While the debate started on facebook, our responses are constrained by a limited number of characters for posting. Additionally, I’m not sure that everyone who visits our page wants to read the dialog (although they would probably benefit from it).

Follow the comments for the debate so far:

While the debate started on facebook, our responses are constrained by a limited number of characters for posting. Additionally, I’m not sure that everyone who visits our page wants to read the dialog (although they would probably benefit from it).

Follow the comments for the debate so far:

1. A belief in a transcendent order, which Kirk described variously as based in tradition, divine revelation, or natural law.
2. An affection for the “variety and mystery” of human existence;
3. A conviction that society requires orders and classes that emphasize “natural distinctions;”
4. A belief that property and freedom are closely linked;
5. A faith in custom, convention and prescription, and
6. A recognition that innovation must be tied to existing traditions and customs, which is a respect for the political value of prudence.

My struggle… I disagree with the large government and lack of libertarian concern of neoconservativism. On the other hand, I don’t see how paleoconservatives address fighting Islamic fascism or a world changing with globalization and developing technology.

Furthermore, does our loss of cultural identify and personal responsibility drive the growth of national government? Or is it the other way around; does growing national government create a society without identity or personal responsibility?

And I just wanted to watch baseball this afternoon.

1. A belief in a transcendent order, which Kirk described variously as based in tradition, divine revelation, or natural law.
2. An affection for the “variety and mystery” of human existence;
3. A conviction that society requires orders and classes that emphasize “natural distinctions;”
4. A belief that property and freedom are closely linked;
5. A faith in custom, convention and prescription, and
6. A recognition that innovation must be tied to existing traditions and customs, which is a respect for the political value of prudence.

My struggle… I disagree with the large government and lack of libertarian concern of neoconservativism. On the other hand, I don’t see how paleoconservatives address fighting Islamic fascism or a world changing with globalization and developing technology.

Furthermore, does our loss of cultural identify and personal responsibility drive the growth of national government? Or is it the other way around; does growing national government create a society without identity or personal responsibility?

And I just wanted to watch baseball this afternoon.