@Atman: "In Australia last century the vast majority of Catholics voted for the Labor Party and even formed their own version, the DLP, when the communist influence began to dominate the Left."

Not quite: yes, the ALP was purged of Communist influence with the aid of the Catholics, but it then became necessary to purge the Catholics, who were equally pernicious and destructive of the party's aims. It is a testament to the party's integrity that this was done, despite the enormous rancour it caused, but it kept Labor out of office for nearly twenty years.

And anyone who wants to associate the DLP with the word "progressive" must be using a dictionary all their own.

davidf:
<Marxism and fascism were the great ideologies of the twentieth century, and they both unleashed horrors. Ideology offers the same certainty as religion and can be just as destructive to reason and humanity.>

Marx initiated a doctrine that was precisely designed to counter the pervasive conservative ideology of his day. What Marx had in mind was precisely a cure--emancipation from ideology. He failed and the vast majority today in the West remain ideologically-enslaved. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideology#Ideology_as_an_instrument_of_social_reproduction

It's long been the hope of the left that via piecemeal reform of conservative institutions, capitalist ideology (false consciousness) might finally be seen through by its benighted minions.
In response the capitalist state has shown itself to be remarkably flexible--which should point-up the fact for its denizens that there is no sincere morality within liberalism--while its alienated masses have shown themselves to be remarkably obtuse.

In the household where I was raised the word conservative, was usually followed with a mouthful of soap suds. My parents were died in the wool socialists. Why? Well because progressive conservatism died centuries before they were born; and replaced with extreme exploitative capitalism.
Capitalist with a born to rule mindset. Capitalists who needed Inflation to wax fat on the efforts and enterprise of others.
Capitalists who created thing like derivites, so they could virtually print/make trillions, without lifting anything heavier than a pen or engaged in truly productive enterprise or fair-minded profit sharing?
Capitalists who never ever had/have enough money but always want(ed) more; or rather, more of the store bought fair weather fiends, and the pseudo power and prestige; they invariably crave like an alcoholic craves booze.
Capitalist who concentrate more and more of our finite resources in fewer and fewer hands, until a tipping point is reached and a wealth destroying Great Depression or GFC is created.
There is a time to be frugal and a time to throw money around like a drunken sailor. The time to be frugal is when the economy is going well and spend up large when it is not!
However the conservative mindset seems to value even more counter-productive economy shrinking frugality when things are going bad, and generosity, as welfare for the rich and tax breaks for the wealthiest, when thing are going well, only to find it is a false economy that comes back to bite hard, as (a) structural deficit(s)and generational debt.
So, are there any genuinely rational reformers or progressives out there anymore? Well probably.
Just don't go looking for them in any current political party, all of who seem to have political masters, one would be hard placed to describe as the people? Or indeed, the great silent majority or moderate middle? Rhrosty.

I would defend -- and have defended -- science vigorously as the best possible method of getting at the truth. But I have worked in science, and I know that at least half of the claims made by scientists turn out to be false. What does that say about politics, law and the other disciplines which don't have self-correcting factors built in to them, as science does?

Conservatism is the natural result of bearing in mind that most new ideas will turn out to be wrong; and all it requires is a sense of history and some understanding of human nature.

RObert, you said "Bill Muehlenberg makes a good point in his article currently on the site regarding the Greens different treatment of same sex marriage and pluralistic marriages."

You must have missed or possibly ignored my derisive comment on Bill's piece. I was not impressed at all; it seemed quite clear to me that Bill is an old conservative, defending his set of 'morals' as the best for everyone and at the same time attempting to debunk his 'enemy' - the evil Greens.

Bill's argument was twisted and didn't make sense because it is obvious that is attitudes are based on negative feelings about gays and anger and a desire to destroy the evil Greens. It is psychologically impossible to come to a rational analysis of any question if you hold ideas that are based on a religion or 'feeling' that something is wrong.

It is quite clear in the psychology literature that polarised beliefs about others moral values are rarely based on fact. Strongly held beliefs prevent a person seeing the 'facts' as they are.

JonJ, further on in the comment thread says it is all about human nature; which is what I said. JonJ seems to think that human nature is a problem that we don't understand but psychologists do have a very good idea of how our brains basically work.

I fail to understand why you still have a problem with the CSA - along with many men who were treated badly by 'the system' and you blame the left'. I do not mean to minimising your outrage at the things that were done in the name of the children and protecting women from violent and destructive men?

You blame the left for that and blame the conservatives for turning a blind eye to the domestic abuse that was allowed to happen under their watch. I think you are minimising the problems that were caused by men who wanted to punish their ex's rather than care for their kids

But there are always two sides; neither of us is stupid or evil and bad things happen even when good people mean to do well.

But being so close to, and emotional about any issue is not the way to see the truth. This is quite clear from the psych evidence; 'detachment' or objectivity is the only way to see the 'truth'. I've quoted him before but Spinoza, one of the most interesting of the enlightenment philosophers, said the same thing centuries ago. To see the truth, one needs to hold no opinion either for or against.

What you say about bad human behaviour is true but these problems are all caused by our dysfunctional society, by our childrearing methods and failure to help the less fortunate to raise their children well.

We are by no means perfect and never will be, but our natural state is to be 'good' and the conservative idea of humanity is based on a mistaken understanding of the human nature as 'bad'.

If you are interested in human nature and the latest research about this, as well as a critique of 'the left', I recommend Jonathan Haidt's book 'The Righteous Mind'. This is a link to Amazon and some reviews of the book by conservatives. I am sure you will enjoy a look.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Righteous-Mind-Politics-Religion/dp/0307377903/ref=cm_rdp_product

He's a psychologist, also writes a blog that you might also find interesting. He's from the US but I've seen Aussies commenting there.

I think RObert that it is time to stop the war and tone down the political partisanship; it's obvious that neither 'party' is as good as we all want them to be and the only way to fix that is to talk co-operatively about what it is that we want.