"Left vs Right" - Politics is a farce.

[Ceegen]

I put it in quotes, because with almost 100% certainty, I can say that most every politician in history has never looked out for their own populace, except when it was good for them.

Voting for the lesser of two evils, is still voting for evil. Why do democrats vow to stop the wars, but never do? Why do republicans vow to stop the spending, but never do? Why do both sides attempt to pass legislation that restricts the freedoms of all the rest of us?

It's a rigged system, and it was meant to fail. Like all other governments before it, the United States will fall, because we by definition live in a fallen world. Until the world is perfect, nothing in it will ever be close to perfect.

And just for clarification, no I don't hate the USA. I dedicated 7 years of my life to Uncle Sam's Army. Love the country, hate the government. It's just quite obvious what direction we're headed in, all thanks to the lies of an ancient cherub.

Politics is meaningless to me, now that I see that we live in a world which is controlled by Satan, the "prince of this world". Remember that Jesus' kingdom was "not of this world" for a reason, and why the Jews of his time were so mad that he wasn't the conqueror they thought he would be; who would free them from Roman rule and then take over the world.

This is my only "contribution" to this forum. I hate politics. It's like arguing about who is "more righteous".

 

[Don]

If all Christians stay out of politics -- then Christians have no right to say anything when non-Christians, anti-Christians, etc. make the laws that prohibit Christian freedoms.

No man-made system is perfect. But it's the one we have to live in. And all we can do is do our best to make it better.

 

[Zaac]

I put it in quotes, because with almost 100% certainty, I can say that most every politician in history has never looked out for their own populace, except when it was good for them.

Voting for the lesser of two evils, is still voting for evil. Why do democrats vow to stop the wars, but never do? Why do republicans vow to stop the spending, but never do? Why do both sides attempt to pass legislation that restricts the freedoms of all the rest of us?

It's a rigged system, and it was meant to fail. Like all other governments before it, the United States will fall, because we by definition live in a fallen world. Until the world is perfect, nothing in it will ever be close to perfect.

And just for clarification, no I don't hate the USA. I dedicated 7 years of my life to Uncle Sam's Army. Love the country, hate the government. It's just quite obvious what direction we're headed in, all thanks to the lies of an ancient cherub.

Politics is meaningless to me, now that I see that we live in a world which is controlled by Satan, the "prince of this world". Remember that Jesus' kingdom was "not of this world" for a reason, and why the Jews of his time were so mad that he wasn't the conqueror they thought he would be; who would free them from Roman rule and then take over the world.

This is my only "contribution" to this forum. I hate politics. It's like arguing about who is "more righteous".

One of the best posts I've read on many a message board.:godisgood:

 

[mandym]

I put it in quotes, because with almost 100% certainty, I can say that most every politician in history has never looked out for their own populace, except when it was good for them.

Voting for the lesser of two evils, is still voting for evil. Why do democrats vow to stop the wars, but never do? Why do republicans vow to stop the spending, but never do? Why do both sides attempt to pass legislation that restricts the freedoms of all the rest of us?

It's a rigged system, and it was meant to fail. Like all other governments before it, the United States will fall, because we by definition live in a fallen world. Until the world is perfect, nothing in it will ever be close to perfect.

And just for clarification, no I don't hate the USA. I dedicated 7 years of my life to Uncle Sam's Army. Love the country, hate the government. It's just quite obvious what direction we're headed in, all thanks to the lies of an ancient cherub.

Politics is meaningless to me, now that I see that we live in a world which is controlled by Satan, the "prince of this world". Remember that Jesus' kingdom was "not of this world" for a reason, and why the Jews of his time were so mad that he wasn't the conqueror they thought he would be; who would free them from Roman rule and then take over the world.

This is my only "contribution" to this forum. I hate politics. It's like arguing about who is "more righteous".

Well go find a cave to hide in

 

[Crabtownboy]

I put it in quotes, because with almost 100% certainty, I can say that most every politician in history has never looked out for their own populace, except when it was good for them.

I agree. The politician who put his/her populace ahead of their own ambitions and chances of being elected again is exceedingly rare if, indeed, it has ever happened.

Voting for the lesser of two evils, is still voting for evil. Why do democrats vow to stop the wars, but never do? Why do republicans vow to stop the spending, but never do? Why do both sides attempt to pass legislation that restricts the freedoms of all the rest of us?

It is really so often the voting for two evils, or voting for the lesser of two lessors?

It's a rigged system, and it was meant to fail. Like all other governments before it, the United States will fall, because we by definition live in a fallen world. Until the world is perfect, nothing in it will ever be close to perfect.

Countries, empires rise and fall ... one of the lessons of history.

You say a rigged system. Who rigged the system? Who would rig it to fail?

And just for clarification, no I don't hate the USA. I dedicated 7 years of my life to Uncle Sam's Army. Love the country, hate the government. It's just quite obvious what direction we're headed in, all thanks to the lies of an ancient cherub.

Just curious, is there a government in existence you would rather live under?

 

[Zaac]

If all Christians stay out of politics -- then Christians have no right to say anything when non-Christians, anti-Christians, etc. make the laws that prohibit Christian freedoms.

No man-made system is perfect. But it's the one we have to live in. And all we can do is do our best to make it better.

There was no mention of a need for Christians to stay out of politics.

 

[mandym]

There was no mention of a need for Christians to stay out of politics.

I forgot who I was responding to. Never mind.

 

[Zaac]

WHEW! For a minute there I thought I was gonna have to endure more justification for political idolatry.

 

[Sapper Woody]

There was no mention of a need for Christians to stay out of politics.

IMO, it was implied when he said:

Voting for the lesser of two evils, is still voting for evil.

To me, that means don't vote if there is only evil to vote for.

 

[Don]

There was no mention of a need for Christians to stay out of politics.

It was inferred from this:

Politics is meaningless to me, now that I see that we live in a world which is controlled by Satan, the "prince of this world". Remember that Jesus' kingdom was "not of this world" for a reason, and why the Jews of his time were so mad that he wasn't the conqueror they thought he would be; who would free them from Roman rule and then take over the world.

This is my only "contribution" to this forum. I hate politics. It's like arguing about who is "more righteous".

I checked the poster's personal info, and in it, he claims he's a Christian.

A self-proclaimed Christian states "politics is meaningless...this is my only "contribution"...I hate politics." What other conclusion are we to draw than that this Christian feels it's best to withdraw from the arena of politics?

Thus, I framed my answer for his/her consideration.

 

[Salty]

Our history has been compromise after compromise.

Even having the two houses of Congress was a compromise.

Whats interesting is that Americans give Congress an approval rating of about 12%, but when asked about their individual - the % goes up to about 23.

So, most Americans think all of Congress is doing a bad job except for their Representative.

Bottom line - if you don't like what is going on - then run for the office yourself.

Salty

 

[Zaac]

IMO, it was implied when he said:
To me, that means don't vote if there is only evil to vote for.

Or it could have just meant don't vote for either of the evils ,but to vote and write someone in.:thumbsup:

 

[Zaac]

It was inferred from this:

I checked the poster's personal info, and in it, he claims he's a Christian.

A self-proclaimed Christian states "politics is meaningless...this is my only "contribution"...I hate politics." What other conclusion are we to draw than that this Christian feels it's best to withdraw from the arena of politics?

Thus, I framed my answer for his/her consideration.

You based your unrighteous judgment on your opinion. It would be different if he had said "Christians stay out of politics" but he didn't. And now y'all are making a big deal out of something that wasn't even said.

I do sense a pattern in how some of y'all who have been on this board for a while respond to folks.


It's kinda like what liberals do when they try to frame the conversation to make their position seem like the correct one all the while covering up the truth.

 

[Don]

You based your unrighteous judgment on your opinion. It would be different if he had said "Christians stay out of politics" but he didn't. And now y'all are making a big deal out of something that wasn't even said.

I do sense a pattern in how some of y'all who have been on this board for a while respond to folks.


It's kinda like what liberals do when they try to frame the conversation to make their position seem like the correct one all the while covering up the truth.

"Unrighteous" judgment? How, exactly, is my evaluation of the poster's message "unrighteous"?

You read far too much into my answer to Ceegan. As I said: I framed my answer for his/her consideration.

You should consider: Is your personal dislike of me clouding your objectivity?

 

[Zaac]

"Unrighteous" judgment? How, exactly, is my evaluation of the poster's message "unrighteous"?

There's a Scripture that says 24 Stop judging by mere appearances, and make a right judgment.” John 7:24

You made it an explicit point to say what you INFERRED not what Ceegen had written, and then proceeded to seemingly get indignant about something he didn't even say.

You read far too much into my answer to Ceegan. As I said: I framed my answer for his/her consideration.

Seems like it's YOU who read too much into what Ceegen said and thus your response to him.:laugh:

You should consider: Is your personal dislike of me clouding your objectivity?

I love you. Why would I have a personal dislike for you? We might disagree on some things, but that doesn't make me dislike you.:thumbsup: But you know, that's unrighteous judgment rearing its head again.

 

[Arbo]

Regarding the OP- The tone of it sure leads one to think that Ceegen was advocating giving up on and withdrawing from politics.

Bottom line - if you don't like what is going on - then run for the office yourself.

Anyone who is not willing to cast a vote or run for office has little credibility when they complain about the state of the nation they were unwilling to have a voice in.

 

[Don]

There's a Scripture that says 24 Stop judging by mere appearances, and make a right judgment.” John 7:24

Quite familiar with it. The fact that you chose to immediately take a contrary position instead of rationally indicating why you think my inference is wrong, indicates that perhaps you should re-look at Matthew 7:1.

Here's my explanation: I replied to Ceegan the same way I would reply to any fellow Christian individually and privately, in an attempt to see the situation from another angle.

You made it an explicit point to say what you INFERRED not what Ceegen had written, and then proceeded to seemingly get indignant about something he didn't even say.

Au contraire, mon ami; I made an inference directly from what he said: "This is my only 'contribution'" and "I hate politics." Combine the two, along with other elements of his message, and you see someone saying s/he's not getting into the politics arena.

So why, exactly, was my judgment "unrighteous"?

And where, pray tell, is my so-called "indignation"? If Ceegan believes I got indignant about what he/she said, then I wholeheartedly apologize to him/her; that wasn't my intention at all, and I have no indignation whatsoever about what he/she wrote. All I have is a differing viewpoint.

Seems like it's YOU who read too much into what Ceegen said and thus your response to him.

Seems like it's YOU who's ignored certain words that Ceegan wrote--such as the ones I and others have specifically pointed out, that create a context.

I love you. Why would I have a personal dislike for you? We might disagree on some things, but that doesn't make me dislike you. But you know, that's unrighteous judgment rearing its head again.

I didn't say you didn't love me; I said "dislike." There's a difference.

You do realize that you've made an inference yourself, while taking me to task for making one? You read what Ceegan said, ignoring specific words; and thus, you've inferred from your personal viewpoint and opinions that I'm completely off the mark about what Ceegan said.

The only person who can confirm which of us is correct--or that in some way, both of us are correct, or that neither of us are correct--is Ceegan.

 

[Zaac]

Quite familiar with it. The fact that you chose to immediately take a contrary position instead of rationally indicating why you think my inference is wrong, indicates that perhaps you should re-look at Matthew 7:1.

I already told you why your inference was wrong: HE DIDN'T SAY WHAT YOU'RE MAKING A BIG DEAL ABOUT.

Here's my explanation: I replied to Ceegan the same way I would reply to any fellow Christian individually and privately, in an attempt to see the situation from another angle.

And that's still based upon you jumping to a conclusion about something that has not been said.

It's the same reason people get confused about God's word. Always inferring stuff and then acting like it was actually said. (smh)

Au contraire, mon ami; I made an inference directly from what he said: "This is my only 'contribution'" and "I hate politics." Combine the two, along with other elements of his message, and you see someone saying s/he's not getting into the politics arena.

I see someone saying what he said and someone else complaining about something he didn't say. But like I said, this seems to be consistent with the way you folks who have been on here for a while tend to operate.

There seems to be a penchant for making scenarios into what y'all think is being said and then starting debates against things that were never said.

So why, exactly, was my judgment "unrighteous"?

It was unrighteous because it wasn't based in truth. It was based in your opinion of what you thought he was saying instead of what he said.

And where, pray tell, is my so-called "indignation"? If Ceegan believes I got indignant about what he/she said, then I wholeheartedly apologize to him/her; that wasn't my intention at all, and I have no indignation whatsoever about what he/she wrote. All I have is a differing viewpoint.

Notice I did say "seemingly" so as to not INFER that you were indignant.

Seems like it's YOU who's ignored certain words that Ceegan wrote--such as the ones I and others have specifically pointed out, that create a context.

Yes, the group is always right. Give me a break. It's no surprise that sharks travel in packs. Folks on here feed off each other. And those who have been here the longest seem to kinda dictate the direction that the tone of a thread will take.

But if he didn't say it, stop arguing from the angle that he did.

I didn't say you didn't love me; I said "dislike." There's a difference.

Love is greater than like. I can't get to loving you if I don't like you. That's just like telling Christ I love your Church but I don't like its members.

You do realize that you've made an inference yourself, while taking me to task for making one? You read what Ceegan said, ignoring specific words; and thus, you've inferred from your personal viewpoint and opinions that I'm completely off the mark about what Ceegan said.

You have no basis for saying that I'm off the mark about what you said because I didn't speak to what you said but rather the lack of a basis for you to say it.

He did not say what you said.

The only person who can confirm which of us is correct--or that in some way, both of us are correct, or that neither of us are correct--is Ceegan.

And to acknowledge that he is the only one who can do that is to acknowledge that you inferred based upon your own opinions instead of dealing with what he DID say.

It's like some of you are just looking for something to come at someone sideways about.

 

[mandym]

Quite familiar with it. The fact that you chose to immediately take a contrary position instead of rationally indicating why you think my inference is wrong, indicates that perhaps you should re-look at Matthew 7:1.

Here's my explanation: I replied to Ceegan the same way I would reply to any fellow Christian individually and privately, in an attempt to see the situation from another angle.


Au contraire, mon ami; I made an inference directly from what he said: "This is my only 'contribution'" and "I hate politics." Combine the two, along with other elements of his message, and you see someone saying s/he's not getting into the politics arena.

So why, exactly, was my judgment "unrighteous"?

And where, pray tell, is my so-called "indignation"? If Ceegan believes I got indignant about what he/she said, then I wholeheartedly apologize to him/her; that wasn't my intention at all, and I have no indignation whatsoever about what he/she wrote. All I have is a differing viewpoint.


Seems like it's YOU who's ignored certain words that Ceegan wrote--such as the ones I and others have specifically pointed out, that create a context.


I didn't say you didn't love me; I said "dislike." There's a difference.

You do realize that you've made an inference yourself, while taking me to task for making one? You read what Ceegan said, ignoring specific words; and thus, you've inferred from your personal viewpoint and opinions that I'm completely off the mark about what Ceegan said.

The only person who can confirm which of us is correct--or that in some way, both of us are correct, or that neither of us are correct--is Ceegan.

Really you shouldn't feed it.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Our history has been compromise after compromise.

Even having the two houses of Congress was a compromise.

That is correct Salty. The then big states wanted only a house of representatives, the little states wanted a senate. So the compromise was agreed upon, have a house and a senate. It was a wise compromise.

Whats interesting is that Americans give Congress an approval rating of about 12%, but when asked about their individual - the % goes up to about 23.

So, most Americans think all of Congress is doing a bad job except for their Representative.

I agree and isn't it interesting that this is found to be the case year after year after year.

Bottom line - if you don't like what is going on - then run for the office yourself.

Run for office or vote the rascal out so another future rascal can be elected.

Politics has been defined as the art of compromise.

Good grief Salty, here we are agreeing again. Twice in one day!