A conservative or a progressive?

An inevitable ultimate question runs through his mind while reading news about the politics and the humans' current situation in the ever-worsening cold wars both within the west and east side of the Pacific, an ocean that ironically gave Eureka when the 'new world' was discovered.

Is he a conservative, or a progressive?

But has he ever really thought the meaning of those 2 words themselves?

What do conservatives conserve? 

And what do progressives progress from or into?

With his limited research, he concluded that conservatives tend to conserve the good old traditional values. 

Values that evolved from religions such as Christian in most American politics and Islam in most Middle-Eastern politics. 

Progressives in the other hand, 'progress' from these traditional values into more modern values that include economical theories, science and technology into their thinking process in making rules & regulations.

He is not surprised to know that there are still people who believe that the earth is flat because of this crucial point. 

Of course however, they are minority. Extreme conservatives only believe in what their source for traditional values tell them. 

Most conservatives however, think that science and technology are worth considering although slightly less important than religions and traditional values, ironically blabbing it loud enough on Twitter, Facebook and other technology-innovated social medias.

Abortion is the same as killing a person since bible does not really tell them anything about overpopulation and limited resources.

And gay marriage, is a sin, because science had not proven them that it's in the natural world for a small percentage of animals (including humans) to be attracted to the same sex.

With science, he then knows that the universe is at least 13 point 5 billion years old by tracking on the furthest star away from the center of our universe traveling with the speed of light right after the Big Bang.

With science, he knows that the earth is at least 4 point 5 billion years old by the radiometric age-dating calculation of earth rocks. 

With science too, he knows that evolution has made human become human after around 4 million years of non-random process of natural selection. 

To think that religions and traditional values that were developed earliest around 40.000 years BC deserve to be fought (conserved) better than evolution which had started 100 times earlier might be considered a strange act, mightn't it? 

It's simple. 

Should the constitution be fought harder than a law that was just made last week that was not really in line with the constitution? How could such a law be created anyway?

Shouldn't science & technology be conserved harder as it is, inevitably, the constitution of the universe?

Well, he thinks so. 

In the end, he never really understands what he is, a conservative or a progressive, as he is conserving the much more important thing to conserve, the constitution of the universe.