Will "Pro Gun Liberals" stand up and vote in 2014 against Gun Control

[CharonPDX]

Who (especially those registered Democrats) intends to vote for liberal/progressive candidates that support gun control, in 2014?

State Representative: Yes (I would classify her as "mildly pro-gun", for universal background checks, for the misguided "no guns even for CHL holders in schools", but against any ban on "assault weapons" or magazine caps. And I'll continue to work with her on shifting her on the other issues.)
State Senator: Not up for re-election, I will run against her in the primary in 2016.
Federal Representative: Undecided.
Federal Senator: Very likely yes. Jeff Merkley is one of the few moderate/independent politicians still in office at the Federal level. Yes, he leans left, but I love his positions on the filibuster, drones, and more. He should be convincable on gun issues. When he ran against Smith, I voted for Smith, but I've been happy more often than not with him since he got elected.
Governor: It depends on who runs. (Kitz hasn't announced yet, I'm *REALLY* mixed on him - and he's no guarantee of winning a primary, he has a lot of opposition within the Democratic Party for various things like education.)

 

[kibs45]

According to my 30 something and 20 something kids, (the daughter calls herself a "green conservative" ) they are working towards a viable third party and believe it is just around the corner.
I've tried to put it in a nut shell but I'm sure I've missed something. Nonetheless, the following is a gist of what they discuss.

They are advocates of less government, and are against the Nanny State.
They want to be left alone.
They believe in pure Capitalism.
They don't care if you're gay or straight, just quit asking for preferential treatment.
If you want an abortion or believe in the practice, it's your choice, though they themselves would not consider it an option under most circumstances. They do not however, want their tax monies used to pay for them.
They are staunch defenders of the Constitution, including but not limited to the 1st and the 2nd Amendment.
They want a fair, and simple tax system, where everyone pays the same percentage, and no loop holes for anyone, or anything.
They want our borders sealed up, 100%, FIRST, and then want a fair and swift immigration system, as they recognize the value of the hard working immigrants who are already here, be they illegal or not.
And, regardless of party they want their President to follow, and uphold the "rule of law" which is drastically lacking these days.
Though they do not want the country to become isolationists, they want the country to stop being the world's police.
This third party wants the U.S. to be energy independent, and to move forward with those cleaner and abundant energy sources like natural gas and the very real clean coal technology, i.e. "oxidation". They want the market to decide the direction of less viable energy sources such as wind, solar, and ethanol.
And finally, be they left or right, this third party is sick and tired of the cronyism that is commonly practiced by our current President and his minions, as has been the case by BOTH past Left and Right Administrations.
And again... The Constitution is first and foremost to these people.
This, folks is the face of the growing number of young adults in our society who will bring both parties to their knees.

This is pretty much where I am. Late 20s and all. The beautiful thing with this arrangement is we don't all have to agree. It actually allows for different viewpoints. The key principles are personal responsibility, and non-interference/removal of/from government in things it shouldn't be involved in anyway. Its encouraging to know there are more of us out there.

 

[Jamie6.5]

State Representative: Yes (I would classify her as "mildly pro-gun", for universal background checks, for the misguided "no guns even for CHL holders in schools", but against any ban on "assault weapons" or magazine caps. And I'll continue to work with her on shifting her on the other issues.)
State Senator: Not up for re-election, I will run against her in the primary in 2016.
Federal Representative: Undecided.
Federal Senator: Very likely yes. Jeff Merkley is one of the few moderate/independent politicians still in office at the Federal level. Yes, he leans left, but I love his positions on the filibuster, drones, and more. He should be convincable on gun issues. When he ran against Smith, I voted for Smith, but I've been happy more often than not with him since he got elected.
Governor: It depends on who runs. (Kitz hasn't announced yet, I'm *REALLY* mixed on him - and he's no guarantee of winning a primary, he has a lot of opposition within the Democratic Party for various things like education.)

Finally.
Very good Charon, to the point and explanatory.

Thank you.

 

[DMax]

I just have one question since this has gone another direction than intended. This is for all the anti God guys. For the record I could care less what you believe in or nothing at all. Once the libs get God out of everything how will that affect The Declaration with unalienable Rights? Take it out of the culture and guess what know we have nothing to protect us from Tyranny because with no God or Laws of Nature no Constitution. However the rights we have is for everyone. All rights will live or die by this in the end. So take it out of school or everyday life future children won't care about the rights of this country. The libs and muslims will be cheering at how we are distroying ourselves. You see how far we have degraded in 4 yrs and yes I get it has started before this so no need to remind me. Do we really have time on our side I think NOT.

 

[kibs45]

To the shock and dismay of the Port Townsend entrenched baby boomer Democrats, there are loads of you in that wannabe like Berkely, Cailf town.
My Republican friends are most interested in this new independent move. There are a few hardcore traditional religious right winger's who still want to stop gay marriage, and abortion but even they are fare and few. Most all of the Christians I know, are of the opinion that people need to make their own choices, and that something far larger than their selves are in play, and that for the most part they stand out of the way, but they do vote, and they do vote on the basis that the Constitution is first and foremost, (a good place to start) and that fiscal conservatism is the answer.

Whats funny, is you hit some of my hot buttons issues in that post. Here's the issue though, it isn't possible to legislate the change I would like to see. Government is never the answer. We have had people trying to make everyones morals and values the same, and shove whatever is fashionable at the time down somebody elses throat. I don't like it done to me, and I am just not that interested in doing it (that way) to somebody else. We should return to actually haveing discussions, and trying to convince people to change their minds, or at the very least an agreement to disagree. Ultimately though, the only way to achieve this, is to tell government to quit taking sides. And the only way for government to quit taking sides, is to remove government from the equation. Then a disagreement is between individuals, and not between a so called "majority", and pick your name and insert it "here". Secondly, our society is just not very civil. The less something impacts me, the less I care whether it happens or not. So we all need to quit shoving whatever down each others throats as well. It's perfectly ok to try and convince someone to your side, it's not ok to go around flaunting crap, whatever that crap is.

Just my rambling thoughts anyway.

 

[kibs45]

I just have one question since this has gone another direction than intended. This is for all the anti God guys. For the record I could care less what you believe in or nothing at all. Once the libs get God out of everything how will that affect The Declaration with unalienable Rights? Take it out of the culture and guess what know we have nothing to protect us from Tyranny because with no God or Laws of Nature no Constitution. However the rights we have is for everyone. All rights will live or die by this in the end. So take it out of school or everyday life future children won't care about the rights of this country. The libs and muslims will be cheering at how we are distroying ourselves. You see how far we have degraded in 4 yrs and yes I get it has started before this so no need to remind me. Do we really have time on our side I think NOT.

That is a battle that must be fought and won or lost in the hearts of men. Legislating it one way or the other doesn't do much (as has been recently demonstrated, there is always a way around "the law"). The Declaration of Independence and The Constitution do little for us when people won't pay attention to them, so where the enumerated rights stem from in it are a non issue until we actually start heeding the documents again.

Just my .02

P.S. I just want to clarify, this is in regards to whether or not they are "Natural Rights" or "God Given Rights". The bottom line, I don't care where you think they came from, I care that you understand they are not "given" rights. They are. Hopefully that clears the post up.

 

[Suge206]

It's pretty clear that you do care what others believe. Why can't we agree on what our unalienable rights are instead of pretending they are divine? lol at degraded. only if you ignore actual data would you be able to make a case for that.

 

[DMax]

It's pretty clear that you do care what others believe. Why can't we agree on what our unalienable rights are instead of pretending they are divine? lol at degraded. only if you ignore actual data would you be able to make a case for that.

Great tell us what they are than. PLease explain in great detail we are just breathless to hear this.

 

[Suge206]

What is 'they'? Sorry that you are breathless.

 

[DMax]

What is 'they'? Sorry that you are breathless.

Just as I thought you got nothing. Thanks for trying though you get the participation award.

 

[WhyteCheddar]

No.

You missed it.

Republicans put up nimrods in races where they very clearly should have won, turning off their own base.

Run fewer idiots, win elections, and the concern for recruiting Democrats to support a single issue cause becomes moot.

I'm not registered with either party, because they are both selling me a load of crap.

Opining about the defenders of liberty losing control of Congress when they are the same party that brought us the Partiot Act and a host of other right infringing big government policies is like insisting that a tabby cat can guard a mouse better than a black cat.

What you are saying is to abandon principles.
Right, I really want to vote for someone who is willing to do that.
The real problem is low information voters who are for socialist like ideology.
The idiots who won were frequently democrats, or RINOS.

 

[mancat]

I just have one question since this has gone another direction than intended. This is for all the anti God guys. For the record I could care less what you believe in or nothing at all. Once the libs get God out of everything how will that affect The Declaration with unalienable Rights? Take it out of the culture and guess what know we have nothing to protect us from Tyranny because with no God or Laws of Nature no Constitution. However the rights we have is for everyone. All rights will live or die by this in the end. So take it out of school or everyday life future children won't care about the rights of this country. The libs and muslims will be cheering at how we are distroying ourselves. You see how far we have degraded in 4 yrs and yes I get it has started before this so no need to remind me. Do we really have time on our side I think NOT.

as previously mentioned, it's entirely possible to believe in a non-Christian god, or none at all, yet still understand the concept of natural rights, unalienable rights, or "God-given" rights - since they are all the same thing. they are rights that are yours, regardless of what a government comprised of men says.

are you one of those people that believes that humans cannot have morals without belief in God?

 

[CharonPDX]

Just as atheists call things from nature "acts of God".

 

[DMax]

as previously mentioned, it's entirely possible to believe in a non-Christian god, or none at all, yet still understand the concept of natural rights, unalienable rights, or "God-given" rights - since they are all the same thing. they are rights that are yours, regardless of what a government comprised of men says.

are you one of those people that believes that humans cannot have morals without belief in God?

Are you one of those people that can't read? I clearly say I don't care what you believe or not at all, and I do mention Natural Law. How is that different than what you said. Where did I use the word morals never came up. I believe we agree maybe not, I really don't care either way.

The entire point is unalienable rights and it would be very easy for a pres like obammy type to tell the world See that old constitution means nothing cause we are secular and not christian end of our rights as we know them. And don't tell me never happen in America our gov is corrupt and any thing goes at this point with out a severe event to change things in a new direction.

I really find it interesting that you never talk about my original question I never asked about what anybody believes in, but thats what happens on these topics.

In case you missed it

"Once the libs get God out of everything how will that affect The Declaration with unalienable Rights?"

 

[DMax]

Nevermind too late doen't matter anymore Unalienable rights already gone LOL

Brennan takes oath on draft Constitution?without Bill of Rights | The Ticket - Yahoo! News

 

[Bob D]

If our rights can be taken away, then how can they be inalienable? If they cannot be taken away, why is anyone worried about them being taken away? What is a "God-given right?" (Not trying to argue. Honestly interested in answers to these questions.)

 

[mancat]

Are you one of those people that can't read? I clearly say I don't care what you believe or not at all, and I do mention Natural Law. How is that different than what you said.

uhh, but you asked for the opinion of "anti-God" guys, which I assumed meant atheists. so, here I am. I'm an atheist, I don't believe in god, and I'm trying to answer your question. do you want an answer or not?

Where did I use the word morals never came up. I believe we agree maybe not, I really don't care either way.

because the same types of people I've talked to who believe that the US and the constitution go hand in hand with Christianity, are the same types who usually say that those who don't believe in God and biblical morality cannot have morals. maybe you're not one of them, but they're out there.

The entire point is unalienable rights and it would be very easy for a pres like obammy type to tell the world See that old constitution means nothing cause we are secular and not christian end of our rights as we know them. And don't tell me never happen in America our gov is corrupt and any thing goes at this point with out a severe event to change things in a new direction.

it could also be flipped around and be said that the constitution only applies to those who believe in a Christian god, and so therefore non-Christians have no constitutional rights. but you probably can't find any cases of this happening because nobody is insane enough to interpret the constitution in such a way. regardless, I don't put anything past them, but this would be a monumental abuse of power and such a declaration would trigger an immediate civil war.

I really find it interesting that you never talk about my original question I never asked about what anybody believes in, but thats what happens on these topics.

but you said you had only one question. I was trying to respond to it.

In case you missed it

"Once the libs get God out of everything how will that affect The Declaration with unalienable Rights?"

see my answer above

 

[DMax]

Thanks for the clarification. I will ask you another way. Does out constitution stand up without unalienable Rights? This is not a religious question none of this ever was. Also if you look in my original question, I said unalinable rights are for everyone. Not sure where you would get Christian Non Christian comment. We still have freedom of religion for all even NO religion so your covered.

 

[DMax]

If our rights can be taken away, then how can they be inalienable? If they cannot be taken away, why is anyone worried about them being taken away? What is a "God-given right?" (Not trying to argue. Honestly interested in answers to these questions.)

inalienable="God-given right=Natural Law all the same thing.

 

[Suge206]

I asked what is 'they' in your question because your question is unclear.