Just A Reminder
Please Don't Forget
To Donate To FR
This Quarter
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
Posted on 11/18/2011 8:04:29 AM PST by SeekAndFind
I was pointing out that your position is a childish absurdity.
Is you arrogance the result of having written a book or two, or is it just a defense mechanism?
Neither. It is the result of having learned a thing or two about Yeshua's teachings not commonly understood in His church together with the sense of responsibility to impart it despite the absolute assurance of a churlish reply.
Your arrogance outdoes your reading comprehension. You are trying to make an absolute case. I am saying that both options are viable. Therefore, your burden of proof is much higher. You have not met it.
You also have some sort of sick idea that your Presidential vote is something that you and the candidates will hash out on a one to one basis - and you will punish those who don’t meet your standards.
I got news for you. Your vote doesn’t matter, and all of these folks will be likely richer and more powerful and more protected from consequences if the nation re-elects Obama than you will ever be.
But go ahead, and enjoy your high horse and think that you are doing them a favor. You are not. You need them much more than they need you. (And that’s true of all of us). Those Republicans we “punished” in 06? They’re fine. But WE”RE screwed thanks to Reid and Pelosi. Same with Obama in 08.
And whom was it you said you were supporting with your posts? ... You make the DNC’s task so easy.
And may I ask which candidate you believe you are supporting with your insults and condescending posts?
Just saying that virtually every Evangelical I know has been divorced at least once...and this includes the pastors. And as for talkmeisters popular with Evangelicals, heck, how many times has Rush been divorced?
I don’t think this is a problem. I would assume that Evangelicals want somebody who supports Christianity, supports small government, is opposed to Agenda 21, and has actually been effective in getting conservative programs passed.
Romney has never been divorced (does he even have a wife?), but he is none of these things.
Got projection?
You are trying to make an absolute case.
Jesus was fond of those. I'm reporting accordingly. Too bad you just don't like those nasty Mosaic Laws. Few do, but you see, He was a stickler. Indeed, if you actually understood the Lord's prayer (particularly the version in Luke), you'd know that He was raising the bar for being forgiven to the point where we had reconciled with ALL who had offended us before even asking Him, just as He did in equating the thought with the crime and just as He did when He told us not to even approach the altar without having done so. ALL of that is in accordance with the purification of the priests, as He would have us be. ALL of that is just as He taught us when He told us even to love our enemies. He wanted us to strive to be perfect as our Heavenly Father is who gave us that Law. Most people try to morph their way out of obedience. It doesn't work simply because the consequences are immutable, whether or not He lifts a finger.
I am saying that both options are viable. Therefore, your burden of proof is much higher. You have not met it.
Funny, I thought I was merely making a point of disagreement (to which you apparently think me not entitled), and not even attempting a proof for which I obviously don't have the time or space here.
You also have some sort of sick idea that your Presidential vote is something that you and the candidates will hash out on a one to one basis -
No, I have the "sick" idea that I am entitled to my opinion for my bases of making choices for candidates and arguing in favor of them, to which you apparently think me not entitled.
What a pompous ass you are.
- and you will punish those who don’t meet your standards.
With what, withdrawing my support? Oh, so you think I'm obligated to support Newt in the primary without regard to his personal behavior? Unbelievable. I seriously doubt you were asserting such when the mediots were saying the same about Clinton.
I got news for you. Your vote doesn’t matter,
Oh but you have shown that it clearly does; else you would not waste so many electrons arguing against my intolerable position.
and all of these folks will be likely richer and more powerful and more protected from consequences if the nation re-elects Obama than you will ever be.
Oh goody, we're down to the "a vote for (fill in the blank) is a vote for Obama!" With an argument that lame you're bucking for full RINO-dumb. It was that kind of "logic" that gave us Schwarzenegger.
But go ahead, and enjoy your high horse and think that you are doing them a favor. You are not. You need them much more than they need you. (And that’s true of all of us). Those Republicans we “punished” in 06? They’re fine. But WE”RE screwed thanks to Reid and Pelosi. Same with Obama in 08.
Care to enlighten us as to the twisted fantasy of which you're accusing me now? If my vote was "unimportant" how then could I suddenly be guilty of delivering Slave Party majorities despite having voted uniformly Republican in the elections? This is a primary you know. I'm free and responsible to argue my preferences for a candidate to represent those preferences.
No it’s Big Government Newt that makes the DNC’s case:
In a May 15, 2011 interview on NBC’s Meet the Press with host David Gregory, Gingrich admitted he has long sought an individual mandate by government:
Gregory: Now, I know you’ve got big differences with what you call Obamacare. But back in 1993 on this program this is what you said about the individual mandate. Watch.
Video of Gingrich in 1993: I am for people, individuals — exactly like automobile insurance — individuals having health insurance and being required to have health insurance. And I am prepared to vote for a voucher system which will give individuals, on a sliding scale, a government subsidy so we insure that everyone as individuals have health insurance.
Gregory: What you advocate there is precisely what President Obama did with his healthcare legislation, is it not?
Gingrich: Well, I agree that all of us have a responsibility to pay — help pay for health care.... I’ve said consistently we ought to have some requirement that you either have health insurance or you post a bond.
I think inane is a more accurate word than extreme. As in, you are an inane troll who used an inane analogy.
“not to even approach without having done so.”
I am convinced that there are days when frustration is so heavy it offers a clear preview of Hell. If you seek mercy you must also grant it.
Looks to me like the Torah teaches that one has to SEEK mercy.
That indicates repentance. I haven't seen it.
And THAT is why you utterly missed the point.
We need to defeat Obama at all costs.
Who else if not Newt? Cain is tanking. Do we really want Mitt?
Newt can speak and debate and has experience with the legislative process in Washington.
So what if he advised Freddy and Fanny. So did top Obama aids.
Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.
“I haven’t seen itg.”
Love is blind. LOL
Understood. I tend to take the Old Testament and New Testament and put them together for the literal rule of the Messiah. It’s a work in progress.
It is indeed a work in progress, and it’s hard sometimes to take the whole counsel of scripture and properly apply it to a given situation. We live under New Testament grace and freedom - but cannot ignore the Old Testament teachings and history.
I try and remain very circumspect when applying these lessons. I am far less circumspect about other discussions here on FR and elsewhere.
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.