Oxymoron: Fiscally conservative, but socially moderate

[Matthanuf06]

Me too, except that I'm a Christian. I support ending the war on drugs, but I'm opposed to gay marriage. I guess that perhaps makes me a "social moderate" as well.

A true libertarian is opposed to "marriage" as a government issue period. Two (or three, or 10) individuals should be able to enter into any contract they please as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of others. The gov shouldn't care what the "terms" or who the "parties" are.

 

[scottstew]

A true libertarian is opposed to "marriage" as a government issue period. Two (or three, or 10) individuals should be able to enter into any contract they please as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of others. The gov shouldn't care what the "terms" or who the "parties" are.

Agreed. This is an example of privately believing one thing (gay marriage is wrong) while publicly stating something different (who am I to tell others who they can and cannot marry?).

 

[Brett85]

A true libertarian is opposed to "marriage" as a government issue period. Two (or three, or 10) individuals should be able to enter into any contract they please as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of others. The gov shouldn't care what the "terms" or who the "parties" are.

That's why I'm more of a libertarian-leaning conservative than a down the line libertarian. I have too many disagreements with libertarians on issues like immigration, marriage, and abortion to be able to call myself one. But I still agree with Ron Paul on enough issues to be able to support him.

 

[TruthAtLast]

To me socially moderate or socially liberal means you don't want the fed involved in others private lives. Like gay marriage or drug use. Entitlement programs are a fiscal issue for me.

i feel the same way. I am fiscally conservative but I guess I'm socially moderate. I'm not religious and don't really care about those issues. Too often the Republican party gets clouded by social (religious) issues when many people just want the Government to live within its means, uphold the Constitution, and get out of peoples' lives. Allow people to do what they want as long as they don't hurt others or infringe on their rights.

 

[LibertyEagle]

That's why I'm more of a libertarian-leaning conservative than a down the line libertarian. I have too many disagreements with libertarians on issues like immigration, marriage, and abortion to be able to call myself one. But I still agree with Ron Paul on enough issues to be able to support him.

You say that like all libertarians agree with each other on all these issues and they most assuredly do not.

 

[LibertyEagle]

i feel the same way. I am fiscally conservative but I guess I'm socially moderate. I'm not religious and don't really care about those issues. Too often the Republican party gets clouded by social (religious) issues when many people just want the Government to live within its means, uphold the Constitution, and get out of peoples' lives. Allow people to do what they want as long as they don't hurt others or infringe on their rights.

That used to be what conservatism was really all about. My, how it has changed.

 

[xFiFtyOnE]

To me socially moderate or socially liberal means you don't want the fed involved in others private lives. Like gay marriage or drug use. Entitlement programs are a fiscal issue for me.

Same with me. Being socially moderate or liberal doesn't have anything to do with welfare or entitlements. It is in opposition to the authoritarian aspects of social conservativism. The government should have no roll in telling you how to live your life morally or socially as long as you are not harming others.

 

[sirachman]

removed

 

[angelatc]

I'm "moderate" on drug laws and civil rights issues like the Patriot Act, NDAA, I'm also not a Christian - but then I guess I get conservative on things like affirmative action, abortion, gay marriage, although on abortion I think it's been grossly miscategorized as a "women's rights issue", I don't give a flyin you-know-what about what a woman does with her body, the babies rights are where I stand, so not sure how I'd be classified.

But I've also seen the self-described social-moderates include support funding for entitlements. So I agree with the OP.

 

[BKom]

Me too, except that I'm a Christian. I support ending the war on drugs, but I'm opposed to gay marriage. I guess that perhaps makes me a "social moderate" as well.

No, it makes you a drug legalizing conservative. It puts you firmly in the camp of regulating people's private lives.

What is it about marriage that makes it the purview of the government? Is it not a private contract between two individuals?

I can understand why people would be against abortion. But gay marriage neither breaks my leg nor picks my pocket. It also does neither to you.

 

[AhuwaleKaNaneHuna]

I understand how one can be a fiscally conservative and socially liberal. The later can just mean you support liberty for all at their own expense. The prior can mean that government should be small and not be spending money on anything other then defence.



All social program spending, entitlements, nation building, earmarks and subsidies fall under the header of being fiscally liberal...........spend, spend, spend as if money comes freeeee wheeeeeeeeeeee

 

[angelatc]

Allowing abortion and gay marriage doesn't cost the taxpayer money. Having those views however can lead people to label themselves socially moderate.

Abortion specifically can be used as a talking point to allow entitlements, such as food stamps and WIC, because those programs allegedly discourage abortion.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

After reading above posts, I return to my original post and stand by it.

Voters today have multiple interpretations of socially moderate and most of them are about spending other people's money. Period.

Those who change common definitions of terms will no doubt find themselves frustrated.

What is a "fiscal moderate"? How about a "fiscal liberal"? Those may be more accurate terms for people who believe in more government spending.

 

[DerailingDaTrain]

This is my understanding as well.

Yeah, I thought that's what it meant too.

 

[Brett85]

No, it makes you a drug legalizing conservative. It puts you firmly in the camp of regulating people's private lives.

What is it about marriage that makes it the purview of the government? Is it not a private contract between two individuals?

I can understand why people would be against abortion. But gay marriage neither breaks my leg nor picks my pocket. It also does neither to you.

I still believe that my views are consistent. I don't want to throw people in jail for engaging in activities like homosexuality, drug use, or prostitution. I don't believe that homosexuality should be criminalized in any way, which in my mind makes my position on that issue no different than my position on issues like drug use or prostitution.

 

[Butchie]

Me too, except that I'm a Christian. I support ending the war on drugs, but I'm opposed to gay marriage. I guess that perhaps makes me a "social moderate" as well.

Yeah, we'd prob be in the same boat then, I have nothing against Christianity BTW, just alot of people get baffled when they see I am against abortion/gay marriage and the it's like "you must be a Christian", as if only Christians can hold those views for some reason.

No, it makes you a drug legalizing conservative. It puts you firmly in the camp of regulating people's private lives.

What is it about marriage that makes it the purview of the government? Is it not a private contract between two individuals?

I can understand why people would be against abortion. But gay marriage neither breaks my leg nor picks my pocket. It also does neither to you.

I guess I should have been clear then, ofcourse my first view is govt should not be involved in marriage at all, but if the gay movement is going to force it in the public square, I'll come right out and say it, I think marriage is a man/woman thing, if that makes me a bigot or what have you, so be it.

 

[Carole]

I understand how one can be a fiscally conservative and socially liberal. The later can just mean you support liberty for all at their own expense. The prior can mean that government should be small and not be spending money on anything other then defence.



All social program spending, entitlements, nation building, earmarks and subsidies fall under the header of being fiscally liberal...........spend, spend, spend as if money comes freeeee wheeeeeeeeeeee

Exactly my point! Today's voters (in general) say they are socially moderate when they are actually socially liberal and love to spend the people's money on social entitlements of any and all types. They call themselves social moderates, but they are really socially liberal. Their idea of moderate is more spending of the people's money. I am simply saying that voters who claim to be socially moderate are not socially moderate; they are spenderthrifts who have no basis in reality for their desire to spend money socially from Washington.

It is a matter of incorrect semantics and thus becomes an oxymoron. One cannot be fiscally conservative and socially moderate (liberal, to most voters) and expect the country to survive it.

 

[DerailingDaTrain]

Exactly my point! Today's voters (in general) say they are socially moderate when they are actually socially liberal and love to spend the people's money on social entitlements of any and all types. They call themselves social moderates, but they are really socially liberal. Their idea of moderate is more spending of the people's money. I am simply saying that voters who claim to be socially moderate are not socially moderate; they are spenderthrifts who have no basis in reality for their desire to spend money socially from Washington.

It is a matter of incorrect semantics and thus becomes an oxymoron. One cannot be fiscally conservative and socially moderate (liberal, to most voters) and expect the country to survive it.

Are you confused? Being a social moderate or a social liberal has nothing to do with how you feel about spending.

 

[Liberty74]

I think a point needs to be made because people are still confused.

Santorum is a social conservative privately. If he wants to force such on others via laws, he then becomes a conservative fascist.

The opposite holds true of the Left. Obama might be a social liberal privately like myself, but if he wants to force his views on others like the recent birth control issue, he becomes a liberal fascist. I am a social liberal because I believe in the choice of using birth control but I cannot be called a fascist because I don't want to force my views on others.

Make sense?

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Oxymoron: Fiscally conservative, but socially moderate

I am so tired and frustrated by those who say they are fiscally conservative, but socially moderate.

Briefly, one cannot be fiscally conservative and still be fine with spending other people's money on ever more social programs that are "well-intended" yet morally bankrupt.

Theft is theft regardless of the nice names it is given in social programs.

Totally frustrated by so-called "do-gooders" in politics.

End of rant.

That's not what an oxymoron is. That would be like 'liberal conservative'.