And The Pulpits Are Silent

[Amy.G]

Our church has a pantry too, but many in our congregation wont help anyone outside of what the pantry can give because, "they have already given" or "the church handles those things"

I am saying that we have a responsibilty as individual Christians to help whoever we can.....with the guidance of the Holy Spirit....I am not saying that we should let people take advantage of us. God wil lead us to help those who really need if we will listen, but if we simply say "no" because we already tithed, then we arent open to Godly instruction.

AJ

I agree. I don't want to go any farther on this subject in this thread since it is off topic. I have already derailed it enough.

 

[ajg1959]

Personaaly, I believe it is a sin to not give a coat to someone that I know for a fact is cold.

I also believe it is a sin to neglect or turn our backs on hungry, oppressed, or even tortured people anywhere in the world.

AJ

And I do believe it extends globally. Just because we dont live in "Whereever" doesnt mean that we should not protect the people who are being tortured, murdered and raped.

Look up what was going on in Iraq when Sadam was in power....look up what his two sons did to innocent women.....look up how many Kurds they exterminated.

Someone needed to stop him and we did....grrrrrr....but now we need to finish it and bring our boys home.

I do honestly believe that God approved of us taking out Sadam, and that He would have disapproved if we let Sadam continue with his murder.

AJ

 

[ajg1959]

And I do believe it extends globally. Just because we dont live in "Whereever" doesnt mean that we should not protect the people who are being tortured, murdered and raped.

Look up what was going on in Iraq when Sadam was in power....look up what his two sons did to innocent women.....look up how many Kurds they exterminated.

Someone needed to stop him and we did....grrrrrr....but now we need to finish it and bring our boys home.

I do honestly believe that God approved of us taking out Sadam, and that He would have disapproved if we let Sadam continue with his muder.

AJ

And as this last post pertains to the topic?

Our churches have a right and an obligation to speak and teach about our world we live in, including politics.

And the OP was right, this is being neglected, I feel because our preachers today (for the most part) dont want to offend anyone, even if they are biblically wrong.

AJ

 

[jsn9333]

And I do believe it extends globally. Just because we dont live in "Whereever" doesnt mean that we should not protect the people who are being tortured, murdered and raped.

Look up what was going on in Iraq when Sadam was in power....look up what his two sons did to innocent women.....look up how many Kurds they exterminated.

Someone needed to stop him and we did....grrrrrr....but now we need to finish it and bring our boys home.

I do honestly believe that God approved of us taking out Sadam, and that He would have disapproved if we let Sadam continue with his murder.

AJ

I think you should be careful before claiming what God believes about such a topic.

I have no idea whether or not God approved of the war in Iraq or "taking out Saddam". What God thinks about such topics (where reasonable Christians can disagree) is an area where pastor's are right to remain silent. What I mean is, a reasonable Christian could say we should have gone into Sudan first and stop the massacres going on there. Another could say we should have gone into a variety of other countries first, each with brutal regimes that kill and rape people. Yet another reasonable Christian could say we shouldn't be in Iraq or any brutal country at all. He might think since we don't have enough economic resources to police the entire world for brutes, we shouldn't police any countries and should, with our limited resources, help brutalized people in all countries in non-military, humanitarian ways. Or another might think we shouldn't be there at all because Saddam was maintaining relative order and not able to kill very many people because we had air superiority and U.N. inspection teams making sure he could never gas the Kurds again. While some people disappeared now and again, it was fewer then the hundreds of thousands who have disappeared or been killed because of the lawlessness the U.S. instituted for years.

I think reasonable people could come to different conclusions on the war in Iraq for a whole variety of different reasons. Therefore I would never say I know what God thinks about it and I don't think anyone (including a pastor) should. If the pastor gives his own opinion about whether it is right or wrong, it should be clear he is giving his opinion and not claiming to "speak for God." We can't know what God thinks about it. Hundreds of thousands have been killed and/or tortured before and after the U.S. (before by Saddam, after by the lawlessness that came with war).

What I do know, and what there is no reasonable disagreement about, is that the Bush administration convinced us (meaning citizens and Congress) to authorize him to go to war in Iraq in order to secure his "WMD's". Remember those? Yeah, there was like a years-long campaign by the administration to prove to us Saddam had WMD's and likely had "yellow cake" from Nigeria with which he could make nuclear weapons (or nuculer as Bush said it). Then there ended up being no such weapons.

There is no reasonable disagreement about that, the Bush administration convinced the country to go to war with false information. I'm not saying Bush is a liar (necessarily), but I am saying Bush gave a reason to go to war that proved to be false.

You may say, "Oh, well Bush knew getting rid of Saddam was good anyway, even if the WMD theory turned out wrong." Well, if that is what he was thinking, why didn't he tell us that? The argument would've gone, "We think he has WMD's, but if he doesn't he is brutal anyway and needs to go." That is not how the argument went though. It went, "He definitely has WMD's. Period. And yellowcake too. We're all gonna die if we don't take this guy out."

And if we're justified in going into Iraq anyway (and staying there) because Saddam was brutal, why doesn't Bush go in and save people from brutality in other places of the world where it happens everyday (Sudan to name just one)? Why? These questions never get asked from the pulpit. Pastors just sit back and say, "God would've approved of the war anyway," as if they know what God thinks about it.

Why do they love Bush so much such that they think God approves of all the man does? Is it because Bush is "anti-aborition"? He is *not*. He doesn't even have the guts to fight until he could appoint a judge who is willing to rule against aborition (Sam Alito and Roberts are not, they both said they would respect the legal precedent of abortion, even if they didn't agree with it personally... which means they are all bark and no bite as far as ending abortion). We have pro-abortion judges on the Court, why not have some truly anti-abortion judges on the court? Bush is *not* "anti-abortion". He is all talk and no action. Why don't you ever hear that coming from the pulpit?

I'll tell you why, it is because Bush has convinced pastors that that he is like God's messenger or something. He has convinced many Christians that, just like them, he knows what God thinks about every political issue out there. And that is bull-honkey.

 

[Revmitchell]

I think you should be careful before claiming what God believes about such a topic.

I have no idea whether or not God approved of the war in Iraq or "taking out Saddam". What God thinks about such topics (where reasonable Christians can disagree) is an area where pastor's are right to remain silent. What I mean is, a reasonable Christian could say we should have gone into Sudan first and stop the massacres going on there. Another could say we should have gone into a variety of other countries first, each with brutal regimes that kill and rape people. Yet another reasonable Christian could say we shouldn't be in Iraq or any brutal country at all. He might think since we don't have enough economic resources to police the entire world for brutes, we shouldn't police any countries and should, with our limited resources, help brutalized people in all countries in non-military, humanitarian ways. Or another might think we shouldn't be there at all because Saddam was maintaining relative order and not able to kill very many people because we had air superiority and U.N. inspection teams making sure he could never gas the Kurds again. While some people disappeared now and again, it was fewer then the hundreds of thousands who have disappeared or been killed because of the lawlessness the U.S. instituted for years.

I think reasonable people could come to different conclusions on the war in Iraq for a whole variety of different reasons. Therefore I would never say I know what God thinks about it and I don't think anyone (including a pastor) should. If the pastor gives his own opinion about whether it is right or wrong, it should be clear he is giving his opinion and not claiming to "speak for God." We can't know what God thinks about it. Hundreds of thousands have been killed and/or tortured before and after the U.S. (before by Saddam, after by the lawlessness that came with war).

What I do know, and what there is no reasonable disagreement about, is that the Bush administration convinced us (meaning citizens and Congress) to authorize him to go to war in Iraq in order to secure his "WMD's". Remember those? Yeah, there was like a years-long campaign by the administration to prove to us Saddam had WMD's and likely had "yellow cake" from Nigeria with which he could make nuclear weapons (or nuculer as Bush said it). Then there ended up being no such weapons.

There is no reasonable disagreement about that, the Bush administration convinced the country to go to war with false information. I'm not saying Bush is a liar (necessarily), but I am saying Bush gave a reason to go to war that proved to be false.

You may say, "Oh, well Bush knew getting rid of Saddam was good anyway, even if the WMD theory turned out wrong." Well, if that is what he was thinking, why didn't he tell us that? The argument would've gone, "We think he has WMD's, but if he doesn't he is brutal anyway and needs to go." That is not how the argument went though. It went, "He definitely has WMD's. Period. And yellowcake too. We're all gonna die if we don't take this guy out."

And if we're justified in going into Iraq anyway (and staying there) because Saddam was brutal, why doesn't Bush go in and save people from brutality in other places of the world where it happens everyday (Sudan to name just one)? Why? These questions never get asked from the pulpit. Pastors just sit back and say, "God would've approved of the war anyway," as if they know what God thinks about it.

Why do they love Bush? Because Bush is "anti-aborition"? He doesn't even have the guts to fight until he could appoint a judge who is anti-aborition (Sam Alito and Roberts are not, they both said they would respect the legal precedent of abortion, even if they didn't agree with it personally... which means they are all bark and no bite as far as ending abortion). We have pro-abortion judges on the Court, why not have some truly anti-abortion judges on the court? Why don't you ever hear that coming from the pulpit?

I'll tell you why, it is because Bush has convinced pastors that that he is "one of them." In the eyes of most pastor's he is like God's messenger or something... just like them he knows what God thinks about every political issue out there. And that is bull-honkey. We can't know what God thinks about anything other then very clear principles in Scripture. And even with some of those there is some room for reasonable disagreement. Bush is all talk and no action, and most of the time his talk turns out to be false anyway. Somebody should preach that from the pulpit.

While I agree w much of what you said here it is false to suggest that the only reason the President gave for going to war was WMD's. It appears you have gave to much energy depending on the liberal media for your sources. As for why should we go into Iraq and not other places , well the reason is we were involved in this conflict since 1990. Contrary to popular liberla spin this current conflict is the continuation of the 1990 conflict which never came to an end. We have only been in a cease fire. Reality always helps in these matters.

 

[jsn9333]

While I agree w much of what you said here it is false to suggest that the only reason the President gave for going to war was WMD's. It appears you have gave to much energy depending on the liberal media for your sources. As for why should we go into Iraq and not other places , well the reason is we were involved in this conflict since 1990. Contrary to popular liberla spin this current conflict is the continuation of the 1990 conflict which never came to an end. We have only been in a cease fire. Reality always helps in these matters.

I get my news from a variety of sources including both "liberal" and conservative... why limit yourself? If you hear every angle you'll know for yourself which is right (instead of letting someone else, namely a conservative commentator, decide for you).

I didn't say WMD's were the only justification given for the invastion, but I am saying it was the main one given to the U.S. public. The justification from an *international* law perspective (which most countries never believed anyway) was, as you said, that the Iraq war was a continuation of the war in the early 90's under United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 and others.

But the justification sold to the U.S. public had a different focus. Listen Rev, we're not stupid. We all remember Bush getting on T.V. and talking about Iraq's WMD's, mobile weapons labs, and aerial vehicles for delivering the weapons. We recall Powell talking about how yellowcake was found in Nigeria, and fearing the next 9-11 would be nuclear or chemical.

We all remember the U.N. inspection team's conclusion that claims by the United States about such WMD's and delivery systems were not true. We remember the administrations subsequent attempt to discredit those teams (I'm sure your "conservative" news sources pumped the airwaves full of those discredits). We all remember ambassador Joseph Wilson coming out and saying, essentially, the administration knew that the WMD/nuclear information was not true. We remember his wife then being mysteriously outed at the CIA and a high administration official going to jail after the resulting investigation.

WMD's and nuclear capabilities were central to the administrations effort to get the public to accept and congress to authorize the invasion. The administration attacked anyone who questioned them on WMD's, because it knew it needed the WMD angle to get authorization to invade. The WMD's are what made Americans think this was a truly defensive war, not an offensive one. The U.N. teams said there were not any WMD's, U.S. whistle blowers said the administration knew there were not any (bringing the Bush administration's retribution against them and their families), and in the end . . . there were not any WMD's. Period. Not a single one. Not even a'one.

No conservative Christians I know of *ever* publicly talk about that extreme failure of our President, or the immorality of ruining a whistle blower's wife's career, or of discrediting U.N. workers with false information, or any other of the moral failures of our President (failure to combat abortion at all, etc. as I mentioned above). They just talk about how the war was justified anyway, as if they know what God thinks about a war that has killed hundreds of thousands. They'll talk about how great Bush is and how he got "saved" by Billy Graham.

That is the problem when we start to think someone "speaks for God". Bush has done essentially nothing for Christians when it comes down to it, even on the key issue that got him elected (abortion). He has done nothing except show how to fool Christian Americans. Even liberal politicians have learned his tricks and now talk about their faith all the time. That is all it took for Bush to become a prophet in the eyes of most pastors instead of a fallible President.

 

[Revmitchell]

Talk about revisionism

 

[Crabtownboy]

Revisionsim

Talk about revisionism

Enlighten us, tell us what was 'revisionism' in the post.:laugh:

 

[ajg1959]

I think you should be careful before claiming what God believes about such a topic.

I have no idea whether or not God approved of the war in Iraq or "taking out Saddam". What God thinks about such topics (where reasonable Christians can disagree) is an area where pastor's are right to remain silent. What I mean is, a reasonable Christian could say we should have gone into Sudan first and stop the massacres going on there. Another could say we should have gone into a variety of other countries first, each with brutal regimes that kill and rape people. Yet another reasonable Christian could say we shouldn't be in Iraq or any brutal country at all. He might think since we don't have enough economic resources to police the entire world for brutes, we shouldn't police any countries and should, with our limited resources, help brutalized people in all countries in non-military, humanitarian ways. Or another might think we shouldn't be there at all because Saddam was maintaining relative order and not able to kill very many people because we had air superiority and U.N. inspection teams making sure he could never gas the Kurds again. While some people disappeared now and again, it was fewer then the hundreds of thousands who have disappeared or been killed because of the lawlessness the U.S. instituted for years.

I think reasonable people could come to different conclusions on the war in Iraq for a whole variety of different reasons. Therefore I would never say I know what God thinks about it and I don't think anyone (including a pastor) should. If the pastor gives his own opinion about whether it is right or wrong, it should be clear he is giving his opinion and not claiming to "speak for God." We can't know what God thinks about it. Hundreds of thousands have been killed and/or tortured before and after the U.S. (before by Saddam, after by the lawlessness that came with war).

What I do know, and what there is no reasonable disagreement about, is that the Bush administration convinced us (meaning citizens and Congress) to authorize him to go to war in Iraq in order to secure his "WMD's". Remember those? Yeah, there was like a years-long campaign by the administration to prove to us Saddam had WMD's and likely had "yellow cake" from Nigeria with which he could make nuclear weapons (or nuculer as Bush said it). Then there ended up being no such weapons.

There is no reasonable disagreement about that, the Bush administration convinced the country to go to war with false information. I'm not saying Bush is a liar (necessarily), but I am saying Bush gave a reason to go to war that proved to be false.

You may say, "Oh, well Bush knew getting rid of Saddam was good anyway, even if the WMD theory turned out wrong." Well, if that is what he was thinking, why didn't he tell us that? The argument would've gone, "We think he has WMD's, but if he doesn't he is brutal anyway and needs to go." That is not how the argument went though. It went, "He definitely has WMD's. Period. And yellowcake too. We're all gonna die if we don't take this guy out."

And if we're justified in going into Iraq anyway (and staying there) because Saddam was brutal, why doesn't Bush go in and save people from brutality in other places of the world where it happens everyday (Sudan to name just one)? Why? These questions never get asked from the pulpit. Pastors just sit back and say, "God would've approved of the war anyway," as if they know what God thinks about it.

Why do they love Bush so much such that they think God approves of all the man does? Is it because Bush is "anti-aborition"? He is *not*. He doesn't even have the guts to fight until he could appoint a judge who is willing to rule against aborition (Sam Alito and Roberts are not, they both said they would respect the legal precedent of abortion, even if they didn't agree with it personally... which means they are all bark and no bite as far as ending abortion). We have pro-abortion judges on the Court, why not have some truly anti-abortion judges on the court? Bush is *not* "anti-abortion". He is all talk and no action. Why don't you ever hear that coming from the pulpit?

I'll tell you why, it is because Bush has convinced pastors that that he is like God's messenger or something. He has convinced many Christians that, just like them, he knows what God thinks about every political issue out there. And that is bull-honkey.

I dont quite understand your opposition to what I said in my post. I started that sentence with the words "I do honestly believe" meaning that I cant prove it be fact, but in my opinion it is indeed fact.

My point is merely this, would God approve of me watching the beating and robbing of an elderly lady in my hometown without me lifting a hand to help her?

If the answer is that God would more than likely expect me to come to her aid, what makes it any different if the people being harmed live on another continent. Does distance change the basic principles that God has instilled in us?

So yes, I stand by my personal belief that God was on our side when we went into Iraq, and I believe that pastors have an obligation to teach on current events that affect us. Many pastors teach in general terms simply to avoid stepping on someones toes, and I believe they should stop being "silent in the pulpit"

Again, this is just my opinion

AJ

 

[Crabtownboy]

Aid to those being mistreated

AJ,

Then why do we not attack the Sudan, Burma, N. Korea, Burma, Zimbabwe, Kenya??????:BangHead:

 

[ajg1959]

AJ,

Then why do we not attack the Sudan, Burma, N. Korea, Burma, Zimbabwe, Kenya??????:BangHead:

Maybe we should.....I dont know.

Sudan is the one I am most familiar with, and no, I dont think enough has been done to protect the innocent people being slaughtered.

If we did send troops in, I would back them 100%

AJ

 

[Palatka51]

AJ,

Then why do we not attack the Sudan, Burma, N. Korea, Burma, Zimbabwe, Kenya??????:BangHead:

Have any of these countries attacked any of their neighbors or are they dealing with rebel factions within their own boarders?

 

[ajg1959]

Have any of these countries attacked any of their neighbors or are they dealing with rebel factions within their own boarders?

Good point. Iraq invaded Kuwait,,,why has everyone forgotten that?

I believe that we will have to fight Iran eventually. They have said in no uncertain terms that they will wipe Isreal off the face of the Earth, and surely, if you believe your Bible, we have an obligation to defend Isreal.

AJ

 

[Sopranette]

We do not have any obligation to defend any other country but our own. It's bleeding hearts like yours who sit back and say, "let's send our young men and women here, there, and everywhere", then act shocked when they start coming back in body bags. Unless that country has declared war on the U.S. and is or plans to harm Americans on our own soil, we do not have any business "helping" sort out other people's problems. Also, as Americans, we have the obligation, not just the right, every one of us, to defend ourselves and our homes. Unfortunately, gun laws have made it such that many Americans today do not have the confidence or the skill to do so any more.

love,

Sopranette

 

[rbell]

Maybe we should.....I dont know.

Sudan is the one I am most familiar with, and no, I dont think enough has been done to protect the innocent people being slaughtered.

If we did send troops in, I would back them 100%

AJ

It stinks, I know...but we can't be the world's policeman.

Our military's responsibility is to defend our country. We start trying to straighten out every conflict on the globe (some of them that have been brewing for centuries)....we'll be stretched too thin to defend ourselves against direct confrontation.

 

[Sopranette]

It stinks, I know...but we can't be the world's policeman.

Our military's responsibility is to defend our country. We start trying to straighten out every conflict on the globe (some of them that have been brewing for centuries)....we'll be stretched too thin to defend ourselves against direct confrontation.

That's right, rbell. People ask, "Well, why don't we just send in everything we've got into Iraq?" Well, then who's left to defend the U.S. if that were to happen? The problems we are having now with terrorists are because we got involved, once again, in something that wasn't our business to begin with. You think we're stupid enough to go into Iran or N. Korea? No, those countries will definitely take offence and fight back.

love,

Sopranette

 

[Joe]

Ephesians 4:1-19*I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called,
*2With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;
*3Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
*4There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
*5One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
*6One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
*7But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ.
*8Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
*9(Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?
*10He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)
*11And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
*12For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
*13Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
*14That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
*15But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:
*16From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.
*17This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind,
*18Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart:
*19Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness.

These verses pretty much cover most of what came to mind.

The "pulpit" is only mentioned once in the Bible (KJV) and it is only a place for the preacher to stand, nothing more.


Here are some points from the verses above:

1. Walk where you are called, meaning if you feel called to teach Youth Group, then do so. Teach what the Preacher is not. God gave each of us a measure of grace, and gifts to be used to become Elders, Preachers, deacons and teachers. Working together to edify the body of Christ.
Pastor is human, he will not cover all the basis.

2. Endeavor to keep peace in the church, continue together in love.

3. Don't be deceived by false doctrine. Become grounded in the word so you aren't throw too and fro if your Pastor or others teaches doctrine (by accident) which may not be sound.

4. Speak the truth in love. We are each a part of the whole body of Christ, it doesn't all rest on the Pastors shoulders.
Also....Matt 16:3 talks about being able to notice the signs of the times.

These are a sign of the times so imo, to spend too much time worrying over it seems fruitless. It is our destiny....

 

[jsn9333]

Maybe we should.....I dont know.

Sudan is the one I am most familiar with, and no, I dont think enough has been done to protect the innocent people being slaughtered.

If we did send troops in, I would back them 100%

AJ

I say *you* should get a gun and go try to fix the situation in those countries if it is so important to you. You are so quick to send other Americans into the grave or the hospital... why don't you go there first!

I personally would rather go to those countries with prayer and a bible instead of a sword. (And yes, I have been... to Iran and other countries led by repression on mission trips).

Besides, gur generals are saying we couldn't carry on a military campaign anywhere right now, because all our resources are strained to the breaking point.

 

[jsn9333]

My point is, why bring your opinion about what God thinks about it into the discussion at all? Reasonable people can view the war in different ways... why assume God is your side and not the other Christian's side? Just say you think it is the right thing to do to go into Iraq, if that is how you feel. There is no reason to say you also think *God* agrees with you.

The Iraq war is such a complex situation with costs and benefits numbering in the hundreds of thousands of people killed (both under Saddam and under the lawlessness that ensured after the invasion). No one should pretend to know if God thinks the war was a good thing to do. We can't know. To use your "watching a lady get robbed" example, it is like if we had to kill a lady as "collateral damage" (or leave a lady unguarded, knowing criminal bandits and would rob/kill her) in order to save the lady being robbed and beaten or killed. Should we? That is a tough question... it is a question of weighing innocent lives against innocent lives. There is no way to know what God would do.

Whether the deaths were "justified" is a matter of your own opinion. We'll all find out what God thinks about it someday when we can actually sit with him and talk about it. Until then, all we should think about God in regards to the war is "Thank God He is full of mercy and forgiveness, for our country has caused the death of a great many thousands of people."

I dont quite understand your opposition to what I said in my post. I started that sentence with the words "I do honestly believe" meaning that I cant prove it be fact, but in my opinion it is indeed fact.

My point is merely this, would God approve of me watching the beating and robbing of an elderly lady in my hometown without me lifting a hand to help her?

If the answer is that God would more than likely expect me to come to her aid, what makes it any different if the people being harmed live on another continent. Does distance change the basic principles that God has instilled in us?

So yes, I stand by my personal belief that God was on our side when we went into Iraq, and I believe that pastors have an obligation to teach on current events that affect us. Many pastors teach in general terms simply to avoid stepping on someones toes, and I believe they should stop being "silent in the pulpit"

Again, this is just my opinion

AJ

 

[ajg1959]

I will just say this and then let it go.

If we, as individuals or as a nation, ever think about doing anything that God does not back, then we had best not do it.

I believe Bush acted under God's guidance and he deserves every American's support.

AJ