Skip to comments.
Capitalist Ron Nash: "The New Face of Marxism - The Religious Left / Jim Wallis-Sojourners
Issues, Etc. ^
| Monday, October 11, 2004
| Ronald Nash, PhD
Posted on 10/22/2004 11:31:05 AM PDT by Matchett-PI
Issues, Etc.
Scroll down to Monday, October 11
KFUO Host: Todd Wilken
Hour 1 WMA [] Hour 1 MP3 free download
"The Religious Left"
(Everything you'll ever need to know about them.)
Dr. Ron Nash (pictured guest)
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Extended News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: alinsky; campolo; capitalism; clinton; dncfalseprophets; falseprophets; georgebush; gramsci; hillary; jimwallis; kerry; kfuo; marxism; nash; sider; socialism; sojourners; wallis
To: fight_truth_decay
2
posted on
10/22/2004 11:41:12 AM PDT
by
Matchett-PI
(All DemocRATS are either religious moral relativists, libertines or anarchists.)
To: Matchett-PI
3
posted on
10/22/2004 11:55:42 AM PDT
by
Stellar Dendrite
(These Commies are ruining our country...........WAKE UP AMERICA BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE)
To: Matchett-PI
The lines between the religious Left and the religious Right definitely blur from the Libertarian-leaner's point of view. Government involvement and laws that prohibit have - in many more cases than not - negative consequences.
Since I'm a Libertarian Christian (a non-common combination), I find myself caught between party policy sometimes. I like to focus, primarily, on the New Testament when looking for policy guidance as it jives with my faith. Yet, at the same time, I don't see how anyone can come up with the absurd conclusion that a life isn't life until it passes through the birth canal, for example.
My bottom line is this: political leanings, support, and ties don't necessarily fall into nice, neat, demographic-pigeon-holling packages.
4
posted on
10/22/2004 12:04:00 PM PDT
by
LowCountryJoe
(It's too damned important, so hold your nose if you must!)
To: Matchett-PI
To: LowCountryJoe
Well I could be construed as a socially conservative libertarian.
6
posted on
10/22/2004 12:42:29 PM PDT
by
RockinRight
(Bush's rallies look like World Series games. Kerry's rallies look like Little League games.)
To: RockinRight
Well I could be construed as a socially conservative libertarian. Right on! So, is homosexuality a choice, a condition, or as Bush might say, "I just don't know."? Being a social conservative libertarian, I'm sure that you would agree with the Federalist position that any law should be left up to the individual state...but then again, the Supreme Court's ruling in the Texas Sodomy Case changes the equation, doesn't it?
7
posted on
10/22/2004 12:50:56 PM PDT
by
LowCountryJoe
(It's too damned important, so hold your nose if you must!)
To: LowCountryJoe
"I'm a Libertarian Christian ..." That's great, if true. Libertarian-anything else is an oxymoron.
The Framers of our Constitution understood that perfectly.
8
posted on
10/22/2004 12:52:09 PM PDT
by
Matchett-PI
(All DemocRATS are either religious moral relativists, libertines or anarchists.)
To: Matchett-PI
OK, how's this then? I'm a Libertarian who also happens to be a Christian.
9
posted on
10/22/2004 12:56:40 PM PDT
by
LowCountryJoe
(It's too damned important, so hold your nose if you must!)
To: LowCountryJoe
I answer the same as Bush because I really do not know. I do believe that marriage is between a man and a woman but should remain a state issue.
10
posted on
10/22/2004 1:02:06 PM PDT
by
RockinRight
(Bush's rallies look like World Series games. Kerry's rallies look like Little League games.)
To: LowCountryJoe
"OK, how's this then? I'm a Libertarian who also happens to be a Christian." That's what I understood you to say the first time. :)
11
posted on
10/22/2004 1:09:55 PM PDT
by
Matchett-PI
(All DemocRATS are either religious moral relativists, libertines or anarchists.)
To: Matchett-PI
Librarian-Christian then? I guess this would depend on whether Teresa Heinz-Kerry acknowledges librarians...guess that's a no!
12
posted on
10/22/2004 2:12:15 PM PDT
by
LowCountryJoe
(It's too damned important, so hold your nose if you must!)
To: RockinRight
I believe marriage is an institution between two individuals and God. It is not an issue for the state but is made one because of the state's ability to violate individual rights and anoint other individuals and groups with political favor. Individuals have the right to freedom of association. As an individual, business owner or controlling stock holder, the right to determine with whom you trade should be absolute, (for any or no particular reason.) Yes, I just defined everyone's right to discriminate, no apology will be forthcoming. Whether or not two individuals wish to call themselves married isn't really an issue. It becomes an issue when the state advocates, condemns, , licenses, bestows economic benefits to, or forces others to abide by the desires of the "offended" group. Having different levels of taxation dependent upon marital status, Forcing employers and insurers to recognize marital status, etc., are all examples of what really create the polarity. Give individuals their right to freedom of association, whereas they may choose to recognize or not, the race, religion, ethnicity, marital status, height, sex, etc. as each sees fit and it is no longer a political issue.
13
posted on
03/10/2006 1:37:11 PM PST
by
FireflySerenity
(LibertarianChristians.Org)
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson