Oh, please. No one here did any such thing, you pretentious, prattling little pantsload.
Here. Enjoy your spending spree.
Pffffftt.
Posted on 08/11/2012 4:42:48 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
Except for his unfortunate go along to get along support of TARP, bailouts, stimulus spending and the increased credit limit, etc, Ryan is a pretty good choice. Probably the best choice of the RINOS that were on Romney's short list. I support Ryan for the vice presidency. Wish he were at the top of the ticket, though.
But I still cannot and will not support the grand father of ObamaCare. Romney still loves and brags about his bastard brainchild, RomneyCare, even today when he knows what an anti-liberty socialist POS it is.
And the fact that he advocated that abortion should be safe and legal in America for over three decades of his adult lifetime and even advocated that Roe v Wade should be supported and sustained as settled law precludes any consideration whatsoever by this pro-life Christian for Myth Romney for the presidency.
And the fact that he boasted that he would be better for "gay rights" than Ted Kennedy, and proved it just increases my resistance.
That, and his penchant for gun control, his continuing support for global warming, gays in the scouts, gays in the military, and his record of appointing liberal judges makes it all but impossible for me to support him.
Lastly, we're having a bit of changeover on our moderator staff. At least two moderators resigned this afternoon after I flatly refused to rein in a so-called anti-Mormon "bigot" on FR. Well, if being in opposition to false prophets and false prophecy makes a Christian believer a bigot, then I guess I'm a bigot. I've posted before that I flat do not believe that the Book of Mormon is the true word of God. Nor do I believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God. The Christian bible warns us to be weary of false prophets and that I am. Romney being the presumptive Republican nominee does not change that fact.
Wow. You really have it in for those Mormons!
***Gosh, Jesus Himself called false teachers “sons of the devil”. I suppose you’d take issue with that as well.
Yes, you have thrown out some circumstantial evidence
***You’re deluded. What you call circumstantial evidence is HISTORY.
and have played with the wording (while I have been accused of using philosophy).
***Seems like the shoe fits as far as I can tell.
You have shown me that your beliefs are so strong that you do not have the ability to discern fact from belief.
***Pot, meet kettle. Kettle, meet pot.
I believe in God, but cannot prove my beliefs are true.
***Yet you presume to suggest to me that I should somehow prove my religion to be true. Once again I see that you are 3 fries short of a Happy Meal.
I believe that God will NEVER present himself to man because he is to remain a test of man’s faith and true character; again, I cannot prove that.
***Then why bother saying it? It does nothing. It’s off topic. Once again, you go off into the weeds.
It is my faith.
***You need to learn what Jesus meant when he said we only need faith as small as a mustard seed. Once a person examines the historical evidence surrounding the fact that Jesus claimed to be equal with God, the faith aspect becomes minimal. I can see how such a thing would elude you because you seem to prefer to veer off topic as quickly as possible, ending up in the weeds on every single post.
I also believe that many have succumbed to the evils of false scripture and the false interpretation of scripture. I put you in the latter, but cannot prove it right or wrong any more than you can.
***I can. And those who work tirelessly on exposing mormonism as a cult on FR already have. Just go and look through those threads. Or is that too much to ask? Probably.
That’s how logic works. Evil works another way.
***When I see logic in your posts, I’ll applaud it.
Posting HTML
How very sad for you.
I see God’s Glory everyday.
I see His Wonder everyday.
I see His Love everyday.
Truly, sad that you apparently are unable to experience these gifts.
Obama will be much worse than Romney in terms of the Catholic Church. Romney is not for imposing his Massachusetts plan on the country but for repealing Obamacare. Also, Romney would more likely appoint pro-life judges than Obama. Obama is pure evil. Mitt, in his currently stated policies, is more of a shade of gray, and one has to make a prudential, pragmatic judgment as to which is the least bad alternative. Catholic faith does not tell us to throw prudence out the window, but in fact extols prudence. Some may be called to live a life without any contact with the world in a purified seclusion, but they’re mainly religious, but we laity are called to do what we can in the world, and if we have to compromise to make things a little better than otherwise, then we should. I guarantee you you will find some moral flaw in the positions and or actions of every single politician — according to your standards that would mean we shouldn’t vote for anyone. After all everyone is a sinner, perhaps even Ronaldus Magnus himself. You hyper purists will objectively make this country worse, because not voting for Romney will objectively help Obama. Apparenlty you guys care not a fig to have Atheistic Communism established in our land in slow motion, because that is what Obama is trying to establish, and Romney is not.
Although your writing may seem wonderful to some (who have criticized philosophy), it needs some work. You need to establish the validity of your premises rather than just calling people names. It’s elementary logic.
Forgetting that Obama exists? You may have a point there. Nearly every person of the Anit-M’s has done that. Splendid! To me it’s like pretending that Satan does not exist.
Situational ethics? Now there’s a subject that can take up pages of arguments. How about saying you believe in God, but that you’re forgiven, so his Commandments do not have to be obeyed. That’s the core of many churches and is situational ethics. But the dollars roll in.
—Either holding to one’s principles is always good or always bad. — That makes sense to you?
I am a conservative and a Republican, and I will make my own prudential judgments, thank you very much. I am not a hack or a slave to anyone. I just feel the logical choice in a general election is to support the most conservative candidate running. Apparently that is in disagreement with your choice, and that is the worst of sins according to your lights, so you have demonize me as a result. How pathetic. So according to your logic, ANYONE who considers themselves a Republican is not a conservative. The two are mutually exclusive. OK, whatever. The demonization of other conservatives and Republicans by you and others on this site is contemptible and disgusting. In politics, one has to work together to form coalitions to forward one’s principles as much as is practicable. One expresses one’s strong ideological preferences in the primaries, but one has to step back and look at the bigger picture pragmatically in the general election. Politics is the art of the possible. You objectively pro-Obama hyperpurists will lead to the death of this once great country. And particularly those still demonizing Romney and anyone supporting after the Ryan pick. Shame on you.
Why is that that people who are supporters of Romney seem to always resort to “if you don’t support Romney, you don’t care about the country”, or some similar phrase.
That is not the case at all.
We do not support Romney because he is a liberal.
I understand Romney has said he wants to repeal ObamaCare, his staff and advisers say he will not.
I understand you are hoping he appoints pro-life judges, however his political records shows he did not and why would he, he is not pro-life.
Romney has a long political history, and it is not conservative or even conservative leaning.
For Romney to live and govern as a liberal, then today say he supports conservative ideals is stretching the bounds of credulity. He can not now say “I have always been a conservative”, and somehow have that wipe away his record, requires a great deal of faith in hope and change.
If those who want to support Romney fine, let’s not pretend its because he is a conservative, he is not.
All Romney is, is not Obama. That in and of itself maybe enough for some but not all.
“—Either holding to one’s principles is always good or always bad. — That makes sense to you?”
Only to people with ‘non’ situational ethics aparently.
Since you spent paragraphs ducking the first post, try answering this honestly while keeping with your above statement/question...
At what point does it become acceptable for a parent to prostitute his 2 year old son to the gay porn industry?
According to your ethos, there MUST be an acceptable point.
Now make that statement again...after you answer the question.
“Obama. Obama is pure evil. Mitt, in his currently stated policies, is more of a shade of gray...”
Gray is more dangerous than black. Republicans will follow RINOmney into all sorts of rationalized foolishness and progressive evil, instead of opposing clear evil.
Opposing Obama may win the short-term, but guarantees the failure of the party and nation in the long-term, by supporting a man who has acted to support all kinds of evil.
RINOmneys stated poisons now are just words to get elected. He remains a statist enemy.
OK I'm reading your post, and then a couple of sentences later, you demonstrate how you are contemptible and disgusting.
You objectively pro-Obama hyperpurists will lead to the death of this once great country.
So this conservative site didn't go out and get you, you came to the site, joined, and then you demonize the site and it's owner as contemptible and disgusting.
What a sweet fella. You do not tolerate anything other than blind obedience to a party that many conservatives refused to join, or who have left over the years, your party is running the most left wing candidate that it has ever run, a candidate so leftist that it is mind boggling that he gained control over the GOP.
As a missionary, Romney devoted himself to converting French Catholics to his anti-Christian religion. His entire Mormon life is devoted to the conversion of Christians, into non-Christians, and Mormons consider Catholics as easier to win over.
You needn't do any such thing, if it isn't the normal way for you, hon. Not a particular hang-up of mine. ;)
I’m sorry to bother you but Mr. Resettozero has asked me to handle his messages while he is in Disposed. I’m sorry but I forgot that he had asked me to copy and save your graphic from your post 3505 on this world wide web Free Republic dot com sight and to tell you it makes him laugh everytime he looks at it and that it’s okay to bill him for it. Flourine
Oh, please. No one here did any such thing, you pretentious, prattling little pantsload.
Here. Enjoy your spending spree.
Pffffftt.
That statement epitomizes your ignorance of mormonism, which is polytheistic.
I suggest you move to the Religion Forum and start a new thread beginning with your knowledge of mormonism.
BTW,
"A commentator on this topic said that anti-Semites who desecrate Jewish cemeteries want to destroy even the memory of Jews by breaking their tombstones and other symbols whereby we honor and remember them. He concluded that baptism of the Jewish dead is just a more sophisticated form of breaking tombstones."
mormons baptize Jewish dead and confirm them as members of mormonism
Mr. Resettozero is a valued friend, not only to this site, but to the cause of principled conservatism itself. Please pass onto him, for me, that he may use anything word or image I post here -- now, and in perpetuity -- as best pleases him, and with both my admiration and my compliments.
Please, too, if you could: ask him to bring me back a t-shirt bearing the legend, "I WAS IN DISPOSED, AND ALL I GOT WAS THIS CRUMMY T-SHIRT." ;)
It was mojitojoe's purse, actually. He dropped it when he flitted out of here, shrieking something which sounded suspiciously like "THERE'S NOTHING AT ALL STRANGE ABOUT A SUPPOSEDLY HETEROSEXUAL MALE AMASSING THE LARGEST COLLECTION OF OBAMA PHOTOS EVER ON THE INTERNET MMMMMMM OOOOOOOOOH AAAAAAHHHHHHH," before finally tripping over a tree root; bloodying his gay, pink little nosie; and settling down for a nice, healthy cry. ;)
Shhhhhh. He's worshiping.
(Well... himself, essentially. But, still -- ) ;)
Perhaps we are going about this all wrong. Perhaps we should embrace the Abo thought process. Try this...
“Since we all know that a man can have oral/anal sex with another man and still call himself hetrosexual, it logically follows that a conservative can embrace a liberal candidate with their vote and remain conservative.”
Doesn’t that make perfect sense now Mr. Hatter?
Absoposilutely, Mr. Hare!
Now, then: let's butter up this sweetly slumbering Dormouse, and see where the day takes us. ;)
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.