A post from "Jesusland"

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by JamieSPC

That's the worst argument I've ever heard.
Surely you don't "object" to that?

Well, I do. If you do a simple search of the board, you'll see your post is not the first of this type. So, I'm not "arguing" anything. And the question wasn't addressed to you.

[DeeGeMe]

I'm going to wait and see the story first! I'm sure he'll do a fair job on it though-he always does. It's got to be tough for him and all, considering he works for a major defense contractor (GE). I can't think his views are very popular around there at MSGOP. But he's independent--it's what got him fired from FoxSports and why he left ESPN. And you know what--I don't think that he cares what they think. Oh yeah, management has to love that kind of attitude! I just wish that there were 100 more journalists just like him out there-this country might not be Jesusland if it were!

[JamieSPC]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

Well, I do. If you do a simple search of the board, you'll see your post is not the first of this type.

I don't have to search the board... you didn't either. I linked to my one and only response to a political thread (before today) earlier in THIS thread.

So, I'm not "arguing" anything. And the question wasn't addressed to you.

Okay, I'm sorry.

[amber]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

Well, I do. If you do a simple search of the board, you'll see your post is not the first of this type. So, I'm not "arguing" anything. And the question wasn't addressed to you.

Wow, really? you object to her and others posting a different set of ideas?

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by amber

Wow, really? you object to her and others posting a different set of ideas?

No. I object to calling my argument the "worst" he's ever heard. It's an opinion.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by DeeGeMe

I'm going to wait and see the story first! I'm sure he'll do a fair job on it though-he always does. It's got to be tough for him and all, considering he works for a major defense contractor (GE). I can't think his views are very popular around there at MSGOP. But he's independent--it's what got him fired from FoxSports and why he left ESPN. And you know what--I don't think that he cares what they think. Oh yeah, management has to love that kind of attitude! I just wish that there were 100 more journalists just like him out there-this country might not be Jesusland if it were!

I know. The media is in "lockdown" mode right now. Jeffery Toobin is now covering the Peterson case?

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

I'm not sure I believe in Christ and I don't read the gospel.

Well, if ya did . . .

Seriously, like the teachings of Buddah, etc. - it is not a bad thing to live your live by regardless of your belief in Christ

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

Why are we suddenly being innundated with posts from people that hardly ever post who suddenly "object" to our right of free speech?

Sighes - once again, the First Amendment of the Const. says:
___________________________________________________

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
___________________________________________________

Thus, the only "right" is not to have the govt. suppress speech Anyone provate citizen can tell any other private citizen to shut up, which I am sure you are ready to tell me

Sorry - as you know - this is a pet peeve

[DeeGeMe]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

I know. The media is in "lockdown" mode right now. Jeffery Toobin is now covering the Peterson case?

You'd think they'd would have learned their lesson after the whole Iraq mess but no--apparently not. As one of my favorite cartoons says, "The Nation's Media-Sleeping Soundly Since Watergate". That about sums it up. I guess they just can't risk giving up their fat paychecks and their summer homes on Martha's Vineyard and in the Hamptons and all that. Keith's a rare one. There are still some good guys on our side-but they're few and far between.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

I know. The media is in "lockdown" mode right now. Jeffery Toobin is now covering the Peterson case?

THAT fiasco of a trial - it is next to impossible to tell what a jury will do, but the latest from CNN is that they are hinting at deadlock and as a general rule, the longer they are out, the less likely a conviction

But, back to the topix at hand - Bush sucks!!!!!

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by DeeGeMe

You'd think they'd would have learned their lesson after the whole Iraq mess but no--apparently not. As one of my favorite cartoons says, "The Nation's Media-Sleeping Soundly Since Watergate". That about sums it up. I guess they just can't risk giving up their fat paychecks and their summer homes on Martha's Vineyard and in the Hamptons and all that. Keith's a rare one. There are still some good guys on our side-but they're few and far between.

I know - although I do not think they were as bad about Iraq as most.

My problem with the media is they are money driven. Fox, without a doubt, is where the money is now. So, they all are emulating in some way Fox. But, the only alternative is a state sponsored media

[estranged4life]

returns He should have to solve a Rubic's Cube...Without Cheating too...

Then I will believe in miracles.

Brian "The stars arent bright...These idiots should be set alite...Deep in the heart of Jesus-land" j.

[golddustwoman77]

First of all, I would like to start by saying, I'm a Christian, and I live in Tennessee (part of the Bible Belt). Having said that, here are my thoughts.

I want to know when religion and politics became intertwined! There is supposed to be seperation of church and state as stated in the Constitution. There is no place for politics in religion and no place for religion in politics. That is why churches do not pay taxes. They are non profit and supposed to be apolitical. Also, the government is not supposed to promote a religion, because we are supposed to be a country where we are free to worship as we choose, and EVERYONE is represented regardless of race, sex, creed, or religion. Isn't that why the Pilgrims and others came to America? It was for freedom of religion. They were tired of having their government telling them they had to go to the Church of England. That is why this is such an important value. It is a value that our country is founded on.

This has always been respected by Democrats and Republicans alike until the past few years. Now all of a sudden, we have a President (George W. Bush) on TV who is always trying to work religion into his speeches, etc. (This could be considered promoting a religion, which isn't the government's place. He is supposed to represent EVERYONE.) He wants everyone to know that he is a Christian. Why the change with this President? He saw the reaction to this by people of his faith. Some Christians started showing him support solely based on the fact that he is a Christian. They weren't looking at the other aspects of his presidency. He saw how this worked, and he started doing it more and more. It was a great way to build his voting base and take people away from looking at other issues. He and his party starts portraying the other side as immoral and not supporting Christian values. More and more Christians buy into this, and the churches even start to get involved in this. You have churches promoting candidates. Ministers telling their congregations who to vote for, and elders in the church handing out flyers of who to vote for. All of this happening during church. (I have seen it first hand here.) This is a very dangerous snowball effect!

What is this?! Government shouldn't be promoting religion, no more than religion should be promoting candidates. It doesn't mix, and it shouldn't. If religious groups/churches are going to support candidates, then they should be paying taxes. They are no longer apolitical. If the President is going to support a certain religious group, are we going to change the Consitution and jeopardize our country and divide us? My answer would be "NO!" Churches need to stop promoting candidates, and Presidents need to stop promoting religion.

Both need to focus on the real issues at hand. Terrorism, job loss, the war, the huge deficit, education, etc. The things that matter to all Americans. Things we can unite on and change together. We shouldn't be focusing on things that divide us, such as religion.

Also, I would like to shoot down the idea that the Republican Party is the only moral party and the Democratic Party is immoral. Here are the ideals that I have heard that make the Republicans moral: (1) Against abortion + (2) against gay marriage=morality. Well, I would like to point out that Roe vs. Wade happened on a republican's watch (Nixon was the President.) There have been five, Republican Presidents including George W. Bush and his father since the decision and not a single one of them have change or abolished abortion, nor have they appointed judges who have change the decision. We need to realize that this an issue that isn't going to be truely addressed by either side, because it is such a sensitive subject. Just look at the above. Gay marriage is an issue that the Republicans purposely brought up for election time, because they knew they could get many Christians up in arms about that. George W. Bush tried to bring up a consitutional amendment on this topic, and it didn't pass even with a Republican Congress and a Republican President supporting it. This isn't going to happen either. Besides, how is this going to effect the lives of people, except for the gay individuals that it pertains? Also, We, as Christians, are not supposed to judge people, as it states in the Bible.

The point is they are talking about Christian ideals, but they aren't enforcing them, which is why the Christians are supposed to be supporting them in the first place. Very stranged? Also, it is the Republicans, not the Democrats, who came up with the plan and sent us to war where innocent men, women, and children are dying daily. Isn't a life, a life? I, as a Christian, believe that "Thou Shall Not Kill." Yet, most Christians are supporting this war and the President who sent us. They are supporting a President who is for the death penalty, etc.

Democrats are supposed to be the anti-Christ, but most of them didn't support this war. They aren't for the death penalty. They haven't voted to change abortion laws, but neither have the Republicans. Therefore, it is a draw on that issue.

In conclusion, the point is people shouldn't vote based on religion. They should vote on issues that the government is responsible for: creating jobs, decreasing the deficit, lowering government spending, preventing war and only going when necessary, stopping terrorism, etc., and they should vote for the candidate who is going to handle these issues the best. Things that affect everyone's daily life. Things that should concern all Americans, not just a few. That is the reason why so many people are disenfranchised right now, and some people are angry with some Christians. They just don't understand how people could believe President Bush is so moral, when only his voice,not his actions, say he is.

[JamieSPC]

The stars arent bright...These idiots should be set alite...Deep in the heart of Jesus-land

Yikes...

Strike a match, Brian. Where would you like to start?

I think that does it for me here...

[wondergirl9847]

Billy Graham....a Democrat.