[Fusilier]

Originally Posted by natehale1971

Having creation taught in the science class. Both Creation and Evolution should be taught in science class, because both theories have valid points, and by teaching both... you allow the student to make up their own mind on the subject. And that's part of teaching critical thinking.

No, there is absolutely nothing valid regarding creation anymore than there is for teaching 'flat earth' in geography class. There is nothing in the realm of science that supports creation. If you have any evidence for creation, you need to collect your Nobel prize immediately. There is a very good reason that not a single national academy of sciences in the western world include creation in their literature and why not a single accredited university includes creation in the science programs.

Should we teach the alternative to the holocaust in history class and leave it up to students to decide if it really happened or not? Should sex ed be split between the vaginal birth and the stork? Should alchemy be taught alongside chemistry and allow the students to decide? How about demon possession alongside germ theory?

The education system has a responsibility to encourage free thought among students but within the limits of their ability. If the US taught creation, you'd be the laughing stock of the western world and for good reason.

And who's creation myth will you want to be taught anyways? Considering how there are over 900 gods and thousands of sects within each, who gets lucky? There isn't time to cover any where near 5% of them.

And finally, this is an education matter, not a political one. So why in the hell is the party that wants to keep government limited, putting there nose in something they are obviously unqualified for?

Originally Posted by natehale1971

Banning abortion. Not Banning Abortion, but stopping the use of abortion as a pro-active form of birth control.

That's not true for all of the candidates. When asked if abortion should be allowed in cases of rape or incest, Bachmann responded that she is "100 per cent pro-life". Herman Cain is also pro-life. He has repeatedly stated that life begins at conception, and that if he was elected President, he would sign legislation to protect the sanctity of life. But again, my point is that party who wants to (by your words) govern the least and have limited powers is once again telling people what to do or not do.

Originally Posted by natehale1971

Halting stem cell research They just did not want to use fetal stem cells from fetuses that had been created for the sole purpose of harvesting stem cells.

Several of the leading republicans are against embryonic stem cells - which by the way don't come from fetuses but embryos that are no older than 5 days since fertilized. Fetus don't form until their 9th week. But again that's not the point.

Originally Posted by natehale1971

Banning same sex unionsNo. They are not against Same Sex Unions. In fact they supported the use of Civil Unions instead of the term "Marriage" for same sex couples. But I'm so conversation I disagree with the Government having ANYTHING to do with marriage.

So they changed the name and benefits - discrimination. Let's allow blacks to vote, but we'll call it something else.

I'm talking about marriage like it pertains to you and me and should be for anyone. Several of the candidates don't agree however and feel its up to them to decide who gets to call each other a husband or wife. Again, intrusive.

I agree with you on the last part though. I'll take it step further and include religion as well though.

Originally Posted by natehale1971

Would close planned parenthood A good thing actually. Have you read anything about who these people are? Or what their goal was when they were founded? Do a quick google search for Marget Sanger quotes and read about how she wanted to use abortion to remove the weeds from American society & Culture. when over 50% of african-american pregnancies end in abortion, the word genocide really springs to mind.

I checked on Margaret Sanger. Apparently she lived in the 1920s... and Planned Parenthood today has stated they "finds these views objectionable and outmoded".

Services provided at locations include contraceptives (birth control); emergency contraception; screening for breast, cervical and testicular cancers; pregnancy testing and pregnancy options counseling; testing and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases; comprehensive sexuality education, menopause treatments; vasectomies, tubal ligations, and abortion.

I see contraception and cancer screening services... what are the up to date criticisms that warrant a political party being invasive?

Originally Posted by natehale1971

Continue drug war More and more conservatives are turning against the Drug War, and are actually listening to the Libertarians on legalizing and taxing the hell out of drugs.

Good to hear.

Originally Posted by natehale1971

Mandate school prayer No. They aren't wanting to mandate school prayer. They are wanting to allow School Prayer. Children have been expelled from school for bringing a bible to read or praying in school. Teachers have been fired for praying over their meals.

Doesn't this conflict with governing the least and having limited powers? There is a distinct separation between church and state, and they want to change that to allow religion in.

Interestingly though, nominee Gingrich would bring back school prayer with a Constitutional amendment and thinks that federal aid should go only to schools that allow voluntary prayer. WTF?

Originally Posted by natehale1971

Extend the war in A-stanIf we're going to fight a war, we should be doing it to win, not pussyfoot around. If we're not there to win, we should be getting the hell out. More conservatives feel this way than just contining the war.

Not my point.

Originally Posted by natehale1971

Andd as I pointed out. Many of these stances are just plan wrong, and taking the talking points of the left and ignoring what conservatives (and the TEA Party) has actually said or done.

I'm only going by what the next hopeful presidents have said.