Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 12
Send Topic Print
What is a Conservative? (Read 10824 times)
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91866
Gender: male
Re: What is a Conservative?
Reply #30 - Feb 18th, 2018 at 1:38pm
 
Auggie wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 11:29am:
Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 17th, 2018 at 3:32pm:
But by the same token, when a critical mass happens, change is inevitable. Gay marriage was one such issue. It was pointless preserving some outdated ideal of marriage, which serves no social purpose in the developed world anymore.


Regarding same-sex marriage, don't you think that society has an interest in recognising the importance of a mother-father family structure over a father-father or mother-mother one? Shouldn't we be prioritizing the family over the individual?

Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 17th, 2018 at 3:32pm:
When the tree changes, you need to go with it. This is conservative too.


But, isn't conservatism also about trying to preserve the best type of society? Even if it means going back to the status quo ante?



Yes, but would you endure bad kings to preserve a monarchy?

Take Egypt - should they have avoided a military coup to keep a useless and unpopular constitutionally elected president? Take America - should they keep giving Trump chances?

On gay marriage, it doesn't threaten mother-father families. With the exception of royal bloodlines, when has the role of the state been to preserve any sort of family at all?

Conservatism isn't about promoting values from the pulpit, it's about cultivating an enduring model of government - a stronger one that doesn't tinker with fads and trivialities.

Homosexuality has become so powerful that gay marriage naysayers were being seen as faddish and trivial - and hysterical. The French aristocracy couldn't get past this, nor could the Romanovs. The paradigm shift had already happened.

When it comes to this tipping point, the system itself has effectively changed without a law being written.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Auggie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571
Re: What is a Conservative?
Reply #31 - Feb 18th, 2018 at 1:52pm
 
Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 1:38pm:
Auggie wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 11:29am:
Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 17th, 2018 at 3:32pm:
But by the same token, when a critical mass happens, change is inevitable. Gay marriage was one such issue. It was pointless preserving some outdated ideal of marriage, which serves no social purpose in the developed world anymore.


Regarding same-sex marriage, don't you think that society has an interest in recognising the importance of a mother-father family structure over a father-father or mother-mother one? Shouldn't we be prioritizing the family over the individual?

Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 17th, 2018 at 3:32pm:
When the tree changes, you need to go with it. This is conservative too.


But, isn't conservatism also about trying to preserve the best type of society? Even if it means going back to the status quo ante?



Yes, but would you endure bad kings to preserve a monarchy?

Take Egypt - should they have avoided a military coup to keep a useless and unpopular constitutionally elected president? Take America - should they keep giving Trump chances?

On gay marriage, it doesn't threaten mother-father families. With the exception of royal bloodlines, when has the role of the state been to preserve any sort of family at all?

Conservatism isn't about promoting values from the pulpit, it's about cultivating an enduring model of government - a stronger one that doesn't tinker with fads and trivialities.

Well, to a certain extent it is. Conservatives value tradition and order. It's also about values.


Homosexuality has become so powerful that gay marriage naysayers were being seen as faddish and trivial - and hysterical. The French aristocracy couldn't get past this, nor could the Romanovs. The paradigm shift had already happened.

No one is saying that homosexuality is wrong or is inherently bad. The question is whether the state should recognize homosexual relationships on equal terms to heterosexual relationships. The latter is more conducive to the nurturing of the child; it is also a union between the two sexes of the human race, promoting harmony between the two. Shouldn't we recognize the uniqueness of this bond between the two sexes and prioritize over other relationships?

Also, why not legally recognize plural marriages?


When it comes to this tipping point, the system itself has effectively changed without a law being written.

Back to top
 

The Progressive President
 
IP Logged
 
Mr Hammer
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 25212
Gender: male
Re: What is a Conservative?
Reply #32 - Feb 18th, 2018 at 1:52pm
 
Both sides of government, their respective media apparatchiks and many big corporations threw their weight behind SSM. Still, the 'yes' vote only comprised 49% of all eligible voters. Should that constitute a natural, evolutionary, tipping point?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Auggie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571
Re: What is a Conservative?
Reply #33 - Feb 18th, 2018 at 1:55pm
 
Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 1:38pm:
Auggie wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 11:29am:
Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 17th, 2018 at 3:32pm:
But by the same token, when a critical mass happens, change is inevitable. Gay marriage was one such issue. It was pointless preserving some outdated ideal of marriage, which serves no social purpose in the developed world anymore.


Regarding same-sex marriage, don't you think that society has an interest in recognising the importance of a mother-father family structure over a father-father or mother-mother one? Shouldn't we be prioritizing the family over the individual?

Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 17th, 2018 at 3:32pm:
When the tree changes, you need to go with it. This is conservative too.


But, isn't conservatism also about trying to preserve the best type of society? Even if it means going back to the status quo ante?



Yes, but would you endure bad kings to preserve a monarchy?

I would say that the conservative position is: if it's bad, then it's need to change. In the case of our monarchy, it isn't bad and produced good results, so there's not reason to change it.


Take Egypt - should they have avoided a military coup to keep a useless and unpopular constitutionally elected president? Take America - should they keep giving Trump chances?

That is a question for an American conservative to answer. They will need to look at their institutions and traditions and make that determination. From my perspective, it comes down to whether or not the existing institutions are good.


On gay marriage, it doesn't threaten mother-father families. With the exception of royal bloodlines, when has the role of the state been to preserve any sort of family at all?

It doesn't threaten mother-father families; I think it shows that society is prioritizing the individual over the family. We can all agree that the family is basic unit of society. Should we become even more post-family than what we already are?


Conservatism isn't about promoting values from the pulpit, it's about cultivating an enduring model of government - a stronger one that doesn't tinker with fads and trivialities.

Homosexuality has become so powerful that gay marriage naysayers were being seen as faddish and trivial - and hysterical. The French aristocracy couldn't get past this, nor could the Romanovs. The paradigm shift had already happened.

When it comes to this tipping point, the system itself has effectively changed without a law being written.

Back to top
 

The Progressive President
 
IP Logged
 
Grappler Truth Teller Feller
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 79578
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male
Re: What is a Conservative?
Reply #34 - Feb 18th, 2018 at 2:04pm
 
Auggie wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 12:24pm:
Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 12:10pm:
Auggie wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 12:09pm:
Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 12:07pm:
Auggie wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 12:02pm:
Gordon wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 11:39am:
Auggie wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 11:35am:
Here's a question:

Should the conservatives in Australia fight to repeal same-sex marriage?


I think true conservatives should first and foremost value freedom of choice, so no.


Should freedom of choice override the structure of the natural family?


No - it may co-exist in harmony, but those who choose to hold the structure of the natural family should in no way be interfered with.  Now that reasoning extends, from that point, to the current easy destruction of the formalised family unit, into separate segments that still perform the same duties.  Mother still remains mother, father still provides etc... nothing changes but the actual structure.... the dream of women - to be independent and run around all they like and still garner the benefits of marriage without all of the responsibilities.


Ok, so would you support a repeal to same-sex marriage notwithstanding that the majority were in favour of it?


Read my addition below - until a binding vote is taken, there is no solution to the issue.... ergo - SSM remains in limbo and may be repealed at any time.




Ok, but if a binding vote took place, would you support same-sex marriage or would you still support its repeal notwithstanding the binding vote?


A good question - even if it were a binding vote, I personally do not believe it is marriage as such to create artificial combinations of up to 126 (63 x 2) artificially created 'genders', when there are only two.

Therefore - as I've pointed out before, and in keeping with the ages long approach of the Catholic Church (of which I am not part, nor of any other), I would tolerate it, while still not beleiving it to be a valid marriage. 

They should have gone with 'separate but equal' and had civil unions with the same rights.
Back to top
 

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams
 
IP Logged
 
Mr Hammer
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 25212
Gender: male
Re: What is a Conservative?
Reply #35 - Feb 18th, 2018 at 2:09pm
 
I'm not a Catholic. I do consider myself a Liberal Democrat, however, and as such, I, um, sort of agree with Graps. There, I said it!
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Grappler Truth Teller Feller
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 79578
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male
Re: What is a Conservative?
Reply #36 - Feb 18th, 2018 at 2:44pm
 
Mr Hammer wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 2:09pm:
I'm not a Catholic. I do consider myself a Liberal Democrat, however, and as such, I, um, sort of agree with Graps. There, I said it!


I sort of agree with me, too, but I remain a little conflicted over my humanitarian and egalitarian side, as opposed to the closet dictator within us all.....
Back to top
 

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams
 
IP Logged
 
Auggie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571
Re: What is a Conservative?
Reply #37 - Feb 18th, 2018 at 6:03pm
 
So, would it be conservative to repeal SSM or reactionary?
Back to top
« Last Edit: Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:39pm by Auggie »  

The Progressive President
 
IP Logged
 
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91866
Gender: male
Re: What is a Conservative?
Reply #38 - Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:00pm
 
Auggie wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 6:03pm:
So, would be conservative to repeal SSM or reactionary?


You're missing the point. SSM means nothing because of previous laws, such as no-fault divorce, the sole-parenting payment, de-facto marriage, equal rights for gay partnerships.

The gay marriage thing was all about symbolism. It meant nothing, just as it would mean nothing today if we changed our head of state's title to president.

Abbott learned from one referendum to bring on his stalling plebiscite tactic. It worked for Howard, it didn't for Abbott.

Neither of them mean anything structurally.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Auggie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571
Re: What is a Conservative?
Reply #39 - Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:24pm
 
Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:00pm:
Auggie wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 6:03pm:
So, would be conservative to repeal SSM or reactionary?


You're missing the point. SSM means nothing because of previous laws, such as no-fault divorce, the sole-parenting payment, de-facto marriage, equal rights for gay partnerships.

The gay marriage thing was all about symbolism. It meant nothing, just as it would mean nothing today if we changed our head of state's title to president.

Abbott learned from one referendum to bring on his stalling plebiscite tactic. It worked for Howard, it didn't for Abbott.

Neither of them mean anything structurally.


So, if it doesn't mean anything, then why not repeal it?

So, essentially what you're saying is that we already live in a post-family society, and if we really wanted to preserve marriage, then we'd have to repeal no-fault divorce, jail husbands for abandoning their family, etc.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:38pm by Auggie »  

The Progressive President
 
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 39948
Gender: male
Re: What is a Conservative?
Reply #40 - Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:35pm
 
Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:00pm:
Auggie wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 6:03pm:
So, would be conservative to repeal SSM or reactionary?


You're missing the point. SSM means nothing because of previous laws, such as no-fault divorce, the sole-parenting payment, de-facto marriage, equal rights for gay partnerships.

The gay marriage thing was all about symbolism. It meant nothing, just as it would mean nothing today if we changed our head of state's title to president.

Abbott learned from one referendum to bring on his stalling plebiscite tactic. It worked for Howard, it didn't for Abbott.

Neither of them mean anything structurally.

Whitlam wept.

Why agitate so strongly for something so meaningless? The leftly commissars in labor, greens, socialist presented ssm as essential for equality.

Now its meanigless.

You bastards are lying every time you utter.

Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91866
Gender: male
Re: What is a Conservative?
Reply #41 - Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:37pm
 
Frank wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:35pm:
Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:00pm:
Auggie wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 6:03pm:
So, would be conservative to repeal SSM or reactionary?


You're missing the point. SSM means nothing because of previous laws, such as no-fault divorce, the sole-parenting payment, de-facto marriage, equal rights for gay partnerships.

The gay marriage thing was all about symbolism. It meant nothing, just as it would mean nothing today if we changed our head of state's title to president.

Abbott learned from one referendum to bring on his stalling plebiscite tactic. It worked for Howard, it didn't for Abbott.

Neither of them mean anything structurally.

Whitlam wept.

Why agitate so strongly for something so meaningless? The leftly commissars in labor, greens, socialist presented ssm as essential for equality.

Now its meanigless.

You bastards are lying every time you utter.



I told you it was meaningless, I never agitated for it. You know that, you were privy to the meaninglessness of it all, weren't you?

And if you don't mind my saying, dear boy, you still are.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91866
Gender: male
Re: What is a Conservative?
Reply #42 - Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:41pm
 
Auggie wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:24pm:
Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:00pm:
Auggie wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 6:03pm:
So, would be conservative to repeal SSM or reactionary?


You're missing the point. SSM means nothing because of previous laws, such as no-fault divorce, the sole-parenting payment, de-facto marriage, equal rights for gay partnerships.

The gay marriage thing was all about symbolism. It meant nothing, just as it would mean nothing today if we changed our head of state's title to president.

Abbott learned from one referendum to bring on his stalling plebiscite tactic. It worked for Howard, it didn't for Abbott.

Neither of them mean anything structurally.


So, if it doesn't mean anything, then why not repeal it?

So, essentially what you're saying is that we already live in a post-family society, and if we really wanted to preserve marriage, then we'd have to repeal no-fault divorce, jail husbands for abandoning their family, etc.


The fact that you can repeal it is hardly a conservative issue. Burkean conservatism is predominantly constitutional.

If the marriage act, prior to Howard repealing it, was so enduring, then how could it be repealed at all?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Auggie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571
Re: What is a Conservative?
Reply #43 - Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:43pm
 
Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:41pm:
Auggie wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:24pm:
Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:00pm:
Auggie wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 6:03pm:
So, would be conservative to repeal SSM or reactionary?


You're missing the point. SSM means nothing because of previous laws, such as no-fault divorce, the sole-parenting payment, de-facto marriage, equal rights for gay partnerships.

The gay marriage thing was all about symbolism. It meant nothing, just as it would mean nothing today if we changed our head of state's title to president.

Abbott learned from one referendum to bring on his stalling plebiscite tactic. It worked for Howard, it didn't for Abbott.

Neither of them mean anything structurally.


So, if it doesn't mean anything, then why not repeal it?

So, essentially what you're saying is that we already live in a post-family society, and if we really wanted to preserve marriage, then we'd have to repeal no-fault divorce, jail husbands for abandoning their family, etc.


The fact that you can repeal it is hardly a conservative issue. Burkean conservatism is predominantly constitutional.

If the marriage act, prior to Howard repealing it, was so enduring, then how could it be repealed at all?


I'm not sure what you mean by being able to repeal it is hardly a conservative issue???

Howard didn't repeal the Marriage Act; he had amended it to make clear what had been practised at that time. As far as I'm aware, we never had same-sex marriages before such amendment??
Back to top
 

The Progressive President
 
IP Logged
 
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91866
Gender: male
Re: What is a Conservative?
Reply #44 - Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:57pm
 
Auggie wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:43pm:
Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:41pm:
Auggie wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:24pm:
Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 9:00pm:
Auggie wrote on Feb 18th, 2018 at 6:03pm:
So, would be conservative to repeal SSM or reactionary?


You're missing the point. SSM means nothing because of previous laws, such as no-fault divorce, the sole-parenting payment, de-facto marriage, equal rights for gay partnerships.

The gay marriage thing was all about symbolism. It meant nothing, just as it would mean nothing today if we changed our head of state's title to president.

Abbott learned from one referendum to bring on his stalling plebiscite tactic. It worked for Howard, it didn't for Abbott.

Neither of them mean anything structurally.


So, if it doesn't mean anything, then why not repeal it?

So, essentially what you're saying is that we already live in a post-family society, and if we really wanted to preserve marriage, then we'd have to repeal no-fault divorce, jail husbands for abandoning their family, etc.


The fact that you can repeal it is hardly a conservative issue. Burkean conservatism is predominantly constitutional.

If the marriage act, prior to Howard repealing it, was so enduring, then how could it be repealed at all?


I'm not sure what you mean by being able to repeal it is hardly a conservative issue???

Howard didn't repeal the Marriage Act; he had amended it to make clear what had been practised at that time. As far as I'm aware, we never had same-sex marriages before such amendment??


No, it was left to the states, who run births, death and marriage under the constitution.

The ACT had just changed its marriage act, which Howard gazzumped with his federal law.

State's rights, you see - a conservative stalwart in our country. Cunning, no?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 12
Send Topic Print