Posted on 12/13/2001 7:50:35 AM PST by 11th Earl of Mar
In your rightiousness, I'm glad you've taken it upon yourself to judge God himself. - "He is not worthy of out respect." You are amazing, really.
I believe God is more generous than you give him credit for. For example, words like "justice", "good" and "evil" are SO subjective and reflect the values of individual cultures. For example, what if something is "good" in one society and "evil" in another, what's a God to do? In some cultures it is "evil" to eat cows, or pigs. Is a God worthy of your respect if he hits you with that when you get to the pearly gates? "OkieGrit - you have been evil and eaten Pig."
If you argue that God will punish those who break his laws, regardless of whether they were even aware of them, then assuming 99% of the people die as a member of the religion they were born into, then he is predetermining certain hell to people even before they were born. Is that Justice?
For a Christian, the issue of abortion is a false god. It is placing an ISSUE above following the Holy Spirit. We are taught to obey those in authority, and to pray for those in authority. We also must use common sense, and we absolutely MUST follow the Holy Spirit. You say, "Well, the Holy Spirit would never have me vote for a pro-abort candidate." Oh really? Jesus didn't have the vote, but He DID pay taxes . . . to a "pro-abort" government---actually, a corrupt Roman government that engaged in crucifixtion of innocents as a way to teach people a lesson. Jesus met a Centurion once---a man obviously who had, due to his position, probably participated in more than a few "atrocities" of innocents. Yet Jesus helped this man's servant without a SINGLE REBUKE.
God worked through Pharaoh (a slaveowner) to move Joseph to a position of power; and He worked through Nebuchadnezzar to move Daniel to a top advisor. God constantly used non-born-again people (none of the Jews were "born again," were they?) to work His will. So clearly if there are two "pro-choice" candidates on the slate, and since God does not intends for you to abstain, He expects you to SEEK HIS WILL on which of the two may have a malleable heart, or which might cast the decisive vote. You cannot say that God does not move His will among the non-believers. Therefore, WE MUST ALWAYS SEEK HIS WILL, and not raise the false god of "abortion," or any other single issue. You never know when the person God has installed will have a sudden conversion.
Good for you guys in PA. You also illustrate why we need Conservative Christians to get and stay involved in the political process, even when we don't win. Because the Rinos stay involved, they are constantly trying to water down our message. It seems that instead of taking over the party, we end up quiting, only to refight the same internal battles each and every election.
It's no surprised that Rick won. People admire those who will stand by their convictions. Even if you don't care about stopping abortion. You might be attracted to a prolife candidate, if he proves to be a man of principle.
All I was saying is that abortion is part of the GOP legacy. I agree that some single issue voters get carried away, but the sad thing is that many of them are duped into voting for the GOP because it's supposed to be the "pro-life" party. That simply isn't the case anymore. The GOP is every bit pro-choice as the Democratic Party. My "single issue" is simply to try to restore our constitutional republic. I believe that I am doing God's will when I cast my vote in that respect.
I do understand that we are to submit to authority but that does not mean that we should trample on God's Word in so doing. Would you suggest that my wife should obey a law that limited us to only one child and required her to have an abortion if she ever became pregnant again? I don't think for a minute that you would.
Jesus' disciples were some of the best examples of civil disobedience. They preached the Gospel of Christ which was against the law as far as the Jews and Romans were concerned. I understand your position but I also understand the position of those "single issue" voters. They see abortion as tantamount to murder, which is specifically condemned in Scripture. Many of them feel they would be violating God's command by voting for a pro-abortion candidate. The same principle applies to other areas. Some people won't go to a bar because they believe that an establishment like that is advocating drunkenness. Others won't rent movies from certain video stores that also rent or sell pornography. I could go on but you get the idea.
True, some people may be putting a "single issue" above all else but that's not the case with every voter who takes a stand against abortion.
I certainly support a PBA ban but will the lives be saved or will the abortionists just use another procedure?
After the Jim Jeffords fiasco, you'd be crazy to volunteer for any candidate other than a very close friend.
If you are eligible to register and vote, you are a participant in the system whether you want to be or not. By not voting you are increasing the value of the votes of those who do vote.
If you are content to let others pick the people who make the laws that govern you, you should not complain about the laws they make.
If there is one thing that I have learned after 40 years in politics, there is no human being in whom I place total trust. Some individuals are more trustworthy than others and, based on this thread, the moderate amount of trust I have in the President is larger than that I have in you. If you disagree with me, fine, I suggest that you simply follow the advice of your screen name.
It is probably better just to put it on your FR hopepage, and reference that in threads. I have to do that also, since I'm often cross questioned about my screen name.
The duty to participate requires voting for the highest office. Frankly, if you live in a state in which the presidential vote was not certain ahead of time, I think that not voting, or casting a protest vote, were two forms of abstention. In either case, the duty to participate was not performed.
I tend to take people on their own terms. If they say they are pro-life, and do not stray too far from the ordinary meaning of the term, I consider them pro-life. While not conceding that Bush in fact holds the positions you imply, the absolutist position you hold is supported by 17% of the electorate. If you are not willing to work with those who are in agreement with you about other aspects of the issue, no restrictions will be made on abortion.
To the extent that you are able to accomplish this, you will be responsible for not saving the babies who could be saved, allowing them to die because we could not now save them all. This making the perfect the enemy of the good is a recipe for failure, and will allow the murder of millions who could be saved.
Excellent points. Sometimes I think that posters should have to have read some Edmund Burke before posting on electoral subjects. However, I think that you make a bit of an error referring to the forum as a whole. The group on this thread is far from representative of Free Republic.
It is a little humorous for the part of the GOP that makes the smallest contributions to talk about its money clout. To the extent that the GOP leadership does not consist of true believers, and generally it does not, and they having decided that they have made a good faith effort to attract religious voters, which they have decided, I do not think they will react to a Christian lack of support in the way you suggest. I think they will decide that the Christian conservatives can not be relied upon, and therefore no further effort should be made on their issues. They will simply go and find some other coaltion partner who will be more agreeable.
Fortunately this is not a problem, since there is no chance whatsoever of a signifigant proportion of the pro-life Christian community following your position.
I would probably prefer living in a world run by the very close friends of Alberta's Child, but don't expect to see it. In the meantime we are obligated by God to fight for justice in this world, while recognizing that it is a world of fallen human beings. My approach is to find the best person I can, where there is a possibility of making a difference in the world, and work for his election. Even while doing this, I know that I will be disappointed in them after their election. I just hope that they might be marginally better than the alternatives.
You'd be crazy to WORSHIP any candidate. Volunteering to assist in election campaigns is a good thing to do -- providing you keep an jaundiced eye on the guy running.
The goal is to develop enough cloat to get them to fear crossing you. You can't do that by dropping out, or by demanding perfection or by waging a scorched earth policy against those whom you disagree. You only inculcate that fear by gaining victory for those you support-- especially in primary elections.
Did not mean to be any stronger in response than the post I responded to. There is a post about 30 places above, which says I'm a maniac and they want to lock me up (assuming the moderator has not removed it, as I requested). You certainly have been more civil that that person. By the way, I don't think that 'sullen' derives from LC Sulla's name, and I think that their is little evidence that I am using the tactics of that statesman. LOL
That's not a protest vote -- that's not even a vote on principle. That is a moral requirement placed on me by the Catholic Church. I do not cooperate in the crime of abortion.
Your arrogance in presuming that a vote cast for someone other than Bush is a "protest vote", speaks volumes about why the Republican party continues to lose conservative voters.
As for your abortion response, Bush himself was widely quoted as being perfectly happy to accept abortion in the case of rape, incest, (and later RU486). Perhaps you weren't paying attention. You would not say that man who is for slavery in certain instances, was "anti-slavery." (Or perhaps *you* might -- who knows?)
As for not working with those who aren't 100% against abortion, that too is false. Pro-lifers are perfectly willing to take whatever we can get and move on to the next battle, so long as we're moving in the right direction. However, someone who is so morally ignorant that they don't realize abortion is murder and therefore oppose it on all grounds, is not fit to hold high office.
The fact that I'm having to point that out to an alleged Catholic, shows how far in decline this nation really is. If you're voting for pro-aborts like Bush, you're materially cooperating in the crime of abortion. I hope you haven't been to communion with that on your soul.
Until putative pro-lifers stop voting for confused psuedo pro-lifers like Bush, abortion will continue. Until putative conservatives stop voting for psuedo conservative candidates, socialism will continue to reign. Given the astonishingly low level of intelligence exhibited by most Republicans, I don't look for either condition to improve any time soon.
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.