If you look at my relatively libertarian politics and you haven't known me for a long time, you might presume that I am secular and personally libertarian in my own conduct. If you look at my strict Christian beliefs without seeing my politics, on the other hand, you might presume that I am on the Christian Right. Well, I break such stereotypes and frankly I wish that such stereotypes didn't exist. My theological beliefs are these. I believe in the Nicene Creed, in the real potential for eternal (*)(*)(*)(*)ation, in purgatory as well as heaven and hell and I believe in consubstantiation (the co-existence of the bread and wine and Christ's body and blood). My moral theology is even stricter. I oppose all recreational use of intoxicants, suicide, smoking and fornication. Moreover, I believe that any deliberate carnal thoughts outside marriage are immoral, and I think that deliberate carnal thoughts in marriage are justified only with the sole intent of procreation. I think that the penalty for any unrepented sin is eternal (*)(*)(*)(*)ation. I also pray to the Christian God many times every day and I repent for all sins that I have committed, and it is my sincere intent to avoid sin.
However, I do not think that I have the right to enforce my beliefs on others. Should I, for example, advocate the government finding some way of reading our thoughts to ensure their moral purity? I also don't consider all or even most of the current administration's actions to be ethical, so if, as a Christian, I am supposed to be a supporter of George W. Bush, you can count me out of another stereotype. What I want to understand is first, whether there is significant truth to these stereotypes and second, if there is, why I am expected to support enforcing my full moral code through the government? I appreciate all replies. Thank you very much.

__________________
"I am a Tory Anarchist. I should like every one to go about doing just as he pleased- short of altering any of the things to which I have grown accustomed." (Max Beerbohm)

Most people of a libertarian or secular liberal nature are not hedonists, contrary to the beliefs of some of the social cons (I don't think social cons are always so innocent either). Most libertarian/secular liberal types I know are Christians who just don't think they need to enforce their beliefs, believing in free will and seperation of the sacred from the profane (what is government if not profane?). As for those of us who are not Christian, many not even religious in the strictest sense, aside from adolescents, I don't think there are too many of us that go out and look for deviant things to do.
I've lived up to a strong moral code and improve it by trying to make up for mistakes I make along the way, but I don't judge others by their behavior provided it doesn't affect anyone. And within reason I respect the religions of others. I don't expect anyone to give up their own moral code and beliefs. But don't expect me not to point out the things I don't like about religions. I promise I won't do it during any emotionally troubling times like funerals- because that's mean.
But I don't see such things as blasphemy, swearing, speaking against religion, or making off-color religious jokes in the right company as evil... and since those things hurt NO ONE they should not be enforced by government. I should never have to go to church in order to gain certain rights. I should never be expected to pray with you outside of your home (I bow my head during grace in the homes of others). I don't think you should be able to threaten me about Hell or market your religion to me using the power of the State or any of its utilities. I don't believe my tax money should go to any religious institution.
But the social cons are convinced people like me need to be controlled, lest we corrupt the minds of their children by perhaps mentioning something that makes sense to them. They're so obsessed with keeping their kids in a vaccuum that we all must pay with our freedom... at least those of us that aren't mainstream Christians.

__________________
"It's never over... BOY!"
The Tall Man, Phantasm III

I just call things as I see them. When Madonna blasphemes just to make money and tries to step on others' property rights to make even more money, I take her to task for it. When George W. Bush or Democrats trying to imitate him use theocratic rhetoric, I take them to task for it. I must be a "leftist" who personally likes pornography if I don't support Big Brother censoring it (in reality, most actual leftists on the site don't like the garbage). I'm not a "real" Christian unless I'm loyal to Pope- I mean President- Bush. Sorry, I just get sick of it. Criticism of Bush is seen by some as equivalent to criticism of God. I hate many things that I think should be 100% legal. Most anti-PC conservatives defend the legality of racist hate speech (as do I). Does that make them racists? Of course it doesn't, but by the same token the fact that I don't support criminalizing all immorality doesn't make me immoral. Do these social conservatives really want to ban everything that Christianity states is immoral? Logically, then, they should be seeking a way of giving the government the ability to read our thoughts at all times to make sure that we don't have sinful thoughts. I would call that a reductio ad absurdum, but given some of the rhetoric I see on this site, some of the authoritarian right-wingers might think that was a good idea. I hope that these people are on this site for a reason, i.e. that their ideas, like those of the anti-Semites, are too extreme to gain real ground in the "real" world.
I should note, moreover, that I'm not an extreme social liberal. There are some gray areas about free speech, for example. Books giving instructions on how to commit crimes often cross the line and thus should be banned or restricted in their distribution. If I had my say, I would legalize gay marriage and even (reluctantly) polygamy, but I oppose legalizing prostitution. I also oppose legalizing hard drugs.
Finally, I don't see the connection between hawkishness and anything Godly. Pat Buchanan, whose rhetoric is otherwise similar to that of certain hard right-wingers on this site, sees no connection, and those who do see a connection must truly believe that we are on a Seventh Crusade, meaning that they want to drag the world back to the Middle Ages. I now understand why nawbut chose a sarcastic "We don't 'do' the Enlightenment" as his signature at one point.

__________________
"I am a Tory Anarchist. I should like every one to go about doing just as he pleased- short of altering any of the things to which I have grown accustomed." (Max Beerbohm)