CADsortaGUY
Lifer
President doesn?t use faith as a bargaining tool
Read it - there is no registration for the link AFAIK.
CsG
Read it - there is no registration for the link AFAIK.
CsG
-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Bush is a Religious Extremist!!!1!!one
- Thread starter CADsortaGUY
- Start date
LordMagnusKain
Banned
I've always thought that it would be bad for the Republican Party to give its constituency what it wants.
I consider myself a pro-life southern democrat and without the abortion issue at hand i could even vote for a liberal like Lieberman or Giuliani.
In other news: paying people to be poor keeps them poor.
I consider myself a pro-life southern democrat and without the abortion issue at hand i could even vote for a liberal like Lieberman or Giuliani.
In other news: paying people to be poor keeps them poor.
Steeplerot
Lifer
Bargain? That's what daddy is for.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Yeah, I agree to an extent. Politics isn't something you can come in and radically change on your whim. Our structure isn't built to allow that - which is why we have peacefully transfers of power and other things.
CsG
DealMonkey
Lifer
The evangelist vote and its impact is of course debatable. What I've always wondered is, why are the evangelists voting on a whole lot of talk and very very little action? For example, Bush & The Republicans will control our gov't for 8 years ... what socially conservative agenda have they, or will they, push through?
Is there a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage? Nope.
Has abortion been outlawed? Nope.
Has embryonic stem cell research been nixed? Nope. Only in terms of federal dollars. It's still going on @ the private level and now @ the state level (e.g. California).
Has Christianity been injected into our daily lives? Not really. The evangelists keep trying, but overall, not really.
So exactly what, are the evangelists turning out for?
Is there a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage? Nope.
Has abortion been outlawed? Nope.
Has embryonic stem cell research been nixed? Nope. Only in terms of federal dollars. It's still going on @ the private level and now @ the state level (e.g. California).
Has Christianity been injected into our daily lives? Not really. The evangelists keep trying, but overall, not really.
So exactly what, are the evangelists turning out for?
Exactly, I think Bush talks a good religious fight, and he certainly comes off as a lot more religious than many of our previous presidents (he IS born again after all). But he really hasn't DONE anything that would worry me from a religious standpoint. I'm pissed about the whole gay marriage ban, but Bush got slapped down on the federal level (and I don't think he tried very hard) and the states that banned it did so as a result of the voters, not Bush.
So here's a big "No Sh!t Sherlock" for CAD. If anything, this just shows how stupid some religious voters are. They went out and voted based on nothing more than words. That seems dumb if you ask me.
Edit: Since I didn't make this really clear, I don't think Bush is a religious extremist who wants to use his position to force his beliefs on all of us, or if he is he's doing a crappy job of it (either is good for us "non-believers"). But he IS good at convincing the religious right that this is exactly what he is, which is why he got their votes. It's all about perception, not reality. But if you think religion didn't play a big part in Bush's victory, I suggest you need to pay a little more attention.
DealMonkey
Lifer
Good point. That's one of the few tangible quid pro quos Bush has pulled off. Otherwise, it's mostly the perception that Bush is "born again" and that his faith will somehow "trickle down" through the agenda of his 8 years in office. But again, why does perception trump solid action?
Steeplerot
Lifer
LOL nice list of quotes there from Al. Kinda sad he didn't get some of my more colorful posts.
Or even any of the ones that get me banned... But of course not P&N is biased to the left, right?
Or even any of the ones that get me banned... But of course not P&N is biased to the left, right?
The big question is "Why do you fear someone who is a Christian?"
Jesus taught we should treat people equally with love and compassion. Are you truly professing to be a good samaritan? Do you care for your fellow man or are you so greedy you only care about yourself?
These are not just christial views, they are universal truths.
When Jesse Jackson runs around and stirs up trouble, why dont you claim he is a religious fanatic and claim his actions are all wrong, Or do you?
Clinton was seen many times going to Church. Look at some of the decisions he made. This shows that religious faith is not necessarily the primary reason for decisions.
Over 50% of all the people in the US say they believe in God. Are they all bad and untrustworthy?
Your argument is flawed.
Jesus taught we should treat people equally with love and compassion. Are you truly professing to be a good samaritan? Do you care for your fellow man or are you so greedy you only care about yourself?
These are not just christial views, they are universal truths.
When Jesse Jackson runs around and stirs up trouble, why dont you claim he is a religious fanatic and claim his actions are all wrong, Or do you?
Clinton was seen many times going to Church. Look at some of the decisions he made. This shows that religious faith is not necessarily the primary reason for decisions.
Over 50% of all the people in the US say they believe in God. Are they all bad and untrustworthy?
Your argument is flawed.
By design we have a very slow process in this government. Which is good. It prevents one president (or congress or judge) from exerting too much change in a short period of time. Think of all of the knee jerk reactionary laws that are proposed or passed. While the process slows that to a crawl and eventually eats up the bad ones. Here is the process...
Congress makes a rash and knee jerk proposal (good examples are post Columbine gun laws and the Patriot Act).
The president can either sign the law or not. If not, it will filter back to the lowest levels of Congress (the Committees) and be re-written, or it will just fade - as happens with most knee jerk laws.
If a law passes the president it is law, but is it lawful? Days, weeks, or years down the road, most laws meet the scrutiny of the court system. Some are deemed legal rather quickly, others must face the tough, grinding legal road to the Supreme Court - which can take decades.
This entire process takes time. And even after a law makes it past the Supreme Court there is a chance that it is obsolete or already being replaced. However, most laws that make it this far and survive, stand a good chance of being fair and balanced because of the variety of parties and the mellowing of feelings that effects them through the process.
For this reason I tell all of the worrying anti-Patriot Act liberals to calm down. There is nothing to worry about. With fairly liberal courts 75% or more of the act will be abolished or re-written before it is all said and done. This is the process. Congress writes wide ranging laws and uses a shot gun approach to govern. There are filters in place to catch the garbage.
Congress makes a rash and knee jerk proposal (good examples are post Columbine gun laws and the Patriot Act).
The president can either sign the law or not. If not, it will filter back to the lowest levels of Congress (the Committees) and be re-written, or it will just fade - as happens with most knee jerk laws.
If a law passes the president it is law, but is it lawful? Days, weeks, or years down the road, most laws meet the scrutiny of the court system. Some are deemed legal rather quickly, others must face the tough, grinding legal road to the Supreme Court - which can take decades.
This entire process takes time. And even after a law makes it past the Supreme Court there is a chance that it is obsolete or already being replaced. However, most laws that make it this far and survive, stand a good chance of being fair and balanced because of the variety of parties and the mellowing of feelings that effects them through the process.
For this reason I tell all of the worrying anti-Patriot Act liberals to calm down. There is nothing to worry about. With fairly liberal courts 75% or more of the act will be abolished or re-written before it is all said and done. This is the process. Congress writes wide ranging laws and uses a shot gun approach to govern. There are filters in place to catch the garbage.
CubicZirconia
Diamond Member
It's not the religion that people fear, it's the extremely conservative agenda that goes along with it.
This may sound trite, but tell that to the thousands of dead Iraqis guilty of nothing more than trying to live their lives.
Edit: To reiterate what others have said, the religion is a merely a shell. It's a way to pick up guaranteed votes. For a devout Christian Bush seems to have a hard time remembering the phrase "thou shall not kill."
What people keep forgetting is that it isn't just Bush. Bush doesn't do the legislating, that's done by the Congress. And, guess who's gaining power in the Congress? Ayup, people like DeLay, DeMint, and Coburn, all fundamental Christians and DeLay have the honor of being a rat-bastard on top of that but with powerful fund-raising abilities.
There are two ways to look at the article's premise about the relationship between this "Christian" voting block and Bush. The author looks at it from the point of view of Bush's response to the so-called "moral" voting block. I don't have any major disagreements with her points, it doesn't matter to me why or how Bush comes up with bad ideas.
I think the issue that is worth exposing for what it is, is looking at why the voting block votes the way it does. I believe it is more about irrational fear than it is about Bush.
Irrational because the things they worry about losing aren't really at risk the way they think they are. An example of what I mean is the fear of homosexuals, when what they should fear is their own violation of fundamental values like-
do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
I think the issue that is worth exposing for what it is, is looking at why the voting block votes the way it does. I believe it is more about irrational fear than it is about Bush.
Irrational because the things they worry about losing aren't really at risk the way they think they are. An example of what I mean is the fear of homosexuals, when what they should fear is their own violation of fundamental values like-
do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
[please take me back to 1999]
This year is most crazy for me. So was 2000 and after that.
In America, we have corruption just like anywhere else. No wrong or right, only money and power to rule the world is all that matters.
Gasoline is what rules the world, war is fought just for oil.
What else? the elimination of the world's population aka population control.
This year is most crazy for me. So was 2000 and after that.
In America, we have corruption just like anywhere else. No wrong or right, only money and power to rule the world is all that matters.
Gasoline is what rules the world, war is fought just for oil.
What else? the elimination of the world's population aka population control.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
-
-
