Skip to comments.Baptist: Giuliani won't get our votes
Posted on 03/22/2007 4:24:28 PM PDT by pissant
A top leader in the Southern Baptist Convention predicted that former New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani would not succeed in winning the votes of Southern Baptists if he were to become the Republican nominee for president in 2008.
In brief comments after a chapel service at the North Carolina legislature on Wednesday, Richard Land, the president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, said former U.S. House speaker Newt Gingrich would likely fail for the same reason.
"Three is one marriage too many for them," said Land, referring to the 16.4 million members of the Southern Baptist Convention, the nation's largest Protestant group. Both Giuliani and Gingrich have been married three times.
A friend and adviser to President Bush, Land keeps close watch on politics as head of the commission, which studies moral, social, and religious liberty issues for the convention.
Though Southern Baptists are independent and do not necessarily follow his counsel, Land said three others who have already entered the presidential fray were more likely to win support among Southern Baptists. Those three are Sam Brownback, a Republican Senator from Kansas, Michael Huckabee, the former Republican governor of Arkansas, and Duncan Hunter, Republican Congressman from California.
As for Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts, who is a Mormon, Land didn't rule him out. But, he said, the Republican hopeful has to convince the American people that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints won't dictate his policy. Land said he met with Romney recently and told him: "That's not a hill that can't be climbed. But you're going to have to climb it."
Finally, Land said he sensed that U.S. Senator John McCain was perceived as a wild card.
"People are uncomfortable with his predictability," said Land. "They tell me, 'We don't know how he's going to come down on the issues.'"
How about 2 1/2?
;-) back, LOL.
Hahaha! Well, one way to find out! ;-)
What wins the White House is a "free" health care program, "free" college and, depending on how bad the mortgage thing gets, a free bail out for homeowners.
Any of those jive with a conservative platform?
Nah, Rudy aint gonna get the nomination.
Yeah, better to leave them as slaves. Or just grant them 3/5 personhood.
Maybe men should have settled for giving women half a vote when they did the suffrage thing.
Pols are like anyone else, they want to keep their jobs.
That's the problem. "Soldiers are like everyone else. They don't want to risk their lives."
Substitute slavery for abortion and at one time it would have been a true statement also.
BTW -- just that sticky part about not depriving another of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. ya know, that kind of tends to put a crimp in people's style.
No doubt Hildabeast will be glad to hear that..........
You're comparing apples to apples. The incidents you describe in scripture are for accidental death of the fetus. (e.g. two men fighting and they bump into a woman)
Regardless, ancient Jewish law also had a lot of stuff added to it that was not really approved by God's latest living Word, Jesus Christ. He called them 'traditions of men' -- ancient Jewish law also allowed for divorce all the while Jesus said "God hates divorce" and Moses conceded and allowed it because of the hardness of their hearts. So your point is moot. God also says to Jeremiah "before you were formed in the womb, I knew you." and in Psalm 139 it vividly describes God's intimate knowledge of a human being before he was born. What are we to make of that?
So shall we fine/demand restitution of abortionists since ancient Jewish law prescribed such for damage/death of a an unborn child? ...For of such is the Kingdom of God.
He'll also be judged by his Supreme Court justices, so far so good.
hence the thirteenth amendment.
Apparently the term is latae sententiae excommunication.
Those Catholics who publicly announce their denial that abortion is always gravely immoral, or who publicly promote abortion, or who publicly argue in favor of legalized abortion, also commit a mortal sin and also incur a sentence of automatic excommunication.
This sentence of excommunication applies to Catholics who are politicians, as well as to those Catholics who are political commentators, or public speakers, or who write or otherwise publicly communicate their erroneous view that abortion can be morally-acceptable or that abortion should be legal. This sentence of excommunication also certainly applies to those Catholics who claim to be theologians or Biblical scholars, but who believe or teach that abortion is not always gravely immoral.
Those Catholics who promote abortion are automatically excommunicated for two reasons. First, they have fallen into the sin of heresy by believing that abortion is not always gravely immoral (canons 751 and 1364). Second, these Catholics are providing substantial assistance for women to obtain abortions by influencing public policy to make abortions legal, and to keep abortions legal, and to broaden access to abortion. Those who provide such substantial assistance commit a mortal sin and incur a sentence of automatic excommunication (canon 1398).
Ah well you should probably go find some of those then.
I'm here because i enjoy clever grade school comebacks from Christian bashers like yourself. Thank you for blessing me today! *by the way, if you were familiar with Scripture, you'd realize that God fearing people are rarely 'nice' according to the rest of the world. "Nice" is for moderates and other wimps who don't know what they believe.
Personally, I'd vote for a whiskey-swilling, foul-mouthed, agnostic like Winston Churchill over some squeaky-clean choir boy any day.
God helps those who help themselves.
Is that in the Bible? Actually, God helps those who realize they cannot help themselves (just ask AA). He Even helps whiskey-swilling foul-mouthed sinners on occasion, and overlooks smooth talking charlatans who have everyone else by the nose.
Remember that Churchill was writing little more than a decade after the Mahdi uprising in the Sudan, which led to the death of Gen. Gordon in Khartoum. The 1898 Kitchener expedition to retake the Sudan was in retaliation for that disaster. Churchill as you know was part of that expedition, fought at Omdurman and then wrote about it. The Mahdi was the bin Laden of his time.
Churchill was immersed in English and Western civilization, although he was not an observant Christian. I think he considered himself agnostic, but he wasnt hostile at all to Christianity like Gibbon.
Again, one's propensity for or against drink or one's coarseness of speech is not enough criteria on which to judge a vote. You have once again pulled out your fallacious arguments to give yourself the illusion of having made a point.
"Run Rudy and risk it all. Run someone who can unite the party, and we have a chance."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.