Today, which party do you see as the party of family values.

[The Mark]

Simple choice, which party do you think is more the party of family values.

I think we need a definition for family values.

Because when I hear that phrase, it brings to mind the biased and in my opinion wrong definition held up on a pedestal of lies by fundamentalist Christians and conservatives, mainly republicans.

Edit: In my opinion we should be looking at policies and decisions that benefit people, not families specifically, and especially not families over people.
Especially since we have plenty of cases where for one reason or another, a person will be part of a broken, dysfunctional, or nonexistent family, instead of one that fits the "family values" norm. But that situation shouldn't mean the person in question is worth any less to society as a result.

 

[reinaert]

Good question. I'm going to say God.

Who do you think designed it?

No design. It's an emergent custom.

But, if you believe it has a designer, and you think that the design merits the protection of Leviathan, you must produce the designer in person, or your demand is tantamount to theocracy.

 

[donhughesmusic]

Neither

 

[post]

You mean my demonstrated love for the enjoyment of marriage in the traditional sense.

Gay marriage is not about freedom. It's about destroying the tradition of marriage.

Get it right.

Only five posts mentioning CRT in DP forum threads since September 29, an indication that "problem" is solved, or that it did not actually exist in the first place?

If you evaluate every reason to vote for G.O.P. candidates for any reason other than it is cheaper for the wealthiest G.O.P. donors to finance their campaigns as well as an atmosphere of distraction from issues that actually matter to the majority of households, than to pay taxes that might reflect the unprecedented concentration of their wealth, resulting in arresting national debt growth, there actually aren't any unless you're one of the wealthiest G.O.P. donors or a church pastor embracing christian nationalism.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

I think we need a definition for family values.

Because when I hear that phrase, it brings to mind the biased and in my opinion wrong definition held up on a pedestal of lies by fundamentalist Christians and conservatives, mainly republicans.

Edit: In my opinion we should be looking at policies and decisions that benefit people, not families specifically, and especially not families over people.
Especially since we have plenty of cases where for one reason or another, a person will be part of a broken, dysfunctional, or nonexistent family, instead of one that fits the "family values" norm. But that situation shouldn't mean the person in question is worth any less to society as a result.

If you look at the version of family values promoted by evangelical Christians, the GOP fails that one miserably. As I pointed out earlier in the thread, they have a Senate Candidate in Georgia right now, fully supported by the party and it's voting base, that has a history of domestic violence against women and children, a deadbeat dad, and has paid for an abortion, yet the vast majority of Georgia Republicans will almost certainly vote for him. A few years ago, the GOP ran a literal pedophile in Alabama, and he barely lost because he still had a majority of Republicans voting for him. In Florida, Republican Matt Gaetz is under federal investigation for underage sex trafficking, and will win a landslide just the same. The last Republican president was married 3 times, a serial adulterer, bragged about sexual assault, paid off pornstars, and sexualized his own daughter on television, yet had the vast majority of Republican voting just the same.

If you use the traditional Christian message of family values, today's Republican Party fails miserably, its not even close. When is the last time the Democrats ran a domestic abuser and deadbeat dad that had full support of the party and its voting base?

 

[Lisa]

I am surprised the left has not called for a ban on the word "family".

Because some huckster has you convinced that we don't have families.......................?

Family Values was a good tour in 2001, but when a politician uses the term, it's usually bullshit.

The GOP's use of "family values" is a euphemism for legislating white protestant conservative Christian beliefs as secular law. AKA Christian sharia.

 

[Doppelgangirl]

Simple choice, which party do you think is more the party of family values.

Neither.
No option to vote for that

 

[The Mark]

If you look at the version of family values promoted by evangelical Christians, the GOP fails that one miserably. As I pointed out earlier in the thread, they have a Senate Candidate in Georgia right now, fully supported by the party and it's voting base, that has a history of domestic violence against women and children, a deadbeat dad, and has paid for an abortion, yet the vast majority of Georgia Republicans will almost certainly vote for him. A few years ago, the GOP ran a literal pedophile in Alabama, and he barely lost because he still had a majority of Republicans voting for him. In Florida, Republican Matt Gaetz is under federal investigation for underage sex trafficking, and will win a landslide just the same. The last Republican president was married 3 times, a serial adulterer, bragged about sexual assault, paid off pornstars, and sexualized his own daughter on television, yet had the vast majority of Republican voting just the same.

If you use the traditional Christian message of family values, today's Republican Party fails miserably, its not even close. When is the last time the Democrats ran a domestic abuser and deadbeat dad that had full support of the party and its voting base?

I guess the question I have is...

Why are we letting them define the argument?

 

[Lafayette]

THE US MUST SUBSIDIZE MUCH LOWER COST POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

Dems naturally

You would not know "socialism" if it bit you on the arse.

Which is typical of most Yanks who have no education in the matter. Go back to school, open a book and get informed.

Socialism per se exists no where in the world except in bits and pieces. Two of those bits and pieces are perfectly obvious nowadays because they've been working for decades:
*The first is National Healthcare that allows me, a Yank, who lives in France a lifespan of four years longer than yours in the US.
*Post-secondary education to obtain a higher-degree diploma thus allowing you a better payscale-employment costs me (for my kids here in France) an average of 1500€ (about the same as the dollar) a year whereas the average cost for the US is around $25K.

If America wants to better the job-outlook for the nation as a whole, it better get its Collective-Ass in gear and make that possibility come alive by subsidizing post-secondary education in the US!

Wakey, wakey! Apparently most Americans are uninformed of all the lower-status jobs that fled the US for Middle- and South America (and mostly China!). Those mostly manufacturing jobs no longer exist to any credible amount any more. They are gonzo ... !!!

 

[Queen Margo]

Because some huckster has you convinced that we don't have families.......................?

I have no idea what you are talking about?

 

[reinaert]

What families, whose values?

 

[Ren]

No it doesn't. I've been happily married for 51 years in a heterosexual marriage. Homosexuals finally getting the 'legal' right to marry hasn't affected my marriage at all. If any one who is in a heterosexual marriage has allowed their marriage to be "destroyed" - that is on the married heterosexuals; not the married homosexuals. Too bad some people are so caught up worrying about others' marriages, they allow their own marriages to be "destroyed." That's what is known as a "your heterosexual marriage" problem - not a "their homosexual marriage" problem. There are plenty of divorce attorneys to help dissolve those "destroyed" heterosexual marriages.

Congratulations to 51 years with your spouse, but your loosey goosey approach to marriage in general isn't going to cut it.

Marriage needs to be restored to its proper configuration between man and woman, and that is on our to do list. If you don't like it, then I suggest you dissolve your marriage and join the homosexuals in a civil union.

 

[Ethel2]

Congratulations to 51 years with your spouse, but your loosey goosey approach to marriage in general isn't going to cut it.

Marriage needs to be restored to its proper configuration between man and woman, and that is on our to do list. If you don't like it, then I suggest you dissolve your marriage and join the homosexuals in a civil union.

Bigoted post alert!

 

[Donatello]

Congratulations to 51 years with your spouse, but your loosey goosey approach to marriage in general isn't going to cut it.

Marriage needs to be restored to its proper configuration between man and woman, and that is on our to do list. If you don't like it, then I suggest you dissolve your marriage and join the homosexuals in a civil union.

"Needs to be restored? Do you think the Government should make guidelines and mandate "proper configuration" for married couples?

 

[Ren]

Bigoted post alert!

Bigot? How so? Especially in light of the Homosexual Agenda?

 

[Ren]

"Needs to be restored? Do you think the Government should make guidelines and mandate "proper configuration" for married couples?

I think the government should leave it alone, and the first step to leaving it alone is reversing its decision from the Supreme Court.

 

[Ethel2]

Bigot? How so? Especially in light of the Homosexual Agenda?

The "homosexual agenda" includes equal rights. You have no problem with equal rights do you? Please let everyone know how a homosexual marriage hurts you personally. And while you are at it please let everyone know why anyone else should be subjected to your warped set of values.

 

[Ren]

The "homosexual agenda" includes equal rights. You have no problem with equal rights do you? Please let everyone know how a homosexual marriage hurts you personally. And while you are at it please let everyone know why anyone else should be subjected to your warped set of values.

Homosexuals already have equal rights. What they want is MORE rights. They want the right to not be offended.

Talk about everyone else's right to not be offended.

 

[Old 'N Chill]

Congratulations to 51 years with your spouse, but your loosey goosey approach to marriage in general isn't going to cut it.

Marriage needs to be restored to its proper configuration between man and woman, and that is on our to do list. If you don't like it, then I suggest you dissolve your marriage and join the homosexuals in a civil union.

Another ignorant reply from you, you show your ass to all of us every day.....you should be ashamed.

 

[Ren]

Another ignorant reply from you, you show your ass to all of us every day.....you should be ashamed.

Just throwing the truth in your faces, is all. There's the ignore button if you don't like it.

 

[Lafayette]

Inflation is global

All economic matters are "global". But, I suggest comparing the US and Europe is most significant because both are similar in economic-structure:

It's interesting to note that both economic-entities (US and EU) vary inflation-wise in a similar pattern generally.

Though as recently as 2021 they both bumped up hugely in a similar fashion. Quite likely because the "bump" is due to Covid that shook both economies significantly ...

 

[Old 'N Chill]

Homosexuals already have equal rights. What they want is MORE rights. They want the right to not be offended.

Talk about everyone else's rights to not be offended.

All Americans deserve equal rights and freedoms in this country, regardless of gender, race, religion, etc. Those who disagree with that are racist, bigoted and anti-American. Usually they are also hypocritical religious extremist nutters.

 

[Ethel2]

Homosexuals already have equal rights. What they want is MORE rights. They want the right to not be offended.

Talk about everyone else's rights to not be offended.

So you have no problem with homosexual marriages being codified into law since as of now they do have that right, correct? A yes or no will do.
And you are wrong and obviously ignorant about gay people having equal rights. Do you know that in 27 states there are no explicit laws against discrimination based on sexual orientation? Do you think its just fine to be able to deny a gay couple housing solely due to the fact that they are gay? A yes or no will do.
If you do not want to behave as gay people behave feel free to live your life the way you choose. Just stay the hell out of the bedroom and lives of people who are different than you are.

 

[Ren]

All Americans deserve equal rights and freedoms in this country, regardless of gender, race, religion, etc. Those who disagree with that are racist, bigoted and anti-American. Usually they are also hypocritical religious extremist nutters.

ALL Americans already have equal rights. You're beating a dead horse.

 

[Old 'N Chill]

Just throwing the truth in your faces, is all. There's the ignore button if you don't like it.

I have nothing against truth. What you post is offensive bullshit, you get what you give in the respect department, remember that.