|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Conservative voters - 11/7/2008 7:48:28 AM
|
|
|
Strider33
Posts: 183
Joined: 4/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: stamper_ben
Strider, I am not much of a "debater", so forgive me if I say my piece and move on, or if I don't hit all the points that are brought up by you.
I'm not that much of a debater either. I didn't really intend my previous comment as an invitation to debate, although I can see how it would be read as such. What I really mean is that I'm interested in exchanging views with you, even if it does turn into a debate.
quote:
As for there being not "enough conservative voters" in the land, that depends a great deal on how one defines conservatism. What has been shown to us in these past few years in nothing at all that I call conservatism. In my view it is just more of the same of what the "other" side is. Why would a voter want to support a pretend liberal when they could go for the real thing?
Conservative values do appeal to Americans. The "Reagan Democrats" didn't come out of thin air, his conservative message appealed to them. But to come to today, sub groups of the conservative movement aside, people want representatives who have stands on issues that affect them, locally for the most part. Taxes of all kinds (property, sales, income), education (Public education, something that hasn't really been addressed by conservatives), health care (polls show that for women under thirty that is THE main issue for them) are some of the issues that need to be addressed by whatever party takes on the conservative mantle. The GOP MUST redefine itself to attract those out there who have been known as Reagan Dems, and it must get its leadership out of the beltway in DC.
What did the Reagan Democrats do this year? Vote for Obama? Why? Stay home? Why? What did conservative Republicans do this year? Why?
I don't agree that local issues favor conservatives more than national issues. In fact, I'd almost say the opposite. In 1994, Newt Gingrich organized the Contract with America around the idea of turning the congressional election from 535 local elections into a national election. An awful lot of people who voted for Republicans in that year were voting on the basis of national issues, and not local issues.
quote:
For the reasons above, Juan McCain wasn't the guy. If you are going to make pork barrel spending an issue and then late in the campaign vote a 3/4 trillion dollar spending package with 1.5 billion in pork that just doesn't cut it! You don't outdo the other guy by going further then him in promising a government buy out of all bad mortgages! No, McCain wasn't the standard bearer of conservatism.
Why weren't conservatives able to nominate a conservative Republican candidate in 2008? Why didn't conservatives have a standard bearer? What was stopping you? (I'm saying "you" presuming from your comments that you are a conservative.)
quote:
Bush also did not and does not define conservatism. Making government larger than ever before and increasing spending (aside from the military) beyond a large governments defender's dream doesn't cut it with Americans.
Wasn't Bush elected in 2000 as a conservative candidate? Didn't he have the support of Reagan voters?
Reagan also allowed government to become larger than ever before. The national debt doubled in the eight years of the Reagan presidency. And, while I don't defend Bush's record, don't you think that congressional Republicans had something to do with enlarging government and increasing spending?
Who got rid of Newt Gingrich, and how did they do it? I surely don't believe that the media had the power to influence the Republican caucus in the House!
more importantly, where is a conservative candidate going to come from in 2012? How is that candidate going to prevail? What role will the media play? What role will progessives play? What role will young voters play?
What chance to conservatives have to affect the Congress in 2010, the way you did in 1994?
< Message edited by Strider33 -- 11/7/2008 8:53:14 AM >
_____________________________
Not all those who wander are lost.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conservative voters - 11/7/2008 9:53:08 AM
|
|
|
IMA_CHRISTIAN
Posts: 1700
Joined: 1/23/2006
Status: offline
|
hmmm well its been a few days since obama got elected.. Has life changed for any of us?
not for me, at least I dont perceive it. Nothing has changed. Has anything changed for you?
_____________________________
Just give us peace, Lord.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conservative voters - 11/7/2008 9:59:25 AM
|
|
|
StephK
Posts: 2238
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Southwest Louisiana
Status: offline
|
He hasn't taken office yet. So he can't make much change in our lives at the moment.
_____________________________
Stephanie
The heart of the wise inclines to the right but the heart of the fool to the left.
Even as he walks along the road, the fool lacks sense and shows everyone how stupid he is. ~ Ecc. 10:2-3
|
|
|
|
|
RE: We've Voted - Now What? - 11/7/2008 11:08:19 AM
|
|
|
P31W
Posts: 2942
Joined: 6/13/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
You've cast your ballot and you hear the announcment that Candidate X has won.
Now what?
This thread is for your predictions of the future.
What do you expect to see happen now that Candidate X has won?
There is more to this country than the one office. My favorite candidate won.
There was a party and now I see a brighter future for our area. There are some great Christian conservative men and women in positions of power and I am doing all that I can to help them help our nation.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: We've Voted - Now What? - 11/7/2008 12:49:10 PM
|
|
|
stamper_ben
Posts: 10366
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lone Star State
Status: offline
|
quote:
What did the Reagan Democrats do this year? Vote for Obama? Why? Stay home? Why? What did conservative Republicans do this year? Why? The Reagan dems sure didn't didn't vote for a conservative this year. They didn't have one to vote for. Conservative republicans for the most part held their nose and voted against Obama. That's not a choice either. Why would anyone want to vote for a faux liberal when they can vote for a real one?
quote:
I don't agree that local issues favor conservatives more than national issues. In fact, I'd almost say the opposite. In 1994, Newt Gingrich organized the Contract with America around the idea of turning the congressional election from 535 local elections into a national election. An awful lot of people who voted for Republicans in that year were voting on the basis of national issues, and not local issues. The point I'm trying to get across is that local issues will always affect you in a more profound way than national ones do. The mayor, city council, county government and school board make much more of an impact on your life on a day to day basis than the US congress ever will.
quote:
Why weren't conservatives able to nominate a conservative Republican candidate in 2008? Why didn't conservatives have a standard bearer? What was stopping you? (I'm saying "you" presuming from your comments that you are a conservative.) I thought I made clear my opinion that it was the fourth estate that made the choice for us after a small state made McCain it's choice. The media revitalized McCain's campaign to the detriment of the other, better candidates. (Yes, you could call me a conservative, and by my saying "us" up above I am meaning conservatives.)
quote:
Wasn't Bush elected in 2000 as a conservative candidate? Didn't he have the support of Reagan voters? Yes, he was elected as the "compassionate conservative", and as the vote total showed, no, he did not get the Reagan Dems. But in the end, did he show himself to be a true conservative? I sure don't think so now.
quote:
Reagan also allowed government to become larger than ever before. The national debt doubled in the eight years of the Reagan presidency. And, while I don't defend Bush's record, don't you think that congressional Republicans had something to do with enlarging government and increasing spending?
Who got rid of Newt Gingrich, and how did they do it? I surely don't believe that the media had the power to influence the Republican caucus in the House! Reagan had to work with a Democrat congress. That is where a large part of the increase you speak of came from. The debt came from the fact that after the decline of our military under Carter it had to be rebuilt, and in that rebuilding was the showdown of sorts with the Soviet Union. They couldn't keep up with our strengthening so they could have the superior military and in the end it contributed to their demise.
Did a corrupt congress that had lost it's focus have anything to do with where we are now? It sure did. Again, there's my emphasis on paying attention to local issues and elections. Your Congressman is also about as local as it gets. Its up to you to make sure to keep them locally focused and not inner beltway focused.
In my mind, Newt is not as bad as he is made out to be. A pack of dogs will turn on one of their own when it is beneficial to the pack.
quote:
more importantly, where is a conservative candidate going to come from in 2012? How is that candidate going to prevail? What role will the media play? What role will progessives play? What role will young voters play? I do not have the answers to these questions with the exception that I know the media will play way too big a part.
quote:
What chance to conservatives have to affect the Congress in 2010, the way you did in 1994? We will have to see what the results of Obama's policies have had on us then.
Now let me turn the tables on you Strider, and ask you to address you very own questions...
[Edited to add...]
Just a thought on Reagan Democrats: Not that they are all in California, but the values that they hold are the ones that have TWICE voted for marriage to be between a man and a woman, even while this election voting overwhelmingly for Obama.
< Message edited by stamper_ben -- 11/7/2008 2:23:38 PM >
_____________________________
We will be known as His by the love we show one another.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: We've Voted - Now What? - 11/7/2008 2:26:33 PM
|
|
|
Strider33
Posts: 183
Joined: 4/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: stamper_ben
quote:
What did the Reagan Democrats do this year? Vote for Obama? Why? Stay home? Why? What did conservative Republicans do this year? Why?
I think a lot of people who might have been "Reagan Democrats" in 1984, 1988, and even 2000, and 2004 voted like Democrats this year, and this helped elect Obama and a few more Senators and Congressmen from the Democratic party.
I don't think the Reagan Democrats were ideological conservatives, either then or now. To some extent, their abandonment of the Democratic party back in the Reagan years was a repudiation of liberalism, but it wasn't really an embrace of conservatism.
quote:
quote:
I don't agree that local issues favor conservatives more than national issues. In fact, I'd almost say the opposite. In 1994, Newt Gingrich organized the Contract with America around the idea of turning the congressional election from 535 local elections into a national election. An awful lot of people who voted for Republicans in that year were voting on the basis of national issues, and not local issues.
The point I'm trying to get across is that local issues will always affect you in a more profound way than national ones do. The mayor, city council, county government and school board make much more of an impact on your life on a day to day basis than the US congress ever will.
That may be true, but it doesn't shed any light on the outcome of Tuesday's election. I seriously doubt that many conservative voters showed up at the polls, and voted for conservative school board members but left the top of the ticket blank.
I think that McCain was trying to put together a center-right coalition, and Obama was trying to put together a center-left coalition. Obama was more successful, especially after September 15. I believe it was the center that elected Obama, not the left, nor the apathy of the right. You are right that McCain was not the real choice of conservatives, but that doesn't explain his loss.
Here's what I think: I think there are three major ideological voting blocks in the US: rightists, centrists, and leftists. There may be a little more of one group than another, but any two groups, voting together, can carry an election. I think the leftists all voted for Obama, and the rightists all voted for McCain. I don't think either group stayed home in big numbers, or left their vote blank. I think the centrists voted in large numbers, maybe 66%, for Obama. This group may have been following your analysis of "why vote for a faux liberal when you can vote for a real one?"
quote:
quote:
Why weren't conservatives able to nominate a conservative Republican candidate in 2008? Why didn't conservatives have a standard bearer? What was stopping you? (I'm saying "you" presuming from your comments that you are a conservative.)
I thought I made clear my opinion that it was the fourth estate that made the choice for us after a small state made McCain it's choice. The media revitalized McCain's campaign to the detriment of the other, better candidates. (Yes, you could call me a conservative, and by my saying "us" up above I am meaning conservatives.)
I think of myself a slightly right of center, but a few of my views are perhaps left of center.
I don't think the media determined the outcome of the primaries, although they had an influence. There is a problem in the primaries, but it's not overwhelming media influence, IMO. It's open primaries. Independent voters, such as myself, shouldn't be allowed to vote in party primaries. They should be restricted to regular party members. I'll admit that I don't have a clue as to how you tell "regular" members from "occasional" members, but I think the party selection should be made by the party.
I think McCain won because centrists wanted him more than they wanted any single conservative candidate. Conservative votes were split among Huckabee, Romney, and Thompson. It might behoove conservatives to hold caucuses of their own, early on, and coalesce behind a single candidate. Or it might behoove the party to institute "instant runoff" voting, a scheme by which splinter candidates don't split the vote. If all the conservatives had backed a single candidate, they might have managed to put together more delegates than McCain would have had.
quote:
quote:
Wasn't Bush elected in 2000 as a conservative candidate? Didn't he have the support of Reagan voters? Yes, he was elected as the "compassionate conservative", and as the vote total showed, no, he did not get the Reagan Dems. But in the end, did he show himself to be a true conservative? I sure don't think so now.
IMO, Bush's low popular vote meant that he started out with almost no political "clout" in 2001. It doesn't matter what position he had taken on conservative issues. Without the Republicans in Congress supporting him, he didn't have the votes. The Republicans in Congress abandoned the idea of small gvoernment and limited spending, in favor of pork. They behaved just as badly as if they had been Democrats. If you had wanted to punish politicians for betraying conservative values, 2002 would have been your chance.
IMO, I think a large number of conservatives did stay home in 2006, and that Democrat victories in Congress were the result. Unfortunately for the conservative movement, conservatives were unable to regain control over the party between 2006 and 2008. Also unfortunatley, from my point of view, conservatives are more efficient at undercutting moderate Republican politician than they are at banishing far left Democrats. I'd like to see moderates from both parties displace the far left and right wings of each party. But I don't think I'm going to see anything like that any time soon.
quote:
quote:
Reagan also allowed government to become larger than ever before. The national debt doubled in the eight years of the Reagan presidency. And, while I don't defend Bush's record, don't you think that congressional Republicans had something to do with enlarging government and increasing spending?
Who got rid of Newt Gingrich, and how did they do it? I surely don't believe that the media had the power to influence the Republican caucus in the House!
Reagan had to work with a Democrat congress. That is where a large part of the increase you speak of came from. The debt came from the fact that after the decline of our military under Carter it had to be rebuilt, and in that rebuilding was the showdown of sorts with the Soviet Union. They couldn't keep up with our strengthening so they could have the superior military and in the end it contributed to their demise.
Did a corrupt congress that had lost it's focus have anything to do with where we are now? It sure did. Again, there's my emphasis on paying attention to local issues and elections. Your Congressman is also about as local as it gets. Its up to you to make sure to keep them locally focused and not inner beltway focused.
Pork is local, too.
quote:
In my mind, Newt is not as bad as he is made out to be. A pack of dogs will turn on one of their own when it is beneficial to the pack.
Agreed. I couldn't stand Newt at the time, but in the intervening years, I've come to appreciate him. He had as much to do with a balanced budget as Clinton did, but he seldom gets credit.
quote:
quote:
more importantly, where is a conservative candidate going to come from in 2012? How is that candidate going to prevail? What role will the media play? What role will progessives play? What role will young voters play? I do not have the answers to these questions with the exception that I know the media will play way too big a part.
Quit whining about the media. If you are going to take control of your own county back, you are going to have to deal with things the way they are. The media have some influence over the electorate, but if you organize your ideas well, and if the public agrees with your ideas, you will have more influence than the media has.
quote:
What chance to conservatives have to affect the Congress in 2010, the way you did in 1994? We will have to see what the results of Obama's policies have had on us then.
Now let me turn the tables on you Strider, and ask you to address you very own questions...
I've tried, but I'm not all that happy with my own answers....
_____________________________
Not all those who wander are lost.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: We've Voted - Now What? - 11/7/2008 2:59:53 PM
|
|
|
stamper_ben
Posts: 10366
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lone Star State
Status: offline
|
I'll address this right now...
quote:
Quit whining about the media. If you are going to take control of your own county back, you are going to have to deal with things the way they are. The media have some influence over the electorate, but if you organize your ideas well, and if the public agrees with your ideas, you will have more influence than the media has. I do not mean to whine. I do mean to point out that they make and break campaigns. See the thread about how the media is now saying they don't know anything about Obama in the Obama disciples already rejecting messiah thread. I agree wholeheartedly with the second half of your statement. Organization, of the message especially, is the key.
Overall also I like your ideas on the primary process. Key to making those changes is to act locally to implement them.
_____________________________
We will be known as His by the love we show one another.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: We Vote Now What - 11/7/2008 6:40:19 PM
|
|
|
PaleHawkWoman
Posts: 645
Joined: 7/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SonInMe1
The agenda that Joseph followed was God's not the Pharoh's. To work WITH someone is fine and dandy but we cannot contradict biblical principles in doing so. Worjking with someone indicates a compromise to their beliefs.
That is bad.
Josephh had to answer to Pharoah, and could not disobey or usurp Pharoah's laws. He managed to execute his office without compromising his faith but still had to obey Pharoah.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: We Vote Now What - 11/7/2008 6:51:34 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5921
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Northern Califonria
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PaleHawkWoman
quote:
ORIGINAL: SonInMe1
The agenda that Joseph followed was God's not the Pharoh's. To work WITH someone is fine and dandy but we cannot contradict biblical principles in doing so. Worjking with someone indicates a compromise to their beliefs.
That is bad.
Josephh had to answer to Pharoah, and could not disobey or usurp Pharoah's laws. He managed to execute his office without compromising his faith but still had to obey Pharoah.
If Pharaoh forbid Joseph to pray to God Joseph would have had to disobey Pharaoh... We are to strive to obey, but God's law is supreme and He comes first by a long shot...
_____________________________
John
Proverbs 12:10 A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: We Vote Now What - 11/7/2008 7:10:42 PM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 2350
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
If Pharaoh forbid Joseph to pray to God Joseph would have had to disobey Pharaoh... We are to strive to obey, but God's law is supreme and He comes first by a long shot...
So if Obama isn't telling you not to pray for example than working with dems when it is a part of your job should be acceptable, correct?
_____________________________
-Roger
I could wile away the hours
Conferrin' with the flowers
Consultin' with the rain
And my head I'd be scratchin'
While my thoughts were busy hatchin'
If I only had a brain
|
|
|
|
|
RE: We Vote Now What - 11/7/2008 10:23:19 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5921
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Northern Califonria
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rlj
quote:
If Pharaoh forbid Joseph to pray to God Joseph would have had to disobey Pharaoh... We are to strive to obey, but God's law is supreme and He comes first by a long shot...
So if Obama isn't telling you not to pray for example than working with dems when it is a part of your job should be acceptable, correct?
Define, part of your job...
The job of those elected is to represent those who voted for them... I doubt Obama is going to represent the typical McCain voter so how is it the job of a Republican to work with him?
Obama is an unjust man... Other than working to counter his injustice how can one work with him and maintain their core values?
_____________________________
John
Proverbs 12:10 A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: We Vote Now What - 11/7/2008 11:43:31 PM
|
|
|
ekserekseez
Posts: 693
Joined: 7/3/2008
Status: offline
|
Conservative is not a synonym for anti-abortion-at-the-cost-of-every-other-issue.
TRUE fiscal conservativism will eventually result in what you call "social" or "religious" conservatism.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: We Vote Now What - 11/8/2008 4:01:05 AM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 2350
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Define, part of your job...
Trying to get co-sponsors and votes on legislation you want passed. Since all committees will probably be chaired and have a majority of Democrats on them if one refuses to work with them on moral or spiritual ground you will have no chance to get anything passed that you wish to introduce.
_____________________________
-Roger
I could wile away the hours
Conferrin' with the flowers
Consultin' with the rain
And my head I'd be scratchin'
While my thoughts were busy hatchin'
If I only had a brain
|
|
|
|
|
RE: We've Voted - Now What? - 11/8/2008 9:06:55 AM
|
|
|
Strider33
Posts: 183
Joined: 4/24/2008
Status: offline
|
Yes, the media is powerful. But the power of the media has actually been declining for the last eight years. The reason? Declining marketshare. The three major networks have a much smaller marketshare of eyeballs during the evening news than they once did. Even if you add in PBS, FOX, FOX news, and CNN, it's still less than it was as a percentage. And newpapers are in the process of going out of business. Some of the best are going out first, but over all, they are less significant than they were.
The reason? The internet. The internet isn't just a billion people saying "hello" to each other any more. There is real content out there, and people are using it as a news source. The thing that's new is that it isn't "broadcasting". It's something different. And your views aren't going to be suppressed the way you might feel they were in the broadcast era. Of course, along with that, views you consider horrendous aren't suppressed either. And along with the truth that can be propagated, lies can be propagated as well. That's another topic.
So how do I reconcile this with the second part of your reply, to keep your focus local? Actually, they reconcile fairly easily. In order to keep the focus of your action local, you need to keep the base level organization local. About 15 people max, meeting in somebody's living room or a small hall. Local concerns, local action, local organization. In the past, if you had base level organizations like this they would tend to be isolated from each other and disjointed when it comes to acting on a larger scale. But not with the internet. You can use the internet to allow small base groups to network with each other, and keep each other on similar tracks.
This is already happening among Christians, whether conservative Christians or not. Christians are meeting in small groups like never before, and those groups focus on local concerns in their prayers and in their discussions. But concerns from distant lands also make their way from small groups meeting in far away places, like Northern New England or the Amazonian jungle. Of course, Christians have a more powerful force than the internet guiding us in our interaction with each other. The epsitles of John cover how we should network with each other so well that I can hardly add anything of worth.
"Take your candle, go light the world."
_____________________________
Not all those who wander are lost.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: We Vote Now What - 11/8/2008 12:14:31 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5921
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Northern Califonria
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rlj
quote:
Define, part of your job...
Trying to get co-sponsors and votes on legislation you want passed. Since all committees will probably be chaired and have a majority of Democrats on them if one refuses to work with them on moral or spiritual ground you will have no chance to get anything passed that you wish to introduce.
Are you talking about other Democrats?
_____________________________
John
Proverbs 12:10 A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: We Vote Now What - 11/8/2008 12:22:58 PM
|
|
|
Strider33
Posts: 183
Joined: 4/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe
quote:
ORIGINAL: rlj
quote:
Define, part of your job...
Trying to get co-sponsors and votes on legislation you want passed. Since all committees will probably be chaired and have a majority of Democrats on them if one refuses to work with them on moral or spiritual ground you will have no chance to get anything passed that you wish to introduce.
Are you talking about other Democrats?
PMFJI.
I understood him to be saying that a Republican in Congress has, as part of his job, working with Democrats in order to get some of his agenda turned into law.
Your job might not have anything to do with compromising with Democrats. Mine sure doesn't. I'm retired.
Still, the idea that compromise is part of politics is relevant to my life, even if not to my job.
_____________________________
Not all those who wander are lost.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: We Vote Now What - 11/8/2008 12:49:59 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5921
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Northern Califonria
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Strider33
quote:
ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe
quote:
ORIGINAL: rlj
quote:
Define, part of your job...
Trying to get co-sponsors and votes on legislation you want passed. Since all committees will probably be chaired and have a majority of Democrats on them if one refuses to work with them on moral or spiritual ground you will have no chance to get anything passed that you wish to introduce.
Are you talking about other Democrats?
PMFJI.
I understood him to be saying that a Republican in Congress has, as part of his job, working with Democrats in order to get some of his agenda turned into law.
Your job might not have anything to do with compromising with Democrats. Mine sure doesn't. I'm retired.
Still, the idea that compromise is part of politics is relevant to my life, even if not to my job.
Whatever one's job may or may not be, God comes first... If whatever you do comprises that it's an issue...
_____________________________
John
Proverbs 12:10 A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: We Vote Now What - 11/8/2008 4:59:41 PM
|
|
|
Strider33
Posts: 183
Joined: 4/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
Whatever one's job may or may not be, God comes first... If whatever you do comprises that it's an issue...
I think we were talking about compromise on political matters.
_____________________________
Not all those who wander are lost.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: We Vote Now What - 11/9/2008 1:00:37 AM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 2350
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
I think we were talking about compromise on political matters.
Which from bouncing around the threads here it's enough to make me think that some don't separate political and spiritual matters. It's been said numerous times that someone who is on the right or a Republican shouldn't be working with Dems because it is a compromise. Well it has to be done and Strider you're right on with what I'm saying.
_____________________________
-Roger
I could wile away the hours
Conferrin' with the flowers
Consultin' with the rain
And my head I'd be scratchin'
While my thoughts were busy hatchin'
If I only had a brain
|
|
|
|
|
RE: We Vote Now What - 11/9/2008 2:26:07 AM
|
|
|
Strider33
Posts: 183
Joined: 4/24/2008
Status: offline
|
Well, political matters and the Kingdom of God certainly do deal with some of the same issues. And there are times when a Christian ought to take a stand, even when a pure pragmatist would compromise.
But politics is all about compromise. A Christian who becomes a member of Congress had better be prepared to compromise, most of the time.
_____________________________
Not all those who wander are lost.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: We Vote Now What - 11/9/2008 2:41:30 AM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5921
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Northern Califonria
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Strider33
quote:
Whatever one's job may or may not be, God comes first... If whatever you do comprises that it's an issue...
I think we were talking about compromise on political matters.
Yes were are... Yet is that a viable excuse to compromise one's beliefs? For that matter is there ever an excuse?
_____________________________
John
Proverbs 12:10 A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: We Vote Now What - 11/9/2008 2:43:32 AM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5921
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Northern Califonria
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rlj
Which from bouncing around the threads here it's enough to make me think that some don't separate political and spiritual matters.
How can one separate political and spiritual matters? How many masters can one have?
_____________________________
John
Proverbs 12:10 A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: We Vote Now What - 11/9/2008 8:29:11 AM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 2350
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
How can one separate political and spiritual matters? How many masters can one have?
John, I'm going to drive to church soon down an interstate going 65mph. How spiritual really are the laws that pertain to traffic codes, speed limits, highway funding money? Perhaps on the cash to be good stewards with it but honestly how spiritual are those types of laws?
To take it a step further that highway was one of the early ones in my state with 2 nasty cloverleaf type exchanges and they need changed. They're expensive to maintain and difficult to navigate through. Redoing those is smart. Am I really a compromising sinner when if I was a politician and a christian one at that if I worked with some pro choice, homosexual transgender philanderer on efforts to get that project done? If the answer is yes then we as christians need to rethink our views on welfare because we are forced to work with sinners constantly.
_____________________________
-Roger
I could wile away the hours
Conferrin' with the flowers
Consultin' with the rain
And my head I'd be scratchin'
While my thoughts were busy hatchin'
If I only had a brain
|
|
|
|
|
RE: We Vote Now What - 11/9/2008 9:49:52 AM
|
|
|
ekserekseez
Posts: 693
Joined: 7/3/2008
Status: offline
|
If all social conservatives do is engage in the sort of discussions I've seen here, which to most people would appear to be quite bizarre, all the while ignoring the fact that the country is turning Marxist overnight, it's no wonder the GOP is down and out, probably permanently.
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
