The way I figure it, peoiple who are looking for a saviour to elect often end up with the opposite. German history is a good lesson for that.
People who won’t vote for someone who doesn’t share their specific religious dogma are intolerant, closed-minded bigots. Plain and simple. These people are also not true Americans.
Their highjacking of the Republican party brought us to incompetence and catastrophe that is the Bush administration. Most of W.’s decisions may have been right, but the execution seems to be mostly faith-based. That doesn’t work in the real world.
One’s religious beliefs do not qualify one for anything other than to be a member of that religion.
Are you not a German living in Germany?
Or, are you an American living in Germany?
Either way, you have a lot of gall suggesting who is a "true American" and who is not.
Blaming Christians for the Bush administrations ills is pretty ridiculous, would you care to elaborate on that. What have Christians done for example to keep him from securing the borders or cutting spending or pardoning border patrol agents not increasing the size of government.
Your post strikes me as being from someone who receives little information about America that hasn’t come through the Democrat media’s filter.
You speak about religious bigotry, like you thought it was a BAD thing.
Zealotry and bigotry are really two different things. Zealots defend their faith, bigots go out of their way to suppress those of different faiths.
What you see in Mitt Romney is a quiet sort of zealotry. Not a person to impose his faith on others. But it is good to know that he does have a reliable internal moral compass.
Personal faith DOES work in the real world. But there is an implied social contract here, you stay out of my beliefs, and I won’t try to change yours in any other way than by personal example.
[People who won’t vote for someone who doesn’t share their specific religious dogma are intolerant, closed-minded bigots.]
Like the athiest evolutionist religionists. Personally, as a bible believing Christian, I would settle for a man who is a conservative, which Mitt and Rudy and McCain and some others are not.
Merry Christmas.
Without their "hijacking of the Republican party" you would never have had Ronald Reagan as President. In fact, the GOP was a nationally minority party with no prospects until they joined with conservative Christians.
You think this hunt for Saviour mentality is limited to the right? The left has already proclaimed government as saviour, remember stem cell, global warming, survival of fitness at the welfare trough? Now Christ said these things need be and he told us to test the fruit, and yes I know some confuse testing with judging.
Now I am quite sure there will be somebody coming along real quickly telling me I am gossiping or judging and am on dangerous grounds. Just as the gods of government legislate blind loyalty to their means and methodology it really is not difficult to spot the same spot in denominationallism.
If the alternative is to be an open-minded windbag such as yourself, I wear the label of bigot proudly. Signed, a True American
AS to your comments - DUH? You hardly sound like a tolerant person yourself. The FIRST reason I object to Romney is that he is not conservative......his political past is steeped in liberalism. The SECOND reason is his religious beliefs....and it is also the reason he IS my THIRD choice in a primary candidate. And here I am a conservate, religious voter.
Please tell me you are NOT an American citizen. You are scary.
One’s religious beliefs do not qualify one for anything other than to be a member of that religion.
-you better rethink that.........eternity is forever.
Rinos to conservatives - Just shut up. (but please continue to send us money and vote).
I will take exception to that remark- No one is looking for a saviour in the religious sense, but rather are looking for a candidate who is sure to uphold the Judeo-Christian ethic that is the basis of Western morality, and certainly the foundation of the culture of the United States in particular. To accuse Christians of looking for a "saviour" in any other than Christ is to be oblivious of the essence of Christian thought, by the very nature of the accusation.
German history should be instructive, as it was socialism that brought forth it's fruit in fascism, *not* adherence to the faith of her fathers. Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it.
People who won’t vote for someone who doesn’t share their specific religious dogma are intolerant, closed-minded bigots. Plain and simple. These people are also not true Americans.
A statement born of ignorance, no doubt. Philosophy and religion are the same thing, and to suppose one would vote for something opposed to (or even indifferent to) what one believes is truth is an absurd statement. That the candidate's beliefs (philosophy) are akin to one's own would be a matter of paramount concern, as that belief predicts the candidate's actions.
To accuse Christians of intolerance is an asinine position. The Christian heritage of the Western world is the root of freedom. Of course one is intolerant of those wishing to cut off that root. Without it there is no sustenance. Freedom and Justice will wither and die. One may as well accuse us of being bigoted toward murderers and rapists, which of course, we are. It is a specious and inaccurate skewing of the concept, to say the very least.
Their highjacking of the Republican party brought us to incompetence and catastrophe that is the Bush administration.
The incompetence and catastrophe of the Bush administration is based in it's sojourn into socialism and globalism, and you must note that the Christian Right were among the first to pull support away when the administration strayed. In fact, his efforts toward globalism are still widely supported by all except the Conservatives, who have rejected such attempts outright. Those Conservatives are largely made up of the Christian Right.
Most of W.’s decisions may have been right, but the execution seems to be mostly faith-based. That doesn’t work in the real world.
All decisions are based upon faith of one form or another. A leader who would humble himself and subject himself to the will of Almighty God is less likely to enforce his own will with the aspirations of empire. Certainly a plus in my book.
One’s religious beliefs do not qualify one for anything other than to be a member of that religion.
That is not your decision. That is decided by the aggregated citizens of the United States, eighty-five percent of whom are Christians.
Your position is without merit.
That's nuts....folks have full right to vote for folks based on religious beliefs...it's a crucible of who we are.
Most men would be their OWN saviour, than reach out to the Only One who is.
Who made you the arbiter of who is and isn't an American? You, whose screen name is the German national anthem?
GOD FIRST, then Country, otherwise, FRiend, the country won't be worth defending. Any country.
As far as religious dogma goes, I'm pretty flexible within the Judeo-Christian ethic (although I have my own particular beliefs, as does anyone who believes), but a pro-"choice", anti-self defense, or pro-homosexuality platform just won't cut it for me with any party or candidate. YMMV.
Who hijacked? Conservatives supported Bush over McCain, who was running as the moderate in 2000.