Posted on 07/04/2012 1:16:13 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
So your proposal is to go minor party and try to get conservatives elected to Congress and to the White House from outside of the GOP apparatus?I proposed no such thing.
Take what I post at face value, don't twist it around OK?
We just have to use prayerful discernment as best we can. If some conservatives haven’t noticed yet, they’ll be coming to the realization soon that this is no longer a safe watercooler to gather around and chat as if no one is watching and listening. We’d all probably be surprised to learn how long ago things really began to change for conservatives posting on FR. (Then again, somethings, such as lying for no good reason, do not change—not these days anyway.)
"Perceived and regarded" by whom? The entire political world knows about "ABO", and that many of the people supporting Romney are only doing so because they can't stand Obama. Nobody in their right mind will read this result as a full endorsement by every voter of everything Romney supports.
And that's hardly uncommon in a two party system. Many voters are not happy with the choices presented to them, and a vote may be as much against a candidate rather than for one. my vote will be included in the final tally that will, I hope and pray, make it so whichever menace wins, Romney or Obama, has a weak and pathetic victory.
How do you expect your vote to do that? It's not going to result in any electoral votes going to your candidate, so the only thing it is going to do is affect the popular vote. Why does that matter? I pointed out before, Bubba only got a plurality, and Bush actually lost the popular vote. But nobody cared -- it made no difference at all.
So what is your basis for thinking it will make a difference this time? I get not voting for Romney because you don't like the guy -- that's makes sense even if I don't agree. But thinking a third party vote will make some mystical difference has zero historical support when there is not viable third party candidate running who actually has a chance to win.
It’s not - if you’ve ever gone to churches and listened to pastors speak (not from their own authority, as they say). And it’s not when you go to seminaries and are taught about the doctrine of God’s Word and that being the authority.
I’m afraid this indicates you’re basically unfamiliar with this idea and theology - which is the theological doctrine in every Evangelical church that I’ve ever been in - in my entire life.
I’ve NEVER ONCE heard a pastor speak as if he’s speaking from “his own authority” - but ALWAYS - speaking from what God’s Word says, and he quotes it and goes into the understanding - usually from the ORIGINAL LANGUAGE itself - and if necessary, giving quotes from those who are experts in the original language and explaining exactly what the wording and syntax means - in that original language that God gave to us. And they all say that God’s Word is exact and precise (and that’s what it says “of itself” too) - down to the very sentences and words.
I hope he doesn't have any paying clients!!
Look to yourself and YOUR motives. And cease crying "raca".
“They might call me a ... or an old hag.”
Wish you would lay off the “old hag” comment as I am way older than you and most everyone on this forum, so what would that make me? Actually, I’ll try out for Miss America when I’m 90 and I will win.
Just be ready to compete against the MEN in the MISS Universe contest later ;)
You post very respectfully about the FR posters who are workers in the profession of “Psychology.”
If you can find an honest psychologist, he will tell you it’s all 100% malarky and BS. Every. Last. Ounce.
I respect more the person who can fix hail damage on my car.
I'd like to take a moment to point out something that often troubled me about the poster in question.
Quix claimed to be a clinical psychologist. As a clinical psychologist, he was bound to a code of ethics.
One particular of that code is that it is considered unethical to diagnose folks “long-distance” as a result of limited interactions with them.
Psychological diagnoses properly happen within the context of one or more clinical interviews, possibly augmented by testing. One psychologist might privately offer his opinions about a client of another psychologist, after having reviewed the client's file, in the manner of a consultation, but that's not the sort of circumstance we find here.
Now, unless you're going to tell us that you have actually met Quix in the flesh, and that he conducted a psychological diagnostic interview with you, it is apparent that Quix has violated this ethical stricture in his post here that you copied. I've seen him offer such diagnoses before here at Free Republic. They were serious lapses in ethical behavior.
Furthermore, another particular of the code is that of confidentiality. Needless to say, Quix’s posting of this diagnosis on the Internet is a violation of that code.
Thus, if Quix’s claim of being a clinical psychologist is true, he is an unethical one.
Of course, many people say many things about themselves on the Internet, sometimes not altogether true.
If that is the case here, then Quix is merely a liar.
One or the other.
sitetest
How the heck am I involved, even with the /s?
I knew nothing about rogue yam’s problems until this thread and just recently posted to him inquiring about it.
I have no interest in that hate site and I don’t give a rip who’s posting there.
I understand the humor in your comments, but I don’t think altura is on this thread.
LOL! I’m sure you will try out AND win! I’m looking forward to meeting you, dear.
You did NOT quote Scripture from the Bible. You palmed off mans opinion as Scripture. It ain’t. Quote where the Lord condemns the Catholic church or SHUT UP.
No, but she’s an example of this very thing and that’s why I mentioned her. The last go-around RE TBL was over her going there, saying one thing, coming back here and crying innocence. She got caught cold and cried the blues, stomped her feet and all the rest.
The fact that the TBL libs slam a lot of people I happen to respect, yourself included, greatly pisses me off. And when they come back here and play little MR and Miss innocent about it it REALLY torques me.
The trouble is ... I never said that ... so let’s take a look at this, since you’re bringing it up.
— — —
King James Version ...
But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, You fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
New American Standard Bible ...
“But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, ‘You good-for-nothing,’ shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, ‘You fool,’ shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell.
New International Version ...
But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.
— — —
Now, you’ll note I’m not angry at my brother. And I didn’t call him a “good-for-nothing” or an “idiot” or a “fool” or “Raca”.
However, you will find in the Bible - very explicity so - to vigorously contend over teachings and doctrines and groups and/or institutions.
BUT ... once again ... if you want to go into it some more, please do post a thread on this subject and let’s cover it in the Religious Forum. It’s a worthwhile subject to cover - and it’s worth clearing it up in the Religious Forum. People do have to understand that there is a difference between teachings and doctrines and groups who engage in those things - versus - a person himself and calling him names or hating him so that you basically almost want to kill the person.
SO ... no ... there’s no hate against a person here.
Perhaps those pastors would be better served to look to the Torah for “God’s word”.
And, “no,” I have never been to an Evangelical church and I intend to keep it that way.
See you later. Got to go.
Perhaps those pastors would be better served to look to the Torah for “God’s word”.
And, “no,” I have never been to an Evangelical church and I intend to keep it that way.
See you later. Got to go.
And, how many of those will survive and remain in office with another failed, liberal Republican in the White House?
Why on earth should we have to wait eight years rather than just four to put someone like Scott Walker in the White House?
Your strategy of putting RINOs in the White House has repeatedly failed, moved the nation to the left and resulted in the careers of rising conservatives to snuffed out.
Actually, I think there is a problem with the general and secular profession of psychology -versus- the doctrines and teachings of the Bible.
BUT, if a person who is in that profession can separate that out, and maintain the Biblical teachings while engaging in the practice of psychology ... I commend them for it.
I could give you the website of a couple of formerly practicing psychologists, if you’re interested in more of that perspective - and in connection with the Bible.
Who, my husband? He had a full scale, jammed packed medical practice of patients. Very high success rate too. He went to Mass every day before seeing patients. The power of prayer should never be underestimated.
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.