Clinton Speaks about Bush-

[Jazzman]

Originally Posted by PanTheMan

Wow, McCain, Obama, Powell? You cover the Spectrum! Throw in Jesse Jackson and Santorum, and you have a ROYAL FLUSH! Which isn't a bad idea, if we were to Flush ALL of them.

Those were just a couple of names off the top of my head; hardly a complete covering of the entire spectrum. But I do see them as good candidates because they all seem to present a sense of integrity and willingness to do what they believe is right, as opposed to dancing along the party line and making decisions based on opinion polls. But Jackson and Santorum? The biggest political opportunist of all time and a total Ivory Tower dwelling, holier than thou wacko? Hardly.

Originally Posted by PanTheMan

One thing Hillary would bring is a Big Stick with her if she was elected. I would pay BIG BUCKS to watch her B*TCH-SLAP Osama Bin Laden back to the Middle Ages.

I hardly believe that Darth Blondie has the chutzpah to actually accomplish that. Talk about it? Yes. Do it? No. She’s as much of a cause-du-jour, all bark and no bite limp noodle as anyone ever has been. She wouldn’t dare ever step out and take any action that would make her score on “random” (liberal think tank generated) opinion polls take a hit. At least Bill shot up some tents. I doubt that Hillary’s ever even played “Battleship.”

[scaeagles]

On a side note, Jazzman, that is one hot woman with you in the pic. You are a lucky man. Anyway....

Back to the church thing....I am completely aware that people who are involved with leadership in religious organizations can be and are politically active. My only dispute was the "registration drives" at churches, which I've never seen before. I know all sorts of religious people involved with organizations that put out surveys with how candidates have answered certain questions. I have no problem with that, but saying you must vote for "the more Christian" of the candidates is way off. I don't know why religious people should be precluded from having religious views influence their politics or from trying to influence others as to how they vote. It's no less valid a reason than anything else.

As far as Catholics.....is it wrong for the leadership to say it is a sin to vote for a pro-choice candidate? I don't think so. Is it a sin? Not for me to say. The thing is, if you ar a catholic, should you not abide by what the catholic leadership says? If you do not agree with the catholic leadership, fine. Either accept that you may be sinning in the eyes of the leadership (and then presumably in the eyes of God), or do not participate as a Catholic.

But as to the name "demoncrat"....I like it, and may decide to start using it on a regular basis.

[PanTheMan]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

As far as Catholics.....is it wrong for the leadership to say it is a sin to vote for a pro-choice candidate? I don't think so. Is it a sin? Not for me to say. The thing is, if you ar a catholic, should you not abide by what the catholic leadership says? If you do not agree with the catholic leadership, fine. Either accept that you may be sinning in the eyes of the leadership (and then presumably in the eyes of God), or do not participate as a Catholic.

If all non conforming Catholics left the Church, there would be NO ONE in the church. How is it that a Bunch of old Men who never have sex (Hopefully) can say women shouldn't be on birth control if they choose, has always been amazing to me.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

As far as Catholics.....is it wrong for the leadership to say it is a sin to vote for a pro-choice candidate? I don't think so.

Depends on what you mean by "wrong". Legally? Probably not. But I don't consider it proper or particularly ethical for someone in that position to be giving that kind of political advice to their congregation. Go ahead and preach the values, but leave the political descission alone. It's one thing if an individual comes to them for dicussion and advice. But making that kind of blanket statement to a congregation is using the pulpit for something I don't think it should be used for, imo.

Sorry for the "last edited by" on your post, I hit the wrong button. Fortunately I caught my error and managed not to wipe the post out

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Sorry for the "last edited by" on your post, I hit the wrong button. Fortunately I caught my error and managed not to wipe the post out

Oh, yeah - sure. I think that must be what happened when I had my time line wrong regarding hurricanes Hugo and Andrew. I didn't really write that stuff - you edited them, huh????

[innerSpaceman]

That's why I never accepted your apology on that, scaeagles. I've been waiting for GD to grow a pair.

[PanTheMan]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Depends on what you mean by "wrong". Legally? Probably not. But I don't consider it proper or particularly ethical for someone in that position to be giving that kind of political advice to their congregation. Go ahead and preach the values, but leave the political descission alone.

Jesus Spoke Of Politics "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God, what is God's"

The thing I find REMARKABLE about "Single Issue Voters" #1 being Abortion, is really, What has the Republican party DONE to try to STOP Abortion? Nothing. It will NEVER be outlawed, They dont Explain to their religious base that overturning Roe V. Wade will not make Abortion ILLEGAL, just turn it over to the States to decide. The Far right is AGAINST the ONLY thing that will reduce Abortions- EDUCATION.

Would JESUS Be a Republican?...lol. Would Jesus Stand up on a stage in his Armani Suit and Rolex Watch on T.V.?

OR Would Jesus walk the AIDS Wards offering comfort and Hope. Would Jesus Walk the streets at night helping the Prostitutes?, the Homeless? The Sick? The Poor? Would he be right there to Pull the Switch during Executions? or would he be against the death penalty?

Throwing Stones..... I think he spoke of that too....

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by PanTheMan

Would JESUS Be a Republican?...lol. Would Jesus Stand up on a stage in his Armani Suit and Rolex Watch on T.V.?

....

Would He wear a pinky ring, would He drive a fancy car?
Would His wife wear furs and diamonds, would His dressin' room have a star?
If He came back tomorrow, well there's somethin' I'd like to know
Could ya tell me, Would Jesus wear a Rolex on His television show.

Would Jesus be political if He came back to earth?
Have His second home in Palm Springs, yeah, a try to hide His worth?
Take money, from those poor folks, when He comes back again,
and admit He's talked to all them preachers who say they been a talkin' to Him?

Ray Stevens

[scaeagles]

Honestly, I think Jesus would consider the politicians of today from all over the political spectrum as the Pharisees of the day. As the man on the corner praying loudly thanking God that he isn't a sinner like man in rags next to him. As the rich young ruler would couldn't give up his money to follow Him. As the rich man in the temple giving much and bragging about it, but not nearly as much as the poor woman giving her last cent.

He would be uninterested in them, or in politics in general.

He'd have been with Mother Teresa in India and Billy Graham on his worldwide crusades.

Whether you believe in the diety of Jesus or not, he certainly did walk the earth some 2000 years ago. And his ministry was a practical one. While he was certainly about preaching the word, he was all about meeting the needs of people. If you choose to believe it, he healed the sick. He fed the hungry. "In as much as you do it to the least of these, you do it unto me".

Practical Christianity is not practiced often enough. I read somewhere that some group was passing out New Testaments to Katrina victims. Like this meets any need they had at the time? Man shall not live by bread alone, but he certainly needs bread or he isn't going to live very long.

Jesus, though, wouldn't expect the government to do anything for the poor and sick. He would expect those who call him Savior and Lord to be out doing it. And Good Lord knows I don't do it near enough.

[Name]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Practical Christianity is not practiced often enough. I read somewhere that some group was passing out New Testaments to Katrina victims. Like this meets any need they had at the time? Man shall not live by bread alone, but he certainly needs bread or he isn't going to live very long.

Jesus, though, wouldn't expect the government to do anything for the poor and sick. He would expect those who call him Savior and Lord to be out doing it. And Good Lord knows I don't do it near enough.

He would probably rebuke those that called him saviour and lord and did nothing to help the poor, and I don't mean helping the poor for the "publicity." And would point to the "hypocrites" that do all they can to help those that are poor, sick, homeless, etc, as examples.

The one thing that I like about the stories of Jesus, is that he was an unjudgemental man, he cared not about what a person did, but was more interested in the person as a person. If only many of the religious organizations of today would stop preaching, and sit and talk with people, then I would have more respect for those religious organizations.