You'd think with all the anti-SOPA protests that the party that just lost the election would be pushing the issue. Hollywood and the media -- key copyright industries -- have never been friendly to Republicans. So they wouldn't make many new enemies with an anti-copyright position.
Meanwhile, they might be able to detach younger, technology-savvy, Internet-loving freedom junkies from the Democratic party by taking an aggressive stance on that bloc's core issue.
While many HN'ers seem to be donkeys to the core, I daresay a not-insignificant number would vote Republican if that party managed to get its head out of its elephant (the usual idiom features the wrong party's mascot) and put libertarian principles on the front burner.
Of course, hoping that politicians -- of any party -- will behave in a way that's actually in the public interest is probably a lost cause.
Not to mention the beneficial effects of having people in office who don't think that rape can be legitimate, etc., etc.
Even if that guy actually believes that, it was a stupid thing for him to say. I'm sure that even he himself would agree after the election results.
> fiscally conservative but socially liberal
Is it possible to be socially conservative privately but socially liberal publicly? I'm thinking it's not an inconsistent worldview to believe that things like abortions and homosexuality are morally wrong, yet it is not the government's job to enforce those rules.
I'd believe that most church-going, God-fearing Americans would say adultery is morally wrong, yet few would support making adultery illegal. In fact, most of the Western world looks down on many Muslim countries for their positions on adultery.
When you come right down to it, the reason many Christians believe an omnipotent, omniscient God tells people that it is His will that "Thou shalt not commit adultery," yet chooses not to enforce that moral compass by (for example) bending the rules of reality in a way that makes it physically impossible for us to do so, or making anybody who thinks about it change their mind before they actually do it...is that it is God's will that morality is something humanity should freely choose, rather than something which should be enforced by the power of the Authority above.
I fail to understand why so many self-described Christians do not agree with an argument endorsed by God Himself. But theology is rather far afield from my areas of expertise; perhaps there's something I'm missing.
I'm glad you clarified what you meant, I thought your first sentence was just referring to hypocrites.
I think it's possible. Your adultery example is good; I personally think that for 99% of people, polygamy doesn't work at best, and harms at worst, but I have zero interest in the government poking its nose into people's relationships, and I'd probably vote for multiple-partner-marriage becoming a recognized legal entity like man-and-woman marriage is today.