LIBERAL CHRISTIANS?

[ted]

Choosing the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil. When I'm faced with that kind of choice, I just write in somebody else that's not on the ticket that I know would lead with a Christian heart. I may not pick the eventual winner, but I didn't vote against my faith, either.

t.

[Guest LCPGUY]

Choosing the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil. When I'm faced with that kind of choice, I just write in somebody else that's not on the ticket that I know would lead with a Christian heart. I may not pick the eventual winner, but I didn't vote against my faith, either.

t.

Ted

Bro John

[Catsmeow]

I think the last several elections I voted by "write-in". My husband asked me, "Who'd you vote for?"

I said, "Jesus Christ". I wrote His name in. It's my right as an American to vote according to my own conscious and I was inspired to write in God.

RE: Catholics

I disagree with some of the basic things they teach but I love them as brethren just the same.

[Work in Progress]

Still, don't forget...we have some people who are very new to the faith and aren't too bright.

I'm married to one. It takes enormous patience to guide and direct them. Whenever my husband says he's a Democrat, I just cringe inside.

It's not easy living with a new believer. He should have shown more fruit by now but it's a real slow going.

I hope we can remember that people make bad judgements and poor choices.

God didn't come to save the healthy but the sick. My hubby is definitely in need of a Savior...and he knows that.

We shouldn't just write everyone off as lost just because they're grossly immature as believers.

There's a lot of infants who haven't reached any real level of maturity and they haven't produced much fruit as of yet.

We have to be patient. I know...God is teaching me this daily. He was patient with our many immature decisions and choices. He's been patient with our years of growth and struggle.

I think the name says it all...we are all a "Work in Progress" and while my own husband isn't for abortion and doesn't drink, et al...he has a lot of emotional baggage and yes, he's a Democrat (gag, choke)...

But that's life...and he needs time to grow in Christ. We just have to remember that many people are still "growing"...

Hi Cat. I'm not sure why you addressed all that to me. I pretty much just agreed with things already said. I agree with you too.

[Guest yod]

Choosing the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil. When I'm faced with that kind of choice, I just write in somebody else that's not on the ticket that I know would lead with a Christian heart. I may not pick the eventual winner, but I didn't vote against my faith, either.

t.

But sometimes not voting is the surest way of getting the worst of 2 evils.

For instance. ....

Bob Dole

He took absolutely no stand on core issues of the Republican plank except abortion. He was for it.

I didn't vote and Clinton got another 4 years. He was going to win anyway...but we probably wouldn't have been any better off if Dole had won. He was too easy to manipulate.

I have been a local precinct chairman. All you have to do is go to the place where you voted after the polls close and you would find about 10 or 15 people standing around with a list of resolutions they have written. These folks vote for a precinct chairperson...who goes to the County Convention where they vote on who represents them at the State Convention.

You don't have to be invited! Both parties are made up of volunteers who show up!

At the county level is where you find the grassroots members.

I would estimate that at LEAST 85% of the Republican party at the county convention were christians trying to influence the government.

At the county level for the Democratic Party were people defined by their particular abberation. "Pro-abortion" , Pro-gays, "environmenal whackos" etc....everyone was part of a special interest group. It was a stark difference betweent he 2 parties.

[Cerran]

Please define environmental whackos =)

[Guest kitkat]

Please define environmental whackos =)

Usually they are environmentalists that are extreme in their beliefs and practices.

Their policies are contrary to the general public and are beneficial to a very small minority. Jimmy Carter and Ralph Nader, for example, although they may not be as extreme as others.

Kat

[RGR]

Please define environmental whackos =)

Tree Hugger Gore!

Basically, this would be people of the persuasion that animal life should be over and above human life. For instance, suing a farmer because some rare bug is on his land and he farms it anyway. Stopping loggers from their job to save a stupid spotted owl! And the list goes on...

[Cerran]

The whole Spotted Owl controversy wasn't really about the Spotted Owl, the media just spun it like it was. Anyways I started a new thread on this so we could leave this one in peace in controversial issues. Maybe a mod can move this post there .

[Cerran]

The Liberal agenda is composed of people who support abortion, homosexuality, equal rights for children, legalisation of drugs, they don't support prayer in school and want to take God out of the Constitution and out of the Pledge of Allegiance.

Almost everything listed here is a basic afront to God. For them to call themselves Christians and to believe, support or endorse these issues, makes them pagans or non-believers in my humble opinion.

Salvation is a personal issue and I'm sure many of these people believe in God and Jesus as their Savior, but by supporting these issues, I believe they continue to sin according to the scriptures. I believe it is up to the Lord to judge those Liberals for their viewpoints.

Just to point out that the original pledge of allegance didn't have the phrase "Under God" in it. I don't disagree with it being there but too many people use this as pointing out we are moving away from god, I agree it's a symptom but it's not like it was there from the creation of the pledge. I have a really old boy scout manual from the 1920's and the pledge is in there and the phrase isn't there.

Our forefathers believed religion shouldn't play a role in making governmental decisions, but they didn't believe God should be 100% seperated from a public forum either. People have taken things to extremes.

Oh and God isn't mentioned in the US Constitution, I believe notes from several of the people who signed it felt that they didn't want to endorse any particular religion.

Edited May 10, 2004 by Cerran