A lousy excuse for supporting the party that wants to slaughter unborn children. Despicable
Last edited by a moderator:
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Death Panels You Say?
- Thread starter OldRegular
- Start date
A lousy excuse for supporting the party that wants to slaughter unborn children. Despicable
Maybe it's just me and I'm getting old. (sigh) The older I get, the more weary I become of finger pointing back in time rather than facing today head on. Looking backwards for excuses to play the blame game. The pot calling the kettle black, regardless of political, social, or worldly viewpoints.
What do you mean "large scale abortion"?
A little murder is OK as long as we don't do a lot of it?
Supporting the "sanctity of life in general". What does "in general mean"? That life is sacred as long as it's in accord with my opinions? A little abortion is OK? I can support my opinion by expressing distain for "meaningless wars" or being opposed to capital punishment.
Supporting the "sanctity of life in general" by expecting the government to do what the scriptures declare that I should do myself. It is MY responsibility to aid those in need (also defined in the scriptures).
How many sit back on their laurals because they give dollars to the government in the name of "charity"? Because I gave at the office (Uncle Sam) seems to mean that I don't need to personally take a hot meal to the "widows and orphans" next door. Let Uncle Sam take care of them. I've done my part. It's OK for him to TAKE from others, to be Robin Hood, as long as I can talk in terms of generalities about the sanctity of life.
While I'm still on my soapbox. "not supporting meaningless wars"
That term hit a sore spot this morning.
Matthew 24: KJB
5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
6 And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.
7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.
This oldtimer does not presume to know the will God by classifying particular wars as being "meaningless". Whether we like them or not, whether we "support" them or not, God keeps his promises.
FollowTheWay said:
Republican leaders are very much like the Pharisees on this topic, total hypocrites. They were Jesus' primary enemies. Hypocricacy was the one sin that Jesus simply would not accept.
Mat 23:27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead [men's] bones, and of all uncleanness.
I feel the same way about leaders who wear the mantle of Christianity but do nothing to deserve it. They fight to preserve the magnifician American fighting machine and fight to deny health insurance to those who don't have any.
And most hypocritical of all they loudly preach against abortion but to nothing to stop it and don't ever admit that they themselves were responsible for bringing this curse upon us. I also hate the huge numbers of abortions that have been performed in America but I also hate the hypocrites that keep it going.
Beware of hypocricy. It's deadly spiritually.
This is completely false. I suggest you do some research. Of course when one just wants to make excuses and point the finger at everybody else instead of dealing with their own misdeeds then research is not necessary is it.
Granted that there will be wars on earth. Christians simply do not have to support starting them. Of all the Christian leaders in the U.S. only one didn't sign a letter to Bush pleading for him not to invade Iraq. That was the Presidentof the Southern Baptist Convention. Jesus didn't come to be the general of our armies nor did He support violence. He told us to love our enemies and that's the way I try to live. Everyone who supports war in the name of Jesus is treading on very thin ice.
Give us some facts. Just what have Republicans done to stop abortion?
The same thing the democrats did to stop war. How's come you skip over so many questions ?
I would agree with you that the Viet Nma war was basically Johnson's war. Nixon did prolong it but it was Johnson escalated it significantly. Afghanistan and Iraq were GW Bush's wars. He started themfor no really good reason. If we had wanted to capture bin Laden we should have reinforced the initial efforts to take him out using special forces. That was tried initially but was not supported by Rumsfield and failed. Ultimately Bush said in 2007 that he was no longer interested in capturing bin Laden. Why? Because the real objective all along was to invade and occupy Iraq.
The Neo-Cons put this statement in a position statement written by the far right think tank "Project for a New American Century." They approached President Clinton with a request signed by Rumsfield, Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, etc. to invade and occupy Iraq. Of course this was before 9/11 so that had nothing to do with their desire to occupy Iraq. It had everything to do with Americdan Imperialism.
I would have liked to see Obama immediately pull out of both Afghasistan and Iraq because I felt that neither war serveed any good purpose. Of course if he had tried to do that the Republicans in Congress and the Far Right Press would have called him a traitor. I think it was simply politically impopssible.
That's a coward's excuse.
He also promised to end the Patriot Act, and expanded it. You blaming republicans for that, as well ?
He also promised to end the Patriot Act, and expanded it. You blaming republicans for that, as well ?
No but I blame them for the first and second versions of the Patriot Act. What bill was passed during the Obama administration which expanded it?
LOL. You are a fool.
"Obama expands Patriot Act" has about 1 million and a half hits on google. Do some research, then tell me where I'm wrong.
"Obama expands Patriot Act" has about 1 million and a half hits on google. Do some research, then tell me where I'm wrong.
He did sign the bill extending the Patriot Act which I didn't support. The question was about bills expanding it. I'm not aware that he did that. The original bill allowed breaking into anybody's home without a search warrant and holding American citizens indefinately without charging them with a crime. My guess is you supported that, right? Calling people names is not a winning argument.
Actually, no. I never supported the Patriot Act. And that's why you are a fool. After the conversations we have had, to think I support this means you either can't, or won't read.
I want an immediate end to the war.
I want our bases closed, our troops home.
But you and your ilk are happy to look backwards and blame the folks you "assume" think differently from you.
You actually DO support the war, so you should stop whining about warmongering republicans.
How old were you, 1n 1992, when Clinton & Gore starting beating their war drums ?
I want an immediate end to the war.
I want our bases closed, our troops home.
But you and your ilk are happy to look backwards and blame the folks you "assume" think differently from you.
You actually DO support the war, so you should stop whining about warmongering republicans.
How old were you, 1n 1992, when Clinton & Gore starting beating their war drums ?
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh. My mistake. You said "...my guess is you supported that, right ?" In my day, that was an assumption. Here I am learning something new, eh ?
I called you a fool because you blame republicans for the war and the patriot act. Like democrats had nothing to do with either.
Would you prefer me call you a "partisan hack " ?
I called you a fool because you blame republicans for the war and the patriot act. Like democrats had nothing to do with either.
Would you prefer me call you a "partisan hack " ?
You can dodge the real questions by calling me whatever you choose to rather than facing the facts.
Exactly what question am I dodging ?
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2012/10/spy-o01.html
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkai...-national-defense-authorization-act-now-what/
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Obama_Administration_quietly_expands_Bushs_legal_0407.html
http://www.alternet.org/story/155045/how_obama_became_a_civil_libertarian's_nightmare
http://larouchepac.com/node/19848
http://beforeitsnews.com/obama/2012...land-security-mission-in-the-u-s-2445282.html
Last edited by a moderator:
You have not been on board long enough to guess any such thing. He is in fact a libertarian and has always been against those Bush policies as long as I have been on this board. You might want to get to know folks before jumping to conclusions that fit your predetermined agenda. That way you do not say such silly things.