To: Marie2; Das Outsider; steve86; Westbrook
I’m just saying this post Christian nation has no
authority to decide if there is life in the womb.
We’ve lost our way. Now that we are secular, let’s
stick to nation management and leave moral instruction
for parents.
19 posted on
08/14/2008 9:09:14 PM PDT by
Jo Nuvark
(Those who bless Israel will be blessed, those who curse Israel will be cursed. Gen 12:3)
To: Jo Nuvark
You’re in a losing battle trying to explain this one. You are exactly right, but it’s hard to fathom because our thinking is so nationalized.
It’s happened incrementally enough that even the most conservative can’t see it. We went from states rights to federal rights in a blink and I’m not sure there’s a way back out to complete personal responsibility.
I do take responsibility for myself, my family, my faith and my children... sounds like you do too.
The best we can do right now is to speak the truth and keep on leading... Your screen name says it all.
27 posted on
08/14/2008 9:15:55 PM PDT by
Gordon Greene
(www.fracturedrepublic.com)
To: Jo Nuvark
Im just saying this post Christian nation has no authority to decide if there is life in the womb.
I might probably have a stroke soon. Are you saying that the Supreme Court of the United States really has no moral authority over just what constitutes a human being? ;)
Weve lost our way. Now that we are secular, lets stick to nation management and leave moral instruction for parents.
But with management, we get a managerial class. Wait, we already have one. However, you're right that we should live our lives as Christians in the world, but not of it.
You and I know that there's really only one thing to depend upon.
28 posted on
08/14/2008 9:16:03 PM PDT by
Das Outsider
(They're here. Deport now. Pay less to Mexico.)
To: Jo Nuvark
I can only speak for myself, but I can't see it that way, anymore than I could see it that way if the federal government decided that euthanasia of the elderly or the handicapped was just peachy, or, looking back, if the federal government had decided in the critical moment that owning another human being was tolerable. At some point, on a very broad scale, morality is the government's business. I don't know just where the line starts,. but there is one. Otherwise, we're on a slippery slope of devaluing human life for all kinds of reasons.
If my choices from here on out are going to be between one liberal and another liberal, on so many issues but especially on that of the right to life for the innocent, I'll have to opt out of politics as a means of attempting to advance my worldview (which in at least certain ways, is all it is), and just turn inward. It's coming to that one day anyway.
35 posted on
08/14/2008 9:20:21 PM PDT by
mrsmel
To: Jo Nuvark
I don’t know. The ultimate ramifications of your position get pretty bizarre.
Penalties for theft are moral in nature. Enforcement of contracts are moral in nature. Penalty for kidnap is moral in nature, as are laws against all forms of child abuse and neglect. To just leave the one form of child abuse known as abortion out of the equation seems inconsistent.
Or would we just allow people to do whatever they want to kids in your “nation management” strategy? I’d hope not.
140 posted on
08/14/2008 11:35:50 PM PDT by
Marie2
(Everything the left does has the effect and intent of destroying the traditional family.)
To: Jo Nuvark
Weve lost our way. Now that we are secular, lets stick to nation management and leave moral instruction for parents. Good lord ma'am. Are u on the right board?
151 posted on
08/15/2008 12:22:57 AM PDT by
wardaddy
("Cause my grey hair just can't cover up my redneck.")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson