# Can furries be Republican?



## CrazyLee (Jun 4, 2010)

Note I didn't say "Can furries be conservative?" because there IS a difference.

I know this guy who lives in the area who draws murry purry art, does a murry purry web comic that's semi-popular, and sells murry purry art.

Yet he is a card-carrying Republican who often mocks and makes fun of liberals in his LJ, quotes and praises Rush Limbaugh, blames Obama for everything, and does typical hardcore Republican behavior.

The problem I have with any fur, especially one who does gay fur art for money, being a Republican is that the Republican party has established itself as being primarily a party of evangelical and fundy Christians, and has often established itself as being anti-gay and anti-pegan/atheist, which a large part of the fandom is. For instance, every Republican voting against repealing "Don't Ask Don't Tell". So to be republican and furry would be against most of the members of the fandom.


----------



## Luca (Jun 4, 2010)

Just because somone is a republican that does not mean they have to agree with the republicans on every debate.


----------



## Syradact (Jun 4, 2010)

Republicans = Democrats = Republicrats

Carry on.


----------



## Browder (Jun 4, 2010)

I don't see why not. Having an interest in anthropomorphic animals isn't something the Republican party stands against.


----------



## Kazdrax (Jun 4, 2010)

I do not see a problem with a furry being Republican or conservative. :/


----------



## Scotty1700 (Jun 4, 2010)

lolpolitics.....


----------



## Tewin Follow (Jun 4, 2010)

Your political parties are terrifying.

From what I've read/seen, they aren't fond of the "different lifestyle" type people, and furries are all for loving them, so...


----------



## Browder (Jun 4, 2010)

Harebelle said:


> Your political parties are terrifying.



...says the woman who has David Cameron for a PM.


----------



## Tewin Follow (Jun 4, 2010)

Browder said:


> ...says the woman who has David Cameron for a PM.



Sod off, I voted for Clegg-chan.


----------



## Willow (Jun 4, 2010)

I don't see why not


----------



## TashkentFox (Jun 4, 2010)

I voted for Griffin.


----------



## Alstor (Jun 4, 2010)

TashkentFox said:


> I voted for Griffin.


It's the U.S. type of Republican.

[/buzzkill]


----------



## Tewin Follow (Jun 4, 2010)

TashkentFox said:


> I voted for Griffin.


Cool story, bro.
Did he send you a little Neo-Nazi gift bag, with Swastika badges and balloons and a little flag?


----------



## CannonFodder (Jun 4, 2010)

If I'm not mistaken around 30% of the fandom are republicans, I'd have to double check but right now I can only get on for a couple minutes.


----------



## Browder (Jun 4, 2010)

TashkentFox said:


> I voted for Griffin.





Harebelle said:


> Cool story, bro.
> Did he send you a little Neo-Nazi gift bag, with Swastika badges and balloons and a little flag?


Hey! We are not starting that again. Tashkent if anything proves that Furries and arch-conservatism are compatible. That's all.


----------



## Tally (Jun 4, 2010)

They can be whatever the fuck they want to be.


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Jun 4, 2010)

This will end up turning into a thread on British politics.

And the OPs question is stupid.  Furries favorite thing to do is hate what other furries do and cite them as what's being "wrong" with the fandom.  This fits perfectly with the neo-conservative mindset, and in terms of rational political discussion furry should have no impact on one's beliefs anyway.


----------



## Tewin Follow (Jun 4, 2010)

Van Ishikawa said:


> This will end up turning into a thread on British politics.





Browder said:


> Hey! We are not starting that again.



FATHERS FOR JUSTICE!


----------



## TashkentFox (Jun 4, 2010)

Harebelle said:


> Cool story, bro.
> Did he send you a little Neo-Nazi gift bag, with Swastika badges and balloons and a little flag?



No, but you're nonetheless amusing.


----------



## Willow (Jun 4, 2010)

..I didn't vote for anyone :|


----------



## TashkentFox (Jun 4, 2010)

Harebelle said:


> FATHERS FOR JUSTICE!



Get down off Buckingham Palace or we'll let the Irish Guards throw stones at you!


----------



## CrazyLee (Jun 4, 2010)

Van Ishikawa said:


> This will end up turning into a thread on British politics.
> 
> And the OPs question is stupid.  Furries favorite thing to do is hate what other furries do and cite them as what's being "wrong" with the fandom.  This fits perfectly with the neo-conservative mindset, and in terms of rational political discussion furry should have no impact on one's beliefs anyway.



I never said that Republican furries are what is wrong with the fandom, nor do I hate Republican furries. Now you're just putting words into my mouth.

What I was curious about is how someone could BE furry, a fandom that is mostly gay/bi, and be a member of a political party, and be fans of members of that party, who often bash gays and vote against gay rights.


----------



## Zontar (Jun 4, 2010)

He's a Log Cabin Republican.


----------



## Ratte (Jun 4, 2010)

CrazyLee said:


> Note I didn't say "Can furries be conservative?" because there IS a difference.
> 
> I know this guy who lives in the area who draws murry purry art, does a murry purry web comic that's semi-popular, and sells murry purry art.
> 
> ...



That's as annoying as it gets.

Right-wingers are weird.  I don't know how they could stay sane in the furfag fandumb if everyone is a raging faggot.


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Jun 4, 2010)

CrazyLee said:


> I never said that Republican furries are what is wrong with the fandom, nor do I hate Republican furries. Now you're just putting words into my mouth.


That's not what I said.  Look at this forum itself and you'll see furries who are against pornography, or for cub art, or against "lifestylers," and those people want to the rest out because they think they are ruining the fandom in a similar fashion to a neo-conservative blaming the countries woes exclusively on immigrants, lack of faith, and our black president.  I was not saying you hated Republican furries, chill.



> What I was curious about is how someone could BE furry, a fandom that is mostly gay/bi, and be a member of a political party, and be fans of members of that party, who often bash gays and vote against gay rights.


Some people don't like gay sex getting in the way of their furry porn.  Or they don't believe in gay rights even if they don't have a specific problem with homosexuality.  Furry is a fandom that is heavily LGBT, but it is not an LGBT organization.


----------



## Tewin Follow (Jun 4, 2010)

Zontar said:


> He's a Log Cabin Republican.



I don't get what that means?


----------



## Kellie Gator (Jun 4, 2010)

Yes, they can.

Although if I've confused republican with conservative, I apologize. But Ralph Hayes Jr. is really as republican as furfags can get.


----------



## wolfrunner7 (Jun 4, 2010)

... sigh.

Enough hate in the world today, for us to be beating ourselves over political beliefs.

For the record, (R)moderate here, I had been more conservative in the past, but when I realized what I was ...

And as someone stated earlier.. identifying with a party doesn't mean you agree with their entire platform.  My personal reasons stem to my core values (non-religious of course, considering I'm agnostic).  Personally, if you want to go somewhere in life, get off your own tail and do something about it.  Don't ask, expect, or convince uncle sam to pickup your slack.  There are far too many "social" programs to begin with, money yet being wasted.  Handouts being given and not earned. There's a reason socialism only looks good on paper...

I for one do not agree with my party's views on gays, furries, or abortion rights... among a few other things.


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Jun 4, 2010)

Do republican's have an opinion on furries?

pretty sure I haven't really heard anything on that from anyone...ever.


----------



## Lobar (Jun 4, 2010)

Can? Yes.

Should? No, but that doesn't just apply to furries.


----------



## Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs (Jun 4, 2010)

I think what you really are asking is: Can a gay-furry be a republican? And the answer is yes. I am a gay republican(no not a Log Cabin Republican), but I' am also not a furfag, so not sure if I count.


----------



## WolfyLion (Jun 4, 2010)

CrazyLee said:


> What I was curious about is how someone could BE furry, a fandom that is mostly gay/bi, and be a member of a political party, and be fans of members of that party, who often bash gays and vote against gay rights.



I better tell my republican gay friends that they aren't supposed to be republican.

Just because you disagree with a political party over one subject doesn't mean you shouldn't support them. Its ussualy a whole of issues. Most homosexual/bi republicans I know are so because they fiscally conservative, when it comes to social issues they are more moderate. 

This is a really broad statement, that I have no way to verify but it seems if you take away gay rights, and abortion more people are actually pretty conservative/republican. 

As a disclaimer: I am not a republican. If anything I am libertarian, just get the government out of my life. If I am gay straight bi shouldn't even be a debate in politics.


----------



## Gavrill (Jun 4, 2010)

I'm a conservative for the most part, not sure what party I identify with though. I guess when it comes to things like gay marriage, abortion, etc I'm more Democrat, but I have some Republican tendencies.


----------



## Lobar (Jun 4, 2010)

Molly said:


> I'm a conservative for the most part, not sure what party I identify with though. I guess when it comes to things like gay marriage, abortion, etc I'm more Democrat, but I have some Republican tendencies.



I'd say that makes you small-L libertarian.  The big-L Libertarian party is full of nutters though.

(but they're still better than current Republicans)


----------



## CannonFodder (Jun 4, 2010)

Van Ishikawa said:


> Do republican's have an opinion on furries?
> 
> pretty sure I haven't really heard anything on that from anyone...ever.


Conservatiapedia had a article, but that doesn't count cause even though the nutter republicans actually believe what the site puts out it is actually a satire site.


----------



## Lobar (Jun 4, 2010)

CannonFodder said:


> Conservatiapedia had a article, but that doesn't count cause even though the nutter republicans actually believe what the site puts out it is actually a satire site.



Sadly no, Conservapedia isn't satire.


----------



## Gavrill (Jun 4, 2010)

Lobar said:


> I'd say that makes you small-L libertarian.  The big-L Libertarian party is full of nutters though.
> 
> (but they're still better than current Republicans)


Cool, learned something new today.


----------



## CannonFodder (Jun 4, 2010)

Lobar said:


> Sadly no, Conservapedia isn't satire.


.............
:'(
Damn you poe's law!


----------



## Lobar (Jun 4, 2010)

CannonFodder said:


> .............
> :'(
> Damn you poe's law!



I know right? D:


----------



## Lurk (Jun 4, 2010)

I like to think you can learn something from all the parties but if you don't know if he can be a Republican or is some how hypocritical (Yeah, I'm putting words in your mouth right now but please read the rest of this statement), then by all means confront him about it and see what his take on it is. I just think that this would be a better solution than asking a forum about it. Real life flame wars is much better than forum ones IMO.


----------



## Lobar (Jun 4, 2010)

Lurk said:


> I like to think you can learn something from all the parties



Yeah no.  "The truth must be in the middle! :V" is lazy thinking and is common enough that your perceptions will be taken advantage of.


----------



## Kazdrax (Jun 4, 2010)

Note that being conservative or Republican doesn't exclude you from being open minded.
I think you should try to always hear people out, even if they are crazy.


----------



## Slyck (Jun 4, 2010)

A furry can be a republican. He should be used to the hypocrisy.


----------



## Pliio8 (Jun 4, 2010)

Yes. The same way a furry can be Christian. You're generalizing all republicans... stop it.


----------



## Machine (Jun 4, 2010)

Furries are people. People can be Republican. Furries can be Republican.

/thread


----------



## Shima Muurine (Jun 4, 2010)

Pliio8 said:


> Yes. The same way a furry can be Christian. You're generalizing all republicans... stop it.



This thread is a poorly disguised jab at republicans.


----------



## Kazdrax (Jun 4, 2010)

All political labels are wrong just fyi.


----------



## Kreevox (Jun 4, 2010)

I'm furry and Libertarian.


----------



## Machine (Jun 4, 2010)

Kazdrax said:


> All political labels are wrong just fyi.


Really now?


----------



## Unsilenced (Jun 4, 2010)

I know a gay libertarian christian diaperfur. 

It happens.


----------



## Machine (Jun 4, 2010)

Unsilenced said:


> I know a gay libertarian christian diaperfur.
> 
> It happens.


Fascinating!


----------



## Slyck (Jun 4, 2010)

Amphion said:


> Fascinating!



Indeed?


----------



## Fenrir Lupus (Jun 4, 2010)

CrazyLee said:


> Note I didn't say "Can furries be conservative?" because there IS a difference.
> 
> I know this guy who lives in the area who draws murry purry art, does a murry purry web comic that's semi-popular, and sells murry purry art.
> 
> ...


I'm conservative, and I vote for republicans.

If social issues are most important to you, NOMINATE LIBERTARIANS.

Libertarians are on your side with all the funky social issue stuff, but the same side as conservatives on economic issues (what I care about.)

Go ahead, let gays marry, legalize pot, whatever.  Just don't take from me what i've earned (or give to me what I haven't.)

Oh, and for those of you who aren't sure about your beliefs, this should give you a general idea.
http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz

and if that's not enough, http://www.nolanchart.com/

libertarians and conservatives are likely to vote for republicans, statists and liberals are likely to vote for democrats-- I say likely because there are some pretty major exceptions, Ron Paul supporters being among the biggest.  [they'll always vote for a 3rd party libertarian candidate if possible]


----------



## HotRodLincoln (Jun 4, 2010)

I am a STRONG Tea Party Conservative, I like Glenn Beck, and dislike Obama and his Obamunism
see my sig


----------



## Fenrir Lupus (Jun 5, 2010)

HotRodLincoln said:


> I am a STRONG Tea Party Conservative, I like Glenn Beck, and dislike Obama and his Obamunism
> see my sig



Ditto, but I wish Glenn would lay off the whole God thing.  I respect his religion and all, but arguments for conservatism/libertarianism can be made without religious reference.  That way they are more effective on the average liberal....  err...  progressive...  and logicians don't /facepalm.


----------



## Don (Jun 5, 2010)

Conservative furries are certainly out there and hardly as uncommon as most people assume.

Case and point, I'm an ardent monarchist and draw most of my political ideals from the teachings of Benito Mussolini and the Tsar's Black Hundreds. So I'm not just a Conservative furry, I'm a _Fascist_ furry. Good luck wrapping your heads around that.


----------



## Fenrir Lupus (Jun 5, 2010)

Don_Wolf said:


> Conservative furries are certainly out there and hardly as uncommon as most people assume.
> 
> Case and point, I'm an ardent monarchist and draw most of my political ideals from the teachings of Benito Mussolini and the Tsar's Black Hundreds. So I'm not just a Conservative furry, I'm a _Fascist_ furry. Good luck wrapping your heads around that.


You certainly aren't conservative, because fascism is a derivative of socialism...  and would fall under "statist" because of their hard-ass stance on social issues.

same with naziism and communism.

Funny that they're generally thought to be opposite ends of the spectrum, naziism and communism...  considering the fact that communists in the reischtag voted almost exactly the way nazi's did...  and there's that little thing where Hitler called capitalism the creation of the Jews...  [and we all know what he thought of the Jews...]


----------



## Don (Jun 5, 2010)

Fenrir Lupus said:


> You certainly aren't conservative, because fascism is a derivative of socialism...  and would fall under "statist" because of their hard-ass stance on social issues.
> 
> same with naziism and communism.
> 
> Funny that they're generally thought to be opposite ends of the spectrum, naziism and communism...  considering the fact that communists in the reischtag voted almost exactly the way nazi's did...  and there's that little thing where Hitler called capitalism the creation of the Jews...  [and we all know what he thought of the Jews...]



I never said I was a Conservative. I do consider myself a statist on social issues and a socialist economically. 

Despite how similar my views are to the Communists', I honestly can't stand them. The whole ovethrowing the Tsar and killing millions of my countrymen just doesn't sit very well with me.

EDIT: And before someone goes into a long-winded tirade calling me all sorts of unsavory things for being a Fascist, I'll have you know I'm not blatantly racist, I don't hate gays, I'm not a religious extremist, and I do not wish to install cameras in your bedroom...just in the living room.


----------



## Fenrir Lupus (Jun 5, 2010)

Don_Wolf said:


> I never said I was a Conservative. I do consider myself a statist on social issues and a socialist economically.
> 
> Despite how similar my views are to the Communists', I honestly can't stand them. The whole ovethrowing the Tsar and killing millions of my countrymen just doesn't sit very well with me.


I guess what you mean to say is you agree with the _ends_ but not the _means_?


I prefer a freer economy...  they tend to...  you know...  _work better..._


The reason I sorta blew up is because you made it sound like you were comparing your beliefs to conservatism, when they're not (save your positions on social issues)


and I know you didn't say anything about right wing/left wing, but i'd just like to take this moment to say that the right/left way of thinking should be thrown out...  because it ignores the fact that the political spectrum is 2 dimensional...

Actually, I suppose you could add a 3rd dimension to the nolan chart, means, and that would tell you how "radical" someone is...  but that'd make things too complex.  nobody likes 3d graphs.


----------



## Taren Fox (Jun 5, 2010)

No because if you like cartoon animals, that dictates all of your interests and life, and you aren't allowed to have any opinions or interests out side of furry.


----------



## Fenrir Lupus (Jun 5, 2010)

Taren Fox said:


> No because if you like cartoon animals, that dictates all of your interests and life, and you aren't allowed to have any opinions or interests out side of furry.



I suddenly remembered why I accepted your friend request.


----------



## Lobar (Jun 5, 2010)

Fenrir Lupus said:


> You certainly aren't conservative, because fascism is a derivative of socialism...  and would fall under "statist" because of their hard-ass stance on social issues.
> 
> same with naziism and communism.



oh yes, the Democratic party is really just a House Slytherin-esque amalgamation of all the "bad" ideologies grouped together under one roof for your convenience

politics is so much easier once you realize that, you don't even have to use your brain most of the time


----------



## TashkentFox (Jun 5, 2010)

Don_Wolf said:


> Conservative furries are certainly out there and hardly as uncommon as most people assume.
> 
> Case and point, I'm an ardent monarchist and draw most of my political ideals from the teachings of Benito Mussolini and the Tsar's Black Hundreds. So I'm not just a Conservative furry, I'm a _Fascist_ furry. Good luck wrapping your heads around that.



My political awakening came from reading the works of A. K. Chesterton and Oswald Mosley.


----------



## Bando (Jun 5, 2010)

This has probably been said to OP, but:

People will do gay/bi art despite their politics (if they even agree with the majority of the party on that issue) because IT PAYS MONEY! Cash is king, bro.


----------



## Digitalpotato (Jun 5, 2010)

Telephone for you - It's Cyberfox or whoever that dude everyone loves to make fun of every time he posts in Fox News threads is.


----------



## Rahne (Jun 5, 2010)

Sure, people can be republican and furry. It's kind of fucking retarded to do so... but they can. We can't blanket the entire republican party here. 

Even though 99% of the stupid bastards are all braindead.

It's like people who are furry, but ALSO religious, such as Christians. There are furry Christians. Not every republican or religious person agrees with what the majority of their "group's" stance and views on things. That's fair. However, I personally think it's still an oxymoron to associate yourself with those people; Let's say you're a fur. Let's say you're also gay. WHY the fucking hell would you want to associate yourself with a bunch of assholes who are typically AGAINST gay rights, and anyone who is "different" altogether? I never understood that.


----------



## yiffytimesnews (Jun 5, 2010)

Yes, and I am a Liberal


----------



## Aleu (Jun 5, 2010)

Rahne said:


> Sure, people can be republican and furry. It's kind of fucking retarded to do so... but they can. We can't blanket the entire republican party here.
> 
> Even though 99% of the stupid bastards are all braindead.
> 
> It's like people who are furry, but ALSO religious, such as Christians. There are furry Christians. Not every republican or religious person agrees with what the majority of their "group's" stance and views on things. That's fair. However, I personally think it's still an oxymoron to associate yourself with those people; Let's say you're a fur. Let's say you're also gay. WHY the fucking hell would you want to associate yourself with a bunch of assholes who are typically AGAINST gay rights, and anyone who is "different" altogether? I never understood that.



Are you forgetting the closet homosexual republicans that are caught at gay bars? hur hur

Independent FTW


----------



## skunkspray03 (Jun 5, 2010)

it does seem semi-paradoxical... republicans are typically conservative, and furry is a very...new (i can't find a correct word to describe it XD), and people react so harshly to  it because it's so different...

at any rate, I wouldn't be surprised if ALL of the fandom were liberal.


----------



## TashkentFox (Jun 5, 2010)

skunkspray03 said:


> it does seem semi-paradoxical... republicans are typically conservative, and furry is a very...new (i can't find a correct word to describe it XD), and people react so harshly to  it because it's so different...



Just because I'm right wing doesn't mean I'm adverse to everything from 1960 onwards, I'm not a bleeding luddite.



			
				skunkspray03 said:
			
		

> at any rate, I wouldn't be surprised if ALL of the fandom were liberal.



Me and Don Wolf are the exceptions.


----------



## skunkspray03 (Jun 5, 2010)

TashkentFox said:


> Just because I'm right wing doesn't mean I'm adverse to everything from 1960 onwards, I'm not a bleeding luddite


now you're putting words into my mouth. I said typically, and everyone has a different stance on every issue.

personally, I believe that everything has a possible solution that will solve the problem, where both sides get what they want, but, alas, human nature will make them unhappy when that's over...


----------



## TashkentFox (Jun 5, 2010)

skunkspray03 said:


> now you're putting words into my mouth. I said typically, and everyone has a different stance on every issue.



It's not my fault you're not articulate enough to illustrate your thoughts.



			
				skunkspray03 said:
			
		

> personally, I believe that everything has a possible solution that will solve the problem, where both sides get what they want, but, alas, human nature will make them unhappy when that's over...



Kinda like how everyone in South Africa is now pissed off by the government? Nelson Mandela has somehow managed to alienate the whites AND the blacks.


----------



## Shima Muurine (Jun 5, 2010)

I am the conservative, gun toting, flag waving, god fearing republican your mother warned you about. I'm also a furry. And I'm Bi. And I oppose gay marriage for the sake of the English language. Man+woman= marriage. Man+man or Woman+woman= civil partnership.  Same rights for both of 'em, but just semantics.

I am the walking contradiction.


----------



## Tycho (Jun 5, 2010)

I don't like a lot of the tenets of the right-wing/GOP.  Some I can agree with.  Not many.

Their image as a bunch of backwards-minded bigoted elitist greedy bitter old men is not entirely undeserved.

Dear Average Joe Blue Collar Worker: the GOP's penchant for tax cuts does you little to no good.  The "trickle-down" economics theories they frequently subscribe to can only work if the people at the top (the wealthy) are honest enough to let the "trickle-down" actually happen.  They're not usually honest and will just as soon shit on you as look at you, much less let economic benefits "trickle-down" to you.  You're a faceless peon to most of the people you rely upon to keep your economic model of choice working properly.  They will use you and throw you away like any other.

They pander to your religious conceits, your xenophobia, and your bigotry, to keep you content.  Grow up.  I don't care whether you switch parties in any given direction, but quit deluding yourself into thinking today's GOP gives a good-god-damn about you, the "blue collar hard working red-blooded American man".  God won't save you from another economic disaster precipitated by deregulation and greedy speculators.


----------



## Fenrir Lupus (Jun 5, 2010)

Lobar said:


> oh yes, the Democratic party is really just a House Slytherin-esque amalgamation of all the "bad" ideologies grouped together under one roof for your convenience
> 
> politics is so much easier once you realize that, you don't even have to use your brain most of the time



No, because 
1) party â‰  ideology
2) statist â‰  liberal/progressive

I'm not calling communism, fascism, and naziism LIBERAL.  I'm calling them STATIST.

If you're still confused, take a look at that "nolan chart" thing I linked a few posts back.

[and I stuck "progressive" in there because liberal used to mean what libertarian now means...]


----------



## Rahne (Jun 5, 2010)

Shima Muurine said:


> I am the conservative, gun toting, flag waving, god fearing republican your mother warned you about. I'm also a furry. And I'm Bi. And I oppose gay marriage for the sake of the English language. Man+woman= marriage. Man+man or Woman+woman= civil partnership.  Same rights for both of 'em, but just semantics.
> 
> I am the walking contradiction.



Separate, but equal. That's just arbitrary. If gay people want to get *married*, then they should be able to get *married*. What kind of self-respecting bisexual or homosexual person would say otherwise?


----------



## JoeStrike (Jun 5, 2010)

Kellie Gator said:


> Yes, they can.



Oh great, now there's a right-wing fox to go with the right wing duck...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mallard_Fillmore

The strip you linked to, with a whiny loud-mouthed gay ranting for his 'rights' while the fox rolls his eyes kinda reminds me of the birth announcement a fur put in his _Rowrbrazzle_ contribution: a bunch of bloody-handed lesbian-ish pro-abortion women are furious that this guy & his wife actually had their baby. When it was pointed out that the picture was slightly less than an accurate depiction of pro-choice women, the guy promptly dropped out of the fanzine.



wolfrunner7 said:


> There are far too many "social" programs to begin  with, money yet being wasted.  Handouts being given and not earned.  There's a reason socialism only looks good on paper...



It's been said that big business loves socialism, as long as they can privatize their profits and socialize their losses. (ie, we wind up paying for their mess-ups, like investment firms handing out fat bonuses after being bailed out by the government.)



HotRodLincoln said:


> I am a STRONG Tea Party Conservative, I  like Glenn Beck, and dislike Obama and his Obamunism



The essential Glenn Beck: "NAZIS NAZIS NAZIS The Nazis are coming, NAAAAAAAAT-ZEEEEEEES!!!!!!"



Shima Muurine said:


> I oppose gay marriage for the sake of the English  language. Man+woman= marriage. Man+man or Woman+woman= civil  partnership.  Same rights for both of 'em, but just semantics.



It's been suggested that the government get out of the marriage business altogether and ONLY give out civil partnership licenses (after passing laws that civil partners get the same rights as married couples)  and leave marriages to religions who can decide for themselves whether they want to marry same-sex couples; I think that's a pretty good idea, frankly.

Oh, and I searched Conservapedia; NO entries for furry or furries.


----------



## Tycho (Jun 5, 2010)

Rahne said:


> Separate, but equal.



When it comes to civil rights, this is tantamount to an oxymoron.


----------



## Fenrir Lupus (Jun 5, 2010)

JoeStrike said:


> The essential Glenn Beck: "NAZIS NAZIS NAZIS The Nazis are coming, NAAAAAAAAT-ZEEEEEEES!!!!!!"



You forgot the
[insert ridiculous amount of evidence that supports his case that nobody will pay attention to]


He does mention nazi's and communists a lot-- mostly the self-proclaimed communists, and evidence of nazi-like behavior.

Case in point: the way most media outlets have been reporting that flotilla in Israel.  Israel has video, Fox has been showing it.  Everywhere else, it's an Israel bashing fest.


----------



## Takun (Jun 5, 2010)

Clearly it's because conservatives are all in gay denial.



Shima Muurine said:


> I am the conservative, gun toting, flag waving, god fearing republican your mother warned you about. I'm also a furry. And I'm Bi. And I oppose gay marriage for the sake of the English language. Man+woman= marriage. Man+man or Woman+woman= civil partnership. Same rights for both of 'em, but just semantics.
> 
> I am the walking contradiction.




The English language has never changed nor adapted. When I tell someone I think something is cool they ask me how cold it is.  9_9


----------



## RayO_ElGatubelo (Jun 5, 2010)

I don't get how consevatives can life Glenn Beck so much. If he'd lay off the crazy conservative theorizing. It's obvious from seeing him that the guy is a nut.


----------



## Ratte (Jun 5, 2010)

Shima Muurine said:


> I am the conservative, gun toting, flag waving, god fearing republican your mother warned you about. I'm also a furry. And I'm Bi. And I oppose gay marriage for the sake of the English language. Man+woman= marriage. Man+man or Woman+woman= civil partnership.  Same rights for both of 'em, but just semantics.
> 
> I am the walking contradiction.



Language is as stable as my dad's psyche.

Try again, and don't fail on your next attempt.

Gay marriage is awesome.  Equal rights for all.


----------



## RayO_ElGatubelo (Jun 5, 2010)

I agree with Ratte on gay marriage. Being Puerto Rican, I know what it's like to be considered a second-class citizen.


----------



## gdzeek (Jun 5, 2010)

I'm a registered republican, but my views are pretty indepent. both parties rub me wrong sometimes, and others I'll agree on certain topics. 

to me politics is a two winged airplane, it cant fly without that balance between the two wings.  however said airplane likes to make u-turns alot XD


----------



## TashkentFox (Jun 5, 2010)

gdzeek said:


> I'm a registered republican, but my views are pretty indepent. both parties rub me wrong sometimes, and others I'll agree on certain topics.
> 
> to me politics is a two winged airplane, it cant fly without that balance between the two wings.  however said airplane likes to make u-turns alot XD



The aeroplane analogy reminds me of Operation Condor for some reason...


----------



## JoeStrike (Jun 5, 2010)

Fenrir Lupus said:


> He does mention nazi's and communists a lot-- mostly the self-proclaimed communists, and evidence of nazi-like behavior.



To Beck *everything* is evidence of 'Nazi-like' behavior, even churches talking about 'social justice' (which of course - according to Beck - is how the _*Nazis!!!*_ got started.)

Everything that is, _except_ Arizona's (say it with a clipped German accent) "may I see your papers please" law - _that_ has nothing to do with a disliked ethnic minority being put on the spot, nosiree. (And no, I'm not saying that Arizona is building concentration camps for Mexicans, but this is _far_ more like the kind of thinking that can lead to fascism than the supposed left-wing examples Beck keeps pulling out of his ass.)



> Case in point: the way most media outlets have been reporting that flotilla in Israel.  Israel has video, Fox has been showing it.  Everywhere else, it's an Israel bashing fest.


Jon Stewart completely ripped Beck a new one on this - _everyone_ ran that video (he ran clips from every channel); 'only Fox showed it' is another figment of Beck's imagination he discovered in his tushy.)


----------



## wolfrunner7 (Jun 5, 2010)

JoeStrike said:


> It's been suggested that the government get out of the marriage business altogether and ONLY give out civil partnership licenses (after passing laws that civil partners get the same rights as married couples)  and leave marriages to religions who can decide for themselves whether they want to marry same-sex couples; I think that's a pretty good idea, frankly.




^^ Give the man a medal, this is .. $$ (brilliant)


----------



## JoeStrike (Jun 5, 2010)

wolfrunner7 said:


> ^^ Give the man a medal, this is .. $$ (brilliant)



Nah, give it to whoever first suggested it, I'm just repeating what s/he said...


----------



## haynari (Jun 5, 2010)

Republican, doubtful. conservative is a possibility so is libertarian, i guess, but i don't see any real way how republican and furry would mix well.


----------



## gdzeek (Jun 5, 2010)

just out of curiosity why would a republican NOT be a furry? My stereotyping sense is tingling tremendously.


----------



## Slyck (Jun 5, 2010)

In one of Rush Limbaugh's shows he said furrys are more liberal than Obama.

I laughed so hard.


----------



## Rahne (Jun 5, 2010)

Ratte said:


> Language is as stable as my dad's psyche.
> 
> Try again, and don't fail on your next attempt.
> 
> Gay marriage is awesome.  Equal rights for all.



Yes, yes.


----------



## Tycho (Jun 5, 2010)

Slyck said:


> In one of Rush Limbaugh's shows he said furrys are more liberal than Obama.
> 
> I laughed so hard.



Rush actually knows what a furry is?


----------



## Telnac (Jun 5, 2010)

I'm a Republican, and a Christian to boot.  You don't have to be a bigot to be a Republican, or a Christian for that matter.  Frankly, I'm dismayed at how much power the bigots in the Republican party have.  But rather than leave, I'd rather stay a Republican and do my best to change the party from within.

Going 3rd party is a waste of my vote.  I learned that the hard way when my vote for Perot helped put Clinton in office in '92.  Voting Democrat would mean voting for a wide variety of things I vehemently oppose and nothing I support.

Yeah, Republicans support stuff I don't, like the pro-life & anti-gay agendas so voting Republican is far from a perfect vote.  But they are standing tough on opposing all the big spending, big government stuff Obama's doing that's dragged the economy to its knees and keeping it there.  They support Arizona's tough stand against illegal immigration.  Those two things alone will keep me voting Republican until the Democrats change their tune (which I don't expect will ever happen.)


----------



## gdzeek (Jun 5, 2010)

Who the heck is Rush Limbaugh?


----------



## Lobar (Jun 5, 2010)

gdzeek said:


> Who the heck is Rush Limbaugh?



The _de facto_ chairman of the RNC.


----------



## Telnac (Jun 5, 2010)

wolfrunner7 said:


> ^^ Give the man a medal, this is .. $$ (brilliant)


I don't know if he's referring to me, but that's exactly what I've said on here in the past.  I first heard of the idea from my ex-wife (as ironic as that may be.)  I'm betting she came up with that concept on her own, so she may be the one deserving of that medal.


----------



## Fenrir Lupus (Jun 5, 2010)

Lobar said:


> The _de facto_ chairman of the RNC.



Former.  He stepped down.


----------



## Telnac (Jun 5, 2010)

Fenrir Lupus said:


> Former.  He stepped down.


Huh?  Whether the RNC likes it or not, Rush Limbaugh is the voice of the party simply because no one in the party leadership has the cojones to say the things that he says.


----------



## Fenrir Lupus (Jun 5, 2010)

Telnac said:


> Huh?  Whether the RNC likes it or not, Rush Limbaugh is the voice of the party simply because no one in the party leadership has the cojones to say the things that he says.



He used to call himself the leader of the republican party, he said he's not going to anymore.


----------



## Tycho (Jun 5, 2010)

Telnac said:


> Huh?  Whether the RNC likes it or not, Rush Limbaugh is the voice of the party simply because no one in the party leadership has the cojones to say the things that he says.



I wasn't aware that "cojones" was Spanish for "hot air".


----------



## Telnac (Jun 5, 2010)

Tycho said:


> I wasn't aware that "cojones" was Spanish for "hot air".


Hot air is far better than the hemming & hawing the real leaders of the RNC do.  That's not to say that I agree with Rush Limbaugh all the time since he's pretty hardcore pro-life, anti-gay but I'd rather Rush Limbaugh be the unofficial leader of the Republican Party than John McCain, or others like him who have the spine of a jellyfish.


----------



## Takun (Jun 6, 2010)

Telnac said:


> I'm a Republican, and a Christian to boot.  You don't have to be a bigot to be a Republican, or a Christian for that matter.  Frankly, I'm dismayed at how much power the bigots in the Republican party have.  But rather than leave, I'd rather stay a Republican and do my best to change the party from within.
> 
> Going 3rd party is a waste of my vote.  I learned that the hard way when my vote for Perot helped put Clinton in office in '92.  Voting Democrat would mean voting for a wide variety of things I vehemently oppose and nothing I support.
> 
> Yeah, Republicans support stuff I don't, like the pro-life & anti-gay agendas so voting Republican is far from a perfect vote.  But they are standing tough on opposing all the big spending, big government stuff Obama's doing that's dragged the economy to its knees and keeping it there.  They support Arizona's tough stand against illegal immigration.  Those two things alone will keep me voting Republican until the Democrats change their tune (which I don't expect will ever happen.)




1.  You can't blame Obama for an economy he inherited just by being elected.  Economists are divided on just how much stimulus was needed and if we need another.  If we want to discuss whether the cause of the recession is from Clinton that's another story but Obama didn't drag an economy that was already on its knees, to its knees.

2.  Some of the biggest recent expansions of government have happened under Bush.  It'd be nice if the Republican party really did follow through with the small government mantra, but I really don't see it.

3.  It seems counter-intuitive to me that they cut taxes and then increase military spending.  I'm sorry if I can't believe that they are against big spending with what I've seen.


----------



## HotRodLincoln (Jun 6, 2010)

Too poor to be a Republican, too smart to be a Democrat


----------



## Telnac (Jun 6, 2010)

Takun said:


> 1.  You can't blame Obama for an economy he inherited just by being elected.  Economists are divided on just how much stimulus was needed and if we need another.  If we want to discuss whether the cause of the recession is from Clinton that's another story but Obama didn't drag an economy that was already on its knees, to its knees.
> 
> 2.  Some of the biggest recent expansions of government have happened under Bush.  It'd be nice if the Republican party really did follow through with the small government mantra, but I really don't see it.
> 
> 3.  It seems counter-intuitive to me that they cut taxes and then increase military spending.  I'm sorry if I can't believe that they are against big spending with what I've seen.


1.  Oh, Obama inherited a mess to be sure.  But Obama's big government policies long predate Obama himself, and it's those very policies that created this mess in the first place.  The roots of the recession don't date back to Bush, or Clinton for that matter.  Fannie Mae was created by FDR, but it was the Community Reinvestment Act under Jimmy Carter that really transformed Fannie Mae into the beast it is today.  Clinton required that Fannie Mae approve more mortgages for people who couldn't afford them, and once the interest rates plunged after the dotcom bubble burst, the market went nuts.

You see, the market isn't the problem.  It's government tinkering with the market that is.  They had the best of intentions: to help low income people get into homes.  But the result was that people could get mortgages when they shouldn't have been able to, and they used these mortgages to buy homes & flip them a year or two (or less!) and make a ton of money.  That ran up the cost of housing and led to the housing bubble that starting this recession in the first place.

...and the answer to our problems is _*more *_government intervention???

As much as Democrats may bitch about Bush's tax cuts (hell, even I bitch too since they weren't paid for by spending cuts), you can't deny the fact that the dotcom recession came to a screeching halt shortly after a flood of capital came flowing back into the market.  Yes, the tax cuts were mainly for the rich.  But look what the rich did with that money: they invested it, which pulled the market out of a free fall and quickly ended the recession.

Some economists say we're out of this recession... which I disagree!  But even if that's true you can't claim we've had any real recovery.  My financial situation certainly hasn't improved, nor has the financial situation of anyone I know... rich or poor.

2.  I never said I was a fan of Bush.  Tax cuts I agree with.  Out of control spending... I don't.  Bush never met a spending bill he didn't like, and he rubber stamped nearly everything set in front of him, even when the Democrats controlled Congress.

Bush is a social conservative, fiscal moderate.  I'm a social moderate & fiscal conservative.  I believe in tax cuts, provided they're tied to spending cuts.  The only time in my memory Congress cut spending was under Gingrich, and that was when a Democrat was in the White House!  The result: budget surpluses.

But as bad as Bush was, Obama's 10x worse.  Our national debt is spiraling out of control, and special interest giveaways disguised as stimulus packages are doing little to help the economy in the short term and will do great damage in the long run.  All I'm hearing from Obama is that we haven't done enough spending!  

3.  Increasing military spending makes sense when the nation's at war.  Even if you disagree with the war in Iraq (for good reasons, no doubt), we are still at war with Al Qaeda and to fight a war you need the resources to do so.

No, it's Bush's rubber stamping _*every*_ spending bill that came to his desk that particularly irks me.  Yes, I really hope Obama loses in 2012... but I hope his successor doesn't end up being another big-spending Republican like Bush.  It'd be nice to have a Republican President with the guts to actually veto bills sent to them from Congress until all the pork gets cut out of them, and someone who insists that balancing the budget become a national priority again.


----------



## CrazyLee (Jun 6, 2010)

Okay, I get it, my question was worded poorly and sounded a bit dumb. One can certainly be a Republican and still be a member of a group that's largly gay (even if you're not gay yourself) and still believe in gay rights, just like how some Christians can be gay, or believe in gay rights.

I think I was more asking about guys like the person I mentioned who is a fur and draws gay furry porn (probably for TEH MONEY like someone said) yet quotes Rush and spews the kind of generic anti-liberal/obama hate retoric that usually comes from the more vocal members of the party. To me, that's hypocritical. It's like the comic posted here, the guy who writes that seems anti-gay marriage and anti-feminist which seems to go against the beliefs of many of the people in the fandom, and I would call him a hypocrit.

I would also think it a bit hypocritical to be a Republican or Christian and be gay, since the official stance of MOST of Christianity is that homosexual sex and marriage are wrong, and the unwritten stance of the Republican party is the same. You might be better off joining the Libertarians in that case, since they're fiscially conservative but believe in free rights. Like this person says:


Rahne said:


> It's like people who are furry, but ALSO religious, such as Christians. There are furry Christians. Not every republican or religious person agrees with what the majority of their "group's" stance and views on things. That's fair. However, I personally think it's still an oxymoron to associate yourself with those people; Let's say you're a fur. Let's say you're also gay. WHY the fucking hell would you want to associate yourself with a bunch of assholes who are typically AGAINST gay rights, and anyone who is "different" altogether? I never understood that.


 
I would find it hard being someone who supports gays and voting for a party that typically goes against gay rights, even if I agree with other beliefs of that party.

I consider myself independant although I usually vote Democrat, I want to keep my options open. My biggest beefs with the Republican party as it is today is twofold:

- The tendancy for the more vocal members of the party to treat politics as if it's "Us vs Them" and anyone who doesn't agree with them is THE ENEMY, which leads to the word Liberal or Democrat to become a hate filled insult, which leads to conservatives to blame the other side for everything, vote against anything democrats vote for, call members of the other party everything from traitors to commies, and basically act like fucking children. Yes, the dems sometimes do this too. Politics seems more like a circus than anything intellegent.
- The running of the party by the Religious Right. The constitution very clearly states a separation of church and state but I have seen the Republican party taken over by people who generally vote against gay marriage, abortion, and for things that support Christanity. The law should be neutral when it comes to religious matters. It bugs me to see things that are going on now in Texas when it comes to schooling and creationism.

I had a third point but I forgot it. Durr....



> It's been suggested that the government get out of the marriage business altogether and ONLY give out civil partnership licenses (after passing laws that civil partners get the same rights as married couples) and leave marriages to religions who can decide for themselves whether they want to marry same-sex couples; I think that's a pretty good idea, frankly.


(my quotes screwed up, don't remember who posted this)

I say that religion get out of the marriage business. Keep marriage a contract between two (three? more?) grown adults, no matter what the gender. IF a person also wants a religious ceremony, that's up to them and their religion.



Telnac said:


> I'm a Republican, and a Christian to boot. You don't have to be a bigot to be a Republican, or a Christian for that matter. Frankly, I'm dismayed at how much power the bigots in the Republican party have. But rather than leave, I'd rather stay a Republican and do my best to change the party from within.


Sounds like a good plan. Although you sound a little more like a libertarian than a republican.

I had more quotes but teh quote thing screwed up.
Also, I'm fully aware that there can be more moderate Republicans or Republicans that are cool with gays, but that's not the official stance of the party.


----------



## Bacu (Jun 6, 2010)

I vote republican.
though you were asking for furries. ho ho.


----------



## Takun (Jun 6, 2010)

Telnac said:


> 1.  Oh, Obama inherited a mess to be sure.  But Obama's big government policies long predate Obama himself, and it's those very policies that created this mess in the first place.  The roots of the recession don't date back to Bush, or Clinton for that matter.  Fannie Mae was created by FDR, but it was the Community Reinvestment Act under Jimmy Carter that really transformed Fannie Mae into the beast it is today.  Clinton required that Fannie Mae approve more mortgages for people who couldn't afford them, and once the interest rates plunged after the dotcom bubble burst, the market went nuts.



I agree! 




> You see, the market isn't the problem.  It's government tinkering with the market that is.  They had the best of intentions: to help low income people get into homes.  But the result was that people could get mortgages when they shouldn't have been able to, and they used these mortgages to buy homes & flip them a year or two (or less!) and make a ton of money.  That ran up the cost of housing and led to the housing bubble that starting this recession in the first place.
> 
> ...and the answer to our problems is _*more *_government intervention???



I agree this went poorly too.  I have to ask by what you refer to by more government intervention.  I feel it comes out to be a buzzword all too often.  I'd like some concrete things you are against.  I see a lot of government programs working and see more places they could be of use as well.  I see complaints of government intervention and then the BP spill take place and people complain asking where the government was to prevent it.  The mining collapses we had awhile back are another that come to mind.  I see a lot of "government intervention is bad except when it is working out for me in that case it is good."



> As much as Democrats may bitch about Bush's tax cuts (hell, even I bitch too since they weren't paid for by spending cuts), you can't deny the fact that the dotcom recession came to a screeching halt shortly after a flood of capital came flowing back into the market.  Yes, the tax cuts were mainly for the rich.  But look what the rich did with that money: they invested it, which pulled the market out of a free fall and quickly ended the recession.



I am not too familiar with this, though I remember it vaguely.  I have not read anything on it. 




> But as bad as Bush was, Obama's 10x worse.  Our national debt is spiraling out of control, and special interest giveaways disguised as stimulus packages are doing little to help the economy in the short term and will do great damage in the long run.  All I'm hearing from Obama is that we haven't done enough spending!



And we aren't going to start paying off the debt.  Everything I've heard and read urges spending to get through the recession before addressing the debt.



> 3.  Increasing military spending makes sense when the nation's at war.  Even if you disagree with the war in Iraq (for good reasons, no doubt), we are still at war with Al Qaeda and to fight a war you need the resources to do so.



Yes, I don't want our troops over there under equipped but I rather they not be there at all.  I am in favor of defense but we've lost more lives than in the attack we retaliated against, ran up a huge war budget, and for what?  Sending over troops for 3 tours of duty or more?




> No, it's Bush's rubber stamping _*every*_ spending bill that came to his desk that particularly irks me.  Yes, I really hope Obama loses in 2012... but I hope his successor doesn't end up being another big-spending Republican like Bush.  It'd be nice to have a Republican President with the guts to actually veto bills sent to them from Congress until all the pork gets cut out of them, and someone who insists that balancing the budget become a national priority again.



I hope the GOP can put up a good candidate as well.  I'd like to see the party taken back from the social conservative joke of party it's becoming.  I'd say a lot of work needs to be done, in both parties.


----------



## Ozriel (Jun 6, 2010)

Does it matter?


----------



## Zrcalo (Jun 6, 2010)

no.

because everyone knows that republicans live in the fictional land called "texass"


----------



## Lobar (Jun 6, 2010)

Telnac said:


> You see, the market isn't the problem.  It's government tinkering with the market that is.  They had the best of intentions: to help low income people get into homes.  But the result was that people could get mortgages when they shouldn't have been able to, and they used these mortgages to buy homes & flip them a year or two (or less!) and make a ton of money.  That ran up the cost of housing and led to the housing bubble that starting this recession in the first place.



The banks made money off this too, because they could immediately sell off the debt for a quick buck too.  I don't see how CRA can be blamed for the housing bubble (particularly when the volume of loans being given out were well above and beyond anything CRA required once Gramm-Leach-Bliley came around) when the banks were profiting from their actions regardless.  After all, isn't it one of the core principles of the free market that everyone can and should be expected to act in their own best interest?


----------



## JoeStrike (Jun 6, 2010)

Telnac said:


> You see, the market isn't the problem.  It's government tinkering with the market that is.



Yeah, thank God the government wasn't tinkering with the market by really enforcing environmental laws and making sure BP obeyed them. Can you imagine what kind of disaster we would've had in the oil industry if that had happened..

Sarcasm aside, 'the free market is sacred' is the kind of BULLSHIT we have to get over in this country. You can blame Fannie Mae all you want but FM didn't start hustling mortgage securities that turned out to be worthless - that's the kind of shit 'the free market' loves pulling on the rest of us.


----------



## Cavy (Jun 7, 2010)

JoeStrike said:


> Sarcasm aside, 'the free market is sacred' is the kind of BULLSHIT we have to get over in this country. You can blame Fannie Mae all you want but FM didn't start hustling mortgage securities that turned out to be worthless - that's the kind of shit 'the free market' loves pulling on the rest of us.




If only we stop living in candy land and coming back to reality, then we can see this side of the free market.


----------



## Fenrir Lupus (Jun 7, 2010)

Telnac said:


> Community Reinvestment Act under Jimmy Carter


OH MY GOD, SOMEONE ELSE MENTIONING THAT OTHER THAN ME!  I MUST BE DREAMING!



CrazyLee said:


> I say that religion get out of the marriage business. Keep marriage a contract between two (three? more?) grown adults, no matter what the gender. IF a person also wants a religious ceremony, that's up to them and their religion.



See, the thing is...  Calling it a marriage should be up to the people involved.  The contract shouldn't be called marriage, because it should be open to everyone regardless of relationship.  If I want, say, joint custody of a child with someone who is no more than a friend, or what about giving them the right to determine if/when treatment stops if I am unable to make that decision...  and binding of assets...  That's not "marriage," that's a contract.  Marriage isn't a creation of government, the contract that typically accompanies it is.  That contract isn't the marriage itself.  I should be able to get married without a contract (or a license, for that matter)


----------



## Fenrir Lupus (Jun 7, 2010)

Lobar said:


> The banks made money off this too, because they could immediately sell off the debt for a quick buck too.  I don't see how CRA can be blamed for the housing bubble (particularly when the volume of loans being given out were well above and beyond anything CRA required once Gramm-Leach-Bliley came around) when the banks were profiting from their actions regardless.  After all, isn't it one of the core principles of the free market that everyone can and should be expected to act in their own best interest?



The bank's best interest would have been to not give money to people who won't give it back.


----------



## Telnac (Jun 7, 2010)

OK, I see I've created a monster.  I'll be happy to debate the CRA, its affect on Fannie Mae, the culpability of the banks & Wall Street and who's really to blame for all this mess...

...but not here.  I think it'd be best to instead respond to debate threats on these subjects in the Off Topic forum than to continue to derail this thread.  If you'd like to debate me, please create a thread for that purpose and I'll happily throw myself into the fray.

So back on topic...

Why would it be hypocritical to be a gay Republican just because many other Republicans have an anti-gay agenda?  Unlike multi-party parliamentary governments, the two major US parties are coalitions of varying interest groups.  Someone may be a Democrat because they're a union member, and the Democrats are pro-Union.  Does that make that person a hypocrite if they also happen to be pro-life?

I don't know anyone, including Rush Limbaugh, who agrees with 100% of their party's platform.  That doesn't make anyone a hypocrite.  What makes someone a hypocrite is if they loudly proclaim that gays are degenerates, then is later on caught having fun with their gay lover.  No, someone can be a proud gay Republican so long as they make it clear that they don't agree with the anti-gay elements within the Republican Party.


----------



## Werecatdawn (Jun 7, 2010)

Can they? Yes.

Are they? Probably not.


----------



## Telnac (Jun 7, 2010)

Werecatdawn said:


> Can they? Yes.
> 
> Are they? Probably not.


Well, a fair number of furries responding to this thread have said they are...

...including myself.


----------



## haynari (Jun 15, 2010)

Well in my personal opinion, there needs to be a strong third party, which takes the best ideas from both parties and combines them into one super party that most democrats and republicans can support. I have had talks with a bunch of my friends (All of us are political fanatics) and we seriously think that there will be the rise of a new party, NOT THE TEA PARTY, that will bring about the unity of good ideas and will become a heavy opponent for the election, within the next 12 years.


----------



## RayO_ElGatubelo (Jun 15, 2010)

I wonder, what would happen if the Republican party split into a Libertarian party, which would abandon the notion of social conservatism and the morally obsessed clusterfuck they have now?


----------



## Fenrir Lupus (Jun 15, 2010)

haynari said:


> Well in my personal opinion, there needs to be a strong third party, which takes the best ideas from both parties and combines them into one super party that most democrats and republicans can support. I have had talks with a bunch of my friends (All of us are political fanatics) and we seriously think that there will be the rise of a new party, NOT THE TEA PARTY, that will bring about the unity of good ideas and will become a heavy opponent for the election, within the next 12 years.


 
/facepalm /facepalm /facepalm

Ok, you go look up the nolan chart and tell me where the compromise is.  I'll be sitting here laughing my ass off at you.


----------



## haynari (Jun 15, 2010)

Ok. well maybe we could have both parties be not as far to either side and we could work with the parties rather than just bickering and getting nothing done. it takes so long for anything to get done because both parties are being super stubborn and not wanting to compromise on anything.


----------



## Fenrir Lupus (Jun 15, 2010)

haynari said:


> Ok. well maybe we could have both parties be not as far to either side and we could work with the parties rather than just bickering and getting nothing done. it takes so long for anything to get done because both parties are being super stubborn and not wanting to compromise on anything.


 
Any compromise between sanity and insanity is insane.


----------



## haynari (Jun 15, 2010)

Quite true. but then again, we seem to be a nation of the insane.


----------



## Kobu (Jun 15, 2010)

Back to the initial question, I don't see anything wrong with it.  I don't share all of the same views of the party that I associate with.  Republican is just something people choose to associate themselves with because they agree with most of it's views.  Not necessarily all of them.


----------



## mrs.ferdo (Jun 15, 2010)

Harebelle said:


> Your political parties are terrifying.
> 
> From what I've read/seen, they aren't fond of the "different lifestyle" type people, and furries are all for loving them, so...


 
This. 
Not saying all republicans are like this. But A LOT of them are. Enough for it to be a stereotype. So... I guess they could, but other republicans would probably make them cry.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Jun 15, 2010)

I think it's great that we live in a country where you can choose one or the other and for me it's always opposite marriage :3


----------



## DoeADeer (Jul 21, 2010)

Apparently, since I'm a republican furry... and also conservative. *feels weird* ^^; Oh, and I noticed that you said the furry fandom is mostly gay/bi... well, that isn't true. In fact the majority of the fandom is straight, though it may not seem that way.


----------



## Xaybiance (Jul 21, 2010)

*Facepalm* 

DoeADeer, what do you not understand about "_Stop necro-bumping_"?!


----------



## Commiecomrade (Jul 21, 2010)

Luca said:


> Just because somone is a republican that does not mean they have to agree with the republicans on every debate.


 THIS.

I don't really like choosing sides, but I do usually find myself on the Republican side. I'm usually liberal about gay rights and eco stuff (who on here isn't?) but when it comes to government control, I'd like less of it.

But really, my political views are this;
The government doesn't do things well. They shouldn't be running everything. Now, if some company has extremely unsafe working conditions, destroying acres upon acres of forests, or becoming a monopoly, then by all means the government should step in. (When's BP going to die?). I just went to the DMV to get my permit. MY GOD, are those people living the stereotype. Everything is inefficient in that place.

Do I think we should still be in the Middle East? I don't know. I don't think it's about oil, I sincerely do think it's about finding terrorists. I guess they may not be powerful enough anymore, but I don't read military dossiers, so I can't say anything about this.

Ecostuff? HELL YES! We're running ourselves into a hole here. LGBT rights? Yes. Bailouts? No. Universal Healthcare? No. Illegal immigration? No, but only because that's just a slap in the face of everyone who came here legally. Fundamental Christian stuff? NO. Those people need to realize that they aren't the only religion in the entire world.


----------



## Bando (Jul 21, 2010)

Doeadeer, please stop bringing back all these old threads. It's fucking annoying.


----------



## Commiecomrade (Jul 21, 2010)

Bando said:


> Doeadeer, please stop bringing back all these old threads. It's fucking annoying.


 Dammit, didn't read the dates. I AM NOT AN ACCOMPLICE.


----------

