I take offense at this. I am not a conservative in any way or form, but I do know that not a that is being conserved is without value and not all that is progressive is positive.
No, not really. Everything I have seen in the past decade or two I have either seen at an earlier time or have known about through reading history. There were several events that occurred in my younger days that I really thought we had learned from and would never let happen again. I was unfortunately wrong. We have this apparently instinctive habit of denying the truths and lessons of past experiences. And also of not appreciating the fact that what we are and what we do and how we think is conditioned by our past and the past of our forebears. The Church, like most institutions, is not immune to any of that.
Someone in another thread wondered why Americans are more "religious" than most other people, especially Europeans. One scholar (and perhaps more) who has studied this topic posited that the separation of church and state has greatly aided the growth of religion and faith in America, in essence encouraging it by not limiting or controlling it. It is an interesting phenomenon that the more religiously diverse our nation becomes the more some people want to remove or alter that constitutional protection.
But change that is cyclical, rather than progressive. I don't intend by that to imply that there has been no progress, but that some change is between two poles or extremes, moving back and forth. During my life I have witnessed amazing social progress and events that were not repeats of the past but actual positive change. But in some cases we seem to quickly forget what we have learned and the progress we have made, and repeat past mistakes or try to undo the good that has resulted from progressive change.
You seem to have, whether intentionally or not, provided confirmation of what I was saying in posts 44 and 47. I think it is very relevant, and many of the arguments we are having and the issues we are facing today are the result of what was done or not done, decided or not decided, decades and even centuries before us. Many people say that is not relevant, but any good historical review will show that it is.
Probably not. Remember that you're in a forum where posters are assumed to accept homosexuality, or at least are not supposed to attack that position.
That's what Liberals constantly tell them--agree with everything that the Liberals stand for or else you won't do well in the next election or you're a bigot or you aren't a good Christian or you will offend someone.
You make a valid point, but since the topic sentence here is a generalized one, "How to get through to Conservatives," a generalization about their opposite number--Liberals--is appropriate. Still, we all should be careful about accusing or characterizing individual people on the basis of such labels as these.
Partisanship in any form, including the I-word(Ideology) has the the potential to of changing otherwise highly intelligent and thoroughly well adjusted people into babbling idiots who spew mindless rants designed to placate the mental imagery that pops into their own heads when the opposition is discussed.
