I’m all ears.
The reasoning matters more than the “stuff” when it comes to moral superiority, so no - I don’t believe one philosophy is necessarily superior to another.
Big Gov Prog.
Then why did you choose the one you did?
Color me unsurprised.
The Big Gov is your philosophy on the judiciary and the need for order.
Is “America First” as a principle immoral?
No, not at all. But again, I am not surprised that that’s the conclusion that you would come to.
What is “America First”, as a principle?
What do you mean “not at all”?
The first consideration when developing policy.
Come on man.
“America First” is a slogan, not a principle.
If you believe in anthropogenic climate change and resource competition, is it moral to have more than one child? More than two children?
No, it is not. Example Canada and drugs.
Example: Should we ship vaccine before we have vaccinated.
Example: Should we import refugees.
I mean that my judicial philosophy has nothing at all to do with the “size” of government - which is itself an utterly meaningless and undefined metric.
This speaks to my point, as a whole.
The simple fact that we disagree fundementally on what the term means is proof of its lack of sematic value.
Size and authority. Do you believe the judiciary has the power to do what it does today?
The more power gov has, the more it must grow to exercise it. Intrusion or imposition if you prefer.
You’ll have to be more specific than that.
I added to it.
Montana Rifles will do.
I don’t know what you are referring to. The rifle company?