Posted on 09/19/2007 7:14:10 PM PDT by pissant
No Jesus is NOT a “product” of God, He IS God, not a god but the God.
What was your screen name prior to April 23, 2007?
No - Dobson probably is simply in the same position a lot of us social conservatives are. Which is to say, not terribly happy with any of the options. So, it may well turn out that Romney is the most socially conservative of the current front runners. I hope we don’t have to go there but if none of the second tier candides take off - Romney may be our best alternative.
The problem is that Fred opposes a Human Life Amendment to ban abortion at the Federal level. This is one of the reasons that social conservatives are unhappy with Fred.
If that's your stance, no offense, you're not a strong believer in federalism then. Your stance on federalism has limits when it comes to moral issues, something Mr. Madison (and the 10th Amendment) stated were issues for the separate and sovereign states.
A lot of Fred’s popularity in the Bible belt has been based on the assumption by many people that he is socially conservative. However, if he continues to distance himself from social conservatives like he has since he officially entered the race then his political fall may be every bit as dramatic as his rise in the polls was earlier this year.
LOL! No one but a Mittwit would say that.
Romney may be our best alternative.
Nice try, newbie!!
And you find that......where in the Bible?
Bump!
Correct me if I am wrong, Nebuchadnezzar was a Chaldean King? Joseph or at least the one I am thinking of served under a Egyptian Pharaoh.
That kind of belief is blasphemous!
No offense - but if you don’t know anything about Dobson then why are you implying that he has been involved in any wrongdoing. To my knowledge their have never even been any allegations of impropriaty involving Dobson. He is a man of great integrity who is highly respected by most social conservatives.
Now, as to your statement that “[Dobson] needs to bring himself into the 21st century” and that “his issues just don’t matter when you are talking about electing the leader of the free world.” Statements and attitudes like yours are why more and more social conservatives are leaving the Republican party. It seems that a lot of Republicans want our votes but flat out despise us behind our backs. So, let me be clear about this - if you don’t care about our issues and prefer to insult us then don’t be surprised when we don’t vote for you.
He didn't use the word that we now transliterate as Trinity but he continually refers to His abilities to forgive, raise the dead, and perform other supernatural miracles, as being claimed only by God.
It’s all a matter of perspective hoss. William J. Clinton is “highly respected” also. I happen to think he is a leftist jerk.
I also pretty much think that anyone who cannot see that Fred Thompson is the best choice is a retard.
Still not ashamed of myself.
Apt description of Jim Robinson.
He supports FRED and Federalism.
Who are/were you really, newbie?
Well, first he has to break into the double-digits in a national poll.
On the plus side, he definitely seems to have a better work ethic than Fred and is backed by Joe Arpaio, my favorite sheriff and Jim DeMint, one of my favorite senators.
That being said, I think Dobson is off-base to refuse to endorse Fred at this point. He could very well be the nominee.
Overturning Roe would either prohibit all abortions or return it to the states depending upon how Roe was overturned. Roe was based on two main holdings. First, that the right to privacy (which had already been extended to provide a right to contraception in Griswold v. Connecticut) was implicated by laws which prevented women from getting an abortion. Second, that the “fetus” was not a person under the 14th Amendment. If the court simply says that the right to privacy is not implicated by abortion restrictions then the issue would be returned to the states. However, a much more likely outcome would be for the court to say that privacy is implicated but that the unborn child is a person for the purposes of the 14th Amendment. If the unborn child is a person under the 14th Amendment then he or she is automatically entitled to “not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” And congress is specifically given power to enforce this Amendment by legislation.
This was just discussed on MSNBC (Buchanan and Press). They think FT is going to flame out. FWIW, I am just passing it on. Plus I wanted to respond to a post with 800+ replies!
Actually, I prefer my own choice. I prefer a candidate with enough skill, appeal and knowledge, like RR, that he can win without the Christian or Black votes, so he can say, “Look, I owe you nothing. You opposed me, so screw it. Next time be more practical.”
PS: The “Marriage Protection Amendment” isn’t even marginally important. Gays will do what they want, married or not. As a Conservative, my general feeling is that my opinion stops at the front door.
Seduce kids? Shoot ‘em.
Gay rape? Rape is rape.
Wear a dress? Why not look stupid like so many “fashionable” women so?
Demand special “rights” Hell no.
Get married? Why not? Why shouldn’t they be miserable like the rest of us.
BTW, “Gay Marriage” was not an issue launched by gays. It was quietly pushed by the “Matrimonial Bar” when they began to lose too much income to no-fault divorce.
When you follow the money, you follow the crime.
Your post is an absolutely pathetic attack on a good christian man who has dedicated his life to strengthening America’s families. I am sorry he didn’t support your pet candidate but your attack on him is absolutely classless and far more worthy of being posted on DU than FR.
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.