Were Our Founding Fathers Conservative, or Liberal by Nature......?
962468
Obviously a mixed lot but mostly LIBERAL revolution is a liberal concept, traditionalists (conservatives) would have kept the status quo
816036
Yeah- I'm a Goldwater Republican.  Which, by today's standards is somewhere between a Libertarian and a Liberal.  Barry Goldwater, oddly enough, predicted that in the future his type of conservatism would be viewed as Liberal.
185521
I'm not sure if this is strictly an answer to your\nquestion, but I think it highlights the point you are\ntalking about.\n\nThe following was written by a man named Mark Oberzil.\nI first saw it published in the "Oregonian" newspaper,\nbut it is also available on the web.\n\n\n----------------------------------------------------------\n\n             Credo of a Conservative\n\nI am a conservative. I believe in staying solvent and out\nof debt.\n\nI am a conservative. I believe in keeping my nose out of\nother people's business, their nations and their bedrooms.\n\nI am a conservative. I believe in conserving our assets and\nour resources -- our air, our land, our water.\nAccordingly, I don't support or engage in wastefulness,\ninefficiency or lavish excesses.\n\nI am a conservative. I think an ounce of prevention is\nworth a pound of cure. Therefore I support appropriate\ngovernment spending on such things as infrastructure,\nschools, social welfare and crime prevention, because in\nthe long run it's cheaper and more effective.\n\nI am a conservative. I don't sign on to risky schemes. I\nthink if you give Bob a dollar, it helps Bob, but it may\nnot necessarily help Oscar, Fred or Maria.\n\nI am a conservative. If I am attacked, I respond\nappropriately and conservatively. I do not swat mosquitoes\nwith dynamite.\n\nI am a conservative. I don't deal falsely or prematurely\nwith facts.\n\nI am a conservative. I understand the purposes of various\ninstitutions. It is the job of government to govern, the\njob of religion to address spiritual needs, and the job of\nbusiness to secure profits by producing needed goods and\nservices. I do not confuse these institutions.\n\nI am a conservative. I understand my position in the world\nand that my opinions are not the only valid ones.\n\nI do not have an exclusive claim on what is right, good or\npatriotic, and those who disagree with me are not\nautomatically evil traitors.\n\nWhat's really weird, though, is that I've always thought\nthese things, but now everyone calls me a "liberal"!
1113811
We as liberals (for the most part because I can't speak for everyone) are open-minded.  I think if you open your eyes and ears and tune into Fox news, you'll find alot more name calling and stereotyping by neo-cons then you could ever find by liberals.\n\nNow I'm not sure, but I think you have tolerance backwards.  The first amendment says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...".  Liberals don't disagree with religion, as a majority of Jews and Catholics are democrats, but they disagree with many conservative views that religion should play a role in government.  There is nothing in the Constitution honoring one relgion over another, nothing indicating America as a Christian country.  Liberals are tolerant of all religions, thus making sure that one isn't publically favored over another; privately, anything is fair game.  Free exercise has never been attacked by liberals as a whole.\n\nReferring to the south as "stupid" is metaphorical.  Historically, the south has always been slower in technological and economical development than the north.  Aside from that, they are also most easily impressioned by their leaders, a fallacy if you will.  They more believe what they are told and do not question the people who hold similar policital and religious values as they.  The south and "bible belt" are also consistently referred to by many, both liberal and conservative, as the land of red-necks.  All of this is to say that obviously not all of the south is "stupid" just that a majority tend to be very ignorant.  Religion plays a large role in this viewpoint, as many think that supporting something like an undeveloped fetus's rights over a woman's is obsurd.  Or that teaching abstinence rather than safe sex and contraception is just plain dumb.\n\nFocussing on the Iraq war and "brainwashing", let's first look at Germany in the 1930's.  Heinrich Himmer (one of Hitler's henchmen) once said, "The best political weapon is the weapon of terror. Cruelty commands respect. Men may hate us. But, we don't ask for their love; only for their fear."  Sound familiar?  For one second, step down from your viewpoint and think about this quote with an open-mind.  The tactic of using fear played a key role in Hitler's rise to power.  Have you noticed that every corner we turn these days has been plastered with "terrorists", "al-Qaeda", "war on terror", fear, fear, fear, and more fear.  And in doing this, the administration has been given a skeleton key, a free-pass to do anything they want.  Warantless wiretapping?  Don't think for a second that one, single branch of government needs this almighty power to "protect the people against terrorists."  Then the prosecution of our "free press" for reporting this abuse of power to the people?  Everything Bush does happens to be in the name of National Security, but why are we giving him such unlimited power?  If you've read George Orwell's 1984, you would know that it's a very slippery slope towards Big Brother, an all-powerful, controlling, and impressionist government.  The next step, believe it or not, could be something like: halting the mid-term elections in the name of National Security.  We as people shouldn't give up our civil liberties for protection against something that (if you look really hard at it) isn't real.  The threat of terrorism?  If you look really close at what is going on, you'll notice that the threat of terrorism isn't as real as we are told (i.e. brainwashed).  If it was, why would our Republican led government (all three branches) be cutting spending on Homeland Security 7% - from $34.1 bill to $31.8 bill?  It all comes down to reality.  Do you feel better knowing that an unjust war that's profiting private contractors (
743418
I vote for whomever is most conservative (believes in the Constitution as written and freedom). That is usually the Republican. However, I have voted for Democrats when they are more conservative than their Republican opponent (very rare, but it happens).
614886
I think it's that the opposite of liberal is conservative.  Conservatives favor the ways and institutions of the past, and would like to revert to them.  And many republicans are conservatives.  Their ideal is therefor the polar opposite of liberals.  And no, I don't think there's anything wrong with liberals, both keeping an open mind and respecting the past seem like good ideas to me.  That's why I couldn't be a member of the press.  I make too much sense and am too respectful of other peoples opinions.
940938
Jesus may have been what is now termed a liberal when it comes to some social things, but when it comes to morals, Jesus was a conservative.  I should mention that Jesus said that the poor you will always have with you and that we need to go and make disciples rather than trying to only help the poor.  He did say that helping the poor is good, but discipling is the priority.
505583
A conservative liberal is someone who is mostly liberal but conservative on some issues. I know it seems ridiculous because it appears to be an oxymoron, but it is not. This alleged oxymoron is similar to the United States being a Democratic Republic. It is such because we use some elements of democracy (like voting-- in a true democracy EVERYONE votes on EVERY issue, rather than having a congress) but our government has also been influenced by the ways of a republic (having senators, etc., which is similar to the ways of Ancient Rome).\n\nFor example, I consider myself to be a conservative liberal as I am liberal on most social issues involving human rights, such as gay marriage because I believe that everyone, regardless of sexual orientation, deserves the right of marriage. However, I am conservative on issues like immigration because I believe that only people who intend to gain citizenship, pay taxes, learn to speak English, and have a stable job should be allowed to immigrate. I happen to feel this way because, although I value their addition culturally, we cannot finance the welfare for people who do not help fund the services they are receiving.
1061206
.  First of all our "forefathers did not "give us our freedoms"  they fought to ensure that we had that with which  we were rightfully   "endowed by our Creator".   Those freedoms that we commonly speak of like the freedom of the press, the freedom to worship, and the rights: to assemble, to free speech, to trial, etc are all part of that single concept of liberty.  I would not give up one of those individual freedoms or rights because to do so would be to diminish liberty...and liberty is our God given right.  So I agree with several of the other answers in that one respect.  However once again we have our president being accused for eroding our freedoms.  I challenge anyone to offer any evidence that an action on the part of the president has violated the bill of rights.   If you want to talk about an erosion of freedoms lets talkabout some of the liberal legislators in both state and federal  government who have made a habit of imposing arbitrary taxes.  Take for example taxes on tobacco products.  Whether you are a smoker or not, the principle should outrage you.  You have a few politicians who want to raise money who say well...".hey..i don't smoke..how about if we add 50 cents onto the cost of a pack of cigarettes...those smokers are in the minority, we can get away with it".  How fair is that?  Seems to me we fought a revolution in this country over less than this.  How about eminent domain?  You don't think that is an erosion of your freedoms.  A city can just decide they are going to buy your property from you and sell it to a developer because they can make more money in taxes from what will be built there.  What ever happened to private property?  I guess that doesn't mean so much to you liberals.  And why?...Because...private property is the first thing to go under communism and the liberal left mentality in this country today is a direct result of the influence of communist/socialist educators.  Talk about rights.  You are more concerned about a persons right to have unprotected sex without consequences than the right of a living innocent baby to survive.  Of course you are so concerned about crime that you don't want law abiding citizens to own firearms...you'd be just as happy if they banned them all, when statistically these gun owners aren't causing the deaths.  Yet your liberal minded judges continue to give repeat offenders light sentences or grant probation so that young kids can continue to be raped and murdered by these animals.  Yeah, I'd say we have an erosion of our freedoms due to an unresponsive government that does not act in many cases in the best interest of the American people but rather for their own personal agendas.  In my opinion that agenda by and large is the perpetuation of themselves and their positions ala Ted Kennedy.  George Bush was the right man to be in office at this time and he is certainly no enemy of freedom.\n    I guess I kind of got off the topic a bit but the bottom line is I couldn't choose one individual right or freedom over another.  To do so would be like asking me to choose a part of my body to cut off.  They are all important to me.  They are all part of the whole that are liberty and I would give up my life to defend any one or all.
1081156
What constitutes a "conservative" changes with time just as what defines a liberal, Republican, or Democrat.\n\nI think I have rather good credentials as a conservative. I list them so you can understand my current position.\n\nI was a founding member of the Conservative Party of New York State before I was old enough to vote. Even though I was only 15 years old  I was elected the Vice chairman of the Queens County Conservative Party Club (the largest in the state). I was a vice chairman of Youth for Goldwater and a chairman of Young Americans for Freedom. \n\nAfter college when I moved to Missouri I was elected a Republican committeeman, a member of the Republican State Committee, and chairman of the Republican City Central Committee.\n\nI ran (unsuccessfully) for congress at the personal request of President Ronald Reagan who campaigned for me and helped me raise campaign funding. \n\nI have managed campaigns, been a fund raiser for and a political consultant to a large number of  Republican candidates and elected officials including half a dozen United States Senators and two dozen congressman.  \n\nYet despite this history I did not vote for George Bush in either presidential election and have left the Republican Party to become a Libertarian.\n\nGeorge Bush and the current Republican leadership know as much about traditional Conservative principles as Jennifer Lopez knows about the Talmud.\n\nTraditional conservatives believe in fiscal responsibility. \n\nGeorge W. has given us a huge budget deficit. He has signed pork laden spending bills authorizing billions for absurdities like a bridge to nowhere in Alaska and a Museum to the Packard Automobile in Ohio.\n\nTraditional conservatives believe, like George Washington, in "avoiding foreign entanglements." \n\nGeorge W. has sent American troops to the other side of the globe to "nation build."\n\nTraditional conservatives believe in state's rights. \n\nGeorge W. has sought to oust the jurisdiction of Florida State courts when he didn't like the outcome of the Schivo case. He seeks a constitutional amendment concerning marriage, a traditional state prerogative. He uses Federal authority to deal with K-12 education, another local prerogative (and responsibility). \n\nTraditional conservatives believe in individual rights. \n\nGeorge W. has used the so called Patriot Act to violate those rights. He has directed the NSA to conduct covert surveillance of American citizens. He attacks the rights of homosexuals. [NB:Barry Goldwater, iconic conservative leader, once said, "You don't have to BE straight to be in the army, you have to SHOOT straight"]\n\nIt is clear that what passes for "conservatism" today is far removed from the traditional conservatism of men like Senator Barry Goldwater. It won't pass muster with me or anyone else who believes that what a real conservative seeks to conserve is, first and foremost, the Constitution.
759074
many believe he was free-mason, as many other "founding fathers" were freemason. they believe ben franklin was also one.
742645
Thomas Jefferson wasn't very religious and was very in favor of the Separation of Church and State.  He felt that that is why there were people there they wanted to be free to worship as they pleased, and that for that to be possible the State shouldn't be in favor of one particular religion.
674666
Of course he's conservative.  He's the most conservative president in recent history.  What do Republicans do but run up the deficit?  It's practically a badge of honor with them.  As far as immigration policy, hmmmm, let's see..., why would he be soft on illegal immigration?  Oh yeah, could it be that he is so beholden to big business and big business interests that he probably doesn't scratch his head without asking their permission?  Another Republican checkpoint.  Liberals are soft on illegal immigration, too, but generally for different reasons.  And as far as big government and spying, well, all a bit fascist, isn't it?  Fascists are, by the way, considered conservatives.
944484
Check out 'The War for American Independence' by Samuel Griffith II, a former USMC Brigadier General, he writes a readable informative accurate account examining opinions on both sides of the Atlantic.    One 'ugly secret' that The Republicans wish you would ignore is that America's founding Fathers (and Mothers) were -  - - LIBERALS.   \n(Yikes)  Many Englishmen/women then and now view the American Revolutionary War  as an extension of The English struggle for Liberty - - - radical notions such as a majority of the citizens having a voice in Parliament, a say on matters such as taxation, tariffs, how to conduct War and when and against who, etc.   Many Englishmen then saw a Strong Independent America as a better ally to Britain than a weak colony, a view vindicated by America's air during World War One & Two.\n\nPeace...
219883
Look at the words Liberal and Conservative ... and their roots.\n\nAt 22, the idea of conserving seems crazy. The idea of freedom and liberartion to someone young and full of ideas seems the way to go. I consider myself to be moderate. I see the advantage to both ideals and the idea of oppostion. \n\nIt's great to have ideas on how we should proceed. Just remember that the opposite side of the aisle has their ideas too and that you need not disgrace the other side. Both sides have merit.
1061372
No:  It is not an issue of whether we agree with his policies or not.  Our Constitution works as it is and as the founding fathers intended.
1072452
John Adams and John Quincy Adams were Unitarians. So were about half of the founding fathers who came from Massachusetts, Vermont and New Hampshire. Most of the ones from the middle and southern states were trinitarian Protestants of some sort.\n\nYou can see more on\nhttp://www.famousuus.com/\nClick on "American Politics" there.