DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - When did "Conservatism" get replaced with "Christian Totalitarianism?"

**RsQhyZyR** · 01-24-2006, 03:40 PM

Since I personally know many "protesters" who not only respected soldiers (myself included) but were soldiers I can only say your perception of those years does not come close to mine. Drugs, of course, are a nonpartisan scourge and obviously you need to include alcohol (which even republicans and dixiecrats have alwayus liked) in that assessment.
Except for those two misrepresentations it sounds like you agree with me that the bible belt turned republican over race and abortion. You are correct though that I did not include government sponsored christianity in the equation. That is because at the time of the migration, the republican party did not stand for that. As I indicated in my previous post, that is a more recent development which, after years of bait and switch, has finally been delivered on by w.

I didn't know many protesters here in the South but my husband met a few. One was also introduced to my husband's fists after spitting on my husband. Thankfully though, the South has never been like the East and West Coasts, where the drugs of the sixties, "free love" and war protesters were most prominant.
Race and abortion were only part of the reason for the switch. You have to look at the overall picture.
Some people will always balk at a President who is religious. Remember how many people were worried about putting a Catholic in the White House? Now most folks believe that JFK was the best thing since sliced bread. Some didn't like Jimmy Carter because he was "too religious" when in the end, he was nothing more than a lame duck and religion didn't even come into play.

01-24-2006, 03:40 PM	#20
RsQhyZyR Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 432 Senior Member	Since I personally know many "protesters" who not only respected soldiers (myself included) but were soldiers I can only say your perception of those years does not come close to mine. Drugs, of course, are a nonpartisan scourge and obviously you need to include alcohol (which even republicans and dixiecrats have alwayus liked) in that assessment. Except for those two misrepresentations it sounds like you agree with me that the bible belt turned republican over race and abortion. You are correct though that I did not include government sponsored christianity in the equation. That is because at the time of the migration, the republican party did not stand for that. As I indicated in my previous post, that is a more recent development which, after years of bait and switch, has finally been delivered on by w. I didn't know many protesters here in the South but my husband met a few. One was also introduced to my husband's fists after spitting on my husband. Thankfully though, the South has never been like the East and West Coasts, where the drugs of the sixties, "free love" and war protesters were most prominant. Race and abortion were only part of the reason for the switch. You have to look at the overall picture. Some people will always balk at a President who is religious. Remember how many people were worried about putting a Catholic in the White House? Now most folks believe that JFK was the best thing since sliced bread. Some didn't like Jimmy Carter because he was "too religious" when in the end, he was nothing more than a lame duck and religion didn't even come into play.
	Quote