Ah, I think you missed his fundamental assumption: "Conservatives think women should be barefoot and pregnant".

Rejecting your words on the basis of prejudice is a lot easier than thinking about what you actually had to say.

Hmm as a conservative I DON'T feel women (especially ones wife) should be barefoot and pregnant. They should be your partner in life.

Dearest Moxie,
Please feel free to e-mail me for an application to join my harem. Sure most Presbyterians don't have harems, but I've never been one to let the rules of convention, or law, hold be back.

Among my many endearing qualities, I'd be all for you staying home to raise the chirrens, as well as keeping you barefoot and knocked up most of the time. Well until you pass child bearin' age. Then well we'd have to put you back to work and find a couple of additional wives to help perpetuate our kind.

Of course the lifestyle we'd like to live in will be kind of expensive and I probably can't afford to have multiple wives on my salary so could you bring along a couple of rich female friends that are "career" oriented?

As long as we keep the Dems out of the White House and Janet Reno away from an advising position we should be pretty safe to start breeding.

All my Best,
phineas g.

PS: Please send pictures of the sports car you'll be gifting me.

Ed: Who the hell wants a partner in life when you can have someone that's obedient?

Dishman -

You missed my rejection of that very fundamental assumption - "I'll avoid the word 'most' here because I know better."

I am well aware that conservatives are capable of rejecting the barefoot-and-pregnant model - I'm married to quite the liberated conservative. But like racism and polio the b-and-p model hasn't been completely eradicated, and it's quite a pitfall for the liberal or conservative liberated woman.

It's quite important to separate conservative/liberal from the values question. Yes, it's probably pretty crucial for a committed couple to agree on abortion. That however has very little to do with one's opinion on government's involvement in the question. There are a lot of people with moral objection to abortion that still get skittish at the idea of their government making the decision for them.

And that's where the line blurs. Pennsylvania just elected a pro-life Democratic senator. Many Republicans are rooting for Rudy Giuliani, a pro-choice Republican - in 2008.

So curtail a far-too-long story: values are important; political inclination has little to do with it.

"Why would I show sympathy for liberal women who can only find men who want a wife and mother for his children? I'd want to change places with them immediately!"

I kinda figured that one of the tennets of marriage would be the hope of having children eventually. When people get married with the full intent of NOT having children, it seems they want more a 'Pal' (or roommate) than a wife or husband.

Sure, there is emotional intimacy, trust, some division of labor but you can get that from a roommate.

Okay, there's also kissing and sex, too. But has that stopped the libby's outside of wedlock?

What would be the reason of being married, then? Would it be that they want the _experience_ of being married and then when things don't work out they can always divorce? Is this what is driving the divorce rate up?

So now I am going to speak in a way that Liberals can understand (and us Christian Conservatives can too):

One thing is for certain though is that children change the whole equation in the marriage package.

If you get a divorce, in the eyes of the government, you are no longer married.

If you get an annulment, in the eyes of the church, you are no longer married.

But if you have children, in the eyes of that child you will always be Mom and Dad. Their life is Lifes temporal proof (or liscense) that there has been a union of you both. Seperation after than is never quite accomplished as long as either/both has relations with that child.

Perhaps that is why I would not be interested in a woman who wants to marry but not have kids: deep down she may really only be interested in the experience of marriage and is not deeply committed.

Amen. Being a 25 year-old male in a Purple state (leaning to whatever color would be slightly bluer than purple.. I only had an 8-color crayon box) it is nearly impossible to find a woman with even similar viewpoints. Often, I have to supress laughter when I realize the awesome film they breathlessly invited me to watch was Loose Change.

If there is any chance of starting an exchange program, sign me up first.

Moxie,

I've been reading your blog for a couple of years (I know ... slow reader).

I think you should start a cultural exchange with New Zealand. Specifically Wellington. OK, specifically my place.

New Zealand is too far.

On the other hand, Oklahoma is a cheap SW Airlines flight.

You SOBs keep yer damned hands off my woman.

There's no way she can resist joining my harem.

Joel, thanks for your comment. You appear to be one of the few reasonable liberals!

But for me, I am a conservative Republican BECAUSE of my values. I'm willing to admit, there are pro-life Democrats, and pro-choice Republicans, in the sense that they break the party mold. I just don't happen to be one of them.

I used abortion as an easy example, but there are dozens more reasons why I have never voted for a Democrat. And likely, never will.

It's a great point tho, and interesting issue. Maybe I'll write something soon about why I think values and political party are inextricable these days.

Phin, I've send you my harem application!

I like the point about marriage being effectively permanent to the kids of divorce. I don't think that couples should date past the third month if they haven't talked about what they expect their lives to be like 5, 10 and 20 years down the line. Will it include paying for the college tuitions of 2 or 5 kids? Will it be in a Blue or Red state or town? What will be the religious upbringing of the spawn? Will kidlets be raised by a parent or an illegal immigrant so that mommy and daddy can afford to go on fancy vacations and drive late model cars?

I don't think I could stand waking up next to a woman whose values I strive to oppose for my own good, the good of my community, the good of the country and the good of the world. I'd want my spouse to feel the same.

What the hell is the kid of a Matalin and Carville supposed to think growing up?!? That's going to be one screwed up kid.

Shared values and goals will get a couple through good times AND bad. Hot monkey sex doesn't last forever... I've heard. (Oh, and it was my WIFE who coaxed me into her being barefoot and getting pregnant with our six kids.)

Lastly, y'all are going to have to come through "Moxie's rabbi" before I give you my blessing.

Like a mohel... I take tips. Unlike a mohel, I'll take more than a tip if I DON'T like you.

Maybe your criteria are too narrow Moxie. It's amazing how people and perceptions can change. It really depends upon the principals.

I had considered myself liberal well into my 20s. After zigzagging across the country, I wound up in L.A. By the time I met my wife to be, in my late 20s, the wider exposure to viewpoints quite different from Eastern liberalism had moved me libertarianish (the final push came when Clockwork Orange starkly revealed how "liberalism" pertained to acquiring power and that it really hated individuals).

Now this was tricky. Despite a general libertarian leaning, I viewed abortion dimly. She being a country-club type conservative, was pro-choice leaning. I wanted kids, I wasn't too sure of her. We were both professionals in different fields.

Backtracking abit, we hit it off immediately and were living together by day 3.

Afer a few years, she wanted marriage. I demured. Tax laws would hit us with a marriage penalty -- hear that you others? -- and unless there were kids, why pay it? She being a CPA, found it hard to disagree. So it went on pretty well.

Then after nearly 5 years, she finally became pregnant. I stood by my commitment.

We were together 29 years before she passed 4 years ago. Two great kids. She let them be influenced mostly by me since I was the practical philosopher. She considered them to be the best achievements in her life despite her professional status and many awards.

Oh. And one more thing. She said she ultimately understood something that most people think is a bad thing.

She said frequently to whomever brought it up, that the two times she felt the healthiest was when she was pregnant (which lasted until nursing ended). She laughed that the bare feet were necessary to allow relief from swollen feet.

Oops. That wound up in the wrong thread. Except for the barefoot and pregnant reference, I think this belongs in Your Turn.

Sorry Moxie.