Posted on 09/17/2014 4:36:52 PM PDT by Kansas58
A very disturbing number of Freepers are openly advocating, on Free Republic threads, for the defeat of Senator Pat Roberts and other good Conservative Republicans. Greg Orman, in Kansas, is a pro abortion, anti gun, tax and spend Liberal Democrat who has given tens of thousands of dollars to Obama and Pelosi and the Democrat Party and Harry Reid. I am called an "idiot" for supporting Roberts. However, I think that those on Free Republic who support Harry Reid and Greg Orman should be ZOTTED, kicked off the site. I have had enough of there hate filled, vindictive, misguided trash.
Oh, and this statement is bunkum. I often use facts or observations from the enemy to make a point. Not everything they transmit is false.
That’s actually hearsay from another FReeper.
Also, Lazamataz (courtesy ping) knows her personally and was defending her upthread.
Correct, I was defending Buckeye Texan. I know what she’s made of; she’s no liberal or pro-illegal.
I’d defend you too.
And Norm.
“Are you saying we cannot vote for anyone except a truly repentant and faithful Christian? If not, what level of sin can I vote for without “going along” with evil and being conformed to the world? Seriously. I really want to know what you think is acceptable regarding elections.”
(Proverbs 14:34 Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people.) <-—your tagline, what a laugh in light of your post here.
Romans 12:2 by the way is what I was referring to.
If you believed your tagline, instead of it being merely a pleasant thing to have in your tag space, you’d know that.
Tell me, does Jesus accept abortion?
Laz, The article was 180 degrees from the truth. Make whatever excuses you want. The fact remains that false information from an illegal supporting group was posted as factual here with the intent of ‘proving’ fences don’t work. Not to make a point.
If you find that acceptable behavior in your friends then we have nothing to discuss.
First of all, you’re probably wrong about the intent, and definitely wrong about the motivation.
Second, if you are willing (eager, almost) to discard an online friendship because I will choose my other friends, and not you, then so be it.
G’luck to ya.
I will, thanks.
I wouldn’t call Randall Flagg “cute,” however he does have that handsome,
bad-boy appearance that a lot of women find attractive.
And he’s a really nice man, strong, silent type.
Oh, indeed. We have a nice, tidy, double-ZOT post, zots courtesy of JimRob.
Thank you for defending me for making a bone-headed error.
Another FReeper told me via FReepmail that Kansas58 is a woman.
Here’s the initial post in its entirety:
“A very disturbing number of Freepers are openly advocating, on Free Republic threads, for the defeat of Senator Pat Roberts and other good Conservative Republicans. Greg Orman, in Kansas, is a pro abortion, anti gun, tax and spend Liberal Democrat who has given tens of thousands of dollars to Obama and Pelosi and the Democrat Party and Harry Reid. I am called an “idiot” for supporting Roberts. However, I think that those on Free Republic who support Harry Reid and Greg Orman should be ZOTTED, kicked off the site. I have had enough of there hate filled, vindictive, misguided trash.”
I went through hundreds of posts on this thread and I agree some posters did claim not voting helped elect Obama. Are you claiming it doesn’t help the Democrats when conservatives take their votes out of elections?
In none of those posts could I find anything that said you must vote for the RINOs. I repeatedly made the point in my posts that I respected someone who withheld their votes, but I believe it was better to act positively (by voting) to defeat the greater evil. The other posters on my side of the debate generally said they felt it was better to try and defeat Romney. Again, none of them told you what you MUST do with your vote. If I missed someone who did say that, point it out.
I also did not find any posts where someone said we need to accept that some issues are lost causes. Again, I was very, very careful to point out that I was talking about general elections ONLY. Several others posted pretty much the same thing and said they would vote against the RINOs in the primaries.
The abortion issue in particular is what got Kansas58 in trouble, apparently because he said the blood of babies was on people who refused to vote for anything less than a total ban on abortion. He seemed to speak from personal experience where he saw pro-life forces aligned with the abortionists in Kansas against partial restrictions on abortion. I think his mistake was blaming the pro-lifers for the blood of aborted babies, but to be honest, that’s what other posters claimed about the who said they’d vote for a RINO (in the general election if necessary) to stop an abortion-loving president. So the pro-life posters basically accused Kansas58 of having blood on his/her hands, and then he was banned when he said purists in Kansas had blood on their hands. I think both sides went too far on that one, because Kansas58 is clearly anti-abortion and was apparently directly involved in saving babies in Kansas (by fighting for what was achievable at this time—restrictions on abortion that fall short of a complete ban).
So in answer to your post, I think I’m being as honest as I can be. I try very hard to be civil and never engage in personal attacks. If I’m wrongly characterizing this thread, please point to specific posts where someone said you “must” vote for the RINOs or that abortion is a lost cause.
Who was toasty one before they became toasty one? Does anyone know?
LOL.
Yes, this thread IS about “You must vote for the RINO or you are supporting the Dem”.
Not so hard to understand, really.
“So in answer to your post, I think I’m being as honest as I can be.”
IRS: “We follow the law when we can.”
They come back once in awhile under differing guises, they have tried resurrecting old dead threads, rehashing ancient arguments from many years back, etc.
Recently, two of their guises were kukuku and ftd33.
It is possible, however possibly unlikely, that Toasty One was Kansas58.
After spending most of the night trying to retread.
Which would be very obsessive indeed.
Even more so than DannyH!
The point is you preach Jesus, “Proverbs 14:34 Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people.” and then preach compromise. You can’t have it both ways. The Lord spoke of a double minded man. It’s either Jesus or the world and compromise. Your choice.
KC_Lion: “The Slavish Devotion to the GOP made me think Brownback or Pat Roberts himself, but apparently I am wrong.”
Why are you trying to change what Kansas58 posted? She started this thread by defending Pat Roberts who, in fact, does have a pretty conservative voting record. She specifically said she opposed Boehner, Greg Orman (claimed he was a stealth Democrat), and Thad Cochran. That doesn’t sound like slavish devotion to me.
Not only that but she made it quite clear that she would oppose the GOPe in primaries and only vote for the lesser of two evils in general elections. She specifically said she didn’t want Romney to be the candidate in 2012 but voted for him in the general election ONLY to stop Obama.
Again, that’s doesn’t sound like slavish devotion to the GOP.
I don’t know why some FReepers get away with outright lies and mischaracterizations. If you disagree with what I or someone else posts, don’t exaggerate it into a straw man so that it’s easier to knock down. There was ZERO slavish devotion to the GOP on this thread. Posters did nothing more than write they’d vote IN GENERAL ELECTIONS ONLY for a RINO only in order to stop an even worse Democrat. Many specifically stated they OPPOSE the GOPe RINOs in primaries!
Does Jesus accept abortion? No. What does that have to do with my question? What level of sin am I permitted to vote for without going along with evil and being conformed to the world? You tell me.
If you’re being consistent, then you should probably say I must not vote for any candidate who isn’t 100% opposed to abortion. Since abortion is the premeditated killing of an innocent child, my candidate must also push for laws treating abortion the same as 1st degree murder. Anything less than that, and I’m compromising with evil (if you’re being consistent).
Not only that, but why stop with abortion? There are all sorts of other sins that are also evil in God’s eyes. Are you saying I can vote for an unrepentant nonbeliever so long as they’re 100% pro-life? If you’re being consistent, you should probably say, no. If I vote for a nonbeliever, I’m supporting evil and being conformed to the world.
Do you see my point? I’m not trying to be flippant about this. It’s actually a very, very serious issue for a Christian who will seek the Lord’s will in all things. We think about the morality of our actions, and like you wrote, voting for someone who supports evil might be considered an endorsement of such evil.
Honestly, if I thought it was sinful to vote for a non-Christian, I’d stop voting. Some things are more important than winning elections. So what exactly are you trying to say?
Is it a sin to vote for someone who isn’t 100% opposed to abortion? And, if you consider it a sin, is it also a sin to vote for someone who holds any other views that are inconsistent with biblical teachings?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.