Democrats are against the First Commandment., page 4

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 8 times

reply posted on 8-8-2010 @ 12:01 AM by links234

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
This is a radio interview with Congresswoman Sharon Angle.

I wanted to clarify that Sharon Angle is a candidate for Senator Harry Reid's seat, she's NOT a member of congress. I don't think anyone else addressed that.

In the increasingly unlikely event she wins she'll fit right alongside Michelle Bachmann and Steve King, who are in the house. I honestly hope all three lose. Bad.

All three are religious fundamentalists who view the bible above the constitution and would be more than happy to institute laws based on their religious views.

reply posted on 8-8-2010 @ 12:44 AM by desert

my 2c ..... When Sharron Angle says, "We’re supposed to depend upon God for our protection and our provision and for our daily bread, not for our government," (and throwing in the Commandments!) she effectively cuts off entitlement debate, giving it the full force of God's Authority. God wills it, it is so.

One does not even depend on fellow man. God only.

Well, Sharron, last time I noticed, Americans tend to depend on business for provisions and daily bread and police/military for protection, so are those entities also idols, and our use of them making us all guilty of idolatry and against the First Commandment?

The GOP plan since Roe v Wade was to elect those who would then nominate and confirm the Supreme Court justices who would overturn RvW. Ms. Angle is a twofer, using God not just to overturn RvW but also eliminate entitlements.

And Bill Buckley continues to spin in his grave.

reply posted on 8-8-2010 @ 05:39 AM by TheImmaculateD1

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1

Thanks for that perspective. Pretty good summary of what to look for in voting for a secular government.

I'll even go out on a limb and say that it doesn't matter if people with these personal values and this perspective of how a government should work do get into government.

We have some decent built-in protections to ensure that religion doesn't creep into our government, and that we will not become a "Christian nation," which is a far cry from saying it is a nation that welcomes, embraces, and protects Christians and people of all other beliefs and persuasions under the same principles...as humans.

If anyone were to attempt this, it would be a real battle. Best to keep an eye on it though.

The vote you cast at the ballot box shall be based on if this person will make everyone's life better. Do not ever vote in a secular Govt in The USA as we are not setup for it, hence how we have a seperation of Church and State and nothing shall ever come between that.

The Constitution is setup, designed and written so that one bloc cannot squelch or drown out a bloc whose numbers are smaller. This allows for us to embrace and protect those of ALL FAITHS and not those who happen to be the flavour of the week.

[edit on 8-8-2010 by TheImmaculateD1]

reply posted on 8-8-2010 @ 06:32 AM by dawnstar

and yet....
it seems that the religion props men up to be women's "God"...

I mean, who are you suppose to obey, who are you suppose to depend on to meet your needs, who are you supposed to rely on to protect you??

it seems the answer is different in the religion, depending on your sex....

reply posted on 8-8-2010 @ 08:46 AM by TheImmaculateD1

Originally posted by dawnstar
and yet....
it seems that the religion props men up to be women's "God"...

I mean, who are you suppose to obey, who are you suppose to depend on to meet your needs, who are you supposed to rely on to protect you??

it seems the answer is different in the religion, depending on your sex....

Government's job is to pass laws to keep the populous safe and to guarantee that no larger entity drowns out that of a smaller entity.

The International Spiritual Holy Order is there to protect someone from becoming a target or victom of a paranormal/supernatural/psychic and telepathic strikes as Government is unable to protect the people against strikes like that.

reply posted on 8-8-2010 @ 08:47 AM by ~Lucidity

reply to post by links234

Yes, I realized I made a mistake, but it was too late to edit. I had a different congresswoman on my mind when I wrote that. I won't say who

That for setting the record straight.

I think a lot of people are spinning in their graves. However, anyone who wants to can run for Congress. It would concern me if I was in their state or district, and I personally wouldn't vote them in, but if they win they win.

Angle is Tea Party endorsed, I guess. If people vote for her on that basis alone or on the basis of her religious views, which I assume many won't, that's their prerogative too.

And if she wins, she still has to work within the laws and the structure of the government as it was designed. And when she introduces laws and votes, there is still a counterbalance there. It's not too alarming, I suppose. We have a lot of safety nets in place.

[edit on 8/8/2010 by ~Lucidity]

reply posted on 21-8-2010 @ 11:47 AM by ~Lucidity