Free Republic

Roberts knows, just as I know, that this obamacare would NOT have passed had it been a tax. And it's Roberts who claims he doesn't wish to overrule legislative action. He know his claim about obamacare being a tax is pure forcing onto us of something that congress would have rejected.

How could any future Court (with a straight face) look to legislative history and intent for interpretive guidance again? Those are now off the table.

Thanks for your prayers, AG. Good to see you again. The doctors say if all goes well I should be fine with one kidney. Praise God for His redundancies both in His word and in His designs. :)

Thanks D-fendr, good to see you again too.

If we believe in salvation by election, salvation by luck (from our view) by birth, then it follow we must believe in a god that has this as His plan of salvation.

I don't mean to twist your words around, but does that mean you don't think salvation is by election? I mean, my last memory of Catholicism on this subject is that God does elect, and He simply elects those who have chosen faith, and have been water baptized, and have kept the sacraments, and all other things along those lines. Is that not correct?

It seems to be inarguable to me that election is critical to salvation, theologically, to both Catholics and Protestants. I just thought we had different ideas about who the chooser or choosers are and on what basis choices are made.

And, of course, you are one of those who was born lucky.

Now that’s a racket.

Since none on our side claim any merit for having been chosen, the racket you are criticizing must be conducted by God Himself. If it really was true that God picked his own solely by His own counsel and without merit or independent (of God) contribution by those chosen, would you consider God a racketeer? And if yes, why?

I know, I know, - Blessed is the one who waits for and reaches the end of the 1,335 days. LOL! I was just blown away by those great posts. :)

Awesome posts, Daniel, just awesome. :) I’m definitely keeping all of it for good reference. Thanks for posting and for all the work.

Great to see you again Dr. E.! :) What a great story this is of true Christian charity.

I don't see how the individual mandate stands.

I agree. Scalia will make a powerful slippery-slope argument that there is no answer to. If they get away with this then the government will be able to require just about any action and put it under the commerce clause. I have to think that Kennedy would recognize the size of the genie he would be letting out.

However, it's the issue of severability that concerns me.

The last I heard even the pro-Obamacare forces admitted that without the mandate the whole thing folds like a house of cards. There would be no money for it.

"May I have 24 hours to think about it."

Thanks for the ping. This showdown seems to mirror many Biblical stories. First came prayer, then came the Lord, then came greatness.

This must be one of the most difficult things to grapple with because it affects who we listen to, make friends with, give our fund to, etc.

Yes I agree. Most of the time we can't know the private details of the lives of public figures (Weiner exception notwithstanding :) so with candidates we might be better off going with policy, as I took your approach to be.

Do you believe mormons are Christians? I don't.

Perhaps another way to say it is that MormonISM does not teach Christianity, however, surely there are some Christians among the Mormon population. IOW, there must be some lousy Mormons who might "accidentally" be passable Christians in Spite of their professed faith. :)

With no other choice but to not vote, I think I could put a person's Mormon "faith" aside if the person nevertheless had a worldview that mimicked that of a Christian in the important areas. For example, I haven't heard yet what Romney's precise view on nominating SCOTUS justices is. If his answer convinced me he was motivated to nominate an anti-Roe candidate then that would be helpful for me on election day.

Great post, Quix. Thanks for those wonderful scripture references to God's Holy word.

Great posts, thanks for the pings.

"Texas Governor Rick Perry distanced himself from George W. Bush by saying, 'I went to Texas A&M. He went to Yale.' In other words, his idea of instilling confidence is by saying, 'Don’t worry. I’m not as smart as George W. Bush.'" –Conan O'Brien

"Rick Perry is now the front runner. Of course they’re letting him run in front. Because he’s the one with the gun." –Stephen Colbert

"Texas governor Rick Perry has been in the race only three days, and he's already blowing away the competition like it is a trespassing coyote." -- Stephen Colbert

"Perry is an attractive candidate for many conservatives, because he wants smaller government, to cut national spending, and he knows how to fire a grenade launcher. He’s like the Sarah Palin of politics." –Jimmy Kimmel

"Rick Perry was once a Democrat. Just once, in college. He was experimenting." –Jimmy Kimmel

"It turns out that Texas Gov. Rick Perry got a D in Principles of Economics. So he can't be president, but he can get a job on President Obama's economic team." –Jay Leno

"Texas Governor Rick Perry now says his wife has been encouraging him to run for President. Remember first he told us God told him to run; now his wife is telling him to run. Of course, the big difference; if you ignore what God says you don't have to hear about it until the afterlife. That's the only difference." –Jay Leno

"Texas Gov. Rick Perry referred to the Mexican city of Juarez as the most dangerous city in America. In his defense, he probably just thought it was an American city because there were so many Mexicans there." –Jay Leno

"Gov. Rick Perry of Texas shot a coyote while he was jogging. Who carries a gun while jogging? I can barely manage my iPod. I like the idea of runners carrying guns. Think of how interesting the Boston Marathon will be." –Jimmy Kimmel

The Constitution itself allows for its own amendment. A strict constructionist would say, "Amend it according to the process set out in the constitution, and you have correctly applied the Constitution to itself."

Absolutely right. There is nothing whatsoever wrong with amending the Constitution by its own provisions. Thank God they thought to put in that provision to deal with unforeseen problems like activist justices.

I personally think that since the mandate was central to the legislation and in fact is the fundamental lynchpin, I don't see how the rest of it can be constitutionally implemented.

I agree, if this stands the law will never see the light of day from a practical standpoint. IIRC, even the administration has admitted that if the mandate goes down the whole thing goes down because there is no money to fund it. Healthy people will just opt out until they need it. The fines were small I think, so without any real money going in, it will collapse under its own weight.

Oh THAT kind of dead. Whew! :)

From the above post - here is another link:

download free SEO software

Here is a great time-saving research tool I just found yesterday, and the best part is it's FREE! From their website:

SerpAttacks is a free seo software that you can download. It has features like the most seo software out there that have more than 100 bucks price tag. With this free seo software you can, hunt real money generating keywords, discover products to promote, find available domains for your keyword, analyze your websites weak points so you can improve them, spy on competitors activities and beat them and more.

Check it out:

http://serpattacks.com

The works we perform after being justified do not save us. Our justification is a one time event.

Yes, and I think the language can sometimes get confusing as to what the driving force actually is. We hear the quote so often that "we are justified by faith". I'm sure that many have the idea that we choose faith and that in turn is what justifies us. I would disagree since justification as a forensic declaration had nothing to do with our faith as a cause, but rather preceded our faith entirely. Here is an excerpt from Justification as an Eternal and Immanent Act of God (by John Gill) which makes the distinction:

Justification is an act of God's grace, flowing from his sovereign good will and pleasure; the elect of God are said to be "justified by his grace"; and as if that expression was not strong enough to set forth the freeness of it, the word "freely" is added elsewhere; "Being justified freely by his grace", #Tit 3:7 Ro 3:24. Justification is by many divines distinguished into active and passive. Active justification is the act of God; it is God that justifies. Passive justification is the act of God, terminating on the conscience of a believer, commonly called a transient act, passing upon an external object.

...... Now, as before observed, as God's will to elect, is the election of his people, so his will to justify them, is the justification of them; as it is an immanent act in God, it is an act of his grace towards them, is wholly without them, entirely resides in the divine mind, and lies in his estimating, accounting, and constituting them righteous, through the righteousness of his Son; and, as such, did not first commence in time, but from eternity.

First, It does not begin to take place in time, or at believing, but is antecedent to any act of faith. 1. Faith is not the cause, but an effect of justification; it is not the cause of it in any sense; it is not the moving cause, that is the free grace of God; "Being justified freely by his grace", #Ro 3:24 nor the efficient cause of it; "It is God that justifies", #Ro 8:33 nor the meritorious cause, as some express it; or the matter of it, that is the obedience and blood of Christ, #Ro 5:9,19 or the righteousness of Christ, consisting of his active and passive obedience; nor even the instrumental cause; for, as Mr. Baxter {5} himself argues, "If faith is the instrument of our justification, it is the instrument either of God or man; not of man, for justification is God's act; he is the sole Justifier, #Ro 3:26 man doth not justify himself: nor of God, for it is not God that believes": nor is it a "causa sine qua non", as the case of elect infants shows; it is not in any class of causes whatever; but it is the effect of justification: all men have not faith, and the reason why some do not believe is, because they are none of Christ's sheep; they were not chosen in him, nor justified through him; but justly left in their sins, and so to condemnation; the reason why others believe is, because they are ordained to eternal life, have a justifying righteousness provided for them, and are justified by it, and shall never enter into condemnation: the reason why any are justified, is not because they have faith; but the reason why they have faith, is because they are justified; was there no such blessing of grace as justification of life in Christ, for the sons of men, there would be no such thing as faith in Christ bestowed on them; precious faith is obtained through the righteousness of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ, #2Pe 1:1 nor, indeed, would there be any room for it, nor any use of it, if a justifying righteousness was not previously provided. Agreeable to this are the reasonings and assertions of Twisse {6}, Maccovius {7}, and others. Now if faith is not the cause, but the effect of justification; then as every cause is before its effect, and every effect follows its cause, justification must be before faith, and faith must follow justification.