Recruiting Forum Off-Topic Thread II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Social issues of society are very important. Survival of a nation and its foundational principles are far more important. Got to keep the main thing, the main thing. This election is about the later. Once we are safer and the economy is providing opportunity for everybody, then more efforts can be given to cultural changes. That also takes upheaval and change when the corrupted are the rulers. Those that claim truth as falsehood and promote lies and deception in this PC, poor me climate need to be exposed for the pathetic liars they are.

As to the value of life: Deuteronomy 30:19 set the basis for life versus death in all regards. Something that is not understand by the more radical elements of the Islamic faith that encourages death as a way to please God. It is also not understood by those that consider abortion as a woman's right to choose. She does. The following then applies.

"This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live."

There are over a dozen verses that apply to the unborn in the womb. But if the person does not believe the Bible is the Word of God, then they use a different authority for their choices. Unfortunately, many believe themselves to have the final authority or maybe the government or a judge. As for me and my house...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
I realize social issues aren't as important to some, maybe even most, as they are to me. It is America. And you have your voice and opinions. And I have mine. For now, we are allowed to express those views. Hopefully that freedom will be protected forever. But it's not exactly trending that way. Which would
be a good reason for libertarianism to step in. In general, the less government control the better.

For me a candidate must be pro-life or they won't get my vote. For myself, I would feel at least partially responsible for the deaths of the innocent babies that are killed by abortion if I support a pro- choice candidate. And thus I would feel as though I had sinned in doing so. Again I realize not everyone sees it that way. Just sharing my view on it.
 
Read this In preparation for the Bible class we had last night, which was about teaching our children respect for authority, I read this, and thought it was pretty good, and thought it could at least somewhat be relevant to the current political climate and events and themes. And in my opinion, this description is the opposite of the trump movement:


"The Bible not only provides the basis of all authority but also the ethics governing the exercise of authority. Biblical authority is beautiful because it is morally focused. Similar to the character of love, biblical authority is not presumptuous, proud, unkind, or unfair, but full of integrity, gentle, consistent, and gracious. It is motivated by love and used only when needed. Its purpose is to guide by encouragement and restraint. Authority is necessary because law and order for the family and the society is dependent on its proper administration. But authority can be taken to extremes. Too much authority leads to totalitarianism, while insufficient authority leads to injustice and social chaos."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
He was the gov of New Mexico while I was growing up there. He did a great job. Before and after that, he ran the state's largest construction company, big j enterprises. He's a triathlete and has competed in the ironman. He should be the next president. He probably would have been president already if he hadn't been basically thrown out of the Republican Party for saying on a hot microphone that the drug war was lost and a waste of money and that pot should be legal and taxed (this was 20 years ago, and now he's being shown to be right, btw).

The more I learn about him the more I like! Think he will be convinced to run as an Independent?
 
Everyone's morality is subjective, so unless an action impedes on someone else's rights then where do you draw the line? Someone can think Gay marriage is wrong, that's their own choice, but that doesn't effect you. Let them get married that's their own choice and who are you to say that you are right and they're wrong. (Not you specifically but you as a general term).

And look I'm pro-life, but I don't think abortion should be illegal. Facts are, you can't scientifically prove when exactly life starts. Saying you believe that life starts at conception is a religious argument, and that shouldn't be enough for a law. Separation of church and state is a great thing, and it protects people with beliefs that are in the minority. But that doesn't mean the majority can impose their beliefs on others.

I'm over everyone who wants to legislate their own morality over everyone else and lives in an ivory tower and wants to tell everyone else how to live. That's not how the government works



I agree that government shouldn't tell people how to live unless it directly affects the liberty of another. Utopianism is not something I'm interested in attempting. People are and should be free to choose how they want to live, but that doesn't mean the rest of us have to throw out our morals and religion in the public square to appease your choices.

Separation of church and state is not in the Declaration or the Constitution anywhere. It's from one letter from Jefferson. That's not binding law. Now,"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" is in the Constitution, but it's intent was clearly noted by it's authors to prohibit Congress from legislating either to establish a national religion or to disestablish a state religion. That's right, state religions are permissible. Just not national. Regardless, it doesn't mean what you and many might think it means. Jefferson's belief in a separation of church and state was not intended to create a safe space for everyone to be shielded from exposure to common religion in public, but rather a cautionary tool to keep government from taking over large religious institutions for their own self serving agendas like King Henry VIII and the Church of England thereafter or from squeezing out other competing denominations (ie protestants vs catholics).

There are some tough choices we have to make as a people regarding some of these moral gray areas like those you've listed, but for me it's fairly cut and dry.

For me, a fetus is a baby. If I kick your pregnant wife in the stomach it would kill your baby, not your "mass of tissue" that fetuses are made out to be. There are living botched abortion human beings walking around right now that prove that. Now a three day old fertilized egg may not have all the developed features of a human being, but we all darn well know that's what's in there. A living, growing human being. Our Constitution demands that we protect life. No one disputes that. A baby and/or a fetus qualifies as human life for me. We protect turtle eggs and eagle eggs as if they are the actual animal so why not human beings? Now, all that said, I believe certain medical conditions and extreme circumstances can permit the RARE use of abortion, but I don't think it should be used as a form of birth control as 99% of abortions are. Abortion was actually started as a mainstream practice by racist eugenics advocates like Margaret Sanger to control and ultimately eliminate the black population in America. Disgusting stuff. Nevertheless, thanks to a weird Supreme Court ruling it's a protected act. It should have been left to the states to decide individually as prescribed in the Constitution.

Gay marriage is settled. Just like abortion, SCOTUS should have simply allowed states to individually decide as prescribed in the Constitution. What they did was wrong. They have no business monkeying around in affairs reserved for the several states.
"The powers delegated to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the state governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects such as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce. The powers reserved to the several states will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people." - James Madison.
That's pretty clear to me. From a Constitutional standpoint the gay marriage ruling is 100% wrong, morals aside.

Now as to the moral side of it, the Bible is clear. Homosexuality is a major sin. It's consistently referred to as an abomination and even had two cities famously destroyed. There's no question that according to the Bible which is the only source we have been given on Earth for God's word that homosexuality is a big no no. I do not believe that means we are supposed to mistreat homosexuals in any way whatsoever. I love gay people with all my heart. I'd help a gay person the same as any other human being. I just can't condone their lifestyle choice. That means I cannot agree with gay marriage even though I really don't care what gay people do.
I do not think marriage is something that was previously exclusionary toward gay people in the first place which was the only argument. Marriage is a religious act recognized by the state to promote the family unit which is the basis of our entire society, and by definition it is a religious ceremony proclaiming a mutual life time commitment between one man and one woman. Gay people were free to marry any non blood relative member of the opposite sex the same as everybody else. Conversely, they were also free to have same sex weddings in public all day every day without any persecution whatsoever. They just weren't recognized by the federal government or forced to be recognized by every other state. Today's gay activism's goal isn't tolerance anymore. It's promotion. But I digress. Had SCOTUS simply allowed states to decide individually as the Constitution prescribes we'd not have much controversy as the system would work like it was designed to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
I realize social issues aren't as important to some, maybe even most, as they are to me. It is America. And you have your voice and opinions. And I have mine. For now, we are allowed to express those views. Hopefully that freedom will be protected forever. But it's not exactly trending that way. Which would
be a good reason for libertarianism to step in. In general, the less government control the better.

For me a candidate must be pro-life or they won't get my vote. For myself, I would feel at least partially responsible for the deaths of the innocent babies that are killed by abortion if I support a pro- choice candidate. And thus I would feel as though I had sinned in doing so. Again I realize not everyone sees it that way. Just sharing my view on it.

Just curious, are you for or against capital punishment? I know I consider myself the ultimate pro-lifer- I'm against both, capital punishment and abortion.
 
Just curious, are you for or against capital punishment? I know I consider myself the ultimate pro-lifer- I'm against both, capital punishment and abortion.


Good question and discussion. I personally feel like the Bible does give authority FOR capital punishment. Romans 13:1-4 being one passage of reference on it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Just curious, are you for or against capital punishment? I know I consider myself the ultimate pro-lifer- I'm against both, capital punishment and abortion.

I'm the opposite.

Not because I'm pumped about abortion, which I'm not, but rather the safety of the inevitable.

Death penalty, some people just can't coexist with others. It's for the safety of everyone else. Now, I do not think it should be easily sentenced.

With that being said, there are a lot of liberal ideas that I am fully against so I can't even see myself as a libertarian.
 
We are in agreement then.

Yep.
Like I said, I don't consider myself political, my personality may lean conservative I guess but I could never pass the newer, no tolerance litmus tests.
But on occasion, a candidate comes along that truly concerns me.
 
It costs more to execute someone than to put them in prison for life. I don't have a problem with the death penalty for extreme cases. Either way, us tax payers end up getting the bill
 
Just curious, are you for or against capital punishment? I know I consider myself the ultimate pro-lifer- I'm against both, capital punishment and abortion.

Theoretically, I have no problem with capital punishment. But with our current system, I'm against it because it costs the state much more money that prison terms.

I'm all about the bottom line.
 
Yep.
Like I said, I don't consider myself political, my personality may lean conservative I guess but I could never pass the newer, no tolerance litmus tests.
But on occasion, a candidate comes along that truly concerns me.

I'm an older guy and pretty dang conservative. Not all that political either. I believe in the Constitution though and don't believe it's a malleable document. I have softened a bit as I've aged on many social issues. While I believe abortion is wrong I don't think it's my place to force a woman to do something with her body against her will. She'll have to answer for that at some point.

As to the death penalty, I'm all for it providing there is virtually no doubt to guilt. I think it could be a deterrent if it was enforced closer to conviction instead of 15-20 years later.

I'm a staunch second amendment advocate.

I personally believe homosexuality is a sin but again those individuals have to answer for that and don't believe it is my place to judge. I do believe if a private business chosen not to provide a service to homosexuals, I believe it is within their rights not to without civil penalty. I do find it offensive when gays flaunt their orientation in public just to make a point or provoke a reaction. I feel the same way when heterosexuals are crude in public as well.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
I'm an older guy and pretty dang conservative. Not all that political either. I believe in the Constitution though and don't believe it's a malleable document. I have softened a bit as I've aged on many social issues. While I believe abortion is wrong I don't think it's my place to force a woman to do something with her body against her will. She'll have to answer for that at some point.

As to the death penalty, I'm all for it providing there is virtually no doubt to guilt. I think it could be a deterrent if it was enforced closer to conviction instead of 15-20 years later.

I'm a staunch second amendment advocate.

I personally believe homosexuality is a sin but again those individuals have to answer for that and don't believe it is my place to judge. I do believe if a private business chosen not to provide a service to homosexuals, I believe it is within their rights not to without civil penalty. I do find it offensive when gas flaunt their orientation in public just to make a point or provoke a reaction. I feel the same way when heterosexuals are crude in public as well.

Well I own guns, believe in spending conservatively and am more than ok with the death penalty.
Abortion? Wouldn't ok it in my family but, like you, I don't involve myself in the legislative discussion.

As far as sins -
I don't bother at all with whether something is a sin or not when it comes to laws being debated. Nor should I and I believe/support that as much as the second amendment which fails with some.
Same as I fail with many on the left because I believe you can tax a company out of the country or out of hiring, I fail with some on the right because I believe there is a limit on toxins that can be introduced without a negative outcome. Not a tree hugger 'no bbq's' but don't buy the 'no consequences' argument either.

Not really sure why I posted this?
Because I most likely will rouse a response from someone and I have no interest or intentions of debating my beliefs. Just bored I guess. :hi:
 
Well I own guns, believe in spending conservatively and am more than ok with the death penalty.
Abortion? Wouldn't ok it in my family but, like you, I don't involve myself in the legislative discussion.

As far as sins -
I don't bother at all with whether something is a sin or not when it comes to laws being debated. Nor should I and I believe/support that as much as the second amendment which fails with some.
Same as I fail with many on the left because I believe you can tax a company out of the country or out of hiring, I fail with some on the right because I believe there is a limit on toxins that can be introduced without a negative outcome. Not a tree hugger 'no bbq's' but don't buy the 'no consequences' argument either.

Not really sure why I posted this?
Because I most likely will rouse a response from someone and I have no interest or intentions of debating my beliefs. Just bored I guess. :hi:

Lol. Same here.
 
I would imagine that Libertarianism grows in popularity and really be able to challenge the Republican Party if the Republican Party doesn't change. I'm in my mid-20s and I would say a very large percent of my peers are starting to trend that way. For a lot of people social issues just aren't that important, or they're socially liberal in the first place. And for a lot of people how much energy Republicans put into things like abortion and gay marriage is off-putting and seems antiquated.

Which makes the bigger issue that it splinters conversation votes and allows the democrats more power. The younger demographic historically doesn't very often, and that's what makes Bernie so scary is his ability to rally those voters. Even if he doesn't win the nomination if he is able to stay relevant and his voters continue to vote in local elections the political landscape of the country could change very quickly

I'm in my early 30s and look at it the same way. You said it better than I ever could.
 
Good question and discussion. I personally feel like the Bible does give authority FOR capital punishment. Romans 13:1-4 being one passage of reference on it.

The Bible does give authority for it, I'd agree. I'd rather just give someone as much time on Earth as possible to accept Jesus.

Besides, a painless death seems like an easy way to pay for hideous sins such as murder. Spending the rest of your life in a small cell, now that sounds much worse.
 
New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement



Back
Top