all, and doing away with the individual right to keep and bear arms and freedom of speech.

Makes no sense. But I do agree the Republican party needs to get their act together.


He would rather the GOP get back to their original core principals.

He can't be blamed or held responsible for their deviations, it is not his fault that the party caved in and sold out.

He obviously voted his principles and his conscience.

Why should he settle or compromise for any party that doesn't embody his beliefs or positions?
quote:
Originally posted by Extra260:
Killing unborn children is not a religious issue, it is a moral one. It seems that the last vestiges of morality in this country seems to be with those who are the "Religious Right".For that reason, many confuse this issue with religion.
The same people are also confused on the issue of gay marriage. The purpose of the legalisation of same sex marriages has nothing to do with gays being partnered for life, this rarely happens. A few years ago a very good study was done and showed that gays as a rule are not monogomous, but by average have hundreds of partners in their lifetime. The real purpose of gay marriage is two fold: First is to force acceptance on an equal basis with heterosexual marriage for the purpose of removing the shame and stigma of that lifestyle. Second is to gain acceptace of access to America's children. The gay family cannot pro-create, thus it cannot reproduce itself except by the reqruitment of new people to this lifestyle. They know that the only way to reqruit is to expose children to this lifestyle at younger ages before the stigma can be learned by chilren and adolescents. In the gay lifestyle, youth is worshiped, when gays become older they are not wanted any longer by youthful homosexuals. This creates a viscious cycle that creates a very strong demand for new homosexual parners, especially with men. So in the final analysis, it is about unbridled access to America's children.

This is not a religious issue, but a moral one. If we go down the road that the gay lobby wants us to go down, it will mean the soon collapse of our nation.


Where do people get their morals from? Not the government, but rather religion. They go hand in hand. How can you be against gay marriage but be ok with abortion? Just wondering.
quote:
Originally posted by Backwoods:



You liberals need to understand freedom of religion is not freedom from religion.



See, this is exactly what I'm talking about!!!
Freedom of religion means you are free to worship who or what ever you wish, even if you wish not to worship anything. That is what freedom of religion is.
quote:
Originally posted by Extra260:
Killing unborn children is not a religious issue, it is a moral one. It seems that the last vestiges of morality in this country seems to be with those who are the "Religious Right".For that reason, many confuse this issue with religion.
The same people are also confused on the issue of gay marriage. The purpose of the legalisation of same sex marriages has nothing to do with gays being partnered for life, this rarely happens. A few years ago a very good study was done and showed that gays as a rule are not monogomous, but by average have hundreds of partners in their lifetime. The real purpose of gay marriage is two fold: First is to force acceptance on an equal basis with heterosexual marriage for the purpose of removing the shame and stigma of that lifestyle. Second is to gain acceptace of access to America's children. The gay family cannot pro-create, thus it cannot reproduce itself except by the reqruitment of new people to this lifestyle. They know that the only way to reqruit is to expose children to this lifestyle at younger ages before the stigma can be learned by chilren and adolescents. In the gay lifestyle, youth is worshiped, when gays become older they are not wanted any longer by youthful homosexuals. This creates a viscious cycle that creates a very strong demand for new homosexual parners, especially with men. So in the final analysis, it is about unbridled access to America's children.

This is not a religious issue, but a moral one. If we go down the road that the gay lobby wants us to go down, it will mean the soon collapse of our nation.




This has got to be the most ignorant thing that I have ever red in my life, or I have misunderstood what you are trying to say. Are you saying that gay people want to get married so that children will accept them? If that is so then you are an idiot. No wonder this state is considered one of the dumbest in the nation. It seems to be true if this is what the people around here really think.
quote:
Originally posted by Extra260:
The same people are also confused on the issue of gay marriage. The purpose of the legalisation of same sex marriages has nothing to do with gays being partnered for life, this rarely happens. A few years ago a very good study was done and showed that gays as a rule are not monogomous, but by average have hundreds of partners in their lifetime. The real purpose of gay marriage is two fold: First is to force acceptance on an equal basis with heterosexual marriage for the purpose of removing the shame and stigma of that lifestyle. Second is to gain acceptace of access to America's children. The gay family cannot pro-create, thus it cannot reproduce itself except by the reqruitment of new people to this lifestyle. They know that the only way to reqruit is to expose children to this lifestyle at younger ages before the stigma can be learned by chilren and adolescents. In the gay lifestyle, youth is worshiped, when gays become older they are not wanted any longer by youthful homosexuals. This creates a viscious cycle that creates a very strong demand for new homosexual parners, especially with men. So in the final analysis, it is about unbridled access to America's children.

This is not a religious issue, but a moral one. If we go down the road that the gay lobby wants us to go down, it will mean the soon collapse of our nation.


Can you provide anything to back up what you just said? What study? Please provide some proof that the gay community, as a whole, are recruiting children. Why will the nation collapse?
quote:
Originally posted by Extra260:
Killing unborn children is not a religious issue, it is a moral one. It seems that the last vestiges of morality in this country seems to be with those who are the "Religious Right".For that reason, many confuse this issue with religion.
The same people are also confused on the issue of gay marriage. The purpose of the legalisation of same sex marriages has nothing to do with gays being partnered for life, this rarely happens. A few years ago a very good study was done and showed that gays as a rule are not monogomous, but by average have hundreds of partners in their lifetime. The real purpose of gay marriage is two fold: First is to force acceptance on an equal basis with heterosexual marriage for the purpose of removing the shame and stigma of that lifestyle. Second is to gain acceptace of access to America's children. The gay family cannot pro-create, thus it cannot reproduce itself except by the reqruitment of new people to this lifestyle. They know that the only way to reqruit is to expose children to this lifestyle at younger ages before the stigma can be learned by chilren and adolescents. In the gay lifestyle, youth is worshiped, when gays become older they are not wanted any longer by youthful homosexuals. This creates a viscious cycle that creates a very strong demand for new homosexual parners, especially with men. So in the final analysis, it is about unbridled access to America's children.

This is not a religious issue, but a moral one. If we go down the road that the gay lobby wants us to go down, it will mean the soon collapse of our nation.


HOGWASH!
quote:
Originally posted by DILLY:
quote:
Originally posted by Backwoods:



You liberals need to understand freedom of religion is not freedom from religion.



See, this is exactly what I'm talking about!!!
Freedom of religion means you are free to worship who or what ever you wish, even if you wish not to worship anything. That is what freedom of religion is.



I agree, extra went off on the deep end with this one.
quote:
Originally posted by DILLY:
quote:
Originally posted by Backwoods:



You liberals need to understand freedom of religion is not freedom from religion.



See, this is exactly what I'm talking about!!!
Freedom of religion means you are free to worship who or what ever you wish, even if you wish not to worship anything. That is what freedom of religion is.



Amen Brother.
quote:
Where do people get their morals from? Not the government, but rather religion. They go hand in hand. How can you be against gay marriage but be ok with abortion? Just wondering.




Fighting,

For the record i am against abortion, i find it heinous, and partial birth abortion barbarous.

The abortion issue is the one issue that keeps me from voting democrat.

In a sense you are correct, it is hard to separate morals from some kind of religious tenet. I am only making the case from the humanist standpoint that so pervades the moral compass of our nation. We all agree murder is wrong, rape is wrong, stealing is wrong, if we look at the moral implications of these actions we can find a basis to defend both the pro-life position and the defense of traditional marriage. If we thump our bibles, and make our case based on divine knowledge, we have lost the argument as the humanist sees it, because they reject religion outright. We have to make a logical argument based on rational reason.
quote:
This has got to be the most ignorant thing that I have ever red in my life, or I have misunderstood what you are trying to say. Are you saying that gay people want to get married so that children will accept them? If that is so then you are an idiot. No wonder this state is considered one of the dumbest in the nation. It seems to be true if this is what the people around here really think.



Dilly,
You haven't been paying attention. The whole gay marriage issue IS about the children, else why would they be trying to force it into the schools at the second grade level?
quote:
Originally posted by JJPAUL:
''Where do people get their morals from? Not the government, but rather religion."


Morals begin at home.


Through parents, right. Morals aren't engrained into a home, they are passed down through lessons, most of them biblical. Why is that so hard to accept?
quote:
Can you provide anything to back up what you just said? What study? Please provide some proof that the gay community, as a whole, are recruiting children. Why will the nation collapse?



You can start here.



Link
quote:
Originally posted by Extra260:
You haven't been paying attention. The whole gay marriage issue IS about the children, else why would they be trying to force it into the schools at the second grade level?


The gay marriage issue is about the children to YOU. You're acting like there's a secret society of gay people who meet and plot to convert the nation's youth. I'm pretty sure no such thing exists.
quote:
Originally posted by Backwoods:
quote:
Originally posted by DILLY:
It is very obvious that the Republican party has forgotten that freedom of religion is our constitutional right.


You know I didn't realize it until last Sunday when Bush's Secret Police came and forced me to go to a Baptist church.You liberals need to understand freedom of religion is not freedom from religion.


Freedom of religion is freedom from religion if a person chooses such. Trust me. You don't want to push that point. If you force religion on people, then which religion do you force. Yours or your neighbor's? I personally don't want my neighbor's religion being taught in my school.
quote:
Originally posted by Extra260:
quote:
Where do people get their morals from? Not the government, but rather religion. They go hand in hand. How can you be against gay marriage but be ok with abortion? Just wondering.




Fighting,

For the record i am against abortion, i find it heinous, and partial birth abortion barbarous.

The abortion issue is the one issue that keeps me from voting democrat.

In a sense you are correct, it is hard to separate morals from some kind of religious tenet. I am only making the case from the humanist standpoint that so pervades the moral compass of our nation. We all agree murder is wrong, rape is wrong, stealing is wrong, if we look at the moral implications of these actions we can find a basis to defend both the pro-life position and the defense of traditional marriage. If we thump our bibles, and make our case based on divine knowledge, we have lost the argument as the humanist sees it, because they reject religion outright. We have to make a logical argument based on rational reason.


Now that is a very good post. I happened to vote Democrat, but you make very good sense and I applaud your effort. You have my respect.
I don't want to get into the abortion argument because we could go back and forth all day long. But I do want to say rapists and child molesters should be castrated. Most of these folks would still commit crimes because castration doesn't stop their other violence, so I would also keep them in the same prison together. In my opinion there is no rehabilitation for these types of people.
quote:
Originally posted by AlabamaSon:
I don't want to get into the abortion argument because we could go back and forth all day long. But I do want to say rapists and child molesters should be castrated. Most of these folks would still commit crimes because castration doesn't stop their other violence, so I would also keep them in the same prison together. In my opinion there is no rehabilitation for these types of people.


I agree with you there.Talking about freedom from religion I understand your point.I agree on the fact the government should not be telling people to go to church or which one to go to.But,although not as bad locally,this country has seen a push just in my life time to push everything related to religion or God out of the public light.Now thats not freedom either.The republican party may lose a few votes by frontlining moral issues,but no one has mentioned the votes it may gain because of it.And after all,we've had a Republican President for 20 out of the last28 years.Can one person give me a real instance of how religion has been forced on them?
quote:
The gay marriage issue is about the children to YOU. You're acting like there's a secret society of gay people who meet and plot to convert the nation's youth. I'm pretty sure no such thing exists.


Look at this quote. You may need to do your homework before commenting on this issue.

We condemn sexual abuse and all forms of coercion. Freely-chosen relationships differ from unwanted sex. Present laws, which focus only on the age of the participants, ignore the quality of their relationships. We know that differences in age do not preclude mutual, loving interaction between persons. NAMBLA is strongly opposed to age-of-consent laws and all other restrictions which deny men and boys the full enjoyment of their bodies and control over their own lives.

This is from the NAMBLA websits.

quote:
quote:
Extra260,

If you are seriously going to use NAMBLA as a case against gay marriage, then there's no point in any logically minded person trying to debate with you.
Dolemite,
The gay marriage lobby is made up of these people. These are the activists in that group.

They want the sexual liberation of CHILDREN.
From reports generated by international task forces concerning child porn, and my own experience with the Belgian, Dutch and Scandanavian governments, I see a connection with such as NAMBLA and some gay organizations (not all). The US practically threated to turn off internet access to some of the governments to get their cooperation in apprehending some of those involved with child porn.
quote:
Originally posted by Fighting Illini:
quote:
Originally posted by JJPAUL:
''Where do people get their morals from? Not the government, but rather religion."


Morals begin at home.


Through parents, right. Morals aren't engrained into a home, they are passed down through lessons, most of them biblical. Why is that so hard to accept?



I guess it would be how open minded you are and from which Bible you're reading. Most do not understand the Bible. Some have never been inside a church, and the some that go to church, or as wicked as the ones who dont. Wink
quote:
Originally posted by Backwoods:
You know I didn't realize it until last Sunday when Bush's Secret Police came and forced me to go to a Baptist church.You liberals need to understand freedom of religion is not freedom from religion.


And exactly how do you figure that? Freedom from religion merely means that one cannot force their religion onto another.
quote:
Originally posted by Extra260:
Killing unborn children is not a religious issue, it is a moral one. It seems that the last vestiges of morality in this country seems to be with those who are the "Religious Right".For that reason, many confuse this issue with religion.


And of course, only people who follow your religion can possibly be moral persons. Why is it so difficult for you to understand that not everyone agrees with you? Why do you feel the need to force others to follow your own personal moral code, especially when that person is someone you will never know? I just don't get that. Moral decisions are personal decisions.

quote:

The same people are also confused on the issue of gay marriage. The purpose of the legalisation of same sex marriages has nothing to do with gays being partnered for life, this rarely happens. A few years ago a very good study was done and showed that gays as a rule are not monogomous, but by average have hundreds of partners in their lifetime. The real purpose of gay marriage is two fold: First is to force acceptance on an equal basis with heterosexual marriage for the purpose of removing the shame and stigma of that lifestyle. Second is to gain acceptace of access to America's children.[/b]

I've known quite a few gay people in my life and not one of them had hundreds of partners. Promiscuity is an individual trait not related to sexual orientation.

Gain access to America's children? For what purpose? To convert them to being gay? LOL You can't convert a straight person to gay or vice versa. People are what they are no matter how much you may not like it.

[b] The gay family cannot pro-create, thus it cannot reproduce itself except by the reqruitment of new people to this lifestyle. They know that the only way to reqruit is to expose children to this lifestyle at younger ages before the stigma can be learned by chilren and adolescents. In the gay lifestyle, youth is worshiped, when gays become older they are not wanted any longer by youthful homosexuals. This creates a viscious cycle that creates a very strong demand for new homosexual parners, especially with men. So in the final analysis, it is about unbridled access to America's children.


Criminy, how do you maintain such ignorance? Have you no understanding of human development at all? Please do some actual research.

quote:

This is not a religious issue, but a moral one. If we go down the road that the gay lobby wants us to go down, it will mean the soon collapse of our nation.


That's simply nuts. Do you really think that straight people will suddenly stop getting married and having children simply because gay people could get married? Really? Uh, yeah, that's why such a thing has NOT happened anywhere where gay folks can marry. But hey, why let reality interfere.
quote:
Originally posted by skymaster:

So, Dr. Hsieh had rather a Democrat win who believes in more controlling government, a reduction in individual rights, government controlled markets, a weaker national defense if one at all, and doing away with the individual right to keep and bear arms and freedom of speech.

Makes no sense. But I do agree the Republican party needs to get their act together.


This is what makes me so sad, and really gives me a bleak outlook for the future of our nation. "If you ain't fer us, yer agin' us!"

The author said he didn't vote Republican. That does NOT mean he voted Democrat. There ARE more than two choices. If more people voted their conscience and based on issues instead of image, maybe neither Obama nor McCain would be President-elect.

I can't remember who it was that said this, years ago, but I agreed then, and I agree now. "I would be a Republican if THEY would!" The fiscally-conservative, small-government party that they claim to be sounds good, but in practice, they are neither.
It irritates me when you try to use the NAMBLA group for your ammunition. They make up a very minor percentage of gays in America. I myself (and I'm gay) don't agree with them and I don't have any gay friends who do. As far as gays wanting the right to marry just to influence kids, that is a load of crap.
quote:
Originally posted by Fighting Illini:
quote:
Originally posted by JJPAUL:
''Where do people get their morals from? Not the government, but rather religion."

Morals begin at home.


Through parents, right. Morals aren't engrained into a home, they are passed down through lessons, most of them biblical. Why is that so hard to accept?


Speaking of acceptance, how hard is it for you to understand that the Bible is NOT the moral authority of everyone? Buddhists, Hindus, Atheists, Muslims, and many others instill morality into their children without any reference to the Bible at all. Or do you feel that only Christians can be moral?
quote:
And of course, only people who follow your religion can possibly be moral persons. Why is it so difficult for you to understand that not everyone agrees with you? Why do you feel the need to force others to follow your own personal moral code, especially when that person is someone you will never know? I just don't get that. Moral decisions are personal decisions.



Illogical,

I am not trying to force my religion on anyone. I am only trying to save the lives of children from murder.
quote:
Originally posted by Backwoods:
Can one person give me a real instance of how religion has been forced on them?


I think blue laws would definitely qualify.
quote:
Originally posted by Extra260:
Dolemite,
The gay marriage lobby is made up of these people. These are the activists in that group.

They want the sexual liberation of CHILDREN.


Sigh.

Willful ignorance is what you have. You obviously have had little to no real interaction with gay people. Such drivel is utterly untrue.

Are there gay people who target children? Yes, just as there are straight people who target children. The vast, vast majority of both groups are NOT that way, however.
quote:
That's simply nuts. Do you really think that straight people will suddenly stop getting married and having children simply because gay people could get married? Really? Uh, yeah, that's why such a thing has NOT happened anywhere where gay folks can marry. But hey, why let reality interfere



Logical,
Gay people can live together just like married people. In the 80's when i lived in Huntsville, in the apartment complex i lived in, there were three gay couples in the two buildings, eight units in each.

Now since gay people can live together just like anyone else, please pray tell me the rationale for them getting married.

Men and women get married to declare their allegiance to each other till death they do part, forsaking all others, then they begin building a life together, which includes in most cases the spawning of children and the establishment of a family environment.

The gay couple i saw in the 80's were neither dedicated to each other for life nor were they monogomous. As i have stated before, the average gay male by the near end of life has had 100's of different lovers. This does not fit the profile of marriage.

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×