Democrats try to Deceive Christian Conservatives

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 27 2006 @ 08:36 PM
link   
Marge6043,


I'm sorry, but that post is a real downer, and I'm just not a real negative person. That being said, Yes I have all my rainy day goodies, but still hopeful, and still smilin'!




posted on Oct, 27 2006 @ 09:02 PM
link   
It was not against you... it's a figure of style... it's funny... look at this *removed*
This is what i mean.


[edit on 27-10-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Oct, 27 2006 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by HimWhoHathAnEar
Marge6043,
Yes I have all my rainy day goodies, but still hopeful, and still smilin'!


Well is better to be ready than sorry, things are not what it may seem now a days.



posted on Oct, 27 2006 @ 09:27 PM
link   
Off topic comments are sure ways to kill a thread.
Out of respect for the OP and members who post their thoughts in good faith, please return to the topic at hand.



posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 07:53 AM
link   


Starting to wonder if Christian Conservatives were actually duped. I mean Economy rolling, faith based initiatives increased. Sounds like what they were after.


Actually, they really want a consitutional ban on same sex marriage and to allow for the preaching of the christian faith inside classrooms -- the overturn of roe v. wade is also a big one... None of these things happened and the far right was not satisfied with the supreme court nominations. Why do you think Harriet Mierers bowed out?

Not to mention, we are losing not one, but TWO wars right now. (iraq & afghanistan)

Take iraq for example:




As the fighting in Iraq swerved toward civil war in February, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John W. Warner (R-Va.) expressed "a high degree of confidence" that a new government would take charge and that by the end of the year the conflict "won't be the same."

As October opened, Warner returned from Iraq with a far grimmer assessment. "The situation," he said, "is simply drifting sidewise." His judgment gave voice to Republican doubt that had been suppressed in a campaign season. Lawmakers who had vowed to "stay the course" called for change. One GOP senator declared Iraq "on the verge of chaos." By last week, President Bush was saying he too is "not satisfied" and is looking for a fresh approach.

October 2006 may be remembered as the month that the U.S. experience in Iraq hit a tipping point, when the violence flared and shook both the military command in Iraq and the political establishment back in Washington.



And how are things going in afghanistan you ask?:



Boston Globe -- The conflict in Iraq is drawing fewer foreign fighters as Muslim extremists aspiring to battle the West turn their attention back to the symbolically important and increasingly violent turf of Afghanistan, European and US antiterrorism officials say.

The shift of jihadis to Afghanistan this year suggests that Al Qaeda and its allies, armed with new tactics honed in Iraq, are coming full circle five years after US-led forces ousted the Taliban mullahs.


So much for "A grave and gathering" ..."Smoking gun in the shape of a" ... "We're fighting them over" ... "Iraq is the central front in" ... "We must stay the" ... OK, how does this go again?...

And I didn't even touch on # of casualties (which seems to be increasing, not decreasing).



posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 10:03 AM
link   

posted by zoopnfunk
Actually, they really want a consitutional ban on same sex marriage and to allow for the preaching of the christian faith inside classrooms -- the overturn of roe v. wade is also a big one... None of these things happened and the far right was not satisfied with the supreme court nominations.


No one ever gets Everthing they want. That's the beauty of the two party system. I personally think the contrast is quite clear as to who is More Conservative, and it definitely ain't the democrats.

As far as the War's, we've discussed this already, the Dems are not going to do anything significantly different.



posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 01:58 PM
link   
Just a word.

I'm neither "Conservative" nor "Liberal" and am an Independent voter.

Historically, the terms "liberal" and "conservative" have referenced 2 interpretations of the Constitution of the United States, and nothing else. It is pretty darned obvious at this juncture that either the true meanings of these two terms have changes nearly 180 degrees, or the people using them don't have a clue as to their intended meaning as coined.

I also think that it would do us all a great service to remove the word "Christian" from the use of the term in the realm of Secular Politics; unless, of course, it is applied to each equally. My point is that Christianity and Christian Values should never be applied to a Political point-of-view, since the former is not of the World, and the later is of the World. Understand, there are also "Christian" Liberals. When one credits "first use" to the proper source, one realizes that the term was originally coined and promoted by Pat Robinson and later used copiously by both him and Jerry Faldwell. Considering that both of these men's Ministeries have been profoundly de-bunked, I would feign from identifying myself with either the terms or the people who first coined it. For those who are too young to remember this, or have just forgotten that point in time, Pat Robinson, and later Faldwell, claimed the Bible as the Constitution, and stated that they were one in the same. This is, of course, catagorically untrue, and the seperation of Church and State is a necessary institution. Without it, we have Secular interferance in ecclesiastical matters, and the two are completely juxopposed, and so, only create mass confusion in each.

As a Minister, I firmly believe in the total seperation of Church and State, and for thousands of reasons well based in Human History and the teachings of Jesus Christ, whom, Himself, stood strongly against the ecclesiastical government of his time. Involving Religion in Politics was, is, and always will be, a mistake. We will be better off when we again stop doing that for the greater good of both.



posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 06:38 PM
link   


My point is that Christianity and Christian Values should never be applied to a Political point-of-view, since the former is not of the World, and the later is of the World. Understand, there are also "Christian" Liberals.


I find myself in disagreement with this point. If these are two separate worlds then how could one impose any values on anything. Any attempt to do so could be disregarded as 'of the other world'.

And Christian Liberal is an oxymoron. Deceived would be a better title IMO.



posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 07:57 PM
link   


I find myself in disagreement with this point. If these are two separate worlds then how could one impose any values on anything. Any attempt to do so could be disregarded as 'of the other world'.


Many people find there is a morality that transcends religion or specific denominations. Governments should stick to the basics -- the things most people seem to agree on -- and then leave stay the heck out of our business and allow people to practice their own faith and values.



posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 11:31 AM
link   
It's Base Less not Bassless. Base less means without a support or foundation. Bassless is not a word but would probably be interpreted as without a Bass which is either a type of Salt/freshwater fish or a musical instrument. Bass fishing off california is pretty bad right now. The bites off. So, yeah, as someone who enjoys bass fishing, I would indeed be Bass Less at the moment. In juxtposition to that statement I am certaintly NOT without a Bass-refering to the Musical instrument. I gots lots of those from 4 string electric to 6 string electric. I even get to borrow an old upright which is currently in my posession right now. So, in that respect I am not bass less. Retract those hurtfull statements about my musical instrument's and or fishing abilities.



posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by HimWhoHathAnEar



My point is that Christianity and Christian Values should never be applied to a Political point-of-view, since the former is not of the World, and the later is of the World. Understand, there are also "Christian" Liberals.


I find myself in disagreement with this point. If these are two separate worlds then how could one impose any values on anything. Any attempt to do so could be disregarded as 'of the other world'.

And Christian Liberal is an oxymoron. Deceived would be a better title IMO.


HimWHE--

I'd appreciate it if you would clarify, especially, your last statement, if not the entire post. Do you care to elaborate? I seem to see some "slipery slope" fallacy in your statements. Are you saying that, for example, a Liberal Democrat cannot be possessive of a strong Christian Faith and the associated Values, and is, therefore, "deceived" in his Faith, as well as his political views?. On the other hand, are you also stating the a Christian (statement of Faith) Conservative (statement of political view)
votes the "God Ticket" politically, or would prefer an Ecclesiastical Governmental form, such as that of the Vatican State?

Sorry, just need a little clarification on this----



posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 02:55 PM
link   
The whole problem with the Limbaugh brothers is that they tell a lie, or an opinion which they present as fact, and goad you into responding, which legitimizes their asinine assertions.

My favorite part of that ignorantly hate-filled diatribe was the Democrats "institutional sneering at Boy Scouts."

Don't forget, they eat kittens too!



posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 05:33 PM
link   

posted by Ed Littlefox
a Liberal Democrat cannot be possessive of a strong Christian Faith and the associated Values



Since Christians value God given life, and Liberal Democrats favor killing ie Abortion (infantacide). I would say that, yes, Christian Values and Liberal Democrats are mutually exclusive.



posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by HimWhoHathAnEar


posted by Ed Littlefox
a Liberal Democrat cannot be possessive of a strong Christian Faith and the associated Values



Since Christians value God given life, and Liberal Democrats favor killing ie Abortion (infantacide). I would say that, yes, Christian Values and Liberal Democrats are mutually exclusive.


Non sequiter, my friend. I dare say that you cannot prove your statement in masse.
What you state is pure Right Wing propaganda, and no more than that. I could counter it easily, but, since Abortion/Rowe vs Wade is not the topic of this Thread, I will refrain from doing so. Start a Thread on that one and I will happily refute your statement--and with the Truth.



posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 07:43 PM
link   

posted by Ed Littlefox
What you state is pure Right Wing propaganda, and no more than that.



Noooo.... Actually that's my personal opinion! If you disagree with me, you can simply state that fact. Call it HimWhoHathAnEar propaganda if you will. If the Right Wing agree's with my position, then so be it.



posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by HimWhoHathAnEar


posted by Ed Littlefox
What you state is pure Right Wing propaganda, and no more than that.



Noooo.... Actually that's my personal opinion! If you disagree with me, you can simply state that fact. Call it HimWhoHathAnEar propaganda if you will. If the Right Wing agree's with my position, then so be it.


Ok--I disagree with you. I do so because I detest social labeling and bigotry--neither of which is a Christian Value; quite the contrary. Look at it this way; Farmer John has a Bay Stallion; Farmer Pete has a Bay Stallion, Therefore, ALL Horses are Bay Stallions.

For what it's worth, you still haven't answered my questions.



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 09:12 AM
link   


Since Christians value God given life, and Liberal Democrats favor killing ie Abortion (infantacide). I would say that, yes, Christian Values and Liberal Democrats are mutually exclusive.


So, how do you feel about the death penalty? Don't most conservatives support the death penalty? Didn't George Bush authorize more executions than any any other state while Gov. in the state of Texas?



Texas executed 35 inmates last year, the most in the nation, and is ahead of that pace with 18 so far this year. Bush has spared only one condemned inmate in the 5 ½ years he has been governor, rejecting pleas from the Vatican, the secretary of state and officials of foreign countries whose citizens have been convicted in Texas.


or from wiki:


Under his leadership, Texas executed 152 prisoners, more than under any other governor in modern American history;


So does this mean that Christian Values and Conservative Republicans are mutually exclusive?

Please elaborate...

[edit on 31-10-2006 by zoopnfunk]



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 06:19 PM
link   

posted by zoopnfunk
So does this mean that Christian Values and Conservative Republicans are mutually exclusive?


Not at all. When the Law was given by God in the old testament it included capital punishment. It is done for the good of a nation as a whole. If I know that the only punishment for doing some horrific crime, is to spend the rest of my life in jail, which may be like a second home to some..............

You can't get any tougher on crime, and that's a fact!



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 07:59 PM
link   


When the Law was given by God in the old testament it included capital punishment.


So are you only accepting the old testament as valid christianity then?


Under the New Covenant Christians do not execute people for sinning. The most drastic steps anyone can take against an unrepentant Christian are withholding brotherly fellowship from him until he repents (1 Corinthians 5:9-13; 2 Thessalonians 3:14-15); and delivering or handing him over to Satan for spiritual correction (1 Corinthians 5:1-5; 1 Timothy 1:18-20)...

Just as Christians are to no longer execute sinners, so they should not wage carnal war, but spiritual warfare (John 18:36; 2 Corinthians 10:1-6; Ephesians 6:10-18; 1 Timothy 1:18-20; 6:11-14; 2 Timothy 2:3-5; 4:6-8). Christians must be peacemakers (Matthew 5:9, Romans 14:19), forgiving those who do them harm (Ephesians 4:29-32; Colossians 3:12-14; Matthew 6:9-15; Mark 11:25-26), treating their enemies with love (Luke 6:27-36) and not seeking revenge (Romans 12:17-21; 1 Peter 3:8-12). Hatred which is the same as murder (1 John 3:15), is unforgiving, vengeful and hostile towards one's enemies.

source: biblestudy.org



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 08:11 PM
link   


So are you only accepting the old testament as valid christianity then?



Christ said himself that he did not come to replace the Law, but to fulfill the Law. Which, to me, means that you don't throw out the Truths of the old testament.





top topics
 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join