-
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!
How should they vote
- Thread starter Salty
- Start date
FR7 Baptist
Active Member
I got to meet my congressman, Ander Crenshaw, once as part of a group and he gave us a chance to ask him questions. I didn't ask him any, but one of the people asked him this very question. He said he votes his conscience and doesn't pay much attention to polls. He said that if people don't like how he votes they have a chance to vote for someone else every two years. I tend to agree with Mr. Crenshaw on this.
They should vote the way I want them to vote.
I say let's go back to the original plan:
The House is elected by the people of their district (and for goodness sakes, get rid of the ridiculous gerrymandering!) They would represent those people in their voting...always allowing for those rare, but significant votes of principle (i.e., if I were a rep in a pro-choice district, they would need to get ready for disappointment...and I'd vote my conscience even if it meant being sent home).
The Senate (thanks to the repeal of the 17th Amendments) would be appointed by the legislatures of each state. They would look out for state's interests.
Not holding my breath, though...
The House is elected by the people of their district (and for goodness sakes, get rid of the ridiculous gerrymandering!) They would represent those people in their voting...always allowing for those rare, but significant votes of principle (i.e., if I were a rep in a pro-choice district, they would need to get ready for disappointment...and I'd vote my conscience even if it meant being sent home).
The Senate (thanks to the repeal of the 17th Amendments) would be appointed by the legislatures of each state. They would look out for state's interests.
Not holding my breath, though...
FR7 Baptist
Active Member
I agree with this part. We need to be careful not to weaken federalism.
I agree with Paul, a politician should vote his conscience. We cannot simply vote for a man and depend upon him to do what is right for his district, state, country...
We are responsible as voters for the government we have. We should carefully look at all candidates and determine which candidate reflects our personal beliefs.
We see President Obama in office now, and many here do not like his political views. But, America knew his views before we voted for him. We are reaping what we sowed as a nation. It is our own fault.
We are responsible as voters for the government we have. We should carefully look at all candidates and determine which candidate reflects our personal beliefs.
We see President Obama in office now, and many here do not like his political views. But, America knew his views before we voted for him. We are reaping what we sowed as a nation. It is our own fault.
BigBossman
Active Member
I was kind of torn by voting what the concensus is & voting on what is best for the district. Sometimes those are two different things. A "representative" is supposed to do just that, to "represent" the citizens that put him in office.
For example: If I were a congressman, if the majority of people wanted to have marijuana legalized, as a representative, I would have to vote to legalize it. Truthfully, I would have a hard time with this. This would be one of those things that bother my conscience. In a case like that, I would have to do what is best for my district & vote against it.
I believe that when people are using common sense, that we should represent their voice. In a case where people aren't using common sense, then I believe that a congressman should do what's best for his district, even if it isn't the popular choice.
For example: If I were a congressman, if the majority of people wanted to have marijuana legalized, as a representative, I would have to vote to legalize it. Truthfully, I would have a hard time with this. This would be one of those things that bother my conscience. In a case like that, I would have to do what is best for my district & vote against it.
I believe that when people are using common sense, that we should represent their voice. In a case where people aren't using common sense, then I believe that a congressman should do what's best for his district, even if it isn't the popular choice.
I agree with this!
It stands to reason that it changes over time since that of a child is different than that of an adult.
For some - whether one listens to it or not may be dictated by circumstances.
Situational ethics is the term.
They should vote only for what is authorized under the Constitution (under which they took an oath of office and by which they have no other claim to their position).
For Constitutional matters, they should consider the God-given rights of life, liberty, and property, and vote accordingly.
Virtually, this means that just about everyone in Congress should vote the opposite of what they do now.
For Constitutional matters, they should consider the God-given rights of life, liberty, and property, and vote accordingly.
Virtually, this means that just about everyone in Congress should vote the opposite of what they do now.
That would be good, but at least heeding the Constitution (you know, the actual supreme law of the land by which they are legally bound) would be a vast improvement over the current status quo.
The status quo is always (1) more power and money to government, (2) more protection for incumbents, (3) fewer rights and less money to citizens.