GOP Candidate Endorses Death Penalty For Rebellious Children

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


The reason you don't hear them talk about it is because he DIDN'T ADVOCATE IT!

He co-authored a paper that discussed ALL ways to control population growth...which makes sense given the issues arising form overpopulation. Denying that overpopulation causes issues is a FACT, and merely discussing all possible solutions isn't the same as advocating it.

I suggest you read the actual paper instead of posting misinformed nonsense!

Originally posted by humphreysjim
Stop equating a fetus with a grown child, people!

At least admit there is a difference otherwise masturbation is going to have to be accepted as murder too, because all those potential human beings are being denied the possibility of life. That way insanity lies.

edit on 9-10-2012 by humphreysjim because: (no reason given)

this is one of the silliest arguments. Liberals here are demeaning all of the Republican party over a few odd comments, and yet you do not understand the difference between a sperm and a fertilized egg. Go back to high school sex ed....oh wait I think they failed.

I hear all this talk, "Christians would do this", "Christians would do that", "Christians want a theocracy, Christians are like the Taliban". I'll be the frist to say I have met some wacky (usually uneducated christians).

But I have to say I am a Christian, have been so since my late teens, been to many, many churches, and have never heard ANY of this stuff you guys are talking about. You guys are digging up the extreme nutballs (and yet no one is strapping explosives to themselves in Christianity yet). Do some of the more "fundementalists" take positions of hard core pro-life, yes. Do some "evangelicals" get a little passionate about spreading the message of Christ...yes.. (By the way, you can be a fundamentalist and not evangelical, you can be both, or you can be evangelical but not fundamentalist).

Some of the comments or paranoia on here sound like a bunch of Germans talking about the Jews in 1936. You might want to check yourselves, because I think the atheists are far closer to being Nazi's than most Christians.

Incidently, I am going to give a very brief explanation about the Old Testament v the New Testament and the "contradictions".

The Old Testement is several books including history, law, poetry, and prophecy. To make a long, theological discussion very short. The "law" portion of the Old testament is essentially the list of what you would have to do to be "holy" before God.

But guess what. You can't. A human being, in the flesh, and within their OWN spirit, can not in mind and body, thought and action "do" the required laws of the old testament. And that's why they were there. To point you to a Savior.

The story of the Savior is the New Testament. You don't have to do the things in the Old Testament. You don't have to follow the whole law. All you have to do is accept and beleive that Christ COMPLETED the law. and you are now righteous in the sight of God.

You should WANT and strive to be Holy, and to show love to your neighboor as yourself. That's about it, in a nutshell.

Baby Food

"I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed, is, at a year old, a most delicious nourishing and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricasie, or a ragoust."

**Sarcasm Alert**

I have a better idea, let's just eat our offspring. Allow limited hunting in particular seasons/states. I've heard of Man Food, havent you?

Serve it at the next church function. Tell them the feast is on me.

reply to post by MrXYZ


Yeah...I guess double standard isn't in their vocabulary. ALl religions are evil in my book. Just to clear it up. There is nothing wrong with being spiritual just leave religion out of it.

reply to post by SrWingCommander


Here's a big problem; with Christianity the dogma and belief varies from believer to believer. Believers that are already assimilated into modern society & accustomed to our system of law, ignore certain parts of the Bible like the plague.

Your belief system is founded on the notion that the Bible is the infallible direct translation of/from God. I would assume to truly follow Christianity then, you must accept the Bible as it is; no cherry picking & making excuses for the parts that offend most rational people.

Would you have children put to death for being rebellious/cursing? Would you have those who practice "magic" executed? How about executing homosexuals and adulterers? Do you agree with the acts of genocide, mass-murdering babies, torture, and free passes that God gave people to mercilessly slaughter other groups of people -- for the most trivial reasons nonetheless?

Christians are divided on this. On the "perfect" nature of scripture, and will justify whichever atrocities God enacted on his own creations. You will pick out the parts of the Bible that serve to bolster your faith, and the parts that seem horrible you just skim over or brush under the rug.

reply to post by MrXYZ

The reason you don't hear them talk about it is because he DIDN'T ADVOCATE IT

You have to be FREAKING KIDDING me! Of course he advocated it or he wouldn't have written it in his book. He didn't write that the Nazis were doing it, he wrote that it was a possible solution to overpopulation. This means he advocates it. Take off the blinders please. And Jonah Goldberg's book, "Liberal Fascism", then you will understand that all this depopulation and killing babies and old people and rationing healthcare is all leftist policy that came out of the Progressive Party.

reply to post by mahatche


Stop arresting people for using belts on their children. Dont need to kill em, but everyone understands pain, it's universal.

reply to post by Raelsatu


I think you missed the point of my post....rinse, repeate, read again.

Let's go a bit deeper. I don't think it's 'cherry picking"...but I will tell you that I don't think it is ignoring the parts I don't like. It has more to do with the fact that you have to look at the Bible, both as a whole and as parts in it's entirity. You also have to look at individual scriptures in both the context of the audience of the particpants, and usually in the contect of the original language. While the Dead Sea Scrolls pretty much proved that the scriptures today are the same as the scriptures "back then" looking at them in their particular language, (greek, aramaic, or Hebrew) can greatly alter the meaning. It won't contradicted the meaning, but can give much clarity and context.

From a spiritual percpective, there is a doctrine (and it is based in scripture, although I don't have the reference) that essentially states that if you have not accpeted Christ's gift of salvation, and have not accepted Him, that you CANNOT understand God's word, because it is by faith and spiritual witness that one gains understanding of/and through, the Word of God.

Originally posted by SrWingCommander
I hear all this talk, "Christians would do this", "Christians would do that", "Christians want a theocracy, Christians are like the Taliban". I'll be the frist to say I have met some wacky (usually uneducated christians).

But I have to say I am a Christian, have been so since my late teens, been to many, many churches, and have never heard ANY of this stuff you guys are talking about. You guys are digging up the extreme nutballs (and yet no one is strapping explosives to themselves in Christianity yet). Do some of the more "fundementalists" take positions of hard core pro-life, yes. Do some "evangelicals" get a little passionate about spreading the message of Christ...yes.. (By the way, you can be a fundamentalist and not evangelical, you can be both, or you can be evangelical but not fundamentalist).

Some of the comments or paranoia on here sound like a bunch of Germans talking about the Jews in 1936. You might want to check yourselves, because I think the atheists are far closer to being Nazi's than most Christians.

When I said there is a Christian equivalent to the Taliban, that wasn't to suggest they represent all Christians, but here's the thing, the Taliban doesn't represent all Muslims either. The Taliban makes up a very small percentage of the worlds 2 billion Muslims.

The main difference is the Taliban actually had power to enforce their philosophy. They tend to take over lawless unstable areas and they "stabilize" them by acting as the law. They have nothing to stand in their way. There is no destabilized lawless places for Christian extremists in America to take over, here in America they would be arrested for acting on their extreme beliefs.

America is more stable, so it's harder to do here, but that's not always the case in other countries. It was American fundamentalists Christians, who encouraged Uganda's kill the gays bill. In the Niger Delta children are accused of being witches by people who are mislead by Christian extremists

What happens here in America isn't necessarily the end all be all for christian extremism.

My fear for these extremists in America comes from the good old slippy slope. While an extremist government setting up here may seem unlikely, more and more Christians do believe America should be run as a Christian nation. The GOP has shown it's willingness to pander to the far right, and we already have several dominionists within our government.

Let's say hypothetically we do establish a type of theocracy in America, how long do you think it would take before the more extreme fundamentalist voices start spiritually shaming people with questions like "if we are true Christians, why don't we handle _____ like the bible says"? It would start with stuff like the treatment of gays, and rick santorum's crusade against condoms, but once those are in place, there would be other unfulfilled changes that the extremists would constantly push for in order to meet their ideal vision of a christian nation.

This is how it happened in many middle eastern countries, they weren't always run by extreme fundamentalists, it only took a few charismatic leaders who where willing to spiritually shame people into seeing things their way.

I'm a Spaniard, my people's history has been constantly tainted by the mixture of politics and religion. All Spaniards weren't nutcases, but it only took a few crazy leaders and a handful of people who where willing to follow their orders.

The same is true here, all Christians may not be crazy, but if the crazies land positions of power, and work on building up their following, crazy things can happen. If history shows us anything, people will become afraid to speak up against it, because they would be spun into heretics, and asked why they hate gods rules.

I'm just imagining what it might be like to live in a house where the mom or dad follows this belief. That they'd be OK with killing me if I stepped out of line.

I had a critical dad who didn't know how to show affection, but he was always there for us. He used some spanking, but did his best to be fair. But I can't imagine the loathing and fear I would have if he EVER backed that up with some biblical killing.

I'm pretty sure that being in a prison or juvenile detention would be far healthier than living "under a death sentence" like that. This is definitely a philosophy from some group that is indistinguishable from the Taliban except for a few key religious names and accents.

God is it me or is the GOP realllly crazy? These thought crimes should be enough to give them the boot. Petition to have this bizarre murderer removed.

Originally posted by SrWingCommander
reply to post by Raelsatu

 

While the Dead Sea Scrolls pretty much proved that the scriptures today are the same as the scriptures "back then" looking at them in their particular language, (greek, aramaic, or Hebrew) can greatly alter the meaning. It won't contradicted the meaning, but can give much clarity and context.

From a spiritual percpective, there is a doctrine (and it is based in scripture, although I don't have the reference) that essentially states that if you have not accpeted Christ's gift of salvation, and have not accepted Him, that you CANNOT understand God's word, because it is by faith and spiritual witness that one gains understanding of/and through, the Word of God.

If the Bible is supposedly the innerant word of God, I would like to know why so many followers of Christ dispute its passages. From simple interpretations to laws regarding capital punishment. All the denominations have their own ideas of what does or does not constitute the real truth; & putting things into context doesn't change the clarity of words and history -- doesn't change the incredible acts of violence enacted and condoned by an all-loving 'Creator'.

The "You cannot understand scripture unless you've accepted Christ" arguing point is fallacious. I was raised in a Christian family, went to church every week for 16 years & believed myself to be Christian. I was sure I was saved; over those years I not only saw conflict between believers in a so-called inerrant book, but my own conflict of logic ate away at me deep down. The invention of hell is a ruthless & disgusting fear-trip -- one that keeps those raised religious tied down, & ropes others in with physiological hooks and chains.

Spirituality is a powerful thing that affects people in different ways; just look, over 1 billion Muslims. Christians will say that one billion people are deceived by Satan. They will say the same to you. Catholics believe in acquiring eternal bliss via good deeds & giving to the church, while at the same time fortifying an institution built on the blood of innocents, greed & unimaginably horrifiying atrocities. Yet people will follow their gut, due to the fact that we're hardwired to be religious - or philosophical; and be afraid of what waits for us when the lights go out.

So yes your argument is unfounded, for one because I was Christian once & was surrounded by Christians. I still am. Secondly because it's an illogical Christian axiom that works off the premise that only the faithful can interpret the words correctly. Some verses are vague, some are blunt. Some are common sensible, some make you think deeper. Yet the fact remains that the Bible is full of explicit tales, that if made into a realistic film would be so grotesque and repulsive you'd have to wonder.

Originally posted by SrWingCommander
The story of the Savior is the New Testament. You don't have to do the things in the Old Testament. You don't have to follow the whole law. All you have to do is accept and beleive that Christ COMPLETED the law. and you are now righteous in the sight of God.

You should WANT and strive to be Holy, and to show love to your neighboor as yourself. That's about it, in a nutshell.

It doesn't really matter that you personally feel that way. Earlier in the thread OkieDokie posted a link to the doctrine of dominion theology which explicitly states

The OT Law is our rule of life for today. Although DT teaches that keeping of the Law is not a condition for salvation, it is a condition for sanctification. In addition, the OT Law is to govern over society as well. Since we are called to subdue the earth (Gen 1:28), God’s Law should rule (or dominate) all aspects of society. This view is known as theonomy (or God’s law), and is described by Greg Bahnsen as, “The Christian is obligated to keep the whole law of God as a pattern for sanctification and that this law is to be enforced by the civil magistrate” (Theonomy p34). This would mean that Christians would be obligated to keep the whole OT Law except in a case in which the NT explicitly cancels a command, such as the sacrificial system.

These are the crazies we fear. Rick Perry is seen as a dominionist, and up until the opps heard around the world, he was seen as a serious candidate for president. The New Apostolic Reformation clearly states their plans to infiltrate our government and they are using people like Perry to their advantage. Palin and Bachmann also have connections to NARs, and Rick Santorum walks dangerously close to the line of dominionism, some say he has already crossed it.

Their rise to power isn't all that far fetched.

they can define "rebellious" and would have too much centralized power with an ability to kill

thats dangerous as hell

reply to post by jude11


That's one way of looking at it but I think that may be going to extremes.

What about a 16 year old kid that rapes and murders some kid? Should that "kid" be executed?

I haven't read the guys book so I don't know in what context he was speaking.

I certainly do know how people love to take an excerpt from something and use it out of context to justify their agenda.

I would have to read the book to make a fair assessment.

I find it completely amazing that something a State Rep Candidate for the Arkansas Legislature wrote would generate such a commotion when some of our National Reps are spouting off comparable stupidity all the time and garner little attention. This man has very little if any influence in the field of national politics. The fact that the MSM is giving time to his tired rhetoric leads me to believe that they are trying to initiate more racial division, but that is just my opinion.

Originally posted by anarky1965
I find it completely amazing that something a State Rep Candidate for the Arkansas Legislature wrote would generate such a commotion when some of our National Reps are spouting off comparable stupidity all the time and garner little attention. This man has very little if any influence in the field of national politics. The fact that the MSM is giving time to his tired rhetoric leads me to believe that they are trying to initiate more racial division, but that is just my opinion.

what national rep have suggested comparable stupidity?

and where the hell are you getting racial division from this?

Its not like he said we should have Forced Aborition and Sterlizion to help with population control Oh wait Obamas own science czar John Holdren said that he also said drug the water too. I Wonder were the MSM was with that story.

The American religious right-wing conservatives are the US's equivalent to the Taliban. They both need to go.