west didsblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Oct 2011
- Messages
- 32,298
For someone who rails against identity politics you don’t half go on about “the left” a lot as if they are a homogeneous group.More ignorance.
You described it far better the last time you had a go.
There’s a desperation to equate evangelical Bible Belt right wingers in the US to British conservatives and British Christians and the reason being is to try and paint us in a particular light to win the argument.
It’s not “regressive” to want to hold off on progressing in all areas, regressing is the want to take us backwards and that’s not what the British conservative movement wants nor pushes for.
What you deem as progressive may be considered immoral by others, myself included and you don’t have a monopoly on objective morality, in fact nobody does really, when it comes to politics.
I would actually argue and you can see it in your posts, that social liberals have ironically become the most intolerant bunch of people in the country, who occupy a wide enough base, outside of the extreme fringes.
Let’s take what you’ve said specifically:
- Opposing homosexuality: this just isn’t true, there’s neither the call nor effort to do anything but to allow it in society and most social conservatives have enough libertarianism to suggest it’s no ones business. Now you’re not going to see me at pride but I have friends that are gay and I don’t have any problem with them and neither do social conservatives in Britain, generally speaking.
- Integration: this is actually the opposite of what’s true, every prominent social conservative out there wants to reduce immigration to ensure we can focus on a smaller number, to integrate people better.
- Multiculturalism: first one you’ve got right, I am totally against this in any society on the planet. You want to move to another country? Then you adopt their values and customs and integrate into their way of life. That’s true of people coming to the Far East here and it’s true of Brits on the Costa Del Sol.
- Secularism: again, totally false, religious freedom and atheist/agnostic freedom is prominent in social conservatism, it’s an ideology that pushes for freedom of thought, not the opposite. There are many social conservatives that are atheist and openly say it.
- Living out of wedlock/one parent families: there’s a bloody good reason for this, you’re far more likely to end up in a low income job or jobless and far more
likely to turn to crime, if one of your parents is not in your life. My parents got divorced when I was ten so I am not biased here, but a two parent household generally speaking, across all studies in the world, produces children more likely to become successful and abide by the law later in life. Only the modern left could argue against this point.