To the new Parties

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Marriage- The status of marriage should remain as it is currently. We support the idea of marriage and believe that the nuclear family, composed of two married parents* and children, is the optimal form of the family, and is most ingenious way of raising responsible children and citizens.

To be honest, I prefer multigenerational extended families to nuclear families. What are your feelings on that subject?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Chairman of the Social Democratic Union (Name Subject To Change) here.

Role of government- The government is the natural extension of the people in accordance with democratic principles. Its role is that of a mediator between interest groups in society and a protector of those who would be weaker without its presence.

Fiscal Matters- While I doubt any of us would if asked say that we think there is somehow something intrinsically good about high taxation and spending, we believe that these things are far preferable to what we see Atlasia as running the danger of becoming without them.

Foreign Policy- None of us are warmongers and in general we support a strong but multilateral and humanitarian-focused international presence. We don't all have the same opinions on foreign trade but for the most part we are more in favor of free movement of labor than free movement of capital. It's all about what trade policies are judged to be best for the working man and woman both here and abroad.

Civil Liberties- We support absolute freedom of peaceful political speech but do not believe that unlimited private political spending is either required for or necessarily conducive to such freedom.

Abortion- I don't believe we (yet?) have arrived at any official position on abortion. My feeling is that I am probably much less in support of it than most of the party rank and file, but I could be wrong.

Marriage- The status of marriage should remain as it is currently. We support Atlasia's marriage equality and oppose any attempts to roll it back or undermine it.

Religious Freedom- We support amicable separation of church and state and freedom of religious conviction in the Atlasian political and cultural tradition; not hostile separation as in some continental European traditions.

Education- We believe strongly in public schooling at all levels, including strengthening our state university systems in order to provide the best and broadest-based higher education to all Atlasians regardless of class.

Immigration- Most of us support freedom of movement. I am personally in support of amnesty for peaceful and permanent undocumented immigrants.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Nathan: What about the rights of the regions?

Rights of the regions in what respect? Within the framework of making sure that every Atlasian citizen has access to his or her own rights, immunities, life and limb, education, square meals, and opportunity to work, we're entirely in support of regions tailoring specific policies to fit their unique needs and circumstances.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Nathan: What about the rights of the regions?

Rights of the regions in what respect? Within the framework of making sure that every Atlasian citizen has access to his or her own rights, immunities, life and limb, education, square meals, and opportunity to work, we're entirely in support of regions tailoring specific policies to fit their unique needs and circumstances.

What I ment is the right of the regions to disagree and not enforce or override via law the federal government when conscience and constuition dictates (ie Nullification) In the manner of how many of the states are opposed to Obamacare on the grounds of its interference with the 10 th amendment rights of the states?

They're perfectly free to do that and take it up with the Supreme Court. If the law's genuinely unconstitutional that's fine once the courts sort it out but not enforcing federal law simply on account of 'conscience' is itself unconstitutional.

To be perfectly honest I don't think this is something that most people in the SDU (NSTC) are terribly concerned about, relative to other issues.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Marriage- The status of marriage should remain as it is currently. We support the idea of marriage and believe that the nuclear family, composed of two married parents* and children, is the optimal form of the family, and is most ingenious way of raising responsible children and citizens.

To be honest, I prefer multigenerational extended families to nuclear families. What are your feelings on that subject?

While we believe multigenerational families have many advantages, and are arguably superior in achieving the aforementioned goals than the nuclear family, modern society does not really have the multigenerational family as a common unit. It has our full support and shall in no way be discouraged by our platform

As for gay adoption, I think Cathcon and Clarence have stated the position of the party quite well. We are for familial stability- that's the bottom line.

As a member of one of those few remaining stable multigenerational families (that doesn't all live in one place but whose members are in much closer contact than most aunts and uncles and nephews and nieces and cousins these days), good. I sometimes wonder if anything can be done to make the extended family a more relevant social unit again, but I haven't yet thought of anything.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

The CPA is center-right- more socially rightist than it is economically rightist.

That's still further right than I'm necessarily comfortable with. Besides, the Social Democratic Union (Name Subject To Change) specifically sent for me to be its first Chairman and to the best of my knowledge there weren't even any other candidates. I can't just leave them at the altar!

I'd have to run this by my rank and file first, but I'd definitely be up for possible agreements or alliances on areas where our parties find agreement.

Why do you oppose gay adoption. Sure, some of us might prefer that gay couples not exist, but they do. I'd rather have a child growing up in a family, as non-traditional as it might be (short of crime, etc.) than in a government orphanage. Those kids that are stuck there will hardly be ready for the world when they leave at the age of eighteen, and it's better in my opinion to have them growing up in a household.

I've heard of a LGBT couple in California that are giving shots to their adopted son to suppress his masculinity. The worse part is that this couple professes to be Jewish. Science proves that childern are best raised in a home with a married father and mother anything else and that kid will struggle with his or her self-identity.

I firmly believe in family stability. However gay marriage and adoption is a line I will not cross.

Anti-gay adoption: Because the plural of anecdote is data!

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Well, I wish you the best of success ,and I hope we can work together for families, communities, and Atlasia.

Likewise. After we finish our name and blazon voting, I'll be calling for a party convention (I've suggested either Boston or Chicago) and at that point I will definitely be bringing up our possible relations with other parties, including yours.

Also, I just noticed that I used the word 'agreement' twice in one sentence in different senses in my last post. Sorry about that, everyone!

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I don't know who to join.

The IFP has brownies and cupcakes!

Somehow I wouldn't trust your brownies...

Maybe you'd prefer the SDU (NSTC)'s whiskey and hard candy. The creature comforts of the Working Man.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I don't know who to join.

The IFP has brownies and cupcakes!

Somehow I wouldn't trust your brownies...

Maybe you'd prefer the SDU (NSTC)'s whiskey and hard candy. The creature comforts of the Working Man.

Probably. When it comes to alcohol I only drink the hard stuff because it's the only stuff that tastes halfway decent and isn't reserved for females.

I can only stomach highly diluted whiskey but the taste isn't bad. I actually prefer sweet dessert wines, which are reserved for women or very elderly men, but then I'm at heart at least one of those things anyway, possibly both, so yeah...

My favorite type of hard candy is candied ginger. That stuff's amazing, but it's definitely an acquired taste.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

We firmly oppose Right to Scab in any and all incarnations. Unionization is the cornerstone of an equitable industrialized society.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

We firmly oppose Right to Scab Workin any and all incarnations. Unionization is the cornerstone of an equitable industrialized society.

While I support the right to organize for the purpose of collective bargaining and guarantee of workplace safety I also equally hold to the belief that being forced to join a union as a requirement of employment in any industry is wrong. There are many "Regan/JFK Democrats" IRL who
While think it wise to have unions think it dangerous to allow union dues to go to causes and political canidates who oppose their personal values. I am from one of the union towns in the Midwest that have many conservatives who work in the auto factories like Delphi, Chrysler/Fiat and Ford who think the unions are so historically in bed with the left that the conflict with many of their personal conservative values.  

The solution to that is limits on political contributions, not taking a wrecking ball to the working class.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

We firmly oppose Right to Scab Workin any and all incarnations. Unionization is the cornerstone of an equitable industrialized society.

While I support the right to organize for the purpose of collective bargaining and guarantee of workplace safety I also equally hold to the belief that being forced to join a union as a requirement of employment in any industry is wrong. There are many "Regan/JFK Democrats" IRL who
While think it wise to have unions think it dangerous to allow union dues to go to causes and political canidates who oppose their personal values. I am from one of the union towns in the Midwest that have many conservatives who work in the auto factories like Delphi, Chrysler/Fiat and Ford who think the unions are so historically in bed with the left that the conflict with many of their personal conservative values.  

The solution to that is limits on political contributions, not taking a wrecking ball to the working class.

Allowing non union labor promotes competition and does not take a wreaking ball to the working class.

Non-Right to Work doesn't 'disallow' non-union labor by any means.

Regardless, I don't think you and the SDU (NSTC) will or would be a good fit in either direction, for several reasons.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Nathan: though we may be on opposing sides may we find a way to have an passionate yet amicable debate on the issues and maybe on an issue or two come together for the best of all Atlasians.

Definitely.