Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Vanity: The ultimate harm of betraying traditional American Judeo-Christian values

Posted on 02/05/2007 4:55:12 PM PST by Jim Robinson

When the members of the Republican party betray the sound conservative principles of its founders and its own longstanding party platform and then vote in a leader whose personal beliefs and public record are more in line with those of the degenerate socialist Democrat party, then obviously the Republican party is sliding to the left. When large numbers of the members of a conservative party enthusiastically (you might even say overzealously or militantly) campaign for a social liberal and against sound conservative principles and candidates, then they are pushing the conservative principles, conservative candidates and conservative members out the exit doors.

Should the large number of members militantly campaigning for a socialist liberal for the presidency win out, and the only choices presented to the electorate by the two major political parties both share identical immoral socialist liberal ideologies, and the voter is left with voting for a socialist or a socialist, then obviously the resultant elected government will be a socialist government.

When the Republican Party abandons its conservative principles and abandons its fight against encroaching socialism, then obviously it is no longer a conservative party and we no longer have a major party fighting for traditional American values and against socialism.

When the American people abandon their longstanding traditional conservative family values and instead openly embrace socialism and perverted lifestyles, then America has moved left and is obviously no longer a traditional conservative nation.

When and if the American people abandon their traditional Judeo-Christian morality and traditional American conservative values, and instead opt for corrupt godless liberal/socialist immorality and perversion as the norm, then obviously America will have lost its way.

America was founded on Judeo-Christian principles. The Founding Fathers warned us that our style of Republican government would only work for a moral society. When and if we as a nation turn our backs on God and the nation abandons our American traditional Judeo-Christian morals and values, and rampant godless socialism takes over, the America of our Founders ceases to exist.

You can spin it, twist it, deny it, make a million excuses and logical explanations for why electing a social liberal at this time is a good idea, but you cannot deny the simple truth. A social liberal is a liberal and liberals begat liberalism. Liberalism begats socialism. Our nation was founded on the self-evident truth that our unalienable rights come from God. Socialists deny God exists. Socialists say our rights come from men in government robes. What men in government robes give, other men in government robes can take away. Without God we have no unalienable rights. No unalienable rights means no freedom. No freedom means no America.


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: bankcard; fr; ingodwetrust; moralabsolutes; primaries
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 241 next last
To: Hildy
We're all unhappy that abortion is the law of the land. If it wasn't...the United States would be a much different country today. On many levels.

The most pressing issue we face today is confiscatory taxation to support government entitlements.

Next, is the threat from radical Islam...which I wish we could go back to fighting in the style of the recent Somali air support attacks on muslim jihadists.

Rudy Giuliani's abortion position aside, I saw how he handled 9-11. I saw how he ran New York City prior to that.

At this early stage in the game, he's the only one that can beat a Clinton.

That's good enough for me.

If that makes me appear less of a conservative in some eyes around here, then too bad. This is still home to me...so don't make me stay in my room.

181 posted on 02/05/2007 10:22:07 PM PST by DCPatriot ("It aint what you don't know that kills you. It's what you know that aint so" Theodore Sturgeon))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: Hildy
You seem to be taking this personally, its not personal against Rudy or those that support him.

I couldn't change those facts if I wanted to. It just is what it is.

Rudy hung his hat on positions on the issues that plain wont sell to Republicans outside liberal big cities.

Partial birth abortion polls at about 85% against nationwide and across all party lines.

queer marriage/unions gets voted down by wide margins every time its on the ballot.

Banning guns is a losing issue. Even the RATS know that.

I can't change the facts, but don't take it personally.
182 posted on 02/05/2007 10:22:49 PM PST by Beagle8U (SNICKERS......Its packed with fudge !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: Revolting cat!
and more participation of Jewish incompetents like Donna Sha-la-la and Janet Reno in her cabinet.

Where to begin...I'm going to ask you nicely to explain that. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and think your fingers got a bit confused...so go ahead and explain...we'll be waiting.

183 posted on 02/05/2007 10:25:20 PM PST by Hildy (RUDY IN 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U

He supports a ban on partial birth abortions as long as there is a provision about the health of the mother.


184 posted on 02/05/2007 10:26:56 PM PST by Hildy (RUDY IN 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: Hildy

I asked the same thing on post 136, but got nada.


185 posted on 02/05/2007 10:28:52 PM PST by Rex Anderson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Jim, I just want to thank you for this and the other articles you've written the last few days. I've enjoyed them immensely! Thank you!


186 posted on 02/05/2007 10:30:41 PM PST by upsdriver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: Hildy
"as long as there is a provision about the health of the mother"

That is a cop out and everyone knows it. The "Health" of the mother can be deemed by some quack doctor at planned infanticide to mean she might be depressed, she might get a headache.....Its BS.
187 posted on 02/05/2007 10:33:14 PM PST by Beagle8U (SNICKERS......Its packed with fudge !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

bump


188 posted on 02/06/2007 1:04:09 AM PST by BikerTrash
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Sorry, but abortion "rights," gay "rights," 1st and 2nd amendment issues, and the SCOTUS are not 0.01% issues.

Can I throw in limited government, tax minimalism, and fiscal conservatism?

This also goes hand in hand with personal responsibility as a tenet of responsible governance.

189 posted on 02/06/2007 1:27:25 AM PST by maui_hawaii (China: proudly revising history for over 2000 years and counting.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
I have a question for you regarding abortion.

Without naming names, but we know who I am talking about probably....

On abortion specifically, if one allots a category for abortion strictly for rape, incest, or otherwise abuse and extreme health situations how does that sit?

I mean if we can in effect legally reduce abortions by 97% but not outright have a zero tolerance no matter what...

What say you?

Me, while still not a perfect situation, its way much a step in the right direction.

190 posted on 02/06/2007 1:34:52 AM PST by maui_hawaii (China: proudly revising history for over 2000 years and counting.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: maui_hawaii

Well, "socially liberal fiscal conservatives" claim to be for limited government, tax minimalism, and fiscal conservatism. If not they'd be full bore socialist liberals. Guess it's a matter of degree. Take Arnie for example. He claimed to be socially liberal fiscal conservative. Turns out he's a flaming full bore liberal. I don't think you can be half pregnant.


191 posted on 02/06/2007 1:44:46 AM PST by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: maui_hawaii

I don't think I'm going to split fine hairs. Abortion is the violent taking of an innocent life.


192 posted on 02/06/2007 1:46:47 AM PST by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

bookmark


193 posted on 02/06/2007 1:58:06 AM PST by GiovannaNicoletta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #194 Removed by Moderator

To: maui_hawaii; Jim Robinson; EternalVigilance; PhilDragoo; Peach; neverdem; wagglebee; weegee
On abortion specifically, if one allots a category for abortion strictly for rape, incest, or otherwise abuse and extreme health situations how does that sit?

Wrong premises lead to wrong answers and that's what the Liberals are counting on. How about swift and sure death penalty for any rape or incest? How does that sit? How about a call to manhood so that males who cut-and-run from the women they abandon are treated with all due societal contempt, not as a carefree selfish self-gratifying hedonist who is in fact a socialist welfarist ally in enlarging the nanny state?

As regards extreme health situations, this is a classic red herring, there are so few such cases that this is statistically almost a moot point--except for those desperate to create a Hegelian Dialectic out of something, anything.... In such cases as do occur, Doctors do their best in such cases to save both--and triage if that is not possible. I refer here to actual doctors who first do no harm--not to those who make a living killing.
195 posted on 02/06/2007 2:01:50 AM PST by The Spirit Of Allegiance (Public Employees: Honor Your Oaths! Defend the Constitution from Enemies--Foreign and Domestic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: maui_hawaii
Expanding my remarks:

Abortion is the premeditated American government approved sometimes taxpayer funded (they're involving you and me here) violent taking of a helpless innocent human life, ie, premeditated murder. There are two lives directly affected here. The mother's and the baby's. They both enjoy the unalienable right to life bestowed upon us all by our Creator. The taking of one or the other is not our decision to make. Pray that they both receive God's blessings and the very best medical care possible to keep them both alive and healthy.

196 posted on 02/06/2007 2:04:18 AM PST by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Ron Paul is looking more viable.


197 posted on 02/06/2007 2:06:10 AM PST by Cvengr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr

Only if you wish to surrender to Islam. Sorry, that's not my cup of tea.


198 posted on 02/06/2007 2:10:49 AM PST by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

To: sauropod

.


199 posted on 02/06/2007 2:15:06 AM PST by hellinahandcart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

The American people are losing the ability to govern themselves.

This country is in very grave danger. 'Pod.


200 posted on 02/06/2007 2:17:51 AM PST by sauropod ( "The View:" A Tupperware party in the 10th circle of Hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 241 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson