Any FJingerites with conservative opinions?

[Boogalou]

Alcohol is actually more easily available in Europe and the UK than it is in the US.

Sorry I wasn't very clear. I'm in Canada and I was just using the US as a frame of reference. The sale of alcohol (at least in Ontario) is far more restrictive in Canada than it is in the States and I like it that way. That wasn't worded very clearly. Again, while I have those opinions on alcohol it's not really that important and won't make or break my vote.

[Convicted Blossom]

I don't have a conservative bone in my body. I'm a dirty, fuckin' hippie and have been for almost 50 years. (I started early!) I've always said that I was the only Communist in my sixth grade class. It would be fine with me if they'd ban all guns, but then i'm a pacifist. I am neither for nor against homeschooling or even unschooling if it's done right.

You took the words right out of my mouth Penny Sycamore except that for me it's nearly 60 years. The odd thing is that the older I get the more socialist I become, I had anticipated the reverse.

I cannot believe they are putting forward someone as divisive as Abbot when they could have Turnbull. It's insane.

The Malcolm lust seems to be more widespread than I thought. I hope his staff find this thread among their google alerts.

I do not lust after Malcolm although, for the right-wing, he is a better option that Abbot but that's not difficult.

[synchroswimr]

I think evolution should be taught as "the theory" of evolution since none of us were there to see it. And that creation stories of a variety of religious traditions should be acknowledged as other theories since none of us were there to see them.

[Syd+Marky]

Im fairly liberal w/some conservative values.

Partial-birth-abortion sickens me

I don't believe in capital punishment.

I do believe in euthenasia

I think every husband should support his wife in wanting to be a SAHM&I think there are circumstances in which a wife should obey her husband

I don't believe in "training"children,nor do I agree w/ raising SAHD's

None of my beliefs are based on religeon.

I have a hard time identifying w/ a party when I register to vote

[Wolfie]

Partial-birth-abortion sickens me

You do know that this is a made up term by anti-abortion activists, right?

[lilith]

Im fairly liberal w/some conservative values.

Partial-birth-abortion sickens me

I don't believe in capital punishment.

I do believe in euthenasia

I think every husband should support his wife in wanting to be a SAHM&I think there are circumstances in which a wife should obey her husband

I don't believe in "training"children,nor do I agree w/ raising SAHD's

None of my beliefs are based on religeon.

I have a hard time identifying w/ a party when I register to vote

If none of your views are based on religion why are they so gender specific?

How about thinking that both partners should be supportive of a parent staying home with young children?

If there are circumstances where a wife should obey her husband, are there situations where the husband should obey his wife? What about same sex couples?

I have a hard time understanding how you would come to the views you have about gender roles without religious influence, and I'm genuinely interested to know.

[JenniferJuniper]

Im fairly liberal w/some conservative values.

Partial-birth-abortion sickens me

I don't believe in capital punishment.

I do believe in euthenasia

I think every husband should support his wife in wanting to be a SAHM&I think there are circumstances in which a wife should obey her husband

I don't believe in "training"children,nor do I agree w/ raising SAHD's

None of my beliefs are based on religeon.

I have a hard time identifying w/ a party when I register to vote

Can you list some of these circumstances?

Should women who do not wish to be stay at home mothers also be afforded complete support from their husbands? And should working women support husbands who wish to be stay at home fathers?

As you identify yourself as “fairly liberal†what are your thoughts on gay couples?

[wtfrenchtoast]

Well lilith and JenniferJuniper beat me to it, but I am curious to know what circumstances a woman should obey her husband under. Also, "partial birth abortion" isn't really a thing.

[Iokaste]

Politically I identify as a socialist (which is not the same as a communist, which seems to be the understanding in a lot of US-journalism, sigh). When I see the society that social-democratism has build here in Denmark: free education all the way through Ph.d.-level, free healthcare, 12 months maternity paid maternity leave, low crime-rate, low childhood-poverty rate, I see something very close too what I believe society should be. I'd never say Denmark is perfect or deny that we as a society have problems and challenges, but overall I'm rather proud of the way we run society here.

For a variety of reasons I've ended up with a lot of conservative American friends and funny thing is when we discus politics and I pull the "S"-card, a typical reaction is "But you have good and moral values, how can you be a socialist???!!!"

Ultimately I think what we all want is a safe community where we are free to live, work and believe the way we see fit and I honestly believe that history shows us that this is best attained in a society of healthy well-educated people.

-edited 'cos we don't has...

[formergothardite]

I was always horrified by "partial birth abortion" and then pretty angry when I realized that is just a made up term used for anti-choice propaganda.

Should women support their husband's in being SAHD? Is their some circumstances in which a man should obey his wife?

[2xx1xy1JD]

My parents finally divorced after 32 years of marriage. They were married very young- my mother was only 16. Most people we know were utterly shocked because they had no idea the level of dysfunction that was seething under the surface of our family. I'm going to have to assume you've never lived 18 years in a household with two people who quietly hate each other, because if you had, I cannot imagine you would advocate for staying together for the sake of the children. We probably looked like the ideal family from the outside- my father has a very high-paying job, my mother was a SAHM, we were active church-goers, and we three daughters did well academically, etc. It was living hell. I had untreated clinical depression and suicidal ideation beginning as a child and lasting into my late twenties. One sister has suffered from anorexia, and another developed an opiate addiction. Which just goes to show that a stable home is not a happy home necessarily.

I appreciate the nuance of your position and you've obviously thought about the subject pretty deeply, but I just have to respectfully disagree. I feel awful for my mother living through years of psychological torture at the hands of a quietly terrible man, who happened to be highly respected in the community. There is nothing she ever could have done to mitigate the damage that he inflicted on the whole family, damage that was done in ways much to subtle to be observed from the outside.

I'm sorry if I didn't write clearly.

I do NOT advocate staying in a bad marriage "for the sake of the children". Some marriages have clearly deteriorated to the point that they need to be ended. FWIW, I'm a divorce lawyer - I help people end marriages for a living, and many of those marriages need to be ended. There are situations where I will actively counsel couples to separate. I've also had cases where separation was clearly the better option for the children. In one case, my client told me that there was no fighting - in fact, there was no communication at all even though they were still living together. I asked about the child, and it turned out she was constantly sleeping over at her friend's house. Clearly, she didn't enjoy the stone-cold atmosphere at home. After the separation, the child had a better relationship with each parent.

What I do believe in is (1) making damn sure that you pick the right person before either marrying or procreating (not just "praying on it", but actually getting to know someone well enough that you have rock-solid knowledge that they are loving, respectful, committed, have the same goals, have a compatible personality and are a truly good person), and (2) having BOTH partners put some real effort into the marriage on an ongoing basis, so that it doesn't reach the "broken beyond repair" stage. I do find it sad when I see marriages that could have had a chance, if the parties had only dealt with some issues earlier and not neglected things until they got to the point that they couldn't be fixed. I'm always astounded by the times that I hear "my spouse suggested marriage counselling, but I don't think it's necessary and besides, we don't have the time/money." If it's been suggested, it's a pretty good sign that it's needed. As for the time/money involved - if you think that you can't afford marriage counselling, wait until you find out how much a divorce costs.

[Syd+Marky]

Wolfie-I did not know that..maybe I should have said late second-trimester abortion.I'd like to say I don't like the idea of second- trimester at all,but I know that there are lots of situations where women/girls just cant or mabey dont know in the first 12wks,but the higher the #of wks,especially when we get to possibly viable fetuses-I have a hard time supporting that..&the methods I understand need to be used to abort later 2nd term

[2xx1xy1JD]

This.

I think that a single parent can be just as good of a parent as a two parent team. Some of them are much better than some two parent teams. I feel like the opinion that a single parent family is bad is a very reactionary opinion and not actually based on fact. As a teacher, I can see which parents have good homelives and which don't- and it's not at all based on single or dual parent households.

It's also not a new thing, it's just talked about more now. Two of my great grandparents were raised by divorced parents, both were just fine, and I have a letter from the sister of one of them to my mom that talks about how much happier it was, and how the actual family improved after the divorce from an abusive husband/father.

I never said that single parents CAN'T be successful. What I said is that they have to work harder - which many do. I'm being honest about the fact that it is more challenging.

Parenting is work, and doing it alone means that there is no one to share the work. It doesn't mean that it can't be done, but it does mean that it will take that much more effort to balance school or work with raising a child, and there won't be room for slack or down time. Sometimes, other support system can take the role of the missing parent - for example, if a parent lives with other family members. Otherwise, though, it means living on a single instead of dual income (many times, child support is inadequate or non-existent), having to do all of the transportation, needing to make arrangements for every time your child gets sick or has a day off school, and not having an easy backup if work gets busy or if you just need some personal time. If something happens to you, like a serious illness or even death, your child is up shit's creek unless you have close family available.

[formergothardite]

Wolfie-I did not know that..maybe I should have said late second-trimester abortion.I'd like to say I don't like the idea of second- trimester at all,but I know that there are lots of situations where women/girls just cant or mabey dont know in the first 12wks,but the higher the #of wks,especially when we get to possibly viable fetuses-I have a hard time supporting that..&the methods I understand need to be used to abort later 2nd term

Can you explain a little bit more about when women should obey their husbands and where this comes from if not a religious idea?

[MamaJunebug]

No need to apologize, Minerva, I didn't say - at least I didn't mean to say - that creation stories are scientific theories. People make a decision to believe in a creation story, or to believe in science data, and to explain that numerous beliefs exist - rather than debunk one in favor of another - can only help individuals understand that the world holds infinite options. That's my optimistic view, anyway.

Not sure if your mention of parents choosing special schools instead of crappy schools was in response to my views on classical education. I believe there should *be* no crappy schools. That far more emphasis and respect and honor be paid to those teaching the elementary levels -- without a solid foundation, nothing's going to work right.

Classical educaiton may/not be a liberal/conservative thing, I really don't know. I just observe my cousins whose elementary education was experimental (for lack of a better word) and my own, where the basics were mastered before a child got promoted, and I wouldn't have had it any other way.

Classical education as I understand it doesn't mean caps and gowns and stodgy profs with monocles. A child with evident limitations still benefits from knowing the basic facts as well as s/he can know them. I know a youngster whose ambition is to groom dogs - it's what he loves and anything beyond that (vet assistant training, e.g.) is beyond him. Classically educated as far as he can go, he'll know how to collect the proper fees, calculate what his tips "should" be and thus know which clients are generous and which are cheapos, make his bank deposit, set a budget, etc.

Y'know, I"m not even sure classical educaition is a right/left issue; I just see the schools doing not-so-well and part of that is Federal interference, from my POV - and that's under the Bush administration as well as the current one.

[Carla Bruni]

That means it covers BCP, IUDs, cervical cap, diaphragm, implant or NuvaRing. That is birth control supplied/administered by a doctor, i.e., a prescription (BCP, NuvaRing), getting fitted for a barrier method (diaphragm, cap) or outpatient surgery (IUD, implant). It does not cover condoms or spermacide (which are available over the counter). The idea that birth control prescribed or administered by a doctor is temporary sterlization sounds rather paranoid since most birth control is already administered by a doctor. How is free birth control morally wrong?!

Sorry, should've been clearer on the morally wrong thing, which I'll get to in a moment, but just to clarify - there is NO provision in Obamacare that MANDATES 100% (no co-pay) coverage for ALL birth control pills. Pill/patch/NuvaRing/etc coverage at no cost is provided at the discretion of the insurance company - so I, for instance, pay a $65 co-pay for my fancy-schmancy non-preferred name brand pill. I *could* pay $5 for the generic - that option is available - but my insurance plan does not offer $0 pills/patches/etc. Some do, but not all must. The only MANDATED coverage in the ACA is for doctor-administered methods, which does not mean "prescription" methods, it means actually physically administered by a doctor and only by a doctor at a doctor's office - IUDs and implants. I fought with my insurance company over this for months, but this is actually how it is. Your insurance company may have sent you a brochure about ACA-mandated changes to contraceptive coverage sometime last fall - it's in there in teeeny-tiny fine print.

Here's my problem with this idea, which I hope to be able to explain with a little clarity: if I'm a low-income woman and generic pills do not, for whatever reason, work for me, the only birth control I can get for free is an IUD or an implant, which leave me barren for 3-5 years. If I want to conceive a child (circumstances change, plans change, whatever), I have to go to the doctor to have it removed, and even then it may take a while for my body to be ready to conceive. The doctor may even try to talk lower-income patients out of having it removed ("are you really ready for a child?" etc etc), particularly if it's at a free clinic.

However, women who can afford expensive pills/patches/rings retain full control over their reproductive system/decisions, so I (speaking as myself now) could decide I want a baby tomorrow, stop taking the pill, and not have to consult anyone about it. That circumstance, to me, is morally wrong - that only those rich enough to afford patient-administered methods (and yes, pills, patches, rings, and diaphragms all count as patient-administered) have the freedom to decide when to stop using contraception by themselves, whereas any woman who can't must turn over her reproductive decisions to a doctor.

I should, of course, add the caveat that none of this matters if someone is lucky enough to have a wonderful insurance plan that covers absolutely everything and loves women. However, the majority of Americans are not in this position :|

[Syd+Marky]

Im going to try to respond to the replies on my undertandably confusing views.

JenniferJuniper,Lilith,&FormerGothardite;

Ill start w/the situations in which a wife should obey a husband-In my house-any kind of survival situation(if we are in public,say walking through a parking lot-I keep an ear open for Any command from my husband wether its "get on the other side of me"or"get on the ground")If I depend on him to protect me I need to have Some level of obedience IMO.-When,if ever should a man obey his wife?I would say in a situation where I have knowledge&skills he does not(such as medical emergencies),or any time my own body is involved(sex,having babies)-I asked my husband this question&he said"anytime youare very insistant."-&as for gay couples,on this topic,they need to work that out-I was talking about "traditional"couples.Most gay couples I know do work out the gender-related issues between them,including deciding what is&is not gender-related.

Yes I support SAHD's(Im supporting one now-he supported me for 10yrs)I think one parent(when possible,should stay home w/young children,preferably the mother,especially in early yrs.-And as for gay couples,again,something for them to work out,w/o my input.

As the above were the gender-related issues I believe I spoke on,Ill now address the religeon question.In my early life I was raised Catholic-maybe there id some carry-over there,but for the most part my husband&I have come to agreements through many hours&days of discussion.

and finally I only support 1st trimester abortion because back-alley abortions are horrific.

I would like to know the real name for the procedure dubbed partial-birth abortion.

[formergothardite]

So your belief isn't really for all women, just for you in your situation? Like if a woman is better at survival or at protecting the husband should then obey the wife? Or are you saying all men are better at protection so all women should listen to them in situations where they might be in danger?

[Spider Burps]

RE: the people who are pro-single parenthood:

My mom is, by most peoples' measure, a very successful and fiercely independent person. She has always had a good job while my dad did the whole SAHD thing (we also had a nanny). After she and my dad divorced, however, my mom decided she wanted to start over (who wouldn't?). She took a job 500 miles away from her nearest friends and family members, and while she loved her new town and kicked ass at her new job, she was so overwhelmed by single parenthood that she was unable to keep up her super career woman thing without neglecting my brother and me.

We never had school supplies and we often ran out of food because my mom didn't have time to shop. I did all of the house work and babysat my brother for 4-5 hours a day. Once my mom got home, she would retreat to her room to "unwind" from her hours at the office while I helped my brother do his homework. Sure, we sat down for dinner as a family, but it wasn't until 8:30. She saw her children so little that she didn't notice her son developing paranoid delusions, leaving her teenage daughter (me!!) to deal with acting as a parent towards an unmedicated schizophrenic who was prone to pulling knives on anyone who dared to so much as breathe in his presence. Good times.

So, yeah, maybe I'm a bit biased, but I firmly believe that kids need more than one parental figure in their lives--and I also believe that a parent needs help and support in order to not go bonkers from stress and decision fatigue. I'm not saying you should stay in an unhappy marriage. Heck, I don't care if "parent" number two consists of one or more aunts/uncles or grandparents or godparents or whoever. "It takes a village" is as true as it has always been, no matter how awesome of a parent you may be--and as we've learned from the Duggars, siblings cannot and should not be parental substitutes.

edited for clarity

[Syd+Marky]

Yes,my gender-related views are for me.I dont think all men or all women fit into any one catergory.In some situations women could certainly be the more skilled protector.In a gay marriage/partnership,one or the other will most certainly have more of those skills than the other.

Were my thinking about other people come in is when a new mom wants to stay home but her husband wont agree.If its not a dire financial issue,I feel bad for mamas that feel they should work&parent if they want to only parent.

[Syd+Marky]

And,yes,if a woman is the more skilled protector her husband should obey her in the necessary circumstances.

[formergothardite]

I'm confused why you worded it the way you did instead of saying that every parent(man or woman) who wants to stay at home with the child should be supported by the other spouse or that couples(both men and women) should obey their partners at some points. You made it all about women. Why?

And really, if an adult wants to get themselves killed, well they really don't have to obey anyone. Is it a good idea, sure, but a woman shouldn't have to obey a man just because he tells her to get down.

[Syd+Marky]

Im confused as to why I didnt put it that way also.Probably because I didnt completely tnk over my response until I was responded to.And I probably direct my statements torwards women because Im a woman.

Andif an adult wants to get themselves killed,I agree,let them.I do not want that for myself or anyone else,so I have made a choice tha

[2xx1xy1JD]

And,yes,if a woman is the more skilled protector her husband should obey her in the necessary circumstances.

Are random shooting common where you live?

In my case, I'd probably be more likely to notice safety threats, since my husband has a some vision loss.

Would you agree that you could phrase it as a gender-neutral "partners should listen to the other on matters within their area of expertise or things of great importance"?

[Syd+Marky]

Sorry-cut myself off..

I have made a choice for myself thst I hope saves my life someday.

2xx1-YES!I would phrase it that way,Thank You!!

I do live in an area where shootings,stabbings,muggings,etc.happen on a very regular basis,&the crime gets worse every day.I am soo glad to hear that u r able to possibly protect your husband.I also have some health issues that ciuld prevent me from protecting myself