Growing Pains or Death Throes?

The state of the GOP is definitely in question, and it could end in one of two ways: the Republican party folds into itself or fractures allowing the Democrats to achieve the rare feat if having 12 or 16 years of the world’s highest office, or the GOP grows into a party that actually represents the state of the 21st century American voter and follows up these last 7 1/2 years of Obama with prosperity and a new outlook. Either way this lands we are in for one hell of a ride. I see the majority  of the issues coming from this election revolving around social issues, and how we deal with these things will determine the fate of the Grand Old Party.

I for one, am going to attempt to ride this thing out as a Republican, and hope we can grow into  something resembling Libertarianism without all the BS. Let me break it down this way, we all know that Republican ideology on economic issues, national security, and the function (scope) of government is vastly superior to either Democratic frontrunner’s plan, but our social and domestic policies suck worse than a Dyson with a supercharger. The current leadership is stuck in the 1980s at the best, and the 1890s at worst. We still have people using their faith as a tool for ability to run the country, and somehow people  vote for them. Why? Because you share a similar outlook? Because you feel you need religion to be moral? I have no issues with religions as institutions, or even places that teach valuable life lessons, and bring communities together for a common bond, but religious ideology has exactly 0 place in the running of out government. It would disingenuous to anyone not sharing that faith, and if countries that follow a specific religion are any indication then it clearly doesn’t work.  Just look at the current crop of theocracies and states with official religions, though most of the are muslim, none of them have anything really going for them. I’m not so uneducated that I believe that separation of church and state is in the Constitution, or even mentioned in our pillars of government, but I do subscribe to the English Common Law mentality that writer’s intent combined with the ratifier’s intent make up the heart of a document. This country, being formed as a secular state to avoid religious oppression, should begin heading simultaneously back to its roots and into the increasingly secular world view.

My second issue with the GOP is that they allow these inevitable social changes to become issues of policy. The Democrats are equally guilty of this as well. Luckily we live in a republic instead of a democracy, and it lessens the power of these social claims. The way I see it is this: social issues will change on their own, just look at history to tell you so. It wasn’t at all uncommon for racism against blacks to be prevalent in BOTH parties in 1905, but by 2005 it would be appalling for any candidate from any party to show even mild rhetoric like those times. I’m not saying Trump is guilty if this, but it’s a good example. The Democrats and their media flunkies have painted the portrait of Trump as  being a racist demagogue, making this election FEEL like a moral division  instead  of a policy division. This isn’t that unlike Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation, which did exactly nothing but make the Civil War into a moral issue and prevented the Confederacy from gaining much-needed support from England or France.  I feel that actions like these take away from the actual differences in the parties, and the Republicans are clearly losing. I know it isn’t easy to separate fiscal and social issues that see tightly tied together, but truthfully it’s all about perspective.  Marriage equality is already the law of the land, yet GOP candidates (except Trump) are still against it? How un-American can you be? The same thing will happen for Marijuana legalization, and every other social issue because the GOP leadership hasn’t caught up with the 21st century, and the Dems know that. Maybe if we, as Republicans, adapted to the times and stopped backing these archaic ideals about religion, race, and personal freedoms we could grow past these petty differences and focus on what really matters… getting this country out of debt, making us safe, and growing the Economy.

I’m honestly hoping these issues that are plaguing the party that’s terrified to back it’s front-runner will be over soon. Maybe a real revolution can happen, and we can grow this party into a powerhouse instead of a collection of also-rans, but none of that can happen until the current leadership either gets on board, or gets replaced. I’m not saying Trump is the best person to he flying the flag of change, but he is currently all we have that isn’t Ted Cruz and his 1890s approach to allowing his faith to take precedent over his brain. Trump is the only GOP candidate that is accepting of Gay marriage, willing to make Marijuana legalization non-federally regulated, and isn’t beholden to a certain faith. He is the best hope, as far as choices we have, for the secular base that us rapidly growing inside the GOP. If you fine readers are anything like me you want nothing more than this to be growing pains from a candidate that is actually bucking the system, but you know in the back of your mind the elites of the party aren’t  going to give up their seats at the table willingly. I sometimes wonder if they actually believe the things they say, or if they just use it to stay in power.  I guess time will tell since No one I’ve ever heard of has a crystal ball that will tell us the future. Let’s all just strap  in because thus is going to be a hell of a ride.


Punk attitude/political insight
The political punk dude


5 thoughts on “Growing Pains or Death Throes?

  1. I do consider my faith to be a moral guideline that helps more than hinders, but I’m not evangelical and went to religious schools — where I actually had to study the stuff. This gives me, I feel, a better grounding in why I believe the way I do rather just taking a preacher’s word for it. Which in a sense is what has gone very wrong with the GOP (among other things); first they realized that they could be the “special pigs” and then they thought that acting like Moses the Raven (see: The Animal Farm) would work forever — nothing of this world lasts forever; pride goeth before the fall, always.
    Now, I will be very honest with you, much of what has replaced religion, or at least the sort of religion that is educated about itself, is hardly better I find than the most ignorant of “bible thumpers”. And it is a religion of sorts, for it supposes an unquestioning faith in its “rightness”.
    Are not socialists this way? They have sacrificed millions on the altar of their own “rightness”, and they still don’t question that they may not have been so right after all. That is either blindly insane hubris or wilfull evil — maybe both. [I consider by the way the Republicans to be just as socialist as the Democrats — they just approach it from different angles.]
    And to some extent libertarianism has gotten that way…I will be frank: most libertarians I meet have a really naïve view of human nature — Rousseau-ian even. And they refuse to see this because they believe they operate from infallible, immaculate logic and objectivism…a fatal mistake. (see socialism)
    I always suggest to them that (if they have a strong stomach) they read De Sade after a reading of Rousseau and then consider that it is a critique of Rousseau…it is what will happen if Rousseau’s ideas ever came to fruition in society. Consider it like watching the most horrific horror movie anyone could come up with because it’s true.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. I also do not consider Ted Cruz or his ilk to be Christian — if one studies his faith/church, one will find that it is, well, nearly antichrist in its heresies.
    And he can’t even stay loyal to its rather fluid and un-Christlike tenets, so there’s that too.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I make a distinction between spirtuality, faith, and religion. I feel spirtuality is your connection to the universe (be it a diety, multiple dieties, or just the world around you), faith is your way of following that spirtuality, and religion is the institution that brings people of the same spirituality together for various reasons. To me, religion is a plague because they all function like Ted cruz’s church or worse. I feel that your spirituality should make up a huge part of your voting decision, and your faith would play a factor as well, but not your religeon. And I feel like none of them should have a part in the actual policy making in this country as it would be detrimental to others of different faiths. Like my stance of being pro-life isn’t because of my own thoughts or beliefs, but based on the fact that we should not be imposing our morals or will on others. All theocracies fail, and we should avoid that, especially in a country where we support religious freedom.


      1. I don’t care for the “spiritual but not religious” because, well, it has a history with all the wrong people: Madame Blavatsky, Deep-ack Okra, etc. A quick look into the primary actors in this “spiritual, not religious” stuff will show some mighty unsavory characters promoting some mighty unsavory things wrapped up in pretty spiritual packets — like the Esalen Institute and leading to, well, it isn’t Godwining if it’s true: folks like Goebbels and Himmler.
        And not all religions act like Ted Cruz’ “church” (which is really a cult, as well as a three card monty scheme perpetrated by grifters on a naïve and unsuspecting public, and one with origins in the American spiritualist movement of the 19th century…which kinda rounds out the circle back to spiritualism). A knowledge of my own faith has helped me to figure them out (Seven Mountains Dominionism and the Prosperity Gospel isn’t in the Bible or in any traditional teachings anymore than the Bagwan Rajneesh or The Family).
        So, no, I’m not “spiritual”…I’m religious; there is a difference. I try my best to follow the tenets of my faith, and even if I might disagree a bit I see the wisdom of why they think the way they do — women are free to make their choice, which people will do no matter anyway, but they don’t get to cry “victim” on top of it…this is coming from a woman: either have the salt to say “yes, I did this” or pick up your marbles and jacks and go home; if they felt so free with their body, their choice then why are they looking for absolution after the fact, unless of course they are having some doubts about said choice? In which case, maybe one should really reconsider one’s choices before making them!
        I make my decisions based on what experiences and knowledge have led me too, and that includes my enculturation, something everybody has (and perhaps a bit of emotion…Ted Cruz, Jeb Bush, and Hillary Clinton cause visceral responses in me…one could say that they repulse me to the depths of my soul even).


      2. I see what you mean with that destinction, but you are leaving out plenty of places that practice spirituality and not religion. Any 12 step program is the first example that comes to mind for me. But as a separate and different rebuttal I didn’t say spiritual and not religious… I said one should affect policy making, and the other should not. I think you can be deeply religeous, or faithful and still realize that just because it is so for you, it doesn’t need to be for others, and as a decent human we should each let others make their own decisions and customs, not force ours on others. I don’t think this applies to immigrants, as I feel they should assimilate to the culture they come into while holding onto the pieces of their own that fit. I more feel that it is incorrect to use your religion to make policies that affect everyone. Think about it this way… Christians groups don’t want to be forced to serve gays. Fine, we shouldn’t make them, but the same logic applies to abortion, or smoking pot, or anything else. If that is a person’s choice we should all respect that and work with it to the best of our abilities. If we desire freedom to do what we wish then we should grant that for others as well. I break it down to making any argument just like gun control. Making it illegal only hurts the ones who wish to do it legally and the right way for the right reasons, because criminals and Immoral people will do it regardless. I guess the only other way I could put it is that religions divide us, faith completes us, and spirituality defines how we treat the world. Therefore religion should be left out of politics because it doesn’t apply to all, faith should be left out of policy making for the same reason… but spirituality should affect everything because it brings everything into balance if we apply it correctly and justly.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s