Who's in charge?

I also tend to be a "bottom up" kind of person. Change begins at home.

Why do people vote the way they do? For many, if not most, it's because their personal beliefs are in-line with a particular candidate's. And I'm talking micro-beliefs, here.

For instance, I don't think burning an American flag is a particularly positive thing to do, but I wouldn't vote for a candidate who thinks more about the particular act than they do the bigger issue involved. I think it's essential to have consistent reasoning, rather than picking and choosing legality or illegality based on whether or not we like something. And I can't say that I wouldn't vote for a candidate who is in favor of banning flag burning - if they can provide valid Constitutional reasoning for it. Same thing with gun control, really. I don't particularly like handguns, but I can't let that influence my legal stand on the issue. The issue in each case is Constitutionality (and needless government intervention) - the bits and pieces are less relevant. And yes, I intentionally chose two issues that the major parties have different ideas about and the view I hold about each isn't in line with the views of just one of those parties. At least I tried to.

I think that some people (I honestly have no particular group in mind when I say "some people" - just an across the board observation) have forgotten that the government is our government and have started to think that we are the government's people. It's very disconcerting.

If the government would get their hands out of some of the business it has no business being in , more control would come back to the people. Further, if more people knew that they should have some of the rights they've let the government hold onto, they'd be more interested in voting and such. As it is, it seems the prevailing attitude is, "It doesn't affect me." It certainly does affect "me." "Me" is precisely who the government is supposed to represent!

And that's why major changes need to start at home! How is a government that is allegedly representing the people supposed to do that when the people don't 1) know that's the way it's supposed to work, 2) tell the representatives what they want, 3) know anything about the Constitution, or 4) have any firm positions?

Q: Is it really our legal system that is based on a Judeo-Christian ethic, or our laws that are (arguably, perhaps) based on the Judeo-Christian moral code?

[ October 16, 2002, 12:10 AM: Message edited by: stubbornkelly ]

 

If we don't vote, then we have no say...Part of helping to make a difference in society is by putting those in office who stand for the same things we do....

The problem is not that the wrong person is in office because they got more votes....The problem is that the right person isn't in office because Christians didn't vote....How do you expect to have your voice heard if you don't excerise your right to vote?

~Teresa~

 

I voted for George Bush because of his "read my lips, no new taxes". Then, when he added new taxes, he told America to "grow up", and stop whining about it.

Politicians lie, cheat, and slander each other ad nauseum. Why do people spend millions of $ campaigning for a job that pays &100,000 ?

I vote, but I do not decieve myself into thinking that anybody in office has anything but their own interests at heart.

I'll trust my government when they tell me who killed JFK.

 

I understand the thrust behind this thought, but I don't agree with it at all! You have a right to say what you whatever you want, regardless of your voting status/ record.

 

Or even Abe Lincoln.

 

As I am not American, can I speak about an attitude to politics in general without referring to American politics specifically?
In the O.T. we find that the Lord used Pagan Kings to bring about his purposes. In the N.T. we are exhorted to pray for those in authority.2000 years ago the political leaders made all modern leaders look like angels in comparison.We dont like everything that is done, but there is a sense in which a precedent has been set for Christians to weigh up the odds and make informed decisions about our leadership.
yours,Jon

 

I understand the thrust behind this thought, but I don't agree with it at all! You have a right to say what you whatever you want, regardless of your voting status/ record.</font>[/QUOTE]You have a point freedom of speach is part of the Bill of Rights. However if want to be listened to then you need to vote.

Now are the avg. citizens intrests being represented by our leaders? Yes and No. Yes because the elected officials need to keep us at least somewhat happy so that we will vote for them again. No because our elected officials like the power that goes with the office and will exercise it whenever they can.

If anyone has read Tom Clancy books there is an interesting picture of what our goverment could be in the books. When the main caracter (Jack Ryan) becomes president after the current president and most of the cabinet and congress are killed, the american people actually elect common people to fill the vacent offices. That is not the main point of the books it is an interesting sidebar.

Bill

 

Warm Christian greetings!

In Britain most people have a very low view of politicians, the vast majority of whom are simply out to "feather their own nests". At the last General Election in June 2001 the turnout was extremely low. I do vote because I feel it is a citizen's duty; however, I have no political leanings and do not get involved in politics.

I believe the best way to change society is to preach the Gospel; when people are converted then their attitudes change and they will do what is right by their fellow citizens, no government policy will change the heart.

Kind regards

Robert J Hutton

 

It was the same people who framed O.J. Simpson and Pete Rose.

 

It was the same people who took over the SBC (according to the CBF).

 

The Kingdom of God moves regardless of the current president or senators or whatever.

Political activism is a waste of time. There is no point in polishing the brass on a sinking ship.

 

I thank God that He has seen fit to assist in the setup of America's constitution. The thing that really saves us from the dark side of human nature is the seperation of powers, I'm speaking of the division between judicial, executive, and legislative bodies of the government. They don't all necessarily go corrupt and in cahoots at once. The seperation between federal and state governments is also a help in this way.

I view participation in government through voting as a sacred responsibility and priviledge. I believe some Christians are called to participate by being in public office. I believe that the competing philosopies are less important than basic honesty and fair play, which often are sorely lacking behind the scenes in our political system. I did not say competing philosopies are unimportant.

 

As I see it we are to vote, follow the laws that do not go against God's Word, pray for our leaders, but I have to agree with Robert J Hutton when he said

When we get to deeply involved in political issues we neglect the more important, "taking the Gospel to the lost world"

Richard

 

Does the constitution use those words? I know that it is in Lincoln's Gettysburg address but I'm not so sure it is in the constitution. Am I wrong?

 

Nope, you're right. That's a line from the Gettysburg address:

...It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

The theme of the Gettysburg Address was not entirely new. President Lincoln was aware of Daniel Webster's statement in 1830 that the origin of our government and the source of its power is "the people's constitution, the people's government; made for the people, made by the people, and answerable to the people." Lincoln had read Supreme Court Justice John Marshall's opinion, which states: "The government of the Union . . . is emphatically and truly a government of the people. . . . Its powers are granted by them and are to be exercised directly on them, and for their benefit." In a ringing anti-slavery address in Boston in 1858, Rev. Theodore Parker, the noted minister, defined democracy as "a government of all the people, by all the people, for all the people." On a copy of this address in Lincoln's papers, this passage is encircled with pencil marks. But Lincoln did not merely repeat this theme; he transformed it into America's greatest patriotic utterance. With the Gettysburg Address, Lincoln gave meaning to the sacrifice of the dead—he gave inspiration to the living.

[ October 16, 2002, 05:07 PM: Message edited by: Johnv ]

 

It's a matter of fact that JFK was killed by Elvis, which is why he's hiding out today.

He was allegedly seen on the tarmac with a bottle of lube right before President Ford slid off the jetway. Since then, he's been in the witless protection program.

 

Our system was designed to be one of self-governance. Whether government reacted to the people or the people reacted to the government, the government's erosion of individual rights continues unabated.

If the historical model holds true, our nation will collapse into a totalitarian state before the turn of the next century.

 

When Lincoln was assassinated, Andrew Johnson became Pres. He attempted to follow the same program of leniency Lincoln supported in "healing" the wounds of the Nation after Civil War. Johnson was impeached;

My theory:
a radical congress could not afford to initiate another assassination so soon.

Sometimes (more often than not) true history is read between the lines, in private records, etc. rather than in the biased short paragraphs most of us learn from our text books.

Bro. Dallas.