DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... GOP continues incestuous relationship with itself

Yup Brilliant. Another Bush/Rove campaign. LOL

I think Governor Walker (Wisc) could be a dark horse. Also, Senator Rubio of Florida. I also think Ohio Gov Kasich will get some looks at VP. I wish the Bush family would give it a rest. Ditto, the Clintons. This is America, we're not supposed to have royalty - Kennedys excluded, of course (/sarc).

I think that Kasich may get into the race as a candidate, not for VP though. He is pragmatic enough to be attractive to a wide range of people, and he has balanced the budget in Ohio. (eliminating a massive inherited deficit while doing so, and also he was in charge of the last balanced budget in Congress)

Interesting thing about Walker is that he's busted up the public sector unions in Wisconsin but is for Obama's executive amnesty.

I like the way that he's handled the public sector unions, but his stance on illegals in this country is very troubling.

what's his stance on it? I'm ignorant on this topic of GOP contenders.

jc

http://news.yahoo.com/huckabee-gay-marriage-cnn-video-184025713.html

Possible Republican presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee says homosexuality is a lifestyle choice like drinking and swearing — which is why he can accept friends who are gay, despite his religious convictions.

"People can be my friends who have lifestyles that are not necessarily my lifestyle," Huckabee said in an interview with CNN's "State of the Union" Sunday. "I don't shut people out of my circle or out of my life because they have a different point of view. I don't drink alcohol, but gosh — a lot of my friends, maybe most of them, do. You know, I don't use profanity, but believe me, I've got a lot of friends who do. Some people really like classical music and ballet and opera — it's not my cup of tea."

Still, there's no chance the former Arkansas governor will ever accept gay marriage — whether he runs for president or not.

"This is not just a political issue," Huckabee said "It is a biblical issue. And as a biblical issue — unless I get a new version of the scriptures, it's really not my place to say, 'OK, I'm just going to evolve.'"

Asking a Christian to accept same-sex marriage, Huckabee said, is "like asking someone who's Jewish to start serving bacon-wrapped shrimp in their deli."

"We don't want to do that — I mean, we're not going to do that," he said. "Or like asking a Muslim to serve up something that is offensive to him, or to have dogs in his backyard. We're so sensitive to make sure we don't offend certain religions, but then we act like Christians can't have the convictions that they've had for 2,000 years."

But Huckabee's views on gay marriage are at odds with the beliefs of a majority of Americans. According to a May 2014 Gallup poll, 55 percent of those polled said same-sex couples should have marriage rights like everyone else. Forty-two percent said they should not.

"I'd like to think that there's room in America for people who have different points of view without screaming and shouting and wanting to shut their businesses down," Huckabee said Sunday. "What worries me in this new environment we're in, it's not just that someone might disagree. They don't want to argue with me, even take a different point of view. They want to close someone's business down."

The interview drew some immediate scorn on Twitter, where users mocked Huckabee's comments.




Huckabee's comments come as he is considering another presidential run.

In an appearance on the "Daily Show" last week, Huckabee said it is “very likely, very possible” that he will run for president in 2016. He vied for the GOP presidential nomination — and lost — in 2008.

___________________


As an American, how could I vote for somebody who doesn't support equality for all Americans because of his religion?

Huckabee is a guy I really, really, really try to like, but then he opens his mouth.

Mike Huckabee is an idiot.

Why is it so hard for you to understand that there are those of us who actually believe there is a higher power behind those words and we are accountable to that power? It's not just a 'religion' to us.

Why is it so hard for you to understand that there are those of us who DON'T believe in the bible, or take it seriously, and that we pay our taxes just like the rest of you, and thus should have equal rights?

yea, it's not just a "country" to us.

Thus, there should be room for a secular compromise. Marriage remains as it is, and a new civil union, for unions not allowed under the traditional meaning of Marriage, which predates the creation of this country by thousands of years.

Of course, many want to destroy Judeo-Christian institutions completely, so that kind of compromise can never happen.

Not really. Any man can marry any woman. Just as one man cannot marry 2 or more women at the same time, because that is neither the traditional, nor the religious meaning of marriage, neither is marriage between 2 people of the same gender. It never has been. Ever. Not in any iteration of the word, dating back throughout all of recorded history. (until recently) This joining of 2 people of the same gender is a completely new system, and should have its own name. It is NOT a marriage though. Marriage has a Judeo-Christian history, and has never been 2 people of the same gender joining together.

This is not about civil rights, or anything like that. It is about trying to erode away at Christian institutions. It is trying to erode the authority of the Bible, and the moral authority of Christianity. (cue a certain poster bringing up Old testament law, which has been fulfilled by Jesus, and which is no longer applicable to us) Christ stated that marriage is one man and one women, joining together, for life. That is it. I believe in Jesus Christ, and I believe in the traditional meaning of the word "marriage", which predates this country by thousands of years.

We have destroyed the family unit ..... we have made divorce easier than marriage .... and now we are intent upon destroying marriage itself. Morality is lost, and a young person who wants to remain a virgin till marriage is ridiculed, instead of being celebrated. The murder of unborn babies is called a "choice". Pornography is everywhere. Advertisements have become overtly sexual, and even network TV has become appallingly sexual in too many cases. This country makes Sodom and Gomorrah look virtuous. I fear for the future of the children we are raising in such an environment. I truly do fear for the future of this world. I have a hard time seeing this word continuing for long. We are becoming more and more immoral, and we are, in many ways, as savage as we once were. I am glad that I will probably not be here 50 years from now. I hate to see what "choices" will have been made by then in the name of "equality".

People can believe any way they see fit. They can follow scripture if that is their choice. Nobody is forcing them to do otherwise. The difference is, Christians for some reason feel they can force others to live by their standards. That's where the divide is and I understand it.

There's a difference in having your beliefs and forcing those beliefs upon the rest of society.

I didn't even read what Swish posted. I may actually agree with some of what Huckabee said but there are lots of flaws with Huckabee and his viewpoints on many issues for me to not care. What he says on anything is as valid to me as what Obama has to say.

I will only correct you on one thing here. Marriage has a human history. Your statement seems to imply that it has Judeo-Christian origin. That isn't correct. It predates Judaism by thousands of years and by Christianity by several thousand more years.

And that goes both ways. That's why I say that a secular, negotiated settlement to this matter is better than "You're wrong, period, now go crawl back into the dark ages" approach some take to those who express religious views.

People often use the argument "What would Jesus think" about a number of different things put forth by some Christians. Well .... what would Jesus think about gay marriage? What would He think about divorce being easier than marriage in many ways? What would He think about pornography? What would He think about violence on TV? What would he think about rampant promiscuity? What would He think about young people who choose to wait for marriage before having sex being called all kinds of vile things, and even called gay, simply because they have decided to do as the Bible says we should?

I think that we know what the answers to all of these questions are. He would not be in favor of any of these things. He would offer forgiveness to those who repent of their sins, but a major part of repentance involves turning away from such things. He would love the sinner, while hating the sin.

I admit that I am not perfect, and I could never claim to be. (except in a joking manner, that emphasizes just how far from perfect I really am) Christians are not perfect, just forgiven. However, I think that there are going to be a lot of people who consider themselves to be Christians who are going to be surprised when the day comes and they find themselves standing before judgement. Jesus said, in Matthew 7: 21-23, “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

I think that a lot of people who profess to be Christians really need to take a look at their beliefs. Either we are Christians, or we are not. Either we believe in the Bible as the source of our understanding of God, and Jesus, and what is expected of us, or else we should go be something other than a Christian, because we cannot be a follower of Christ, (a Christian) without following Christ. That simply does not work.

We can love those who sin, and try to help them change, but helping people to sin is frowned upon in in the Bible. Luke 17: 1-2 says: Jesus said to his disciples: “Things that cause people to stumble are bound to come, but woe to anyone through whom they come. It would be better for them to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck than to cause one of these little ones to stumble.

What does this mean? That we are not to make it easy for people to sin, or worse yet, to encourage sinful behavior, causing others to sin.

Either we, as Christians, believe in the Bible, and accept it as the rule book for our lives, or we cannot be Christians. Either God is the final authority, or he is not. Christians are forgiven of their sins, but that implies that we are Christians. I used to be a "cursory Christian" ..... I considered myself to be a Christian, and I thought of myself in generally moral terms ...... I thought that I was forgiven, even when disobeying God's Word, and even when deciding that what I wanted was what was acceptable. I thought that because I considered myself a Christian ...... generally believing in Jesus, and generally accepting that He is the Messiah, and the Savior of those who believe .... but did my life show that this is what I believed? Absolutely not. My life was a constant and habitual rebellion to the Word of God, and to the teachings of Christ. Was I a Christian, or was I just going through the motions, pretending that I was following Christ? I know that answer for myself.

Christ said for Christians to Take up their crosses and follow Him. What does that mean? Does it mean stand by and be "nice" while allowing for the further approval of sinful behaviors, and leading others to sin ... providing tacit approval of sin ...... or does it mean standing up for our beliefs, as strongly and as fervently as those on the other side do?

What has happened since we have moved away from God, and into allowing people to do whatever they want, "as long as no one gets hurt"? We have broken families all over this country. Divorce is rampant. Births out of wedlock are rampant. Abortions are rampant. It's OK though .... as long as it's a choice. Instead of helping people to make moral choices, we say "well, that's their decision, and really none of our business." Why are churches on the decline in this country? Because they have failed to do these things. If the church is largely the same as the world around it, then why bother going to church? When I was looking for a new church, I went to some other churches first. Did I hear about sin? Not really. I heard a good news message, but none of the requirements God puts upon us as Christians. I heard a quick Bible message, but the rest was just shoved aside. No sense upsetting anyone. Well, maybe we need to upset some people. Maybe we need to stand against the tidal waves of immorality that pervades life in America in the 21st century. If we don't, then who will? If we don't, then what's next?

As far as matters of law, that's exactly how they should be treated.

We shouldn't base laws or policy on an ancient book of fairy tales depicting fantastical magic. They should be rooted in logic and reason.

No, it doesn't go both ways. If gay marriage is legal, nobody will force you to get "gay married". You have every right to stand up for your beliefs and live those beliefs. You can't "force people to abide by YOUR moral choices".

I see you continue to preach on here all the time. That's fine if you so choose. Not that it really has any impact on what people believe, because it doesn't. But there's a difference in following your beliefs and forcing your "religious beliefs" upon others.

You can twist this any way you wish. But what you are advocating is that people with a different sexual preference than yourself not be given the same rights as yourself simply because you believe their lifestyle is sinful.

Here's the problem with that. It changes nothing. People who are gay will still live that way. Their life, their acts and the way they go about life will not change. The only difference is they will not be afforded the same benefits under the law as you or I will. That's causing direct discrimination based on sexual preference. So nothing about what you consider the sin to be will change. It has no impact on that.

What you are asking for is people to forego having equal rights based solely on your religious beliefs. It's that simple. You call that a compromise? Why should people be forced to compromise based on your moral and religious beliefs?

The sad part in all of this is that our belief system and feelings on the matter are not that far apart. I too am a Christian. The only real difference is I try to live my life as I believe and do not enter into forcing my beliefs upon others. I am only the morality police of my own life. I refuse to use my moral or religious beliefs as a weapon to compromise the rights of others.

Maybe everyone should realize that their "version of morality" is not a one size fits all and let people be who they are without dictating your version upon everyone. Equality is a wonderful thing. It's not just for people who live their life the way we believe they should.

Setting aside your really disgusting and juvenile comments, what are laws?

Laws are the morality of a people, made into enforceable action. The morality of a people says that this action, or that action, are not allowed, and they carry certain penalties. Often they are negotiated, this far, and no further. This is allowed, but one step more is not. Are they set according to some unknown force? No, they are set according to the morality of the people, and that morality often comes from their religious beliefs and traditions.

To pretend that religious beliefs have had no part in the laws of this nation, over her entire history, is ridiculous.

I am curious. What do you consider "being a Christian"?

Very well said! Never thought I would find such wisdom in a thread about incestuous relationships. Bravo.

What is disgusting and juvenile about pointing out the fact that a book of ancient fiction that depicts fantastical acts of magic performed by an omnipotent wizard has no place in matters of logic and reason?



That's all well and good, but if it's a logic and reasoned belief, an argument can be made for it without a basis or root in a book of children's fairy tales.

What about my belief in Goro, the six armed alien who eats bad children? That shapes my morality, should it have a place at the table when it comes to rule of law?



Who said they didn't?

And the notion that a dark skinned man is property was also a basis of law at one point.

You don't live in the Dark Ages because your predecessors did. As people, governments and nations become more enlightened and intelligent, religion plays less and less of a role. Always has, always will.

I will now force you to follow my religious beliefs...

-You shall not Murder.
-You shall not Commit adultery.
-You shall not steal.
-You shall not bear false witness through Perjury.

Break my laws and you will face jail time.

And how exactly do you plan to enforce this?

Thru the Police and Courts. These are from the Ten Commandments many thousands of years ago and have become the law in these United States of America.

Saying you can't be forced to live by the rules of someones Religious Beliefs is not true after all.

Nope, Cruz is the only one not born in the U.S.

What kind of jail time does one face for committing adultery in this country?

And how many of the Ten Commandments are law in this country?

He was born in Canada to an American woman; he's an American with dual citizenry. I believe he renounced his Canadian citizenship.

He has no viable chance at the White House.

I doubt even the GOP would be foolish enough to run him.

I believe following what I believe to be true according to the scriptures is what I consider being a Christian. At least attempting to do so. With the fact that we as humans we are all born sinners, of course we will make mistakes, but giving your all to try to live right is the goal.

This causes me to be happy and has caused people to ask me how and why I am happy and exactly how that comes about. As such, I explain my beliefs and how they create contentment in my life. I believe being a witness in such cases is what I'm supposed to do.

I don't go knocking on peoples doors or preaching to them. I don't try to sway people who have no interest in Jesus Christ or Christian teachings. I do not try to inflict my beliefs or my version of right and wrong upon others.

I don't cast the first stone or judge that I may also be judged. That is not my job and the Bible plainly tells me this. Since we are being biblical, I also look at Sodom and Gamorrah. Lott and his family were spared. Nowhere does it state that Lott went around preaching to the sinners. Yet it was an obvious sign that those who believed and followed the word of God were saved.

Now I understand that you most likely don't agree with me. And that is fine. But if you look at all of the religions that have been formed based on the exact same scriptures, I believe it's easy to see that there are many ways to interpret the Bible, obviously.

In my way of belief, it's simply not right to deny people equal rights because their version of what's moral and right do not line up with my own beliefs. And that's the entire basis of the discussion here. The gay community is being denied rights afforded everyone else in terms of SSI benefits, tax status and so on, strictly based on their sexual preference.

I guess to me it boils down to which you find most offensive. Gay marriage or the right to persecute people with a different lifestyle than what you propose to be moral. Because in the end, that's the choices.

Still it's the only reason he doesn't belong in that grouping. And yeah he did denounce his Canadian citizenship. Wanna know when? June 2014.

Three: Thou shalt do no MURDER. Pretty obvious one there.
Thou shalt not STEAL.
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor-LIE. This last one as far as law applies would only be applicable in legal dealings, business dealings and political dealings.

Of course you shouldn't lie in personal dealings, but I don't know how the law can intervene unless there is some legal document between the two parties.

OK,I have one more question.

What do you believe, based on the Bible, happens to those who do not believe in Jesus Christ when they pass on?

I believe that covers many people who never even heard of Jesus Christ. There have been many people on different continents who never even heard of him dating back in history. Is that what you mean? Do I believe those who really never heard or understand his word will burn in hell forever? Is that what you are asking or proposing?

Don't forget adultery Ted, one of the Commandments and still illegal in 27 states, with jail time!

No, Paul is quite clear that God has written His law on the hearts of men, and those who have legitimately never heard of Christ will be judged according to that law. (man's conscience, as I take it to mean)

I mean what happens to those who disregard Jesus Christ? What happens to those who have had the opportunity to learn of Christ, but could not be bothered to do so, or decided that they simply do not need or want to do so? What happens to those people once they leave this life? (and I am really curious, because this is actually a question I am struggling with quite a bit, trying to find a solid, purely Biblical answer to) Anyway, of course, I have a follow up question, but what do you think happens to those who disregard Jesus and/or disobey what He said to do?

I believe those who have learned the truth and turn their back on Jesus are doomed. But to me, that isn't those who have simply "heard of Jesus". Let's face it, in todays world children are sent to schools that teach them, or program them as I like to think of it, not to believe in God. Our education system teaches a theory, but refuses to teach other theories. And with that, our children are taught from an early age that man was not created, but evolved. In so much as that all have heard of Jesus Christ, they do not know the word of Jesus Christ.

To me that would make them "ignorant of the truth" just as those who never heard of Jesus Christ.

I also do not believe you go to heaven when you die. In Revelations it tells you of three resurrections. If everyone goes to heaven or hell when they die, there would be nobody to resurrect.

Matthew 27:52: “And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose.” Acts 13:36: “For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption.” The words “saw corruption” mean that his body decayed after he was laid in his grave. First Corinthians 15:51 tells us that “We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.” Psalms 13:3 says, “Consider and hear me, O Lord my God: lighten mine eyes, lest I sleep the sleep of death.” First Kings 11:43: “And Solomon slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David his father: and Rehoboam his son reigned in his stead.” The expression “slept with his fathers” is used many times in the Bible to indicate that a person had died.

There are other examples where death is described as sleep. And we sleep until the trumpets sound. Which is symbolic of the resurrections.

Let's face it, not all Christian religions can be right because their teachings vary so much. Which would mean many aren't really following the teachings of Jesus Christ even though they are to the best they know and believe.

I simply do not believe that those who never knew the truth are doomed. I believe all will have the opportunity to learn the truth AFTER the resurrections and that is the way they are set up. The first resurrection is for those who know the truth. The second resurrection is for those who do not know the truth and will be given the opportunity to be taught the truth by those who were in the first resurrection. The third resurrection is for those who knew the truth but turned their back on God and it is them alone who are doomed.

I also do not believe people burn in hell forever. I have seen scriptures where hell burns forever and it is a reminder that there was a choice of eternal life or eternal death. I know my beliefs are a far cry form what many believe. But I believe the Bible is a much simpler book to follow if one knows the order in which the books were written and we look at things without being influenced by outside sources.

Like aI have said, I wonder what does happen after we die. The Bible says that, for the believer, to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. That implies an immediate transition for the faithful believer, and would seem to support some of the images people who have died and come back have seem. Perhaps some of those who have gone through such a situation and saw nothing were not believers, and their future was simply the grave.

Jesus told the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, where Lazarus and the rich man both died. Lazarus was a leper, who sat outside the rich man's home, and the rich man did absolutely nothing to help him, ever. Lazarus went to "Abraham's bosom", and was comforted, while the rich man was tormented in Hades. (different from hell) The rich man pleads with God to allow him any comfort, and God refuses, because of the way he refused to help Lazarus. (and presumably, anyone else) The rich man then pleads with God to send someone to warn his children, and again God refuses, saying that there is more than enough warning on earth right now. This implies that some evil people will go directly to punishment, even while people live on earth. I have not yet put all of the pieces of the picture together there.

I do believe that man is 3 parts, body, soul, and spirit. I am not completely sure how these 3 parts all work with regard to unrepentant sinners. However, as near as I can tell from a study i have started doing on the subject, (and take this for whatever it's worth. I can send you my pages of notes if you like) it is likely that the faithful go immediately to "paradise". This is probably not yet heaven, as they would not have faced judgment at that point. The unrepentant go to a less desirable holding cell, that would be hades.

Then, when the resurrection occurs, and mens spirits are reunited with their bodies and souls, and they are brought forth to judgment, then they are brought forth from their graves. Perhaps it is that one part of them is sent to a holding cell after death, but the rest is not yet awakened.

Those who have never heard of Christ will have an opportunity to be saved, Paul says so in Acts. However, I do not believe that anyone who is exposed to Jesus, but does not follow Him, despite their upbringing or any other reason, will be saved. Many Apostles and most of the Disciples of Christ were put to death. That, to me, ends any argument that someone who does not believe, because of their neighborhood, or other situation, impossible. If Jesus allowed those who loved him first, and possibly most, to end with their heads removed, then I doubt that he is going to give anyone a pass because of peer pressure. That is just my personal belief. I just cannot see such a thing happening. Now a child who lives under Islam, and who never is allowed to hear the message of Jesus Christ as their Savior, then Acts says that such a person would be judged according to the "laws God has written upon their hearts".

As far as hell goes, I have been doing a study of exactly what the Bible says about hell, and I have been trying to determine what it really says. I have been praying over this, because I do not want to give people bad information. The Bible speaks of souls being destroyed, but the original Greek and/or Aramaic uses words that can also mean "completely ruined beyond repair". That said, though, I don't think that God wants His Word to be impossible for people to know. I am leaning towards taking the Bible at Its word when It says that those unrepentant sinners will be cast into the lake if fire, burned up, and destroyed. Perhaps they face some of their punishment before judgment comes, while they are interred in Hades. Those who are found guilty are cast into hell, and hell itself is burned up in the lake of fire.

Further, because Revelation speaks of the fate of Satan, the beast, and his prophet, along with those who worship him ... where they are thrown into the lake of fire to suffer forever and ever, and seems to use that language only there, I do wonder if that is the only time where a sinner is made to go to eternal suffering. (or, at least, until the end of the age, according to some translations)

There is another interpretation/translation that says that sinners are punished by being completely ruined. They are cast out from the presence of God, and sent to suffer until the end of the age. Their bodies, souls, and spirits are ruined beyond recognition, and they suffer complete and total separation from God. They are set to suffer, alone until the end of the age, for their sins. They will be left to contemplate their arrogance and lack of repentance.

No matter what the end, no matter what the translation, it certainly is a fate I do not wish to suffer.

My next questions would be this. If you believe that hell is horrible punishment, for an interim period, or forever, or if it is just eternal death, should we just stand aside, casually allowing those we consider to be friends, especially, to suffer such a fate without even trying to give them the message of God's love for them? I understand that some will just never get it. They won't care, and they are arrogant enought to think that even if there is such a thing as judgment, that they can figure out an angle, or else that their punishment really won't be all that bad. If the rich man was sent to hades to suffer horribly, whether forever, or just for an age, then why would any other unrepentant sinner be any different?

So, my next question would be this. If this is what we believe, then is it kinder to ignore people who do not believe, and allow then to suffer the fate of the damned, or should we make an attempt to bring them to God? What do you think that Jesus would have us do?

"I wonder if, when we die, we burn for eternity in a lake of fire presided over by some beast?"

Read that out loud and tell me it doesn't sound completely insane.