McCain Is the Only Hope of the GOP & America

[ReformedDave]

Originally Posted by ChristopherHall

I agree that it would be an extremely rare case in which a woman might need an abortion. That doesn't remove the main focus of my question. Why not address the issues women face that cause them to choose abortion instead of just focusing on banning it? If banning abortion was the answer why was the abortion rate higher before Roe than it is now? There are countries that have made abortion extremely rare while allowing women to maintain the right of choice.



Let's assume we ban abortion tomorrow. What would be the criminal penalty imposed on a woman for procuring an abortion?



What state and city do you work in? I don't doubt that you see this, I'm just skeptical as to it's overall prevalence throughout the United States. For example a person might see this more often in San Fransico California when compared to Columbus Ohio. It's very rare around here.



My worldview is that we live in a fallen world. We are called to be individuals that preach the gospel. The world's system will never be holy and will never measure up to God's standards of righteousness. The idea behind Christian Reconstruction of our political system is a manipulative heresy employed by right wing extremists to control our voting habits.

When visiting other countries and seeing how their people live, the socio economic policies, such as health insurance, and even considering abortion rates I was amazed. We Americans are really hokey when it comes to politics.

I live in San Diego and see gay adoption frequently.

We have laws that prohibit murder but it still happens. Does that mean we abolish it just because it doesn't always deter the act?

Scripture states that abortion is murder so the mother and the one who did it should receive the punishment due to them from scripture.

Your worldview is pragmatic relativism and is arbitrary and inconsistent. You also prove that you don't have an idea of what the Biblical view of the state should be.

Your final statement "A biblical society would be distributist in it's economics and communal in it's social structure." is pure fiction. You need to study before you make these comments.

[ChristopherHall]

Originally Posted by BoredOutOfMyMind

ChristopherHall, your social views are almost as troubling ethically as your wild insistance on Government taking care of our healthcare mess.

Government isn't perfect...but it's done a far better job in most other Westernized countries than our private system in the US is doing right now. My family would be up gainst a $370 health insurance premium a month right now if I had private insurance. That's far more than what I'd pay in taxes to support a national health insurance program. Even the American Medical Association is coming out in support of a national health insurance program. Too many people are in desperate need for treatment they need to survive...the only problem is that they cannot afford it. We need to realize that we stand together as a people....united we stand...divided we fall. Let's say a father of two has cancer and cannot afford health insurance. He has raised enough money to pay for part of his treatment but he cannot afford the second half of his treatments. Should he be allowed to die becaues he isn't wealthy enough to pay for treatments?

Let's go to the Canadian thread on health care and talk with some brothers and sisters from Canada. Most of what we hear about their system is a myth. I know first hand...I go to Canada for vacation every year.

Yes, decent Government should say that for two members of the same sex to be together is morally wrong. Any Christian I would say should also.

I 100% agree that it is immoral. But there is a big difference between saying something is immoral and saying that something should be illegal because it's immoral. Should government provide marriage licenses to divorcees who divorced on grounds other than adultery? That's equally immoral. Many things are considered immoral...playboy, nude art, tobacco, alcohol, rap music, rock music, and the list could go on forever. Is it the government's place to criminalize these things? The government's job is to protect the lives and liberties of it's citizens not to play God by criminalizing the sinner. Besides, being hard on gay marriage isn't going to make any gay people straight. While I believe homosexuality is immoral, I feel creepy making people's private relationships my business.

The taking of life is wrong. Why does it become the choice of a woman to take a life when she has made a very poor choice of morals? The Bible does condemn some things soundly. Flee fornication is an admonition that comes to mind.

I believe that the issue is very complex. After talking to women who have had abortions I realized that we failed them. We failed to address the issues they were facing. Two out of three women who procure abortion in America do so because of economic hardship. Husbands lost jobs and they already have three kids. The feel they cannot afford another one, especially in light of the fact that they lost their health insurance coverage. Most who procure abortion also live below the poverty level. If a woman feels she cannot raise a family, cannot afford a baby, cannot afford the health care a child needs, cannot secure a livable wage, or cannot even find a good paying job...she's MORE likely to choose to abort rather abortion is legal or not. We've chanted about how wrong it is to abort...but we've failed to address the issues so many women face.

I have sad news to bare...abortion isn't going to be banned in America. It's here to stay. We need a new strategy. A new perspective. The Republicans aren't going to eliminate abortion by criminalizing women who find themselves feeling so desperate they choose to abort. We as a people need to bare up women facing crisis pregnancies. When other countries offer case workers that visit the home of women, especially single women, to assist with chores and child care...when these countries make sure every woman and child has health insurance....when these countries protect jobs and sustain living wages....when these countries subsidize day care for students and working single mothers with children....it's no wonder their abortion rates are extremely low, far lower than ours, though they allow choice. They are actually addressing the needs of women. They've gone beyond abortion's politics and moved into action to reduce abortions.

When it comes to dealing with abortion government can do far more to reduce abortion rates than fighting for a "ban" that will never materialize.

[ChristopherHall]

Originally Posted by ReformedDave

I live in San Diego and see gay adoption frequently.

We have laws that prohibit murder but it still happens. Does that mean we abolish it just because it doesn't always deter the act?

Scripture states that abortion is murder so the mother and the one who did it should receive the punishment due to them from scripture.

Your worldview is pragmatic relativism and is arbitrary and inconsistent. You also prove that you don't have an idea of what the Biblical view of the state should be.

Your final statement "A biblical society would be distributist in it's economics and communal in it's social structure." is pure fiction. You need to study before you make these comments.

Ok...so according to you I'm a Hell bound unbeliever. That's cool. If you'd say that about me because I disagree politically that reveals more about yourself than it does me. From here out if you're uncomfortable calling me a Christian that's fine bro. But I'm still not going to allow you to use religion to manipulate me politically to vote for Social Darwinistic Conservatives who are selling America's working families down the river.

Your post implies that you would favor executing doctors who perform and women who procure abortion. Bro...that's not going to happen. You should move to Saudi Arabia...you'd be happier there.

[scotty]

Originally Posted by ChristopherHall

I agree that it would be an extremely rare case in which a woman might need an abortion. That doesn't remove the main focus of my question. Why not address the issues women face that cause them to choose abortion instead of just focusing on banning it? If banning abortion was the answer why was the abortion rate higher before Roe than it is now? There are countries that have made abortion extremely rare while allowing women to maintain the right of choice.

In my opinion abortion is equivilant to murder, if not at least manslaughter. Maybe we should do away laws against those and just address the underlying issues. Of course that would be the absense of God in their life which we can't allow government to have anything to do with even though our soveriegn Lord is mentioned as the corner stone of our freedom in several historical documents that we now use to take Him out of our lives. (see the hypocrisy?)


My worldview is that we live in a fallen world. We are called to be individuals that preach the gospel. The world's system will never be holy and will never measure up to God's standards of righteousness. The idea behind Christian Reconstruction of our political system is a manipulative heresy employed by right wing extremists to control our voting habits.

Nobody is saying we can or even want to change the worlds ways or even our country for that matter. We are not to build up treasures here for we are just passing through, yet I still see alot of sense in trying to have as much of a hospitable place to live as I possibly can while I'm here.

When visiting other countries and seeing how their people live, the socio economic policies, such as health insurance, and even considering abortion rates I was amazed. We Americans are really hokey when it comes to politics.

Now here is where we really part ways. You think the government should not get involve in how we live our lives, yet they should, with my hard earned money take care of those who live their lives in a way that they can't take care of themselves.

I don't find Democratic or Republican politics as biblical. Both are biblically bankrupt. A biblical society would be distributist in it's economics and communal in it's social structure.

.

[ChristopherHall]

Felicity, the stuff Bro. Dave is saying to me is typically of what we have here in the US. I even had a brother like him try to pick a fist fight with me in the parking lot of Bob Evans because I insisted that John Kerry may have been a better leader than George Bush.

[ReformedDave]

Originally Posted by ChristopherHall

Ok...so according to you I'm a Hell bound unbeliever. That's cool. If you'd say that about me because I disagree politically that reveals more about yourself than it does me. From here out if you're uncomfortable calling me a Christ that's fine bro. But I'm still not going to allow you to use religion to manipulate me politically to vote for Social Darwinistic Conservatives who are selling America's working families down the river.

Your post implies that you would favor executing doctors who perform and women who procure abortion. Bro...that's not going to happen. You should move to Saudi Arabia...you'd be happier there.

You just prove that you don't like the rules of Scripture. That's your prorogative.
To think that politics, or any other subject, is without religious presuppositions is philosophically naive. To develop one's political outlook based of some alleged "neutral" stance is in fact going against Christ. Neutality is a myth and if you are not for Him you're against Him. To relegate His Lordship to the realm of the church and salvation alone is saying that He's not Lord of all.

[ReformedDave]

Originally Posted by ChristopherHall

Felicity, the stuff Bro. Dave is saying to me is typically of what we have here in the US. I even had a brother like him try to pick a fist fight with me in the parking lot of Bob Evans because I insisted that John Kerry may have been a better leader than George Bush.

You might be interested to know that I'm NOT a Republican, or voted for GWB, or will vote for any of the front runners on Tuesday.

For the record I think that the GOP is as bankrupt and the Democrats.

"Brother like him"? Funny. You don't even know me and you make the assertion?

[scotty]

Originally Posted by ChristopherHall

Government isn't perfect...but it's done a far better job in most other Westernized countries than our private system in the US is doing right now. My family would be up gainst a $370 health insurance premium a month right now if I had private insurance. That's far more than what I'd pay in taxes to support a national health insurance program. Even the American Medical Association is coming out in support of a national health insurance program. Too many people are in desperate need for treatment they need to survive...the only problem is that they cannot afford it. We need to realize that we stand together as a people....united we stand...divided we fall. Let's say a father of two has cancer and cannot afford health insurance. He has raised enough money to pay for part of his treatment but he cannot afford the second half of his treatments. Should he be allowed to die becaues he isn't wealthy enough to pay for treatments?

But the health care is lower in quality and some have waited in line to get the care, thats suffering. I will gladly pay for mine, besides our health care cost is due to frevilous lawsuits(ask any doctor) so we need to get to root of that issue. No wait, that would mean cleaning up the false witnessing which might mean putting God in someones life. Can't do that.! Our "universal healthcare" as being proposed will be based on income tax. Those with lower in incomes would pay less toward this insurance (i.e. be put at the bottom of the list and recieve the less quality healthcare options--kinda like an HMO )

Let's go to the Canadian thread on health care and talk with some brothers and sisters from Canada. Most of what we hear about their system is a myth. I know first hand...I go to Canada for vacation every year.



I 100% agree that it is immoral. But there is a big difference between saying something is immoral and saying that something should be illegal because it's immoral. Should government provide marriage licenses to divorcees who divorced on grounds other than adultery? That's equally immoral. Many things are considered immoral...playboy, nude art, tobacco, alcohol, rap music, rock music, and the list could go on forever. Is it the government's place to criminalize these things? The government's job is to protect the lives and liberties of it's citizens not to play God by criminalizing the sinner. Besides, being hard on gay marriage isn't going to make any gay people straight. While I believe homosexuality is immoral, I feel creepy making people's private relationships my business.



I believe that the issue is very complex. After talking to women who have had abortions I realized that we failed them. We failed to address the issues they were facing. Two out of three women who procure abortion in America do so because of economic hardship. Husbands lost jobs and they already have three kids. The feel they cannot afford another one, especially in light of the fact that they lost their health insurance coverage. Most who procure abortion also live below the poverty level. If a woman feels she cannot raise a family, cannot afford a baby, cannot afford the health care a child needs, cannot secure a livable wage, or cannot even find a good paying job...she's MORE likely to choose to abort rather abortion is legal or not. We've chanted about how wrong it is to abort...but we've failed to address the issues so many women face.

All of the issues you have presented above are easily solved through faith and walking in Gods light. (oh yeah , thats not allowed)

You seeing the repeating "God is the answer to all problems" thing going on here?

I have sad news to bare...abortion isn't going to be banned in America. It's here to stay. We need a new strategy. A new perspective. The Republicans aren't going to eliminate abortion by criminalizing women who find themselves feeling so desperate they choose to abort. We as a people need to bare up women facing crisis pregnancies. When other countries offer case workers that visit the home of women, especially single women, to assist with chores and child care...when these countries make sure every woman and child has health insurance....when these countries protect jobs and sustain living wages....when these countries subsidize day care for students and working single mothers with children....it's no wonder their abortion rates are extremely low, far lower than ours, though they allow choice. They are actually addressing the needs of women. They've gone beyond abortion's politics and moved into action to reduce abortions.

When it comes to dealing with abortion government can do far more to reduce abortion rates than fighting for a "ban" that will never materialize.

As for your last paragraph , maybe you should read the latest news release from one of your other westernized countries, I like their way of doing things too.

[Felicity]

McCain isn't my pick. I'd go for Romney. So what if he's changed his mind a few times? They all do that. There's not much difference between most of those guys anyhow.

Has there ever been a better looking presidential candidate? Besides, he does have intelligence, proven track record, success, & great leadership ability too.

Hehe.

[ReformedDave]

Originally Posted by Felicity

McCain isn't my pick. I'd go for Romney. So what if he's changed his mind a few times? They all do that. There's not much difference between most of those guys anyhow.

Has there ever been a better looking presidential candidate? Besides, he does have intelligence, proven track record, success, & great leadership ability too.

Hehe.

Some would say JFK was pretty sharp. Romney does have great hair and has presence then he starts talking.......

BTW, you're correct. There's not much substantial difference anymore.