-
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!
Why I hope that Obama is our next president
- Thread starter KenH
- Start date
Did you guys know that some babies survive abortions ? Well, at least they used to. Obama voted against medical care for them. That's what a "present" vote does. He wasn't the only one, mind you. But he was one of them.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/obamas_voting_record_on_aborti.html
There are a lot of reasons to be against this guy, his name & where he went to school don't even register. He is an ulta-liberal, and his callous votes in the Illinois senate concerning unborn children should send shivers up the spine of anyone who truly fears God.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/obamas_voting_record_on_aborti.html
There are a lot of reasons to be against this guy, his name & where he went to school don't even register. He is an ulta-liberal, and his callous votes in the Illinois senate concerning unborn children should send shivers up the spine of anyone who truly fears God.
Are you saying that the pro-war/pro-rich standpoint is just as evil as murdering unborn babies? You've go t to be kidding! It's a joke, right?StefanM said:
Is that what they're teaching in seminary these days?
Last edited by a moderator:
Ivon Denosovich
New Member
Obama would do some things right. But he would also do a lot (more?) things wrong. The main reasons I don't support him are UniHC (which I oppose) and gun control (which I also oppose.)
Sadly, McCain is similar to Obama on gun control.
Sadly, McCain is similar to Obama on gun control.
Signs of the times??tinytim said:
SBCPreacher said:
No. I'm saying that they're both bad. You can't pick which one assigns guilt. If one is a murderer for voting for a Democrat, then one is a murderer for voting for Bush. It's applying consistent logic. I don't personally think that voting for a Democrat is equal to murder any more than voting for Bush is equal to being pro-war, but you can't have one without the other.
Abortion is evil. Preferring the rich to the poor is evil. Provoking unnecessary wars is evil. In the Christian right, only abortion is seen as evil. We can bomb whomever we choose whenever we choose for whatever reason we choose, and it's ok. Well, it's not.
Also, neglecting the poor is a very common theme in the scriptures. It's universally condemned.
And, no, I'm not learning this from seminary. Whenever I hear anything about politics, it's the usual theme of GOP= all that is good, Democrats= all that is evil.
There are MAJOR, MAJOR flaws with both parties. If by voting you acquire guilt for every single position the person takes, then the only way to avoid sinning is simply not to vote.
For me, I see no candidate with whom I can agree as-is. I am pro-life, and I am horribly upset that the GOP has done next to nothing on the abortion issue. I held my nose and supported them anyway because I thought they might do something about abortion. I no longer think this way. I don't believe they are serious about the issue, and I refuse to give them a free pass because of their half-hearted pro-life position. IMO, McCain won't be nominating any kind of SCOTUS justice that would actually do something about Roe v. Wade. You'll be seeing more Souters than Scalias.
As an economic moderate-to-liberal, I abhor the GOP's economic platform. I much prefer the Democratic platform here. Economics are not this major moral issue; I simply prefer a firmly regulated market. Socialism is inherently flawed, but so is pure capitalism. I think that government should intervene in areas where the free market fails (public services like fire, police, and military...I would also include government intervention to ensure universal health care, though I oppose nationalization of the health system).
I also abhor the GOP's aggressive neo-conservative platform on war/terrorism. I was against the Iraq War back in 2002-3, and I pray that we don't end up in another quagmire elsewhere. The Democrats aren't perfect on this issue, but IMO they're better.
On social issues (aside from abortion), I'm in the middle. I definitely do not stand as a friend of the gay movement, but I'm not virulently opposed to them. I honestly don't care about gay marriage because it won't make a difference either way. The DOMA is unconstitutional (you can't circumvent the "full faith and credit" clause). Unless you are willing to make a constitutional amendment to change that clause (which would cause legal nightmares) or to ban gay marriage outright (which would be a dramatic shift away from a classic conservative position of leaving the issue to the states), gay marriage is inevitable. I think that the legal justification for it is shaky, but if states pass laws legalizing it, then there is no way to stop it.
I would prefer that gay marriage be outlawed, just like I think many divorces should not be allowed. However, the issue is that of the heart. The solution to gay marriage is not banning it but bringing homosexuals to Jesus where they can be liberated from their sinful lifestyle.
On abortion, I'm in favor of a constitutional amendment banning abortion (which, incidentally, does not involve the President at all). The GOP is better on this issue, but they tolerate too much leeway. There are far too many pro-choice Republicans in prominent places (e.g. Arlen Specter on the judiciary committee). I think the Democrats are DEAD wrong. This issue, though, is dead in the water because an amendment is never going to pass in this political environment. There is no way that the GOP will attain a supermajority of pro-life representatives and senators. The only way will be for something to convince both political parties of the evil of this practice. Even overturning Roe v. Wade will only kick the issue to the states, most of which will preserve the legalization of abortion through state law.
Here's the deal: if a number of practices are evil: 1, 2, 3...
and one party endorses 1 but denies 2 and is shaky on 3
and the other denies 1, but wholeheartedly endorses 2 and 3
What should be done? I think it's a hard question to answer, but I think that a pragmatic triage element must come into play. Which one is likely to be taken care of first? How can I keep voting for a pro-life candidate whom I believe to be very wrong on other issues important to me when I believe that he won't do a thing about abortion anyway? How pro-life is he anyway?
PastorSBC1303
Active Member
StefanM said:
This is not a fair comparison. Universal healthcare would be the gov't taking more of our money and thinking they can use it better than we can. Lower taxes gives us back more of the money that was already earned by us to spend/save/invest as we see fit. There is a big difference in those two things.
I will do all that I can do to see that Obama wins the Democratic nomination in my state during our primaries. Then I will do all that I can to see that either he or Clinton wins the presidency this fall.
BTW, I think it will end up being a landslide for either of them against McCain.
BTW, I think it will end up being a landslide for either of them against McCain.
PastorSBC1303
Active Member
StefanM said:
I agree it is financially motivated, but it is still comparing apples and oranges. Being motivated to keep my own money is not the same as wanting the gov't to use my money for their own programs.
tinytim said:
Deu 20:16 But in the cities of these peoples that the LORD your God is giving you for an inheritance, you shall save alive nothing that breathes,
Deu 20:17 but you shall devote them to complete destruction, the Hittites and the Amorites, the Canaanites and the Perizzites, the Hivites and the Jebusites, as the LORD your God has commanded,
Deu 20:18 that they may not teach you to do according to all their abominable practices that they have done for their gods, and so you sin against the LORD your God. (ESV)
Is God's word true? I believe so. It does not justify abortion in any way, but it is a clear command from God to kill children. I struggle with these passages personally, but they are there.
There is indeed a time for war, but that doesn't mean war is always justified.
PastorSBC1303 said:
When someone making 2 million dollars a year would rather buy a yacht than provide health insurance to a poor child, it gets in the realm of "questionable" motives.
In any case, though, financial motives abound. One of the travesties in this country is the continued legalization of tobacco. It's a product that we know kills people, but the government (both parties) cares more about the economics of the issue than the health of the people.
tinytim said:
No. That doesn't strength the argument. God basically commanded genocide, not collateral damage. It is not inevitable to kill every single person--man, woman, or child--when you conquer a city.
Abortion is wrong. I'm not disputing that fact, but your posts seem to indicate that nothing is prohibited in wartime. Do you think that some things should be prohibited?
If all of us would spend all this time and effort we're wasting on this thread - and give it to M. Huckabee and his campaign we might still turn this thing around.
It's still a long way to Nov and the democratic party is going to have to do some mighty big reconciliation when Obama wins the nomination over Hillary.
This thing is not in the bag for Obama or McCain yet!
So Keep Fighting! :thumbs:
It's still a long way to Nov and the democratic party is going to have to do some mighty big reconciliation when Obama wins the nomination over Hillary.
This thing is not in the bag for Obama or McCain yet!
So Keep Fighting! :thumbs: