I was compiling a list of numerous topics (SOPA, Economy, Defense, etc.) and listing what I could find as the most representative statements from both Romney and Santorum. I was doing this as my research indicates that Romney is more conservative (fiscally, constitutionally) than Santorum. But as I became more aware that it would be impossible for anyone to logically/rationally say that Santorum (or Gingrich for that matter) was more conservative than Romney (or conservative at all) a light bulb went off in my head. This is not an issue of just putting facts in front of people it is a problem with word definition. My son and I often have long debates over what is meant or interpreted by a phrase or word.
The actual definition will not help explain my beliefs so I am presenting my political party platform (would prefer if the Republicans adopted something like this) so when I say conservative you know exactly where I stand.
Below is what I would like to see as a conservative platform that I believe that most groups can get behind. I would encourage an open rational discussion from others.
This country has direction and a guide in our country that must be followed – The Constitution and Declaration of Independence. This should be taught in detail in public schools so that all grow up with an understanding of the original intent. For me the ideal party platform is based on the belief that the Founders meant what they said and it was to be interpreted for areas that they had no knowledge of at the time but not that it is to be interpreted for all new laws people want to see. That is what amendments are for.
That my party stops using the term “democratic” improperly as we are a democratically elected representative Republic and all should actually understand that concept and why that was chosen.
Once we accept the above premise then we go back to the 1st amendment and follow it where religion is concerned. All religions are allowed and proper as long as they do no harm to others. You cannot preach hate inciting violence just like you cannot yell FIRE in a crowded theater. You can preach any other belief you want. Let’s deal with the 2 particular issues the Republican Party has taken to heart (unfortunately).
ABORTION. I do not want to discuss whether or why you support or do not support this. I again refer you to the Constitution – The government has no right to be involved in this type of decision. Row v. Wade and how it is being interpreted is not going to be overturned (even by the right wing appointed justices). The federal government should not and has no authority to fund this type of service – period. Regardless how I feel about 3rd trimester abortions the federal government does not have the authority to make laws regarding this. Now I could make a suggestion that an amendment to the Constitution be made regarding how life is determined by scientifically stating when a fetus becomes viable – but I am sure that would cause others to start the debate again. Back to the Constitution this is your only option as the federal government does not have the right to interfere in the doctor patient relationship and what occurs within that relationship – that would be a state issue. Socially speaking if parents were actually doing their jobs this might actually affect this discussion.
Now the other big issue GAY PEOPLE. This is a religious issue and can be discussed within the religion. I do not consider believing that God is against gays as hate (stupid but not hate – I think Jesus promoted love and I think judgment is God’s purview) as long as your beliefs do not cause action against someone else. Again this comes back to what I said previously you could believe anything you want as long as you do not harm to anyone else. Now you can hold things like “Gay Parades” to the same decency standards that exist for other parades. I think that sex should not be discussed in public schools until (I was going to say High School – my age showing here) Middle School. This discussion should be biologically based only. School is not the place to be making judgments one way or the other – except I think that scientifically and biologically schools can state that abstinence is the only 100% workable format. Again I ask why are parents not doing their job? I rather like Cris’ format for government only being involved in civil unions and marriage being a religious ceremony. But again this is a states right’s issue unless you all agree on an amendment to the Constitution. Which I think needs to be done as it is becoming federal when crossing state lines which of course it will. Maybe we can all agree on the civil union and work from there.
This is a rather long discussion but I also want reiterated here that all government buildings belong to the people so all religious displays should be legal as long as government is not paying for them. This country is a majority of Christians and so we celebrate Christmas (it is a Federal Holiday), we do celebrate Easter, we also celebrate Halloween, Cinco de Mayo and St. Patrick’s Day. So it is what it is. These celebrations do not hurt someone who does not believe in them so get over it as long as your tax dollars are not being used to support any celebration (Chicago is exempt for St. Patrick’s day – such a long tradition).
We really need an amendment for a balanced budget along with an amendment for the budget to be capped. I think that you can debate how to cap it but once we start following the Constitution the budget will not be as high except that we also need an amendment ensuring that federal deficit takes priority in budgeting plans (meaning it needs to be paid off ). The only reason that we should ever allow debt again would be for war or maybe you can suggest something I can not think of but it should be pretty great.
We will not be in the business of assisting people as that is a state or local government’s place – except of course all of our military need to receive all of the care that is needed for them and I do mean the BEST of care possible. I really do not think this is the area where cuts are made except for inefficiencies/beauracracies.
Since I am a realist and do not see Social Security being overturned as unconstitutional (as it is) we need to come up with a plan that supports savings accounts/stocks etc. Pick an age and make it 50 years and older or 45 – I do not care and everyone below will need to continue paying taxes to fulfill the current agreement for that age up to death. For everyone else it from now on it will be a choice – a savings account with your state government, a savings account that you can not access until you retire (whatever age but you can not work anymore – you can invest but not work) or invest in stock market/mutual funds that again are not accessible or any combination of the 3. This will be totally tax free. So now citizens are personally responsible for their own lives.
I think we need to actually clarify our economic system so that it cannot change with the wind and have an amendment to the Constitution stating that we are a capitalistic country and believe in unrestricted free trade. That cronyism eliminated as far as is legally possible and that the rules of capitalism (contract law, property rights, laws against fraud and theft, be considered sacrosanct and inviolable).
We need an amendment to the Constitution stating that every citizen has the right to work and not be forced to join and pay a union. Also added into that all government positions cannot be unionized.
We need to support minimum standards for all grade levels and have a national test for those standards. All states can do their own thing with public schools as I propose the Department of Education is eliminated but all students must meet the standards we desire for our citizens. Keep in mind that I believe that you do not lower standards but always raise them and eventually more people will achieve them. We need an electorate that understands our government and Constitution, can read to a 12th grade level, do basic math (multiplication tables in their head to 12’s), know how to count money without a machine, understand basic English grammar and how to write at a 12th grade level, need to understand the actual history of our country and a general understanding of world history – particularly how it affects current events as with a little study you become aware of how things repeat themselves (might that be because no one ever learns or hears about the lesson?) and science. Again religious beliefs have no place in the school except that you can believe what ever you want but need to understand what others in the scientific community are doing and why whether you accept that or not. Our platform should be clear in stating that school is not for preaching anyone’s belief system – again that is what parents are for! Also that our platform clarifies that government is not there to promote whatever the latest scientific trend is. Oh and by the way I do not think that government should be concerned with nutrition pyramids or picking foods for us but I would support offering physical activity requirements in public schools – whatever happened to Kennedy’s physical program?
All insurance can go across state lines and federal standards will be set for insurance companies (based on protecting the consumer not giving them something)
A federal fund will be set up for states to borrow from for emergencies at the going interest rate. The loan will be based on percentage of costs and will not fulfill all that is necessary as again citizens must accept personal responsibility for choice in life such as where to live.
The federal government stops funding anything not allotted to it in the Constitution (just about everything we are currently involved in).
We do not financially assist another country unless there is a real time return for that – can’t think of that occurring other than rebuilding after wining a war.
There is so much more but I think I make my point – social issues belong in the social market not the government. Freedom is paramount as long as you hurt no one – or your rights extend to where they touch mine but not beyond. Personal responsibility is the guide for all laws and regulations.
I think that any reasonable person would see that Romney would have no issues with agreeing on most of these points (if not all) and Santorum would have issues with most of them. To me that clarifies the issue as to whom is conservative and whom is not. Gingrich would also have issues as it would not allow him as President to have those BIG IDEAS as they have nothing to do with the Federal Government.
And while I am rambling I have a point to make regarding the Moon site that Gingrich and his followers want – am I the only person to remember that there is an international treaty that states that no country can do anything proprietary on the Moon?
So any of you who want to join and support my platform, add to it or clarify it let me know and those who have issues with it – let’s discuss it rationally.