• 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!

Mary Jo Kopechne Can Finally Rest in Peace!!!

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
This is somewhat off topic, but it begs the question:

Is a politician's position on abortion alone sufficient to condemn that politician? I'm not referring to Kennedy per se, just politicians in general.


Yes!.............And any other view is just sick.
 

Magnetic Poles

New Member
This is somewhat off topic, but it begs the question:

Is a politician's position on abortion alone sufficient to condemn that politician? I'm not referring to Kennedy per se, just politicians in general.
No, there are many other issues that are important to our nation. For example, what if there were someone running for president who was adamantly against abortion, but also wanted to dismantle our military defenses? Besides, even if RvW was overturned, the issue would just go back to the states. It would not immediately stop legal abortions.
 

targus

New Member
No, there are many other issues that are important to our nation. For example, what if there were someone running for president who was adamantly against abortion, but also wanted to dismantle our military defenses? Besides, even if RvW was overturned, the issue would just go back to the states. It would not immediately stop legal abortions.


Interesting choice of examples. IMO usually those who are adamantly for abortion also want to dismantle our military.
 

targus

New Member
Who on this board is "adamantly for abortion?" I don't think I've seen anyone with that position.

Alatide, you really should learn to slow down and read what is actually written.

I did not say that anyone "on this board" is adamantly for abortion.
 

rbell

Active Member
OK, I was extremely critical of Kennedy...and I do think he got of very easy on this issue.

However...Christians claim Scripture as authority over matters of faith and practice...so...

The idea of someone "being able to rest in peace" simply isn't spiritual. Mary Jo Kopechne did not need a trial, conviction, etc., to "rest in peace." I know it was a figure of speech, but IMO we should be careful about propagating incorrect theology in how we describe things.

God is a God of justice. This has all been taken care of; we can rest assured about that.
 

tinytim

<img src =/tim2.jpg>
This is somewhat off topic, but it begs the question:

Is a politician's position on abortion alone sufficient to condemn that politician? I'm not referring to Kennedy per se, just politicians in general.


John, this article from Piper solidified my stance, which I will give after I quote Piper...

Pondering One-Issue Politics and Cruelty To Animals
Investigating dog life in Minnesota has solidified my decision to vote against those who endorse the right to abortion. So then what is my response to the charge of being a one-issue voter?

No endorsement of any single issue qualifies a person to hold public office. Being pro-life does not make a person a good governor, mayor, or president. But there are numerous single issues that disqualify a person from public office. For example, any candidate who endorsed bribery as a form of government efficiency would be disqualified, no matter what his party or platform was. Or a person who endorsed corporate fraud (say under $50 million) would be disqualified no matter what else he endorsed. Or a person who said that no black people could hold office-on that single issue alone he would be unfit for office. Or a person who said that rape is only a misdemeanor-that single issue would end his political career. These examples could go on and on. Everybody knows a single issue that for them would disqualify a candidate for office.

It's the same with marriage. No one quality makes a good wife or husband, but some qualities would make a person unacceptable. For example, back when I was thinking about getting married, not liking cats would not have disqualified a woman as my wife, but not liking people would. Drinking coffee would not, but drinking whiskey would. Kissing dogs wouldn't, but kissing the mailman would. And so on. Being a single-issue fiancé does not mean that only one issue matters. It means that some issues may matter enough to break off the relationship.

So it is with politics. You have to decide what those issues are for you. What do you think disqualifies a person from holding public office? I believe that the endorsement of the right to kill unborn children disqualifies a person from any position of public office. It's simply the same as saying that the endorsement of racism, fraud, or bribery would disqualify him-except that child-killing is more serious than those.

When we bought our dog at the Humane Society, I picked up a brochure on the laws of Minnesota concerning animals. Statute 343.2, subdivision 1 says, "No person shall . . . unjustifiably injure, maim, mutilate or kill any animal." Subdivision 7 says, "No person shall willfully instigate or in any way further any act of cruelty to any animal." The penalty: "A person who fails to comply with any provision of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor."

Now this set me to pondering the rights of the unborn. An eight-week-old human fetus has a beating heart, an EKG, brain waves, thumb-sucking, pain sensitivity, finger-grasping, and genetic humanity, but under our present laws is not a human person with rights under the 14th Amendment, which says that "no state shall deprive any person of life . . . without due process of law." Well, I wondered, if the unborn do not qualify as persons, it seems that they could at least qualify as animals, say a dog, or at least a cat. Could we not at least charge abortion clinics with cruelty to animals under Statute 343.2, subdivision 7? Why is it legal to "maim, mutilate and kill" a pain-sensitive unborn human being but not an animal?

These reflections have confirmed my conviction never to vote for a person who endorses such an evil-even if he could balance the budget tomorrow and end all taxation. ©Desiring God Ministries Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do NOT alter the wording in any way, you do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction, and you do not make more than 1,000 physical copies.

Here is my view.

We elect politicians to advance our nation. We expect them to be men and women of great character.. after all they are representing us in this world. If they refuse to stand up for the most innocent among us, the unborn, why would I expect them to stand up for my rights?

A person that doesn't value unborn life is only a power grabber.

A person that tramples on babies lives just so they can advance up the political ladder does not have the dignity, or character it takes to represent me. The value placed on human life is directly tied to the person's valor.

And before anyone says,, you support Capital Punishment, and War...
Let me say, yes, I do.. but both of those are ways of deterring the destruction of innocent life...

A person executed by capital punishment has destroyed an innocent life.
A just War is started in retaliation to the destruction of innocent life.
It is called Justice...

But to just slay innocent babies, and support this in order to get people's votes indicates to me, that this person is a warped individual.. and most likely will be a very corrupt politician.

If a person doesn't value human life.. .they shouldn't be in the position to lead human life.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

righteousdude2

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Amen...Tiny Tim, Amen!

Tim, you said it so well. Ted stopped respecting human life when he let Mary Jo die in the cold waters of Chappaquiddick. His disregard for human life continued onward and upward with his support of abortion, and any public health bill that allows abortion.

This guy was a lier...everytime he spoke out and proclaimed to support woman;s rights. I guess Mary Jo wasn't a women deserving of Ted's support?

Pastor Paul:type:
 

steaver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
John, this article from Piper solidified my stance, which I will give after I quote Piper...



Here is my view.

We elect politicians to advance our nation. We expect them to be men and women of great character.. after all they are representing us in this world. If they refuse to stand up for the most innocent among us, the unborn, why would I expect them to stand up for my rights?

A person that doesn't value unborn life is only a power grabber.

A person that tramples on babies lives just so they can advance up the political ladder does not have the dignity, or character it takes to represent me. The value placed on human life is directly tied to the person's valor.

And before anyone says,, you support Capital Punishment, and War...
Let me say, yes, I do.. but both of those are ways of deterring the destruction of innocent life...

A person executed by capital punishment has destroyed an innocent life.
A just War is started in retaliation to the destruction of innocent life.
It is called Justice...

But to just slay innocent babies, and support this in order to get people's votes indicates to me, that this person is a warped individual.. and most likely will be a very corrupt politician.

If a person doesn't value human life.. .they shouldn't be in the position to lead human life.

Irrefutable :jesus:

Excellent points and biblically solid!
 

steaver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
No, there are many other issues that are important to our nation. For example, what if there were someone running for president who was adamantly against abortion, but also wanted to dismantle our military defenses? Besides, even if RvW was overturned, the issue would just go back to the states. It would not immediately stop legal abortions.

RvW is a secondary issue. Any man or woman who defends abortion is God's enemy. I for one do not want to be yoked together through my vote to anyone who is God's enemy.

Say RvW gets overturned, praise God, then the issue goes to the states. So what? Is abortion still murder? Yes! And the fight for innocent life continues on. Through capital punishment, through war and through voting. The issue is 'does the man or woman you support, support the murder of innocent life'. If 'yes' then do not yoke up with them. They are God's enemy.

:jesus:
 

Magnetic Poles

New Member
RvW is a secondary issue. Any man or woman who defends abortion is God's enemy. I for one do not want to be yoked together through my vote to anyone who is God's enemy.

Say RvW gets overturned, praise God, then the issue goes to the states. So what? Is abortion still murder? Yes! And the fight for innocent life continues on. Through capital punishment, through war and through voting. The issue is 'does the man or woman you support, support the murder of innocent life'. If 'yes' then do not yoke up with them. They are God's enemy.
YATDIAAD = Yet Another Thread Derailed Into Another Abortion Discussion.
 

steaver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Don't you know everything in the world revolves around abortion?

Like I heard it said, "Republicans believe life begins at conception and ends at birth!"

Can you name one republican who is against caring for infants, children, teenagers, adults and elderly?

I know you can name quite a few democrats who don't care about the unborn and some who would rather the weak and old just die and not be a burden as Obama wants in his death care program.

btw Robert, do you know slaughtering babies in the womb is one of the things listed in the seven things God hates? Anyone supporting abortion is an enemy of God.

:jesus:
 

steaver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
YATDIAAD = Yet Another Thread Derailed Into Another Abortion Discussion.

I am always blessed when the truth ends a debate with a "YATDIAAD". It would be easier for you to get on God's side of this abortion issue, especially knowing there is a judgment even Christians must face before God.

Jam 2:13 For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment.


Does your vote show mercy to all including the unborn or is your vote selective and more expedient to your on personal pleasures and maybe your pocketbook? Just wondering.

:jesus:
 

tinytim

<img src =/tim2.jpg>
Don't you know everything in the world revolves around abortion?

Like I heard it said, "Republicans believe life begins at conception and ends at birth!"


Not so... we also value the life of those born... even those that Obama voted to kill (the failed abortions)...
 

tinytim

<img src =/tim2.jpg>
No, there are many other issues that are important to our nation. For example, what if there were someone running for president who was adamantly against abortion, but also wanted to dismantle our military defenses? Besides, even if RvW was overturned, the issue would just go back to the states. It would not immediately stop legal abortions.


Then why do you defend RvW? Allow it to be overturned.. I mean if it won't change anything, overturn it, and see what happens... right?

If women can get legal abortions after RvW, then why do they fight so hard to keep it?
 

tinytim

<img src =/tim2.jpg>
YATDIAAD = Yet Another Thread Derailed Into Another Abortion Discussion.


Not derailed.. .Kennedy was a champion for abortion...

He didn't value Mary Jo's life.. he didn't value babies' lives...

See, the way a person values life speaks of that person's character.. which is why a person should not be allowed to lead our nation if they disvalue any human life.
 

Marcia

Active Member
Don't you know everything in the world revolves around abortion?

Like I heard it said, "Republicans believe life begins at conception and ends at birth!"

I'm not a Republican.

I think your statement should be: "Christians believe life begins at conception because this is a biblically supported view."

It's not just about Kennedy's pro-choice views and efforts, but the deep lack of intergrity and apparently remorse for how he behaved at Chappaquidick.
 

hillclimber1

Active Member
Site Supporter
The senators actions the next morning may have been an illustrative example of having been in an alcohol "blackout".. He had a well known problem with these blackouts, on many occasions...
 
Top