Post election interview with Roy Moore. The People did not understand.

So those who didn't vote for Moore were:
1. Lacking discernment, or
2. Misinformed and gullible to the media

Not a very high opinion of your fellow Christians. You just don't get it, that people can legitimately see this differently than you do.

 

God's Word had nothing to do with this election, any more than any other election. The Bible does not dictate that I must vote for a man who insisted on displaying the Ten Commandments. How I voted is not a test of my faith or my spiritual discernment. You cannot be judge and jury for the Christian voters of Alabama who disagree with you. We were not ill-informed and we did not lack discernment. We did not lack faith or have less knowledge of God's word than you do. We made a well informed, discerning, thoughtful, and prayerful choice. We did not "disagree with God's word." You cannot condemn your brothers and sisters in Christ who don't see this the same way you do. It is very close to patently offensive that you can claim more spiritual knowledge and discernment that all the Christian voters in Alabama who rejected Moore.

 

I still have lots to say about this subject but since I don't have a lot of time right now, I'm just going to deal with this one point.

What was Moore's duty? Well we the people of Alabama elected him to be a judge, not a decorator, not a minister, but a judge. As such we expected him to be able to separate out his religious beliefs and keep them separate enough from his work so as to not force Christianity on anyone. If he can't/couldn't then he would open the door for a Satanist judge to put up a monument to Satan or an Islamic judge to put up a monument to Mohommed.

The laws that this country is founded on call for a separation of church and state in order that religious freedom abound. If we had wanted a theocracy or a state religion our fore fathers would have set it up as such. Moore was unable to separate his religious views from his job even enough to accomplish the purpose of keeping the church and the state separate.

Now, your next arguement will be that the monument wasn't illegal and wouldn't have constituted forcing Christianity on anyone. And you may be right. But, because Moore didn't file that appeal that I keep harping about, we'll never know until someone else decides to try to brave the issue. It is Moore's own fault that the monument was removed. That one simple, little appeal being filed would have eventually led to the case being heard, or deemed unworthy to be heard, by the Supreme Court. By trying to circumvent the laws he cut his own throat and the that of the monument supporters.

I'm sure I have more, , but I'm out of time.

 

I still don't have time to argue this completely. I admit I'm doing a hit and run, but there is no way I would voted for a Cheif Justice based on his experience as an interior decorator. Or any justice for that matter.

While seeing to the decorations being done, nicely, effeciently and cost effectively might have fallen under his responsibility, I have yet to see interior decorating listed in the Code of Alabama as part of the requirements for the job he was elected to.

 

Dale, where have I personally attacked you?
You indeed agree with what I said, and it certainly is not an attack.

And where have I "not handled it"? OF course it is a debate forum. I disagree with your love of this renegade judge, so you say I can't handle it? Get real and get over it. It IS a debate forum, so when people believe you are wrong about Moore, as most apparently do (as well as the voters of Alabama), don't be so hypersensitive. I am beginning to think he is your daddy.

 

I would add that calling your brothers and sisters who disagree about one judge as lacking discernment or deluded sounds very much like a personal attack to me. Debate doesn't mean you pontificate and then denigrate those who think you are wrong.

 

I think that they made decisions based on their personal views and what they truly felt was best for the state. I commend them for that, I do not condemn them. I disagree with them, but both sides made well informed choices. Neither side are deluded and ill informed. We just disagreed.

 

I'm doing another hit and run here.

You are correct that this is a minor issue, so why do you keep bringing it up?

 

I agree 100%. Someone was resisting the higher powers ordained by God. That is serious.

 

Dale,

my voting decision was very informed. I've had personal conversations with Judge Moore and members of his family. Some stuff is privy to me personally...but let me assure you that my vote was cast with a GREAT deal of forethought. When you have had personal conversations with a candidate and members of his family...I'm not sure you can get any more informed than that.

I don't disagree with some of his points. I just saw some things OUTSIDE of the "acknowledging God" issue that led me to believe that Mr. Moore would not make a good governor. He's not the embodiment of evil, IMO. Neither is he God's Anointed. I don't doubt his love for God and his country. Nevertheless, I'm at peace with my decision.

I live less than fifteen miles from where it all went down. Members of Judge Moore's family have attended my church. Trust me...I'm informed. And I'd rather you not insinuate that I'm not.

 

Okay, I'm back and I have more that 5 minutes to be here.

But I've decided not to argue the various points that have jumped out at me during this discussion. I've argued some of them before.

But, the question was asked that it all comes down to money, and my response to that one question will hopefully answer to the other points.

Unless you bury your paycheck in the walls of your house, you use a bank for such things as a checking account, mortgage or car loan. When you choose your bank what criteria did you use? Interest rate? Fees? Integrity? Whether or not the bank president is a Christian? What about, whether or not there are Bible verses posted in the lobby dealing usury, fairness and debt forgiveness?

It all comes down to the money doesn't it?

I expect a lot from my governor. I expect him to have a good understanding of fiscal problems, know how to budget what few tax dollars he collects from me, keep the state legislature from wasting time arguing over non-issues like whether or not Fayette can have the money for a new park, while at the same time following up on issues like whether Fayette's new sheriff is accepting bribes in exchange for not arresting drug dealers, since the old one was doing something similar. I also expect the man to be polite, articulate, to know when to compromise on and issue and when not too. I expect him to do all these things WITHIN the laws of our state and our country without just saying "you can't make me".

George Wallace said the same thing as Roy Moore. The Federal government can't force the states to do anything; they don't have juridiction. Well, Wallace was wrong, and so was Moore. Our federal laws do trump state laws except in certain circumstances where the states rights are clearly indicated in the Constitution. This is why black children, handicapped children and even migrant children all have the same right to be educated as a normal white child does.

If a state or person believes that a federal law is wrong, there are rules to follow to get it changed. One way is simply get Congress to change the law(Constitution). The other way is to get the court system to rule on whether or not the law in question is in agreement with the Constitution. Moore, whatever his reasons were, like Wallace, failed to follow the rules. He tried to force his opinion on others. And he failed in his attempt to keep the monument there, just like Wallace failed in his attempt to keep blacks out of the University of Alabama. Wallace, because he had the support of the majority of white folk and white folk are the majority here, go to keep his job. Thank God, white folk have gotten a little wiser.

Now, besides the fact that Moore failed to follow the rules, if we just leave out that whole fiasco; what qualifications does the man have to be governor of the state of Alabama?

Okay, well he's obviously a Christian. But, I'm placing the responsibility for the entire state of Alabama on the man's shoulders. Resposibility for Christian folk, responsibility for atheists, Islamics, Catholics, gays, disabled, and host of other groups of people who reside in this state. Does the fact that he is Christian, all by itself, make the man fit for this responsibility?

Okay, well then, he was a circuit judge. He's trained to be a lawyer. So now we have to look at his record. Good enough judge, but nothing spectacular. If it hadn't been for the first flack over his ten commandment plaque, the rest of the state would have never heard of him.

Now here's the kicker: where is his administrative experience? What in his record makes me believe that he will be a good administrator of my tax dollars? Nothing. Can't find a thing.

Oh, but he's a Christian! So I should vote for him, right?

No. Not right. The fact of his Christianity alone does not mean he automatically gets my vote. Christ himself warned us about wasting our "talents". While I believe that we should support Christian candidates where ever possible, I don't believe that we should put a man that is unfit for his position into office.

I'm not quite done yet, but I'm splitting my post so I don't exceed the max character count. Wait a bit long for the rest before replying.

 

continued from the last post

So there's this other guy out there. He's a Christian also.

His background is business administration. He successfully ran several businesses while also doing a little farming. Then when Alabama had a dearth of decent men running for office he ran as an unknown and became the first Republican Congressman from this state to get re-elected since the Reconstruction! So not only does he have the qualifications do deal with the money issues, he also has experience with the law side of things AND there's still that matter of him being a Christian.

Now add to all that, the fact that he is currently the governor and has had a very sucessful term in spite of certain things that haven't gone his way. He has shown his integrity a multitude of times and I've got to tell you, he is the most honest governor this state has had in a looonnnngggg time.

So now we have to throw back in the matter of that monument.

No where in the Bible is our government commanded to do anything! Isreal had laws(from God), but not other countries. No where in the Bible are we as individuals commanded to form governments that are Christian. God deals with us as individuals, not as groups. So with this understanding and believing as I do that our government should keeps it's hands out of the church and the church should keep it's hands out of politics, it is now up to me to make a decision about which of these men will be best for... ME?

No wait! God said for me to love my neighbor as myself. That means I have to consider the needs and wishes of the other folk in my state who may not share my opinions. Just because they are not thinking about my needs does not excuse me from considering theirs. Not if I wish to keep the commandment that Christ said was second only to loving God Himself.

So, now I have to choose between a man who has shown me clearly that he will break the rules if they don't fit his opinion of right and a man who has shown clearly that he can follow the rules and honor God at the same time. A man who has shown every nonChristian that he doesn't care what they think, so long as he thinks he is right and a man who has shown that he is capable of considering the concerns of those who are different than he. And then on top of this a man who is relatively inexperienced for the job he is running for and a man who has proven success.

In the end, it did all come down to money. Why? Because both men were Christian, so other qualifications had to be considered.

Remember, we weren't voting for a minister, we were voting for governor. I don't want a governor that uses his position as a pulpit. It is the church's job to preach, it is the governor job to manage.

BTW, a previous gov of ours was a preacher. He went to preach a few times and us taxpayers ended up paying the tab for his travel expenses and he got kicked out of office.