Posted on 03/31/2007 6:03:17 AM PDT by FairOpinion
Nonetheless, if he wins and runs against Hillary will you vote for him? I'd even hold my nose and vote for McCain against Hillary. At least with Rudy you have a chance at more conservative judges. Hillary will get you more Ruth Bader Ginsbergs or worse, guaranteed. Fight your fight as hard as you want now, but once the party has decided on their candidate and you refuse to support that candidate, you might as well go switch your affiliation to Democrat. Same thing.
Aren't his leadership qualities, his Middle East views, his ability to give it back to Schumer as hard as it's thrown important? Or are the only things that matter to you abortion and homophobia?
I grant you that some of the bambast around here about Rg and others is not helpful, and I plead guilty to some of that, but most Freepers, myself included are opposed to Rudy, not because of who he is, but due to his stands on the issues. BTW, you have Freepmail.
Well said. I'd like to add that Rudy is also too much of a nanny-stater for more libertarian-minded Republicans to support. Thompson is somebody both the religious-right types and libertarian-types can like, and he won't scare away moderates or swing-voters. He's eloquent and charismatic and has far less baggage than anybody else in the race.
Nope. I will not vote for Giuliani. And I am in good company. Jim Robinson has stated he won't vote for him either.
I don't trust him at all. I don't trust him to pick judges that are any different from who the Hildebeast will choose.
And at least Republicans will be working hard to thwart her agenda, but will roll over and give Giuliani any liberal thing he wants.
I find it totally hypocritical that many of you were so down on Clinton about his sluts, but think Giuliani's are fine.
The spectacle of him running around with his mistresses in the White House will be appalling. A jerk who sends not only his wife but two mistresses to the same public even shouldn't be allowed to be a dogcatcher.
And now even those few things I supposedly agree on him about are being proven false, since he doesn't appear to be anti-tax....unless switching positions on the flat tax gets him Steve Forbes' endorsement, of course.
Rudy hasn't lied under oath. And no, I don't think the "sluts" are fine, and I feel it's a true weakness. Nonetheless, the more I see of anybody in Washington DC, the more I realize no one has a perfect record. You want to get to the top? You're going to slip somewhere.
Speaking of hypocritical, what about the ones who hate Rudy so much but support Newt?
They are hypocrites, too. I wouldn't support Gingrich for dogcatcher, either.
"Certain people are working overtime to make Fred look like a big, lazy sloth."
I don't recall a single post asserting that he was lazy.
"Having read some of his writings, he is also brilliant".
I would like to judge that for myself. Do you have any references?
Some DobBots have told me that the mere act of Gingrich's repentance is enough to forgive him, because all was forgiven on the Cross, etc. I say it is not my job to forgive, but to evaluate character. It is God's job to judge. All I see is a deeply flawed man, who handed the Clinton's victory out of the jaws of defeat time and again. I don't want him anywhere near the Oval office.
Just as there is a difference between agnosticism (the ism of those who don't KNOW whether there is a God but reject neither possibility) and atheism (the ism of those who THINK they KNOW that there is no God), so too there is a difference between KNOWING that a man is NOT a Christian and NOT KNOWING enough about the man to decide. Let us take Dr. Dobson's own careful remarks as representing Dr. Dobson's actual opinion rather than taking the MSM's distortion of Dr. Dobson's remarks as though those distortions were accurate.
The following will be a first for me: defending the UCC (to some extent). As one client who is a UCC member and another who is a UCC minister have explained it to me (neither having ever lied to me that I know of), the UCC is a CONGREGATIONAL church whose CONGREGATION's call ministers according to the religious views of the CONGREGATION, inter alia. The minister/client was born into a family belonging to an evangelical Protestant church of German ancestry that was much more evangelical than most here might suspect. His UCC church (in New England, no less) helped raise funds for Operation Rescue-style activities and defense. His church is also a very old one of several hundred years standing. He wishes that the evangelical church into which he was born had not merged with UCC. The lay client/UCC member belongs to a congregation which is socially liberal in the sense of favoring legal toleration but private disapproval of various forms of bad behavior including abortion and, perhaps, homosexual misbehavior but otherwise inclined to fiscal and military and regulatory conservatism. Most UCC congregations in their part of New England are dying remnants committed to leftist ideology generally, including more than one with homosexual or lesbian couples residing in their parsonages. Bottom line: Whatever the general reutation of a congregationalist (small or large C) denomination, one ought not to make assumptions just on the basis of the brand name. In my own Catholic Church, there is a BIG difference between an Archbishop Weakland (thank God he is retired) and a Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz. Likewise, what kind of Christian Fred Thompson may be is determined by, well, the qualities of Fred Thompson. My betting is that he is near infinitely better than Weakland but not quite at the level of Bruskewitz. If he is anywhere near the level of the aforementioned UCC pro-life pro-family evangelical minister/client, that is certainly good enough for me.
Fair Opinion: Please note that this post is NOT Rudy Bashing but seeks to set the record straight. I don't support Rudy other than for Attorney General but nothing here addresses him, dissents from him or detracts from him. I do support Thompson at this point and for the foreseeable future but that is positive and not negative.
What poor choices we Repubbies have this time around.
Two guys divorced twice and married thrice (Newt and Rudy).
Thompson, divorced a mere once, and remarried to a gal half his age. A guy who's definitely "in" with the Hollywood and NYC network sets.
Then there's Mitt....married once and still with the same wife.
I believe that committment is an admirable quality in any man, especially a presidential candidate.
Which of the aforementioned men shows the most commitment?
I agree with you. I have no doubt that he's forgiven if he's truly repentant. That repentance doesn't alleviate him of the consequences of his actions.
The Church of Christ churches are stand-alone individual congregations who find direction from the Bible for all beliefs.
Each congregation is directed by the leadership of the elders - men chosen to make the decisions of the church, hire the ministers, handle the direction and beliefs of the church. They are chosen based on the Bible instructions of what kind of men these should be......having only one wife, having raised their own children to be Christians, being soundly based on the Bible teachings. If any in the congregation can show reason a man is not so qualified, they can speak to the existing elders with their doubts.
They believe salvation is from Jesus Christ who died for the sins of man, they follow the direction of "repent and be baptised for the remission of sins and you will receive eternal life". They are Christians no doubt because they are following the same instructions given to the first century Christians.
They are not a cult, not the International Church of Christ (which is indeed a cult) and not part of a United Church of Christ group - as I have been a member all my life and have not become familiar with the United Church of Christ.
They are the Church of Christ and are really non-denominational although society tends to group people into denominations according to their beliefs. But, we get our beliefs from the directions given to the first century christians - not a man evolved creed.
Now, there are many different levels of Churches of Christ. Very conservative, more progressive, more progressive and liberal. But each is a stand-alone church under the direction of the designated elders. The young often want change, want instrumental music, want this - want that which over time causes varying degrees of conservatism, traditionalism, etc.
Finally a man who understands.
Yes, and you understand the reason also. Congratulations!
Instrumental music is a point of contention in the church of today as are other items - same as all churches I guess.
Since it was not definitely specified in the Bible, I have been borderline on it. Although I do find that it leads to more and more use of God's time as a stage for some to show off their talents while others come to see the show rather than worshipping God.
I also feel it leads to members assuming the role of spectator rather than worshipper equal to all others there to worship.
You're right, I did miss the thread last night, but I don't see anything derogatory about Thompson in this article.
My interest is in promoting Fred for President, not fighting with other FReepers who don't support him (unless they're spreading outright lies.) I figure the more exposure Fred gets, the more people will see what an outstanding candidate he will be. Therefore whenever FO posts an article about Fred it keeps his name alive on the forum. I usually pick up 2 or 3 more Fred supporters with each thread. :)
This link at UCC.org provides a history of the United Church of Christ and their origins. BTW, I am a Christian, but not of any of the Churches you mentioned. I am a Catholic. I am also an amateur genealogist, and have always had an interest in American and European history, including religion which has been prominent for good or ill in both places.
It's my pleasure to add you to the FRed List. :)
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.