I agree.

Liberalism I think is actually on the rise, so you don't have to feel bad about being int he minority.

I was pretty surprised with how many lefites there are on this site. Aside from the staunch flag worshipping right wingers (Halogamer, that other guy), most of us here lean at least a little left.

Anyhow, yes, I agree, and you own.

Now if only I could open up my religious and political views to my family without being disowned. :P

I could have written that.

I'm more of a fiscal conservative, mixed with social liberal. I agree with most of the things you say, but you don't really touch on many economic issues other than legalize certain things such as drugs, which I think would be good for the market, great for the government budget, and probably wouldn't be too bad for society. I mean how many people that don't do drugs only avoid them because it's illegal? I don't do crystal meth, heroine, cocaine ect ect and that wouldn't change if suddenly I could buy them legally.

I think the government should have minimal influence on business (though their should definitely still be regulation, absolute free market economy is ridiculous. There needs to be boundries but very distant hardly noticeable boundries), I think that alot of government programs such as welfare are wasteful and are in need of serious reform. But I don't think the free market is an amazing, tried and true flawless thing that will always lead the way towards the betterment of society, because it will fundementally always work towards it's own interest and when it gets too powerful it's interest trumps the needs of society to the detriment of society and business (such as our current health insurance model that is a burden to businesses, families, and hospitals). But I do think free markets allow for incredible ingenuity, competition, and the ability for people to see good for their hard work and should be allowed to flourish, but not for individual companies to dominate nations.

Socially I think live and let live. A person's right to swing his fist ends where my nose begins, but he has every right to swing his fist away from my nose. If gays want to be married, why stop them? If people want to practice a religion based on space aliens and telekinetic powers, who should tell them not to? I believe in pragmatism and science not ideology and faith. I would never tell somebody to abandon their faith, but their right to faith ends where another person's right to practice their beliefs begin.

I am not affiliated with any party, because I see identifying oneself with a vast group as a form of blind ideology. I will not vote for somebody I disagree with just because he has a particular label, and likewise I will not shy away voting for someone because they have an unpopular label. Ideas and actions matter, not blanket ideologies spread over a group.

Your points that I agree with:

• I am an atheist,
• I am pro-choice
• I think pre-marital sex is acceptable
• I think war should be used only in extreme circumstances
• I support gay marriage
• I think all people from all races, creeds and backgrounds deserve equal rights
• I enjoy the occasional drink
• I read the guardian
• I like Obama
• I think prostitution would benefit for being legalised
• the same for some of the less harmful drugs
• I support the freedom of speech
• I like renewable energy and I think it should be supported
• I'm proud.

The only one I don't is “I support better gun control”.

The issue with Liberals is this list is all the freedoms you think people should have. You did not list all the ones you think people shouldn't have (other then Gun Control).

An ultra conservative could make a list of all the freedoms he thinks people should have, and I would agree with his list too.

The problem I have with Conservatives and Liberals, is they are the opposite side of the same coin. Both want to take away your freedoms, the only difference is the freedoms they think you don't deserve.

I think as a free nation, all of our freedoms belong to us, and neither party has a right to take any of them away.

What freedoms do liberals want to supress?

I think some people confuse you as an ultra conservative because your stance often contradicts several left wing ideologies without the understanding that you are staunchly on the side of deregulating/downsizing government (something most liberal/labour/green view as the other side of the left-right spectrum).

I have come to respect your political viewpoints because they have offered something I haven't thought about previously, although I find myself agreeing and disagreeing with you at the same time because I've been unable to come up with a proper way of deciding where government should stand on these issues. 

I do have a question for you though, do yo feel that government should hold corporations or businesses to the same freedoms that individuals should have, or should corporations and businesses be held to different set of ideals than individuals (as I'm mainly alluding to restricting the rights that corporations and businesses have/should have).

I'm a liberal, and agree with Mafoo.  The only difference in the 2 party US spectrum is both parties have different ideas behind what right they want to restrict.

Left wingers restrict right by forcing Catholic churches to marry gay and lesbian couples, something I am opposed to (not the gay/lesbian marriage part).  I'm sure I could come up with many more, but maybe we should clarify what countries government we are discussing because these detailed issues vary from country to country.

Same thing for me, although I want all drugs to be legal.

Thank you very much.

To answer your question about rights businesses should have, I don’t think businesses have rights, only people. Laws in this country should only exist to protect you from others (never from yourself).

Businesses are owned by people however, so at some level, restrictions on businesses impact the people who own them. I am against those kinds of restrictions. On the other hand, a business should not be allowed to act in a manner that harms other people.

So for example, I am for regulation that protects the consumers from businesses, things like the FDA putting restrictions on items for consumption. I am for environmental restrictions so a company cannot pollute ground water that someone else might drink. Things of that nature.

Regulations like limiting what a CEO can make I am against. If the owners of a company decide to pay someone more money than the individual is worth, then that’s their fault (and a law to prohibit this is to protect people from themselves).

As for the question about what freedoms Liberals take away, they always tend to be finical, and most people who make that choice do not consider what money really is.

I work 12 months a year. Today I work 4 months a year for government. If that’s how much money was needed to provide laws that protected me from others, then I am fine with it. But let’s say 50% of that money is for entitlements (and I made that number up to illustrate my point, I have no clue what it really is), that means I work 2 months a year in the service of others.

The government has deemed that I must labor so others can benefit. I am no longer given the right to use that time to better my family, community, or self. My freedom to choose how those eight weeks of my life are to be used has been taken away from me.

Most liberals feel it’s the duty of the country to make sure people cannot fail at life. If there was a magic way to do this without stepping on the freedoms of those who choose to succeed, I would be all for it.

The problem is in a truly free country, there is no safety net, but there should be nothing in your way of succeeding either. I believe the way to make the country better is to remove roadblocks to success (like the civil rights movement), not to strengthen the safety net at the expense of others.

Just my way of looking at the world. Many people think I am wrong. :)

Good for you.