This thread has sure drifted in a lot of different directions from the initial post. See the track back from Pink Elephant Pundit above. It is from a social conservative blog which tried to attribute the views of those commenting here to the views of liberals, noting a lack of outrage as the comments went onto a discussion of the porn industry. I commented there to point out that of the three regulars who had comments here so far two are libertarians are one is a conservative.

There is something to be said for local mores and voting with your feet.

The libertarian term leaves the use of labels just as confusing. There are many social conservatives who now call themselves libertarian, such as with many of Ron Paul’s supporters.

That demonstrates the limitations of our labels. There are people who believe in God who are socially liberal and fiscally conservative who are both labeled liberals and conservatives. Currently far more people who fit this description are considered liberals as the conservative movement has driven such people away. For example, this description fits Andrew Sullivan. Sullivan calls himself a conservative but most in the conservative movement consider him to be a liberal.

Perhaps you should throw in your position on the Iraq war as a tie breaker. Currently the two strongest issues which draw people together under the liberal label are opposition to the Iraq war and opposition to the social policies of the religious right. (You can believe in God without supporting the agenda of the religious right of imposing religious views upon others). Beyond opposition to the war and social conservatism, liberals are all over the spectrum on economic matters, ranging from strong supporters of capitalism to hold outs from the old left. There both liberals who do and do not believe in God.

and @giantslor you wrote “a hate f-ck. It’s not rape, it’s consensual sex between people who hate (but lust after) each other.” and no you are not the only one who who know this term… pretty much everyone over the age of 16 knows it. But it kind of contidicts you point. Consensual being the key word.

It isn’t really based on whether one believes in God or goes to church. There are religious people on the left and there are atheists on the right.  Still that does work as a very rough generalization as frequency of church attendance is probably the best general predictor of ideology and party affiliation, with conservatives/Republicans being more likely to attend church two or more times per week and liberals/Democrats being more likely to attend an average of once or less per week.

It is a poor way to show one’s objection to the expressions of hatred in the Playboy piece by showing similar hatred towards others.

The point here is that this type of material is objectionable, regardless if directed towards someone you agree with or disagree with ideologically. It is possible to express one’s disagreement on issues without stooping to this level.