Changes

:::::::::And what you do is, you lump everybody together in the last group, even though it is really just a minority of those who oppose Bush's foreign policy. Just like it was just a minority of those who opposed Clinton Defense of Marriage act, who opposed marriage. [[User:Order]] 27 March 13:45 (AEST)  

:::::::::And what you do is, you lump everybody together in the last group, even though it is really just a minority of those who oppose Bush's foreign policy. Just like it was just a minority of those who opposed Clinton Defense of Marriage act, who opposed marriage. [[User:Order]] 27 March 13:45 (AEST)  

::::::::::OK, so they don't believe the government is sincere.  Big deal.  Nonetheless, that puts them in opposition to the governments declared policy.  Secondly, they are just a random collection of private citizens--without any Constitutional authority whatsoever (other than thier individual First Amendment rights) to publicly express thier opposition to the governments stated policy of fostering and democracy and human rights abraod.  Third, the government has a track record now of (a)removing a fascist regime and (b) securing universal suffarage and a assisting democratically elected regime to power.  By contrast, our "liberal" friends have a track of (a) arguing for the survival of fascism and (b) actively seeking to undermine a liberal democracy that is also an ally.

::::::::::OK, so they don't believe the government is sincere.  Big deal.  Nonetheless, that puts them in opposition to the governments declared policy.  Secondly, they are just a random collection of private citizens--without any Constitutional authority whatsoever (other than thier individual First Amendment rights) to pulbicly express thier opposition to the governments stated policy of fostering and democracy and human rights abraod.  Third, the government has a track record now of (a)removing a fascist regime and (b) securing universal suffarage and a assisting democratically elected regime to power.  By contrast, our "liberal" friends have a track of (a) arguing for the survival of fascism and (b) actively seeking to undermine a liberal democracy that is also an ally.

::::::::::The Defense of Marriage Act is not really a very good analogy, primarily because there is a difference between law and policy.  And Bill Clinton isn't a dictator, the President has no legislative authority.

::::::::::The Defense of Marriage Act is not really a very good analogy, primarily because there is a difference between law and policy.  And Bill Clinton isn't a dictator, the President has no legislative authority.

::::::::::Believe it or not, there is a strong parallel between this discussion and the one about homosexuals in the Nazi party.  In both instances, early on extreme elements (here it was ANSWER and other radicals, there it was gay stormtroopers) who advocated a position that was outside the mainstream.  Over time, moderate elements adopted thier radical views and gave it legitimacy, so that it did not seem radical, extreme and fringe anymore.  Once it became a majority, and had the reigns of power, then these anti-democratic and anti-human rights positions can be implemented, and they don't seem so radical now that so "centrists" or respectable people embrace these ideas, thus upsetting the long held public policy positions that advocate basic fairness for all people.

::::::::::Believe it or not, there is a strong parallel between this discussion and the one about homosexuals in the Nazi party.  In both instances, early on extreme elements (here it was ANSWER and other radicals, there it was gay stormtroopers) who advocated a position that was outside the mainstream.  Over time, moderate elements adopted thier radical views and gave it legitimacy, so that it did not seem radical, extreme and fringe anymore.  Once it became a majority, and had the reigns of power, then these anti-democratic and anti-human rights positions can be implemented, and they don't seem so radical now that so-called "centrists" or respectable people embrace these ideas, thus upsetting the long held public policy positions that advocate basic fairness for all people.

::::::::::Your arguement is little more than Bush, et al are bad guys and suffer from bad polling numbers.  So what.  It's just your opinion, and I can;t find the words "opinion polls" anywhere in the US Constitution.  But in the final analysis, we see so-called "liberals" no longer advocate human rights and democracy, and if anything, they, and now thier "middle class" allies, have become more strident, stringent, and hostile to those long held goals of US foreign policy.  [[User:RobS|RobS]] 00:32, 27 March 2007 (EDT)

::::::::::Your arguement is little more than Bush ''et al'' are bad guys and suffer from bad polling numbers.  So what.  It's just your opinion, and I can't find the words "opinion polls" anywhere in the US Constitution.  But in the final analysis, we see so-called "liberals" no longer advocate human rights and democracy, and if anything, they, and now their "middle class" allies, have become more strident, stringent, and hostile to those long held goals of US foreign policy.  [[User:RobS|RobS]] 00:32, 27 March 2007 (EDT)