grovetown1 saidThanks for posting that.
As a non-religious conservative I often find myself at odds with my more faithful friends. I'm not convinced that delving into certain versus from the Bible are representative of a coherent philosophical rebuttal to the original ideas of conservatism - quotes out of context can be manipulated to any end. I think a more accurate philosophical approach would be to look at the goals of the Bible as a whole, and of Christianity in general, what their role is to a religious conservative, and how they apply that to their philosophy of government.
My personal opinion is that as a philosophy for personal guidance, the Bible is perfectly acceptable to a politician as a means of formulating their approach to EXECUTING their role in government, ie, am i ethical? am i faithful? am i charitable, forgiving and humble? The mistake many religious Republicans (NOT synonymous with conservative) make, in my opinion, is that they view government in exactly the same way their political opponents on the left do - as nothing more than a blunt instrument with which to force others to live as they do, in this case, in accordance with their particular interpretation of the Bible.
I say a definate "AMEN" to what your wrote:
The best biblical teaching which pretty much covers all good living practices is. "do unto others as you would have them do unto you", that means we don't kill, we don't steal, we don't cheat on our 'partners', we don't covet what your neighbor has to the point of stealing it or cheating them out of it. it means a high standard of truth telling rather than lieing to gain what a person or group wants.
The last one about lieing is a strict ban on using contrived bible texts to support slavery, to claim god hates gays, to make biblical claims of ownership of another peoples land and then follow that belief with 'Carte Blanche' backing of a 'bible chosen people's' war of choice against another nation. I could go on, but the reader gets the point I am sure.