Where is a democrat with christian values suppose to go?

[pop102377]

Government should be involved in marriage as little as possible. But so long as there are laws governing marriage in America, then every married American is entitled to equal protection of those laws.

No one has ever been able to prove gay marriage is harmful to society. That's the bar, folks. The same bar which required bigots to prove interracial marriages were harmful to society.

Bigots can't make it over the bar. Because their only argument is hatred or "Ew, they're icky!"

Yeah, they're icky to me and most heterosexuals. But that's not good enough to deny them their constitutional rights.

You can’t expect people to except anything LGBT, I ignore the whole deal, to each it’s own I guess.

It’s a proven fact LGBT lifestyle is unstable at best... I guess people can get out of their system. But just don’t expect it to be excepted as normal.

If God hates gays so much, why did he put gays on earth in every religion?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rustic]

A Christian Democrat is like a Jewish nazi. Either not a real Democrat or not a real Christian.

Well an extreme example... it is essentially true. In order for a person to be a Christian and a Democrat... they have to be compromising on something. You simply can't be both. It's not possible. You can't say I believe in (X) values.... the values of Christianity for example... and then vote for an entire party built on the exact opposite values.

Then the Christians can officially align with the Republican party and we can remove their tax exempt status. I'm cool with that.

I think any church which invites a candidate for office to address the congregation should immediately lose their tax exempt status.

Why? The Consitution forbids that

The Constitution does not grant tax exemption to churches.

And certainly not to churches which engage in political activity.

To be fair there should be no tax exempt group at all if you’re gonna make any one organization tax exempt, is that what you’re saying?

 

[Rustic]

The American people demand free lollipops from the federal government. So our politicians, caving in to popular demand, pass a law to give lollipops to everyone in America.

Adam and Steve rush down to the government building to get their government lollipops.

But the Joe the Plumber says, "Oh hell no. No lolli's for fags!" And the crowd goes wild.

Gays didn't ask for free lollipops. The American people as a whole did.

Equal protection of the laws.

NOTHING to do with religion.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Government should be involved in marriage as little as possible. But so long as there are laws governing marriage in America, then every married American is entitled to equal protection of those laws.

No one has ever been able to prove gay marriage is harmful to society. That's the bar, folks. The same bar which required bigots to prove interracial marriages were harmful to society.

Bigots can't make it over the bar. Because their only argument is hatred or "Ew, they're icky!"

Yeah, they're icky to me and most heterosexuals. But that's not good enough to deny them their constitutional rights.

You can’t expect people to except anything LGBT, I ignore the whole deal, to each it’s own I guess.

It’s a proven fact LGBT lifestyle is unstable at best... I guess people can get out of their system. But just don’t expect it to be excepted as normal.

If God hates gays so much, why did he put gays on earth in every religion?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He didnt. People have free will.
And everyone has something to battle in this life.

That stupid statement is like believing God endorses murder because He made murderers.

He DIDN'T. People make choices.

 

[Rustic]

A Christian Democrat is like a Jewish nazi. Either not a real Democrat or not a real Christian.

So tell me the many ways Trump the adulter is a real Christian...

Is that what voting is? Is that what you think we're voting on during an election? I thought we were voting on who would be the best possible president.

Since when is the public vote, a vote on who is the best Christian?

And if that isn't what the vote is about, then what relevance does your question have?

It is a determining factor in voting for a candidate even though a religious test is not used according to the Constitution yet the people of the USA are not the Constitution and therefore judge a candidate according to their religion. Which is what this thread tis aboot...

Not true. It simply isn't. Not in this country at least.

At the end of the day, you generally have two choices. I can vote for Tim, the Pastor of Berean Church here in Ohio. But he's not going to win.

There are two people that have a good chance of winning. That's it.

So unless one is a criminal that deletes thousands of emails that were requested evidence in a subpoena.... we have to choose between which candidate best fits with our overall values.

Not stealing money in taxes.
Not controlling and dictating our lives.
Not force us to fund with our stolen tax money, support for murdering babies.
Supporting the state of Israel.
The list goes on.

So if I have to choose between voting for people who actively oppose Christian values, or voting for someone who as a person may suck, but whose party platform is generally in line with Christian values... then obviously I'm going to vote for who will uphold my values in policy, over someone who might be faithful to his wife, but try and destroy Christianity in the country.

The Republican Party only pays lips service to Christian values. Lip service.

Their DEEDS betray they have gone to the dark side.

That's why I quit.

The GOP establishment has never been conservative nor Christian. Fact

 

[BluesLegend]

Where is a democrat with christian values suppose to go?

They are supposed to go re-registered as Republicans.

 

[Rustic]

Evangelicals are finally starting to catch on.

Why Trump’s Evangelical Allies Are Enraged Over His Betrayal of the Kurds

https://www.washingtonpost.com/reli...aven-over-syria-decision-pat-robertson-warns/

“The president, who allowed Khashoggi to be cut into pieces without any repercussions whatsoever, is now allowing the Christians and the Kurds to be massacred by the Turks." - Pat Robertson

“I believe … the president of the United States is in danger of losing the mandate of heaven if he permits this to happen." - Pat Robertson

Lol
Pat Robertson? That’s like saying the pope is a spiritual moral man... Now that’s the best joke I’ve heard all day.

You do realize the Muslims will never be happy until every non-Muslim is cast into the sea… Their words

 

[Rustic]

A Christian Democrat is like a Jewish nazi. Either not a real Democrat or not a real Christian.

So tell me the many ways Trump the adulter is a real Christian...

Is that what voting is? Is that what you think we're voting on during an election? I thought we were voting on who would be the best possible president.

Since when is the public vote, a vote on who is the best Christian?

And if that isn't what the vote is about, then what relevance does your question have?

It is a determining factor in voting for a candidate even though a religious test is not used according to the Constitution yet the people of the USA are not the Constitution and therefore judge a candidate according to their religion. Which is what this thread tis aboot...

Not true. It simply isn't. Not in this country at least.

At the end of the day, you generally have two choices. I can vote for Tim, the Pastor of Berean Church here in Ohio. But he's not going to win.

There are two people that have a good chance of winning. That's it.

So unless one is a criminal that deletes thousands of emails that were requested evidence in a subpoena.... we have to choose between which candidate best fits with our overall values.

Not stealing money in taxes.
Not controlling and dictating our lives.
Not force us to fund with our stolen tax money, support for murdering babies.
Supporting the state of Israel.
The list goes on.

So if I have to choose between voting for people who actively oppose Christian values, or voting for someone who as a person may suck, but whose party platform is generally in line with Christian values... then obviously I'm going to vote for who will uphold my values in policy, over someone who might be faithful to his wife, but try and destroy Christianity in the country.

I'll give you two reasons why I don't vote for a Clinton or a Trump or any other corrupt assholes.

First, as I state above, when you vote for the lesser of two EVILS, you are still voting for EVIL.

Second, when you vote for a corrupt asshole, you are telling him or her, "Keep doing what you are doing!" I absolutely REFUSE to communicate that message with my vote. My vote is way too valuable.

If enough people abstain from voting, and they are, then whichever corrupt asshole wins can never claim they have the support of the American people. They only have the support of fools.

I watched my father make that mistake in 2016. He is elderly, and so I helped him get to the polls. He's a lifelong rock ribbed Republican. But he cannot stand Trump. Absolutely hates Trump.

After he cast his ballot, he told me he voted for Trump, "Because I don't want Hillary to win big."

He hated them both, and voted for evil anyway. I suspect that is exactly why Trump won. He won because of votes against Hillary, not because of votes for him.

There’s no such thing as a moral career politician… It’s absolutely impossible.

 

[Rustic]

then ban the lollipops,,,

Don't blame the gays for wanting the same lollipops everyone else gets. The people did that to themselves.

doesnt change the fact you were wrong as to why the government is involved in marriage,,,

get rid of the lollipops and get the government out of personal lives like it should be

Which is what I said at the very beginning of our conversation.

But as long as the government is giving out lollipops, then we must abide by the Constitution and provide equal protection of the laws.

as per the 10th amendment the constitution forbids them being involved in marriage in anyway,,,
so I agree lets follow the constitution

The 10th amendment forbids who from being "involved"?

You do realize the federal government/deep state disregards the 10th amendment… Gun control one example. Lol

 

[Rustic]

There is a special place in LIMBO ----where both Christian and Jewish democrats (like me) can wait it out

Limbo no longer exist. The Catholic Church did away with it back in April of 2007.

Catholic Church buries limbo after centuries

The Catholic Church represents only the Catholic Church, has nothing to do with Christianity.

 

[The VOR]

There is a special place in LIMBO ----where both Christian and Jewish democrats (like me) can wait it out

Limbo no longer exist. The Catholic Church did away with it back in April of 2007.

Catholic Church buries limbo after centuries

The Catholic Church represents only the Catholic Church, has nothing to do with Christianity.

So is there or isn't there Limbo? I mean it's one or the other, right? LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

There is a special place in LIMBO ----where both Christian and Jewish democrats (like me) can wait it out

Limbo no longer exist. The Catholic Church did away with it back in April of 2007.

Catholic Church buries limbo after centuries

The Catholic Church represents only the Catholic Church, has nothing to do with Christianity.

So is there or isn't there Limbo? I mean it's one or the other, right? LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

Limbo is a Catholic belief. It is theirs alone

 

[The VOR]

Where is a democrat with christian values suppose to go?

In your case, back to school to learn English.

 

[The VOR]

There is a special place in LIMBO ----where both Christian and Jewish democrats (like me) can wait it out

Limbo no longer exist. The Catholic Church did away with it back in April of 2007.

Catholic Church buries limbo after centuries

The Catholic Church represents only the Catholic Church, has nothing to do with Christianity.

So is there or isn't there Limbo? I mean it's one or the other, right? LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

Limbo is a Catholic belief. It is theirs alone

Well, like I said, not anymore. LOL.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Where is a democrat with christian values suppose to go?

In your case, back to school to learn English.

Thy should heeds ones advice.

 

[DOTR]

Where is a democrat with christian values suppose to go?

One's religious beliefs should not affect or influence their principles when it comes to government of, by, and for the people. PERIOD!!!!

That's the problem with the Jesus Nazi wing of the GOP. They apparently believe that all sin should be criminalized, which ironically tends to demonstrate a deep-seated and consciously repressed doubt in the existence of an afterlife. They also believe that Christianity must poke its nose into everything.

If Americans could have compartmentalized and separated their religious believes from their political ideology starting well over 100 years ago, we would have MUCH fewer problems.

LIBERTY should be the first concern of every American citizen, when it comes to political ideology.

My question remains: why is it THE LEAST of their concern?

.

You are insane. Religious beliefs should affect everything about your life, or you shouldn't bother pretending to have religious beliefs.

The founding of this country was based on religious beliefs. The justice system, the policies of government, the method of determining our leadership, was all based on religious beliefs.

Liberty itself, was a religious concept, ground in faith.

If you doubt that, look at the Soviet union were an absence of religious values, led to the enslavement and mass slaughter of millions.

The shit that went down in the Soviet Union was not caused by a lack of religion. Rather, it was a lack of belief/trust in liberty and a lust for power by ruthless individuals who did it all for their own gratification, rather than the interest of the people they ruled.

That's why the two should be separate. Most religions have a set of restrictions/rules to live by. You're saying that we should make them law?

Plenty of religious people are authoritarian as FUCK. Plenty of atheists are libertarians. In fact, a big portion of people in the Libertarian Party are atheists.

.

Which is one of the reasons Libertarians will never be anything more than a niche party. Because without absolutes in life, there is moral authority to say that your belief system is the one to live by.

Libertarians are mostly a chat room grouping.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

I heard a little of the lgbt town hall that CNN aired last night. They pointed out a women there they said has a 9 year old transgender girl and that wasn't right to me. That is way to young for a person to even know anything about that. I don't know if their is some kind of special situation but that to me should be in the realm of child abuse.

Im a registered democrat because you can't vote in the primary's as a independent where I live. I belive largely people should be able to live their lives the way they want. I was for gay's have civil unions and not marriage, marriage is biblical. Even the rainbow is biblical and how did the lgbt community take it?

The democrats running for president are going way too far to the left especially with the hole lgbt movment and some other things. To me republicans have their problems to. The republican party is like Gordon Gekko in the movie Wall Street. What do you do?

Vote Libertarian

 

[DOTR]

That’s right genius. The Republicans don’t trust Democrats to choose their candidate.
You are some kind of bright.

The RNC corrupts the nomination process the same way the DNC does. And the Republican party is no less authoritarian and anti-liberty than the Democrat party.

The RNC rules, like the DNC rules, are always changed in order to keep Independents off the debate stage, even after they've already won the right to participate.

As always, in the name of party 'unity'.

If anyone is under the illusion that the Republican Party is any less corrupt than the Democrat party, they're in dire need of reeducation.

Every year the number of Independents grows because people are sick of this fake two-party system. It was 50% during the 2016 cycle. Both sides of the party of one in D.C. know the percentage of Independent voters grows every cycle and both sides of the party of one in D.C. go out of their way to make sure they do something about it every election cycle.

I have no problem with independents..... And if that's how you want to vote, go for it. However, I don't think the results will be as great as you seem to expect.

The so-called outsider candidate, was Trump. So why didn't we end up with the great Utopia? Because once you are on the inside, you are just an insider like all the rest.

At the end of the day, politics, is politics. And politicians are politicians. Getting a politician from a different party, does not magically make him immune to the same political forces the affect all other politicians.

And while I understand that some people don't like there being two major parties, I don't see that having three major parties does anything. When you look at the UK, their system of proportional representation, does not yield any different results.

Just watch SkyNews out of the UK, and they are having the same debates, the same complaints, the same "it's that parties fault" or "this party is at fault", and "if only it wasn't for those guys, we could have done more good stuff"

Same things.

All representative governments have two parties. In the US coalitions are formed in the parties before elections. In Parliamentary systems the coalition is formed in Parliament itself by party leaders.
In the end you always have a government and an opposition...even if the opposition or government is made up of 12 niche parties joined.
Two party systems are endemic to democracies. All the way back to the Optimates vs the Populares in late Republican Rome.

So our problem isn’t duopoly itself is it?

 

[Porter Rockwell]

That’s right genius. The Republicans don’t trust Democrats to choose their candidate.
You are some kind of bright.

The RNC corrupts the nomination process the same way the DNC does. And the Republican party is no less authoritarian and anti-liberty than the Democrat party.

The RNC rules, like the DNC rules, are always changed in order to keep Independents off the debate stage, even after they've already won the right to participate.

As always, in the name of party 'unity'.

If anyone is under the illusion that the Republican Party is any less corrupt than the Democrat party, they're in dire need of reeducation.

Every year the number of Independents grows because people are sick of this fake two-party system. It was 50% during the 2016 cycle. Both sides of the party of one in D.C. know the percentage of Independent voters grows every cycle and both sides of the party of one in D.C. go out of their way to make sure they do something about it every election cycle.

I have no problem with independents..... And if that's how you want to vote, go for it. However, I don't think the results will be as great as you seem to expect.

The so-called outsider candidate, was Trump. So why didn't we end up with the great Utopia? Because once you are on the inside, you are just an insider like all the rest.

At the end of the day, politics, is politics. And politicians are politicians. Getting a politician from a different party, does not magically make him immune to the same political forces the affect all other politicians.

And while I understand that some people don't like there being two major parties, I don't see that having three major parties does anything. When you look at the UK, their system of proportional representation, does not yield any different results.

Just watch SkyNews out of the UK, and they are having the same debates, the same complaints, the same "it's that parties fault" or "this party is at fault", and "if only it wasn't for those guys, we could have done more good stuff"

Same things.

All representative governments have two parties. In the US coalitions are formed in the parties before elections. In Parliamentary systems the coalition is formed in Parliament itself by party leaders.
In the end you always have a government and an opposition...even if the opposition or government is made up of 12 niche parties joined.
Two party systems are endemic to democracies. All the way back to the Optimates vs the Populares in late Republican Rome.

So our problem isn’t duopoly itself is it?

We are a Republic, not a Democracy. Both the Ds and Rs are one party united against the Constitution of the United States. John F. Kennedy said:

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."

Between the POLICE STATE and the Nanny State, I'd say you better start thinking about your options seriously.

 

[Natural Citizen]

We are a Republic, not a Democracy.

Thank You!

I was just getting ready to say the same thing.


A Democracy

The chief characteristic and distinguishing feature of a Democracy is: Rule by Omnipotent Majority.

In a Democracy, The Individual, and any group of Individuals composing any Minority, have no protection against the unlimited power of The Majority. It is a case of Majority-over-Man.

This is true whether it be a Direct Democracy, or a Representative Democracy.


A Republic

A Republic, on the other hand, has a very different purpose and an entirely different form, or system, of government. Its purpose is to control The Majority strictly, as well as all others among the people, primarily to protect The Individual’s God-given, unalienable rights and therefore for the protection of the rights of The Minority, of all minorities, and the liberties of people in general.

The definition of a Republic is: a constitutionally limited government of the representative type, created by a written Constitution--adopted by the people and changeable (from its original meaning) by them only by its amendment--with its powers divided between three separate Branches: Executive, Legislative and Judicial. Here the term "the people" means, of course, the electorate.