I am bit confused by this.
Conservatives tend to believe that we all have free will and can make choices in our lives which affect the quality of our lives.
On the other hand, Liberals tend to believe that people are born into certain scenarios that preclude some from ever having any choices in life.
these definitions of free will (Conservativism) versus pre-destination (Liberalism)
I am not liberal or conservative, I admit I lean to the liberal side on social issues and to conservative side on fiscal and govermental issues, although on fiscal and governmetnal issues the conservatives have lately gone for big government. Anyway, I fall somewhere in the middle, however I have known many Liberals and conservative and I think these definitions might be backwords. As time has gone on the stands of democrats and republicans have often reversed. It seems the current definitions don't quite fit with what you wrote above.
If conservatives are for free will, then why are they against -
- Gay marriage - Certaininly if conservatives believe in free will, someone should be free to choose who they marry?
- Abortion - If conservatives believe in free will, a women should be able to exercise the free will of what happens to her body?
- The drug war - Again, Where is the free will? I understand keeping this away from children, but shouldn't adults be able to exercise free will here?
As far as liberals being for pre-destination, I really don't understand that or where that could have come from. If anything, it would again be the opposite. Most liberals embrace the concept of personal freedom and self-expression. Pre-destination is a religious conecpt and as pointed out before, conservatives tend to be more religious.
I think the more generally excepted definitions are conservative - "supporting the status quo or opposed to change in tradition" and liberal - "progressive or not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or traditional forms." Conservative want us to keep things the way they are and Liberals want us to continue evolving. Both paths could be dangerous, and both have their time and place in history. If a society or organism evolves at too fast a rate it could be detrimental and kill it. Also, if a society or organism becomes unable to evolve, it has already numbered its' days.
I think it similiar to the teachings of evolution and creation.
The tradition of creation says - God created everything. It is fact and therefore we offer no proof.
The theory of evolution says - Life evolved over time. This is how we think it happened and here is the proof.
The creationist and the evolutionist, both with different theories, niether really 100% provable, but one is tradition based on ancient texts and the other theory based on the progressing knowledge of humanity.
I think(hope) most people fall somewhere in between the liberal and the conservative, neither extreme makes much sense to me.