Republicans and Christianity

[ddgently]

I believe that any Nation that declares its God is The LORD, is going to be blessed.

America once did that, on a National level.

We told Him it was over, in the early 70's, and now were are the opposite, a cursed nation that has shed innocent blood.

Were we ever a Christian nation?
No.
As Patrick Henry said: We are not a Christian Nation, but rather a nation made up of many individual Christians.

So all you have to do is declare "Our God is the LORD" and you can slaughter Natives and enslave Africans and your nation will still be blessed? Sounds about right :

The blessings of the Lord are plenty in Harvest, and the like, and yes, for the sake of His individual children, He blessed this Nation.

Have we suffered great financial judgement, several times in our history?
Yes.
Look at the Civil War.

And we are in an irreversible place now, never to return to liberty and self reliance.

I've actually never lived in the America that we were supposed to be.
And I never will.

So this is all just looking back at what was, anyway.

Or, as someone else pointed out, looking back on something that never existed in the first place.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

A Democrat can't get out of his primary without a pro abortion and pro gay marriage position.
I would not vote for a dog catcher candidate with either position.

I am 100% pro-life so there is no argument from me there.

Anyway, let's see if you are consistent here. Do you vote for politicians who do not have an issue with premaritial sex and common-law relationships? How about "easy divorce"? Would you vote for someone who was known to have practiced adultery? How about gambling? Do these issues matter to you in politics? Does every politician you support HAVE to align 100% with your personal/moral convictions? Do you investigate every single moral issue from every candidate you vote for to make sure every single issue agrees with you?

Unless you are that dedicated and refuse to vote for anyone from any party for things that don't align with your moral compass, bringing morality into the picture as your point of contention is baseless. And if you are that dedicated and thorough, I applaud your consistency and would suggest you would be a minority in your own party.

The two compelling issues I repeat here, gay marriage and abortion are moral issues that happen to be political issues...so I have a litmus test for any candidate I'd vote for....
Other issues, moral or spiritual, are considerations but I'm under no delusion that I'm in a theocracy.
I have voted for people who do not know Christ, but have the same moral and political convictions I have.
My wife doesn't agree with me on 'every single issue'.

I think you're the one who seems to be politically schizophrenic....torn between the baby killing, but otherwise pure Dems and the hypocritical Republicans. Oh! The humanity!

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Patrick Henry: "We Are Not A Christian Nation,..."

Guessed some missed this^^^

Could you cite a source for this quote?

 

[Smellin Coffee]

A Democrat can't get out of his primary without a pro abortion and pro gay marriage position.
I would not vote for a dog catcher candidate with either position.

I am 100% pro-life so there is no argument from me there.

Anyway, let's see if you are consistent here. Do you vote for politicians who do not have an issue with premaritial sex and common-law relationships? How about "easy divorce"? Would you vote for someone who was known to have practiced adultery? How about gambling? Do these issues matter to you in politics? Does every politician you support HAVE to align 100% with your personal/moral convictions? Do you investigate every single moral issue from every candidate you vote for to make sure every single issue agrees with you?

Unless you are that dedicated and refuse to vote for anyone from any party for things that don't align with your moral compass, bringing morality into the picture as your point of contention is baseless. And if you are that dedicated and thorough, I applaud your consistency and would suggest you would be a minority in your own party.

The two compelling issues I repeat here, gay marriage and abortion are moral issues that happen to be political issues...so I have a litmus test for any candidate I'd vote for....
Other issues, moral or spiritual, are considerations but I'm under no delusion that I'm in a theocracy.
I have voted for people who do not know Christ, but have the same moral and political convictions I have.
My wife doesn't agree with me on 'every single issue'.

I think you're the one who seems to be politically schizophrenic....torn between the baby killing, but otherwise pure Dems and the hypocritical Republicans. Oh! The humanity!

And there it is: dodge, weave and then attack in ad hominem manner.

A true Republican, thou art! 

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

A Democrat can't get out of his primary without a pro abortion and pro gay marriage position.
I would not vote for a dog catcher candidate with either position.

I am 100% pro-life so there is no argument from me there.

Anyway, let's see if you are consistent here. Do you vote for politicians who do not have an issue with premaritial sex and common-law relationships? How about "easy divorce"? Would you vote for someone who was known to have practiced adultery? How about gambling? Do these issues matter to you in politics? Does every politician you support HAVE to align 100% with your personal/moral convictions? Do you investigate every single moral issue from every candidate you vote for to make sure every single issue agrees with you?

Unless you are that dedicated and refuse to vote for anyone from any party for things that don't align with your moral compass, bringing morality into the picture as your point of contention is baseless. And if you are that dedicated and thorough, I applaud your consistency and would suggest you would be a minority in your own party.

The two compelling issues I repeat here, gay marriage and abortion are moral issues that happen to be political issues...so I have a litmus test for any candidate I'd vote for....
Other issues, moral or spiritual, are considerations but I'm under no delusion that I'm in a theocracy.
I have voted for people who do not know Christ, but have the same moral and political convictions I have.
My wife doesn't agree with me on 'every single issue'.

I think you're the one who seems to be politically schizophrenic....torn between the baby killing, but otherwise pure Dems and the hypocritical Republicans. Oh! The humanity!

And there it is: dodge, weave and then attack in ad hominem manner.

A true Republican, thou art!

I'm sorry you don't approve of my rationale for political support.
I'll change it immediately and move to your more consistent love-hate schitzo criteria! 

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]The two compelling issues I repeat here, gay marriage and abortion are...[/quote]

...not issues you personally struggle with or ones that impact you in a significant way.  After all,  self-reflection concerning our own vices is a lot harder than being activists about the vices of others.

 

[prophet]

Patrick Henry: "We Are Not A Christian Nation,..."

Guessed some missed this^^^

Could you cite a source for this quote?

Not off hand.  I have long forgotten which books I read it in.

I wouldn't recommend this racist book, but it may have been quoted in Grady's "America:What Hath God Wrought".

Sorry. 

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]The two compelling issues I repeat here, gay marriage and abortion are...

...not issues you personally struggle with or ones that impact you in a significant way.  After all,  self-reflection concerning our own vices is a lot harder than being activists about the vices of others.
[/quote]

Neither do murder or armed robbery, but I'd never support a politican who wanted either to be legalized. :

 

[Smellin Coffee]

The two compelling issues I repeat here, gay marriage and abortion are moral issues that happen to be political issues...so I have a litmus test for any candidate I'd vote for....
Other issues, moral or spiritual, are considerations but I'm under no delusion that I'm in a theocracy.
I have voted for people who do not know Christ, but have the same moral and political convictions I have.

So in essence you are admitting that Republican politics is not about morality, much less Christianity. And how exactly does that admission contradict the article in the OP that triggered this thread?

My wife doesn't agree with me on 'every single issue'.

I guess we both are in that same boat!

I think you're the one who seems to be politically schizophrenic....torn between the baby killing, but otherwise pure Dems and the hypocritical Republicans. Oh! The humanity!

So if someone has issues with the morality of the Republican party, your (selective as is all of ours) moral criteria of importance is the only morality that should count for every Christian?

And why do you have to besmirch my intentions by considering Dems "pure" apart from abortion? FWIW, I voted for more Republicans on the last ballot alone than I have voted for all Democrats combined since I started voting in 1984. "Purity" is not a selling point with me as no parties can be.

I'm sorry you don't approve of my rationale for political support.
I'll change it immediately and move to your more consistent love-hate schitzo criteria! 

Why do you have to misrepresent those who disagree with you? I really am puzzled by that. Instinct tells me ego and hypocritical but I don't think it is appropriate for me to make that call.

I have never had any intention of telling anyone how they should vote. Different people have different priorities and as you say a litmus test. Yours happens to be different than mine and other Christians. That doesn't make your opinion right nor does it make mine right either. My entire political debate is that both parties are equally secular and non-spiritual and I feel it is wrong to claim either particular party to be more "Christian" than the other.

I just started reading Prodigal God by Tim Keller. I'm only halfway through with it so I'm not sure where he will end up but the book is about Jesus' parable about the two sons. Keller points out that both the "prodigal" and the "faithful" son were in rebellion against the father, one openly through radical disobedience and the other hidden, masking it in obedience. Though Keller makes absolutely no political reference (at least to the part that I have read thus far), the parallel between the two sons and the Evangelical Christian view of political parties is very interesting. It is pretty clear to me that the "obedient" son who supposedly was doing things the right way was very wrong in both attitude and actions and the distribution of grace toward both the father and the "lost" son.

All that garble to say I see both political parties just as "lost" and "rebellious" but mask it differently. The goal of my postings is simply to show the rebellion of both and that neither is right nor wrong nor Christian.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]The two compelling issues I repeat here, gay marriage and abortion are...

...not issues you personally struggle with or ones that impact you in a significant way.  After all,  self-reflection concerning our own vices is a lot harder than being activists about the vices of others.

Neither do murder or armed robbery, but I'd never support a politican who wanted either to be legalized. :[/quote]

Yet you are fine with politicians who want to victimize the widow, ignore the orphan, create injustice for the weak, and oppress the poor...

 

[Izdaari]

A Democrat can't get out of his primary without a pro abortion and pro gay marriage position.
I would not vote for a dog catcher candidate with either position.

Those are important issues for me too.
Except that we're on opposite sides.
So I really can't vote for any Republican.

But I'm a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment,
and of strict construction constitutionalist judges.
So I really can't vote for any Democrat.

Libertarian is pretty much the only option left.
That's ok by me though: last time out,
LP nominee Gary Johnson was nearly a perfect match for my views.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

The two compelling issues I repeat here, gay marriage and abortion are moral issues that happen to be political issues...so I have a litmus test for any candidate I'd vote for....
Other issues, moral or spiritual, are considerations but I'm under no delusion that I'm in a theocracy.
I have voted for people who do not know Christ, but have the same moral and political convictions I have.

So in essence you are admitting that Republican politics is not about morality, much less Christianity. And how exactly does that admission contradict the article in the OP that triggered this thread?

My wife doesn't agree with me on 'every single issue'.

I guess we both are in that same boat!

I think you're the one who seems to be politically schizophrenic....torn between the baby killing, but otherwise pure Dems and the hypocritical Republicans. Oh! The humanity!

So if someone has issues with the morality of the Republican party, your (selective as is all of ours) moral criteria of importance is the only morality that should count for every Christian?

And why do you have to besmirch my intentions by considering Dems "pure" apart from abortion? FWIW, I voted for more Republicans on the last ballot alone than I have voted for all Democrats combined since I started voting in 1984. "Purity" is not a selling point with me as no parties can be.

I'm sorry you don't approve of my rationale for political support.
I'll change it immediately and move to your more consistent love-hate schitzo criteria! 

Why do you have to misrepresent those who disagree with you? I really am puzzled by that. Instinct tells me ego and hypocritical but I don't think it is appropriate for me to make that call.

I have never had any intention of telling anyone how they should vote. Different people have different priorities and as you say a litmus test. Yours happens to be different than mine and other Christians. That doesn't make your opinion right nor does it make mine right either. My entire political debate is that both parties are equally secular and non-spiritual and I feel it is wrong to claim either particular party to be more "Christian" than the other.

I just started reading Prodigal God by Tim Keller. I'm only halfway through with it so I'm not sure where he will end up but the book is about Jesus' parable about the two sons. Keller points out that both the "prodigal" and the "faithful" son were in rebellion against the father, one openly through radical disobedience and the other hidden, masking it in obedience. Though Keller makes absolutely no political reference (at least to the part that I have read thus far), the parallel between the two sons and the Evangelical Christian view of political parties is very interesting. It is pretty clear to me that the "obedient" son who supposedly was doing things the right way was very wrong in both attitude and actions and the distribution of grace toward both the father and the "lost" son.

All that garble to say I see both political parties just as "lost" and "rebellious" but mask it differently. The goal of my postings is simply to show the rebellion of both and that neither is right nor wrong nor Christian.

The OP's article was from a liberal loon perspective, just the pure Dems idea of propaganda.

I've never considered my political votes a vote for morality....just base my vote on my personal, and when it applies, Biblical convictions.

It isn't relevant to me in what way you view political parties....the reality is that Dems are THE party of abortion and gay rights a.k.a. Baby killing and perversion pushing.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]The two compelling issues I repeat here, gay marriage and abortion are...

...not issues you personally struggle with or ones that impact you in a significant way.  After all,  self-reflection concerning our own vices is a lot harder than being activists about the vices of others.

Neither do murder or armed robbery, but I'd never support a politican who wanted either to be legalized. :

Yet you are fine with politicians who want to victimize the widow, ignore the orphan, create injustice for the weak, and oppress the poor...
[/quote]

Desperate to defend baby killing and perversion pushing?*



*answering with the same logic you used. 

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]The two compelling issues I repeat here, gay marriage and abortion are...

...not issues you personally struggle with or ones that impact you in a significant way.  After all,  self-reflection concerning our own vices is a lot harder than being activists about the vices of others.

Neither do murder or armed robbery, but I'd never support a politican who wanted either to be legalized. :

Yet you are fine with politicians who want to victimize the widow, ignore the orphan, create injustice for the weak, and oppress the poor...

Desperate to defend baby killing and perversion pushing?*



*answering with the same logic you used. 
[/quote]

I can count the number of Democrats I have voted for on one finger. That doesn't change the fact that you are being selective in your moral outage of societal sins.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]The two compelling issues I repeat here, gay marriage and abortion are...

...not issues you personally struggle with or ones that impact you in a significant way.  After all,  self-reflection concerning our own vices is a lot harder than being activists about the vices of others.

Neither do murder or armed robbery, but I'd never support a politican who wanted either to be legalized. :

Yet you are fine with politicians who want to victimize the widow, ignore the orphan, create injustice for the weak, and oppress the poor...

Desperate to defend baby killing and perversion pushing?*



*answering with the same logic you used. 

I can count the number of Democrats I have voted for on one finger. That doesn't change the fact that you are being selective in your moral outage of societal sins.
[/quote]

No, I'm not.

 

[Smellin Coffee]

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]The two compelling issues I repeat here, gay marriage and abortion are...

...not issues you personally struggle with or ones that impact you in a significant way.  After all,  self-reflection concerning our own vices is a lot harder than being activists about the vices of others.

Neither do murder or armed robbery, but I'd never support a politican who wanted either to be legalized. :

Yet you are fine with politicians who want to victimize the widow, ignore the orphan, create injustice for the weak, and oppress the poor...

Desperate to defend baby killing and perversion pushing?*



*answering with the same logic you used. 

I can count the number of Democrats I have voted for on one finger. That doesn't change the fact that you are being selective in your moral outage of societal sins.

No, I'm not.
[/quote]

Actually, yes. Your selection of choosing the opposition of gay rights over opposition to materialism, civil rights for everyone and unnecessary accumulation of wealth is evidence of that selection.

Right or wrong, you are selective...as is everybody else who votes with a moral conscience.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]The two compelling issues I repeat here, gay marriage and abortion are...

...not issues you personally struggle with or ones that impact you in a significant way.  After all,  self-reflection concerning our own vices is a lot harder than being activists about the vices of others.

Neither do murder or armed robbery, but I'd never support a politican who wanted either to be legalized. :

Yet you are fine with politicians who want to victimize the widow, ignore the orphan, create injustice for the weak, and oppress the poor...

Desperate to defend baby killing and perversion pushing?*



*answering with the same logic you used. 

I can count the number of Democrats I have voted for on one finger. That doesn't change the fact that you are being selective in your moral outage of societal sins.

No, I'm not.

Actually, yes. Your selection of choosing the opposition of gay rights over opposition to materialism, civil rights for everyone and unnecessary accumulation of wealth is evidence of that selection.

Right or wrong, you are selective...as is everybody else who votes with a moral conscience.
[/quote]

Opposition to materialism?
What does that even mean?

Civil rights?
You consider moral perversion to be a civil right?

Where is an unnecessary accumulation of wealth?
What does that even mean?
An accumulation of wealth is NOT sinful!

You and r2 seem to be the political schitzos...with 'I vote for Republicans, but they are eviiiiiil".

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]You and r2 seem to be the political schitzos...with 'I vote for Republicans, but they are eviiiiiil". [/quote]

Ahh...you are of the "there are only two options" persuasion...

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]You and r2 seem to be the political schitzos...with 'I vote for Republicans, but they are eviiiiiil".

Ahh...you are of the "there are only two options" persuasion...
[/quote]

Ahh...just referencing this:

r2: I can count the number of Democrats I have voted for on one finger. That doesn't change the fact that you are being selective in your moral outage of societal sins.

Didn't figure you for the Liberterian or write in vote waster....

 

[Ransom]

Actually, yes. Your selection of choosing the opposition of gay rights over opposition to materialism, civil rights for everyone and unnecessary accumulation of wealth is evidence of that selection.

Um . . . how much accumulation of wealth is "unnecessary," and who decides this?