(LUKE 18) "{10} Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. {11} The Pharisee stood up and prayed about himself: 'God, I thank you that I am not like other men--robbers, evildoers, adulterers--or even like this tax collector. {12} I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.' {13} "But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, 'God, have mercy on me, a sinner.' {14} "I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted."
What I am saying is before God all of our good works are like filthy rags, and its even worse when we hang our hat on them. I don't know if Fred will or has fallen before God and confessed himself a sinner but I do know I see Mitt and his supporters playing the Pharisee here. Oh Thank goodness Mitt is not like Fred he is a great husband!
We are talking about basic integrity
You mean the integrity of flip flopping on every issue he needs in order to get elected?
But, you have to admit that regardless of his political positions, he has lived the most “conservative” life of any of the front runners.
Sure you can be a nice person and a flip flopper at the same time..
“What I am saying is before God all of our good works are like filthy rags, and its even worse when we hang our hat on them. I don’t know if Fred will or has fallen before God and confessed himself a sinner but I do know I see Mitt and his supporters playing the Pharisee here. Oh Thank goodness Mitt is not like Fred he is a great husband!”
Hmmm. But Fred is the one who has publicly declared himself “Right with God,” not Mitt.
“You mean the integrity of flip flopping on every issue he needs in order to get elected?”
I’ve already told you that I am not a Mitt supporter — I have turned down requests for support from people I know and respect who are Mitt supporters — because of his previous positions on some issues. I haven’t taken the time to sift through his previous positions and his current positions to see if they are really inconsistent. I know that anti-Mitt people have embellished the flip-flopping charge.
I can see where a man who is fundamentally conservative, running in a liberal state, would avoid the conservative positions, and try to emphasize points of agreement, without sacrificing integrity. You have to be somewhat pragmatic. But my memory of Mitt’s previous positions is that he went further than that in the 90’s and it bothers me.
Maybe he did “convert” on issues like anti-abortion laws, but I haven’t accepted that. I know otherwise good men who have taken a kind of “hands off” position on the law, but I don’t agree with them. There is no question that Mitt has been pro-life in his own life, and when he has counseled LDS woman as a church official. You can be personally pro-life, yet refrain from wanting to impose that on others by law. Just like I don’t smoke on moral and religious grounds, but I oppose most anti-smoking laws, because it infringes on the freedom of others.
What bothers me more, I think, is his supposed previous embrace of gay “pride,” and a lack of clarity as to how far he believes that gay “rights” extend. Although I think those who are trying to blame him for what the judges did on gay marriage are up in the night. There’s no question that he has always opposed that.
Having said all that, I don’t think there’s any question that Fred has also changed his positions on some issues. All the candidates have.