Sentences with phrase «not social liberal»

What's New Labour if not social liberal?

Not exact matches

And don't get me wrong, we got a lot of white liberal votes, but they tended to be people who were involved in social justice.

Not only are Johnson and Weld social liberals and fiscal conservatives, they espouse views traditionally associated with moderate Republican candidates on the economy, such as favoring international trade agreements and reducing the national debt.

Nault said the virtual presence that Trump has at the negotiating tables — through social media even though he's not physically in the room — is an unprecedented phenomenon, at least in the three decades the Ontario Liberal MP has been in politics.

The Trudeau Liberals will campaign against this type of social conservatism, and why not?

«If it wasn't for families stepping forward to share their struggles publicly, the Liberal government would have continued taking child support money that rightfully belonged to kids,» said Michelle Mungall, New Democrat spokesperson for social development.

A Liberal insider told this blogger that Mr. Turner is seeking the Liberal nomination because he «decided that the conservatives are not progressive on social issues.»

However, the Liberal platform also envisaged temporary deficits to finance higher spending on social programs such as child benefits, a higher Guaranteed Income Supplement for single seniors, public health care, child care and First Nations programs, and did not increase overall federal tax revenues.

I think it comes down to the reality that not only are most news reporters and producers liberals themselves, they are also embedded in social networks of people who are much more partisan liberals.

I'm genuinely curious to know of surveys saying that young people are leaving liberal denominations because they aren't interested in social justice, the findings of modern science, and creating a welcoming environment for LGBT people.

This habit is shared, not only by revolutionaries, but also by constitutionally - minded socialists, and even by many who would describe themselves as liberals, and who locate the instrument of social transformation not in violent confrontation, but in law.

Normal nihilism is not, however, a condition that grips only intellectuals, but rather forms everyone in liberal social orders.

That doesn't sound in any way noteworthy, except for the fact that these figures are solidly liberal about social matters.

I don't know, but I'll risk a guess that the editors thought it worth a momentary suspension of their liberal propensities to have someone take on with gusto, which Laurent certainly does, those terrible Catholic neoconservatives who construe Catholic social doctrine in a way supportive of a market economy and liberal polity.

The triumph of conservatives in the Southern Baptist Convention should not obscure the fact that a sizable number of Southern Baptists share classic liberal concerns for women's rights, racial and social justice and international peace, not to mention the viability of historical - critical method.

One of the biggest fallouts (to oversimplify) then was that conservatives cared about personal morality and not involvement in social ethics / issues of evil, while liberals cared about social ethics / issues but were seen as lax about morality.

The problem is that a basic tenet of classical liberalism — a tenet generally accepted in the Western world by «liberals,» as well as by many «conservatives» — is that differences regarding fundamental principles of human nature and morality are not a threat to social and political life.

Faced with these plans to pursue liberal globalisation, which does not concern the people at all, we must independently develop our own proposals for alternatives, based on social struggle which only the victims of the system can lead.

Christian does not equal Republican; frankly social liberals are more in line with the Gospel in regard to social equality and treatment of the poor and widowed.

I'm a Kingdom of God focused woman, postmodern, liberal to the conservative and conservative to the liberal in matters of both religion and politics (not an easy task, I assure you), a social justice wanna - be trying to do some good, and a nondenominational charismatic recovering know - it - all who has unexpectedly fallen back in love with the Church.

This overall agenda would not differ from those of most liberal Protestant or Jewish groups — except in the high level of consensus, and in the fact that the most important religious goal for UUs is «a community for shared values» (rather than theology or personal growth or social change or experiences of transcendence).

Even if we can not pray for some of these goals with much affirmation — even if we find ourselves praying for the salvation of liberals before Christ returns, or the redirection of evangelical social concern to its proper sphere of evangelism and world mission, or the disappearance of the electronic church — God will answer our prayers, with corrections if necessary, and will either change our minds or the minds of those for whom we are praying.

The real issue for the health of liberal institutions, it seems to me, is not philosophical foundations, but social and cultural foundations.

When liberal Christians or socially conscious evangelicals challenge the failure of this view's adherents to articulate social and cultural concerns, the reply is that such concerns are not part of the church's proclamation, but that individual evangelicals have always been motivated to reform and renew society, almost automatically.

We suspect that when the conservative clergy preach on such topics it is to denounce such individual action — when they preach on crime they emphasize «Thou shalt not steal,» while the more liberal clergy emphasize the social causes of crime.

Doesn't it seem like christians whether conservative or liberal scape goat social issues like abortions, gay marriage or contraceptives for really fiscal issues instead?

Therefore, while the Kingdom can not be directly equated with the social gospel, as American liberal theology has tended to do, the impulse to social action in order to help persons — whether individually or corporately — is in keeping with his spirit and is a legitimate derivative from his message.

But the loss of institutional hegemony should not be equated too readily with a weakening in the various forms of liberal impulse — theological, ecumenical, social, political.

Along with Anthony Appiah and other current writers about the university, she acknowledges the intrinsic value of study (her most recent book on the topic is titled Not for Profit), while ultimately defending the value of liberal arts as essential for social and political progress.

Conservatives, despite their substantive disagreements about the ultimate nature of things, have resisted liberal and radical calls for «transparency» in social life precisely because they understand that society can not withstand a too systematic or energetic analysis of its sometimes fragile foundations.

Despite its age, the liberal Protestant metanarrative continues to influence not only religious studies but also, as Milbank shows, the social sciences of religion.

By taking the lead in pushing the (phony) contraception issue and the (real) abortion issue, Udall didn't just define himself as someone who is a social liberal.

Orwin goes on to say that Liberal Democracy doesn't work like that in practice because it actually assumes a particular conception of the good: «For so long as you observe prevailing liberal democratic norms on all fundamental social questions, you're free in merely secondary matters to continue in the ways of your ancestors.Liberal Democracy doesn't work like that in practice because it actually assumes a particular conception of the good: «For so long as you observe prevailing liberal democratic norms on all fundamental social questions, you're free in merely secondary matters to continue in the ways of your ancestors.liberal democratic norms on all fundamental social questions, you're free in merely secondary matters to continue in the ways of your ancestors.»

Niebuhr said that the relevant norm for political decisions and social policy is not love, as the liberals had claimed, but justice.

Having endured for half a century a Court that seized authority not confided to it to lay down as unalterable law a liberal social agenda nowhere to be found in the actual Constitution of the United States, conservatives must decide whether they want a Court that behaves in the same way but in the service of their agenda.

The liberation implicit in the activity of liberal learning is not merely the concomitant of economic and social conditions that allow a margin of leisure, whether to the few or the many.

Accordingly, the social sciences may be expected to play an increasingly important role in liberal learning, as it becomes ever more evident that the conditions of human existence are not simply imposed by fate, nor the results of the interplay of blind, impersonal forces, but the consequences of deliberale human action.

Yet these young social liberals are not attending the dozens of theologically liberal old line Protestant churches in DC whose beautiful sanctuaries are typically half or more empty with disproportionately old congregants on Sunday morning.

We should not put any less emphasis than in the days of liberal optimism on the importance of large - scale events, of institutions, of the behavior of social groups.

The Renaissance insight of the possibility of indefinite moral improvement does not mean that Niebuhr returned to a liberal philosophy of progress for the social order.

Neo-orthodoxy holds that what the liberal expected, the transformation of the orders of this world into social orders which express and support the expression of Christian love, is precisely what we can not hope for.

The point I am leading up to is that for many laymen the gospel of liberal social activism offered to them by many pastors, denominational headquarters, and ecumenical leaders has not come as good news.

It was not until the 1950s that liberal intellectuals decided that the laity's preoccupation with personal faith encouraged self - absorption at the expense of theological and social issues.

Lastly, I can't wait till the «nation of Islam» penetrates into our government and social life, then all of you so called «liberals» will wish the good old christian values come back!!

While not all is licensed among Christians, a striving for personal rectitude is being replaced by a sense of liberal or revolutionary social «responsibility.»

A major shouting match, as we know, has also developed between religious liberals and religious conservatives, the two sides taking widely differing positions not only on theological orientations but also on social and political issues, and holding strongly negative views toward the other.

Now I recognize that process theology is far more sophisticated than Boston Personalism, and more sophisticated precisely because it is genuinely philosophical, but I fail to detect any substantial or real theological distance between Boston Personalism and Chicago Process Theology, just as I can not fail to observe that both are so clearly related to the social world of modern American liberal Protestantism.

Also you clearly didn't read this because the «Christians» they are talking about are completely different and separate from the social conservatives; they are «progressive» Christians, i.e. liberal left wingers.

The military isn't exactly on the leading edge as crusaders for the liberal agenda on social issues and even though atheists are finally getting recognition and not just rejection in the overall community, there are still many in the military who think differently and won't reccomend this soldier for a higher rank.

The Church's social doctrine is not a «third way» between liberal capitalism and Marxist collectivism, nor even a possible alternative to other solutions less radically opposed to one another: rather, it constitutes a category of its own.