November 22, 2008
Social conservatism is far from dead
Obama embraced guns, fatherhood and marriage
Advertiser

AFTER two years of campaigning among the people, Democrat Barack Obama was elected president by just under 67 million votes to 58 million votes. Liberals are celebrating. Social conservatism is dead.

I say, long live social conservatism.

Obama did not campaign on a platform of gun control, gay marriage and breaking up families.

He spoke in favor of gun owners, in opposition to gay marriage, and for fathers to stop being missing in action.

Let us start with guns. Obama's running mate, Joe Biden, regularly receives an "F" from the National Rifle Association.

But on the campaign trail, Obama said: "I have no intention of taking away folks' guns."

He also said in June: "As president, I will uphold the constitutional rights of law-abiding gun-owners, hunters, and sportsmen. I know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne."

West Virginians did not buy it, but the point is, Obama did not run as Mr. Gun Control. The center has shifted to the right on that issue.

Then there is gay marriage. True, he opposed Proposition 8 in California, which defined marriage as between one man and one woman.

But his supporters backed it. Exit polls showed that 70 percent of black voters and nearly as high a percentage of Latinos supported Proposition 8, while a majority of white voters in California opposed it.

It passed.

Obama spoke of Proposition 8 on MTV just before the election: "I've stated my opposition to this. I think it is unnecessary.

"I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage.

"But when you start playing around with constitutions, just to prohibit somebody who cares about another person, it just seems to me that's not what America's about. Usually, our constitutions expand liberties, they don't contract them."

Then there is church. Obama made a big point about attending church regularly and even used the title of a sermon as the title for his memoir, "The Audacity of Hope."

Report a violation or offensive comment.
[X] Close
to report abuse.
Posted By: One Citizen (12:03am 11-28-2008)
Report Abuse


ORC, the two statements are not in conflict, but I will attempt to simplify it just for you:

DIVORCE rates, whether in red or blue states have NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with being a mother. FYI, women have been known to be mothers without ever having been married and they also may become mothers even after they've been divorced. So as shocking as it may seem, divorce rates are no indication of motherhood.

So now since I've answered you, it's your turn to come up with an answer. Because I don't believe your claim that the U.S. divorce rate among urbanites is 60% higher then rural areas.

Since you cited an "Oxford University in a study published in the Oxford Journal" I'd like to see where you got the idea that "it was a study that included both Europe and the United States and listed the data separately."

It should be simple for you to post a link PROVING your claim, as what you've cited directly conflicts research data compiled by the 2006 US Health and Human Resources, dude

Posted By: One Real Citizen (7:08pm 11-27-2008)
Report Abuse


It was a study that included both Europoe and the United States and listed the data separately. I'd post it but I'm not paying the money to register.

At any rate, OC, you never addressed WHY you said two different things. First, you said the divorce rate was higher in red states and then when I proved that urban areas, in spite of having a higer single motherhood rate, still have a higher divorce rate, you changed your tune and said the divorce rates were about the same in urban vs. rural areas.

So which is it dude, higher in red states or about the same? Or do you even know.

I think you're making up crap as you go along and posting DNC talking points and you really don't know.

I remember you from the old forum. That would seem about par the course for you.

Posted By: One Citizen (12:00am 11-27-2008)
Report Abuse


ORC, first of all, the way you admitted you misrepresented the facts is quite unique in that the Oxford Journal report to which you've alluded apparently refers to studies of European divorce rates and not "red" states or "blue" in the US. ROFLOL

Secondly, please note that the study which I referenced indicates that single UNWED mothers tend to migrate to urban areas as "rural mothers do tend to be far poorer and have fewer resources to rely on than their urban counterparts".

Finally, last time I checked, there are actually single mothers who have never gotten married! Which makes it a whole lot tougher for them to get a divorce and get child support. So the theory advanced by the authors of The Plight of Rural Child Welfare: Meeting Standards Without Services is that UNWED mothers tend to move to urban areas where they'll fare better, skewing data otherwise indicating that more rural mothers never got married!

In other words single DIVORCED mothers have more reasons to stay put!

Posted By: Red Dragon 70 (9:45am 11-26-2008)
Report Abuse


hdt, thanks for the response!!

Advertisement - Your ad here
Advertisement - Your ad here
PRECISION TUNE
Precision Tune Auto Care is the fast, convenient and affordable solution to all of your car repai...
Advertisement - Your ad here