"Why I voted for Bush"

[Ben Kenobi]

And would such people not do this if certain religious elements weren't attacking them at every opportunity.

You equate the conduct with the person. That's like saying a murderer cannot be forgiven for his past actions, even if he repents.

It doesn't matter where they come from. People want manifestly different laws for many things and agree on only a few, so the only solution is the social contract.

But what is part of the social contract? The contract says that you ought to respect those in the church, even if their beliefs differ from yours.

You are not even able to uphold your own contract, which you break to take out some of your frusterations on the church.

Secondly, the source does matter. If you tear at the foundation, everything built on top collapses.

You know I don't agree with that either. But I don't see the average liberal wanting to make homosexuality compulsory.

They don't, and neither does the church make adherance to scripture compulsory. If you choose to be a part of the church, then this applies. If you choose to reject the church, the church will leave you alone.

But it makes no sense to me, to attack the church after you have rejected their message, and want nothing to do with them.

Secondly, if these gay people are so tolerant of differences in opinion, why do they force people to agree with them that homosexuality is a good thing?

[Agathon]

It's pretty evident that most of those who get hysterical about the sexual deviance of others have problems that are closer to home.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


But what is part of the social contract? The contract says that you ought to respect those in the church, even if their beliefs differ from yours.

You have failed repeatedly to respect gays. Get off your high pedestal.

[Agathon]

I wish I had a pedestal.

[MrFun]

Maybe you can buy one off of eBay.

[Ben Kenobi]

Doesn't mean that I will stand up for homophobic bigots, though.

That's a shame.

I'd stand up for you, if I thought you right on a point, regardless of everything else on which we disagree.

[Agathon]

I'd stand up for you, if I thought you right on a point.

That's the problem, you are supposed to stand up for him when you think he's wrong.

Maybe you can buy one off of eBay.

I find that insulting, I shop at www.pedestals.com

[OzzyKP]

Grrr, my thread was closed. Anyway: http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...hreadid=124351

****ing Bush.

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
Grrr, my thread was closed. Anyway: http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...hreadid=124351

****ing Bush.

[rah]

I do get annoyed when people call ALL bush supporters sheep. I'm not a fan of Bush but the alternative is scary. Almost half the country will vote for Bush. From all walks of life and amount of smarts. The same thing is true for Kerry Supporters. You don't hear us calling Kerry supporters brainwashed morons, even though I'm sure that there are those that believe that

Your hatred is going to have to be dealt with after the election, or the other side's hatred is going to have to be. ONE AMERICA, regardless. Armed insurection doesn't seem like a viable solution yet.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Armed insurection doesn't seem like a viable solution yet.

It may in 2 weeks .

[rah]

If Kerry leads it, Bush won't have anything to worry about.

[Fake Boris]

Re: "Why I voted for Bush"

Originally posted by dojoboy
I went and voted early yesterday and submitted my ballot for Bush. I had considered voting for Badnarik, but couldn't bring myself to do it when the time came.

This whole election has been one of great turmoil for me. Several of my good friends are Democrats or leaning toward Kerry, including my wife. Nothing new. One very good friend said to me, "I find it bizarre that someone I like and respect so much as you, would vote for Bush." He's right. It is bizarre.

I completely support the majority of the Democrat's agenda; however, I do not necessarily support the methods for obtaining it. The idea that Republicans are against caring for people insults me. It's just not true.

I'm a rabid nationalist, but I completely support the forum of world opinion. However, I do not support forfeiting American economic & military power to appease the world. Why would I? To do so, I would have to believe others in the world would "play fair." Obviously, that is not true.

My decision came down to one of who makes me feel best about America. Between the two major candidates, it's Bush. Kerry does not.

This is hardwired, nothing Kerry can say could sway me.

Now, anyone of you can easily flame me and offer, ad naseum, comments on "this and that." And, I can easily reply with such comments.

There isn't a single argument in this.

[dojoboy]

Oct. 6, 2004. It was written by Mathew Manweller who is a Central
Washington University political science professor.

The title of the article was "Election Determines Fate of Nation."

"In that this will be my last column before the presidential election there will be no sarcasm, no attempts at witty repartee. The topic is too serious, and the stakes are too high. This November we will vote in the only election during our lifetime that will truly matter. Because America is at a once-in-a-generation crossroads, more than an election hangs in the balance. Down one path lies retreat, abdication and a reign of ambivalence. Down the other lies a nation that is aware of its past and accepts the daunting obligation its future demands. If we choose poorly, the consequences will echo through the next 50 years of history. If we, in a spasm of frustration, turn out the current occupant of the White House, the message to the world and ourselves will be two fold. First, we will reject the notion that America can do big things. Once a nation that tamed a frontier, stood down the Nazis and stood upon the moon, we will announce to the world that bringing democracy to the Middle East is too big of a task for us. But more significantly, we will signal to future presidents that as voters, we are unwilling to tackle difficult challenges, preferring caution to boldness, embracing the mediocrity that has characterized other civilizations. The defeat of President Bush will send a chilling message to future presidents who may need to make difficult, yet unpopular decisions. America has always been a nation that rises to the demands of history regardless of the costs or appeal. If we turn away from that legacy, we turn away from who we are.

Second, we inform every terrorist organization on the globe that the lesson of Somalia was well learned. In Somalia we showed terrorists that you don't need to defeat America on the battlefield when you can defeat them in the newsroom. They learned that a wounded America can become a defeated America. Twenty-four-hour news stations and daily tracing polls will do the heavy lifting, turning a cut into a fatal blow. Except that Iraq is Somalia times 10. The election of John Kerry will serve notice to every terrorist in every cave that the soft underbelly of American power is the timidity of American voters. Terrorists will know that a steady stream of grizzly photos for CNN is all you need to break the will of the American people. Our own self-doubt will take it from there. Bin Laden will recognize that he can topple any American administration without setting foot on the homeland. It is said that America's W.W.II generation is its 'greatest generation.' But my greatest fear is that it will become known as America's 'last generation.' Born in the bleakness of the Great Depression and hardened in the fire of WW II, they may be the last American generation that understands the meaning of duty, honor and sacrifice. It is difficult to admit, but I know these terms are spoken with only hollow detachment by many (but not all) in my generation. Too many citizens today mistake 'living in America' as 'being an American.' But America has always been more of an idea than a place. When you sign on, you do more than buy real estate. You accept a set of values and responsibilities. This November, my generation, which has been absent too long, must grasp the obligation that comes with being an American, or fade into the oblivion they may deserve. I believe that 100 years from now historians will look back at the election of 2004 and see it as the decisive election of our century. Depending on the outcome, they will describe it as the moment America joined the ranks of ordinary nations; or they will describe it as the moment the prodigal sons and
daughters of the greatest generation accepted their burden as caretakers of the City on the Hill."

[Berzerker]

They don't, and neither does the church make adherance to scripture compulsory. If you choose to be a part of the church, then this applies. If you choose to reject the church, the church will leave you alone.

What church or religion doesn't use government to impose it's doctrines on others? The rise of republican and democratic institutions has forced the church to share more of it's power thereby weakening it's ability to compel strict adherence, but all we need is history to see how churches won't leave others alone when given the power of the state. The irony is many religions were founded by people who were persecuted by the state and would be rolling in their graves to see what they spawned. Imagine what Jesus would think upon seeing the Inquisition committed in his name. Burn some witches in His name? Brilliant! These are the people Jesus was talking about when He will say the following words on Judgement Day, "I never knew you". But Jesus never told His followers to form a government and compel adherence, that is a mockery of true Christianity.
So IMO, Christianity died long ago - it was killed by the Romans when they made it the state's religion. If it lives on, it does so only on a personal level.