You liberal! Quotes of the Day

That's why I bite my tongue and vote for the lesser of two evils: Not voting would be a vote for the greater of two evils. (I wish they would change the process to require a majority instead of a plurality, but until then, we will have a choice between only the two.)

However, stealing from one to redistribute only rewards bad behavior and benefits no one. The Lord said to give, he didn't say to steal and give.

 

Well He Himself took a little boy's lunch and fed 5000 hungry souls with it.

BTW, Jesus was BOTH liberal and conservative.

He was liberal because He gave everyone a free lunch with no strings attached.

He was conservative because He didn't want anything to go to waste and ordered the disciples to gather up the leftovers.

HankD

 

.

Amen, Brother HankD -- Preach it!!

.

 

He didn't steal if from the boy though, did he?

 

I assume it was a free-will offering.

HankD

 

The boy had a choice. Just try choosing whether or not you approve of the US government take your money and redistribute it.

 

First of all there's not a sheckle's worth of difference in either party. (That's why I call all you folks who are out there waving one flag or the other "Republicrats"
Secondly to address the quote above....I have not seen it in the scriptures where the Lord said to take someone else's money and support the weak,maimed,halt and poor. If He did we'd have to support the blind too and then the demoricans would never have to have another political fund raiser.
Thanks ------Bart
.....the dueling society was a polite society. [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]My strong preference would be for the churches and individual christians to meet the needs of the poor, handicapped, and aged. But the church hasn't demonstrated close to the level of concern we should have to do this. So, pragmatically, we have to address these needs through the government.

All I'm saying is that we as Christians have the Biblical responsibility as shown in the passage I quoted to meet their needs. The Republican party has always fought against doing this and the Democratic has supported it. I don't think anyone would dispute that claim. You can decide whether you want to be for or against this by your vote.

 

Probably a lot less than what will happen to you in some other countries.

In any event, I choose to pay my taxes.

HankD

 

With the abortion issue, I like the way John Piper puts it in his article "One-Issue Politics, One-Issue Marriage, and the Humane Society"


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.

* * * This article is from A Godward Life, Book I: Savoring the Supremacy of God in All of Life by John Piper

This is my sentiments also.

 

This should probably belong in "politics", but I would never vote for a party that is for killing unborn babies without any limits, steals money to redistribute it, and keeps itself alive by keeping the poor poor.

The republicans aren't much better, but at least they are trying to limit the partial birth abortions (better some limits than no limits), lower taxes (even if they are still unconstitutionally high), and at least expects people to work a little bit.

 

Being pro-abortion is enough for me to vote against a candidate.

 

First of all there's not a sheckle's worth of difference in either party. (That's why I call all you folks who are out there waving one flag or the other "Republicrats"
Secondly to address the quote above....I have not seen it in the scriptures where the Lord said to take someone else's money and support the weak,maimed,halt and poor. If He did we'd have to support the blind too and then the demoricans would never have to have another political fund raiser.
Thanks ------Bart
.....the dueling society was a polite society. [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]We're not talking about how someone else's tax money is going to be used. We're talking about how your tax money is going to be used. You can vote for it to be used to help the poor or you can vote for it to be given to the rich as a tax break or to fund a questionable war. Whichever you think is the Christian way to use your money.

 

Since there have never been any "tax breaks for the rich", and every time that more money is kept in the hands of its rightful owners the economy goes up as well as charitable giving, then that's the way I will vote. So, I will vote for giving the poor a hand up instead of keeping the poor poor and buying votes for giving them a few crumbs.

 

Is a hand-up like a trickle down?

 

I've been told that I couldn't VOTE for a democrat and be a Christian, or at least not a GODLY christian. I was very disappointed to learn that! LOL The nerve of some people....

 

When Christians align themselves with a particular political party of a particular candidate they lose much of their effectiveness as witnesses. Just think about. If you go around saying that the Republican party is "God's party" you instantly turn off 50% of the people you need to reach for Jesus.

 

That's all the more reason people should vote CP:

http://www.constitutionparty.com/