Did you vote for President Bush? Are you aware that George Bush is not 100% pro-life, that the Bush family is not 100% pro-life? Did you vote for McCain/Palin? Do you not see that such a vote was a compromise to your perfection principle since old mister compromise with the democrats despite their evil intentions was not 'standing for God's morality'?
There is something demonically brilliant in persuading folks to now, after all the years of voting to compromise over not true pro-life candidates, to now be absolutely rigid when doing so assures that the most evil lying leftists to ever be elected president will be again re-instated by those who will have nothing to do with your 'Gods morality' strictures. We The People are presently still the sovereigns of this nation. We still have the responsibilty to work at directing the leadership of this nation. Even if your perfected candidate were elected, We The People must continue to make our expectations and directions known to that leader.
It is said that politics is the art of compromise. Frankly, politicians want uUS to believe that but the relity is that it is their politics which compromises our values. If you choose to not vote at all on the presidential slot, you have effectively made a decision to avoid responsibility for that office holder. That is your right as an American and sovereign. But you know that the votes of others will then determine which candidate is the next head of state. If you choose to vote third party, as in Hoefling or Goode, then you have not shirked totally your responsibility. But you know also that there will be two candidates who will get the vast majority of the votes. There is a built in cheat factor with Democrats, and to knowingly allow the most evil to continue ruling is to have made a compromise to your responsibilities when a less dangerous candidate could have had you vote even if you do not agree with his etch-a-sketch approach to gevernance.
Again I would ask you, which of the twisters, Obama or Romney, would you guess to be more like Jacob? I will pray daily if Romney is elected that God direct his heart and turn him toward the morality more in God's expectations. But neither of the main candidates will function as a conservative at a level acceptable to thsoe demanding perfectio ... and that's what God's morality amounts to, perfection. I do believe it will be more likely that the prayers of the people will persuade God to turn Romney.
Killing their kids for their gods was the offense, MHG. And the gods of this age are "ism's": humanism, "me"ism, state-ism, etc.
There is no difference. Nor can anyone claim that killing their babies in that era would have been fine if they had claimed they were doing it for the God of Israel. He would have rejected that, too. (As He did, incidentally, with Abraham sacrificing Isaac.)
So, it is the killing of babies that is abhorent.
So far as Jacob and which of the candidates would be more like Jacob, I would simply point out the meaning of the name Jacob. Jacob means "deceiver". Jacob didn't become acceptable to God because Jacob pulled himself up by his own bootstraps. He became acceptable because God chose him and changed him. God can do that with anyone, to include Obama. So, to ask which sinner is more acceptable to God is a non-sequitur.
Finally, the last thing I believe is possible on FR is for me to squelch anyone's posts. I simply don't have that power. If you get in a squabble with JR, then he owns the place and can zot any of us. I ain't JR. You can post whatever you want.
Sorry, but GWBush was a bonafide pro-life candidate, even to the point of rejecting embryonic stem cells. His wife wasn't, but he isn't Laura.
McCain was pro-life.
Romney has consistently governed anti-life and has the decisions on record to prove it. His changes are all cosmetic for political campaign purposes.
And the gay issue? Romney is a wasteland. He approves of gay couples, of gay adoption, of gays in the military. He's a full-blown advocate of the gay agenda.