Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Heresies and Other Truths (Kathleen Parker attacks GOP evangelicals)
Townhall.com ^ | November 19, 2008 | Kathleen Parker

Posted on 11/19/2008 7:45:33 AM PST by EveningStar

As Republicans sort out the reasons for their defeat, they likely will overlook or dismiss the gorilla in the pulpit.

Three little letters, great big problem: G-O-D.

I'm bathing in holy water as I type.

To be more specific, the evangelical, right-wing, oogedy-boogedy branch of the GOP is what ails the erstwhile conservative party and will continue to afflict and marginalize its constituents if reckoning doesn't soon cometh.

(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: kathleenparker
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-215 next last
To: angkor
There is only one conservative ideology, not two or ten “versions”.

I really want to believe that...But I am also mindful of something that one of the greatest Conservatives who ever lived once observed:

Circumstances (which with some gentlemen pass for nothing) give in reality to every political principle its distinguishing colour and discriminating effect. The circumstances are what render every civil and political scheme beneficial or noxious to mankind. --- E. Burke
101 posted on 11/19/2008 10:27:59 AM PST by PerConPat (A politician is an animal which can sit on a fence and yet keep both ears to the ground.-- Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

>>I’m off TownHall until they stop running articles from traitors like Kathleen Parker.<<

Maybe they are getting ready for the “Fairness Doctrine” and other anti-1st amendment initiatives from Obama.


102 posted on 11/19/2008 10:31:04 AM PST by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas (I want to "Buy American" but the only things for sale made in the USA are politicians)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

Wow! I can so totally see the open-mindedness in the replies to your post. One person demand evidence, as though sharing an opinion here that goes against the grain needs some sort of quatitative backing in order for it to be made. It’s too bad that I do not know were the poll questions — that once were on the sidebar — have been archived to; there’s some very interesting things that FReepers have voted on that have caused me to raise an eyebrow.


103 posted on 11/19/2008 10:32:23 AM PST by LowCountryJoe (Do class-warfare and disdain of laissez-faire have their places in today's GOP?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: angkor
"None of these ideas require a single word or sentence of explanation from the Bible. That they intersected with the views of Evangelicals is nice but not critical or essential."

I would respectfully disagree with this view. IMHO, life, judges, guns and marriage are a constitutional issue because of the Founder’s absolute belief in a Creator and Divine Providence, and the inherent dignity of the human person God created. Without a belief in God, and Heaven and Hell, there is no reason whatsoever to be “conservative” or anything else virtuous. Without God, there would be anarchy.

104 posted on 11/19/2008 10:32:49 AM PST by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: angkor

“I’d go for a simple Conservative Constitutionalist Party.

There is only one conservative ideology, not two or ten “versions”.”

Why don’t you start that party? Banish all opinions of policy based on any religious beliefs, morals, values, no oogeldy boogeldy religionists allowed, what have you, and we’ll see whether you’re right or not and how that works out.


105 posted on 11/19/2008 10:34:52 AM PST by ReneeLynn (Socialism, it's the new black.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: rightwingintelligentsia
I don't know what's more grating, the quasi-bigotry that has you calling religious Christians low brows, gorillas and oogedy-boogedy types

Jonah nailed it.

106 posted on 11/19/2008 10:35:01 AM PST by Mojave (http://www.americanbacklash.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: The_Victor
"That would be the same party intelligentsia that convinced us that McCain was the future of the party?"

And the same party intellegensia that said the bail-out was a good idea

And the same party intellegensia that thought amnesty was a good idea

And the same party intellegensia that thought spending money like drunken sailors was a good idea.

I say our party intellegensia is broken, we need a new party intellegensia; one that can walk and talk at the same time.

107 posted on 11/19/2008 10:35:40 AM PST by Pietro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ChocChipCookie

Your response bears no resemblance to what I said, so I’m at a loss as to how to respond.

I’ve never used the phrase “too christian”. Why you chose to attribute that to me is something only you can answer.

If you disagree that evangelicals get blamed for people beating up gays, you are wrong. We do get blamed. It has nothing to do with the truth, it’s simply what happens.


108 posted on 11/19/2008 10:55:53 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: okie01
My guess: This is all about abortion ...

You may be right about that. If so, the battle within the party (and without) will only get more intensive. This year the Catholic Bishops were drawn into the debate more forcefully than ever. Led by Pope Benedict XVI, they won't be retreating either. IMO, this 'religiosity' that KP is so wrong about, is fundamental to a conservative party or movement. She or others might prefer to call it morals, character or integrity; however, it is based on a belief in God and a people called to live that Judeo-Christian faith out in their lives.

Here's an excerpt from Edward Cardinal Egan (NY) statement to Nancy Pelosi regarding abortion. There is nothing here that requires faith or religiosity to believe. However, it is most powerful with that as it's fundamental underpinning.

We are blessed in the 21st century with crystal-clear photographs and action films of the living realities within their pregnant mothers. No one with the slightest measure of integrity or honor could fail to know what these marvelous beings manifestly, clearly, and obviously are, as they smile and wave into the world outside the womb. In simplest terms, they are human beings with an inalienable right to live, a right that the Speaker of the House of Representatives is bound to defend at all costs for the most basic of ethical reasons. They are not parts of their mothers, and what they are depends not at all upon the opinions of theologians of any faith. Anyone who dares to defend that they may be legitimately killed because another human being “chooses” to do so or for any other equally ridiculous reason should not be providing leadership in a civilized democracy worthy of the name.

109 posted on 11/19/2008 10:58:26 AM PST by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

I’m not sure what your objection is to my statement. Do you think we cannot be against gay marriage unless we also want to treat gays as second-class citizens?

Because I firmly believe that you can have gay friends and tolerate gays in your environment without having to accept gay marriage.

And I am hopeful that most Christians and Conservatives can agree with me that we should not seek to banish gays from society.


110 posted on 11/19/2008 10:58:32 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the Cross

The simple truth is that gays may be able to get away with black and mormon bashing, but conservatives would never get away with it. It’s the double-standard.

But from what I’ve heard talking to people from California, the gay activists are not “getting away with it”. They are building up a well of righteous indignation. I spoke with one person who voted NO who says that if the vote was today he and probably millions of others would change their votes to YES simply because he’s seen a side of the gay community he didn’t believe existed.


111 posted on 11/19/2008 11:00:49 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: what's up

You are correct — and any approach we take has to consider and counter the reality that our position can be twisted against us.

Just as I knew that what I said could sound like I was agreeing with KP, when I don’t. It’s always a danger to use something as outrageous as KP’s remarks to try to make a more subtle point.

On the other hand, when conservatives try too hard to prove they are NOT like the false portrait, oftentime other conservatives get scared that the person is actually a closet liberal. Say you think gay people are human, and some conservatives will think you secretly support gay marriage.


112 posted on 11/19/2008 11:04:55 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: All

Folks, just ignore this Parker clown — she is a liberal still trying to pose as someone of relevance to Rs and conservatives (I know, not the same thing). She does not have conservative interests at heart, so her columns are fundamentally deceptive. The sooner we ignore her the sooner she can just go away to post on Puffington Post.


113 posted on 11/19/2008 11:08:34 AM PST by Enchante (Thanks, Mediascum, you "elected" your candidate and now the country will pay....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: angkor

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Wrong. Arnie IS the exact copy of what the RINO’s think a Republican should be.

Without a moral foundation, fiscal conservatives WILL lose their way. Count on it.


114 posted on 11/19/2008 11:08:38 AM PST by TruthConquers (Delendae sunt publici scholae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Exactly — and in McCain we had just about the most atypical “Republican” we could have.... not in the least symathetic to anything or anyone “evangelical” and not at all out front on the “social” (moral) issues. McCain is a defense-oriented conservative, a “progressive” on a lot of economic issues, and decidedly indifferent or non-aggressive on issues of importance to evangelical Christians (nominally pro-life but has never made a big deal of it so far as I know). If there was anything to Parker’s RINO strategy then McCain should have been the ideal candidate.


115 posted on 11/19/2008 11:17:03 AM PST by Enchante (Thanks, Mediascum, you "elected" your candidate and now the country will pay....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Every self proclaimed moderate is doing the same, pretending this recently concluded election cycle didn’t test their oh so precious theory that the GOP should become ‘Democratic Party Lite’.

Its not surprising they are the same one’s snipping at Sarah Palin these days. The simple fact is moderates aren’t leaders, they are followers.

Which is why there is no book titled ‘Great moments in Moderate Political History’. Nor will there be.

Kathy Parker is just ensuring she is viable on the DC cocktail circuit, and it does appear she wants a show on MSNBC next year.

Good luck with that Ms Parker. Perhaps you can have that whining, hypocritical, catty Peggy Noonan on with you, right after Olberman and Maddow. In other words, well after prime time - which is appropriate.


116 posted on 11/19/2008 11:18:02 AM PST by Badeye (If he's a Messiah, how come his brother lives in a mud hut?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
And I am hopeful that most Christians and Conservatives can agree with me that we should not seek to banish gays from society.

Absolutely, Christians should attempt to rid our society of this abomination, lest the land itself would spit us out.

And Conservatives should equally oppose the Gay agenda, which is in large part incompatible with Conservative ideology. They are our natural enemies, as part of the liberal sphere.

117 posted on 11/19/2008 11:18:48 AM PST by roamer_1 (Proud 1%er... Reagan Conservatism is the only way forward.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: All

What I mean is that if we take the three main axes of policy issues to be defense-economics-morality then McCain is only “conservative” on defense/military issues..... rather liberal on a lot of economic issues, and only nominally conservative (perhaps) on issues like pro-life but does not base his political life around any of the social-moral issues of importance to evangelicals.

Parker is propounding the same kind of theme that Colin Powell did when endorsing Obama — where is the evidence for this claim that the Republican Party has taken any big shift to the right or been captured by evangelical Christians? (fwiw, I’m not evangelical and not at all literalist about the Bible but I don’t fear and cower from evangelical influences either).


118 posted on 11/19/2008 11:21:30 AM PST by Enchante (Thanks, Mediascum, you "elected" your candidate and now the country will pay....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

>>>>>Atheists are inherently dishonest. <<<<

Are you an atheist?


119 posted on 11/19/2008 11:32:46 AM PST by angkor (Conservatism is not a religious movement.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: angkor

Sorry, not a member of your club.


120 posted on 11/19/2008 11:38:06 AM PST by Mojave (http://www.americanbacklash.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: WildcatClan
I do not, personally, like to categorize Conservatives. You either are or you aren’t.

I agree 100%. But we know that there are far too many who love to categorize within the Right. They seem to live for it.


121 posted on 11/19/2008 11:45:22 AM PST by rdb3 (Get out the putter. This one's on the green.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: TruthConquers

>>>>>HAHAHAHAHA!!!! Wrong. Arnie IS the exact copy of what the RINO’s think a Republican should be.<<<<<

You addressed a question to me about “Arnie”.

I presume you mean Schwarzanegger (sp?), about whom I know nothing and could not possibly care any less. Not even a minor blip on my radar screen.

That’s why I said “irrelevant”.


122 posted on 11/19/2008 11:47:37 AM PST by angkor (Conservatism is not a religious movement.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Mojave
>>>>>Sorry, not a member of your club.<<<<<

No, sorry, I'm not an atheist so I'm a little unsure what you've been talking about.

Is that the best you can do?

123 posted on 11/19/2008 11:49:27 AM PST by angkor (Conservatism is not a religious movement.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: ReneeLynn

>>>>>>Why don’t you start that party?<<<<<<

We used to have that party and it was called “the GOP.”


124 posted on 11/19/2008 11:50:25 AM PST by angkor (Conservatism is not a religious movement.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: angkor

Atheists are inherently dishonest.


125 posted on 11/19/2008 11:51:58 AM PST by Mojave (http://www.americanbacklash.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: TruthConquers

>>>>>Without a moral foundation, fiscal conservatives WILL lose their way. Count on it.<<<<<<<

By the way, do you think that “a moral foundation” comes only, exclusively, and specifically from Protestant Christianity?

It’s important that you spell that out.


126 posted on 11/19/2008 11:54:10 AM PST by angkor (Conservatism is not a religious movement.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

>>>>Atheists are inherently dishonest.<<<<<

Yes, yes, of course.

You already said that in post #100.

Cute.


127 posted on 11/19/2008 11:55:26 AM PST by angkor (Conservatism is not a religious movement.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the Cross

>>>>Without a belief in God, and Heaven and Hell, there is no reason whatsoever to be “conservative” or anything else virtuous. <<<<<<<

I could not care less about your personal religious beliefs or your religious morals.

My concern is about enshrining Protestant Christian sectarian beliefs in U.S. law, or even leaving that impression. That’s bordering on theocracy and it’s what the Taliban do.

Most importantly the Religionist impulse presents conservatism and the GOP as offshoots of Protestant Christianity. Every time I have this discussion those are exactly the arguments I hear, the same as yours.

We have done just fine as a nation with the Declaration, the Constitution, and other words from our Founders. Yes, they may have been divinely inspired, that’s quite another discussion.

But note well that those works are entirely about secular governance mixed with a profound revulsion of aristocracy and theocracy.


128 posted on 11/19/2008 12:11:23 PM PST by angkor (Conservatism is not a religious movement.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: angkor

Why? Because you know what is best and others don’t?

Biblical Christianity is the only guide.

If it is in the Bible, that is good enough guide for me. Is it good enough guide for you? Anything else is man made.


129 posted on 11/19/2008 12:27:08 PM PST by TruthConquers (Delendae sunt publici scholae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: TruthConquers

>>>>Biblical Christianity is the only guide.<<<<<<

Biblical Christianity is the only guide to American government?

That’s an interesting concept.

And it is stupifyingly wrong about the Founders and American history, not to mention the entirety of Western civilization.

I’m surprised you’d say something so ridiculous in a public forum. But I suppose you’re proud about it.


130 posted on 11/19/2008 12:34:11 PM PST by angkor (Conservatism is not a religious movement.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar
Yak, yak, yak. I don't know what Ms. Parker, Ms. Noonan, et. al. are complaining about.

RINOs have had defacto control over the Republican party for the last few election cycles. All this public sniping indicates RINOs really don't want to do the hard work of developing some sort of consensus with religious conservatives - or, for that matter, fiscal conservatives like myself. I guess the “Big Tent” doesn't include us unless we abandon our core principles - which personally I have no interest in doing - so why even talk about us at all?

I suggest she and her cohorts’ time would be better spent getting off their collective butts and getting that new base.

Will be interesting to see what groups, if any, they pry away from the Democrats. Time to get out the popcorn.

131 posted on 11/19/2008 12:34:52 PM PST by Strzelec (Soon, folks are going to find out who this John Galt guy really is...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: angkor

If you don’t understand that this country was founded on Biblical Christian principles, that just neatly explains the problem.

It is you who have made a fool of yourself on a public form. The Left has successfully indoctrinated you into the school of never knowing the foundation of real freedom.

There are plenty more of you out there. This nation will be enslaved because people like you will reject reality.


132 posted on 11/19/2008 12:41:11 PM PST by TruthConquers (Delendae sunt publici scholae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar

Mrs Parker: What percentage of folks in US believe in God? What percentage go to church?


133 posted on 11/19/2008 12:54:02 PM PST by ncpatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TruthConquers

>>>>If you don’t understand that this country was founded on Biblical Christian principles, that just neatly explains the problem.<<<<<<

This is such a stupid assertion that you have to be trolling.


134 posted on 11/19/2008 1:08:41 PM PST by angkor (Conservatism is not a religious movement.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: angkor

Typical name calling.

No wonder that the Republican party is losing.


135 posted on 11/19/2008 1:20:39 PM PST by TruthConquers (Delendae sunt publici scholae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: TruthConquers

I said the assertion was stupid.

That’s not “name calling”.


136 posted on 11/19/2008 1:27:04 PM PST by angkor (Conservatism is not a religious movement.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar

Kathleen Parker is best ignored. She never has had much interesting to say, but now that she is in “martyr mode”, she has even less.

Why do you even bother reading her, much less posting her?


137 posted on 11/19/2008 1:45:57 PM PST by gridlock (Bill Clinton will be offered the job as Obama's Secretary of State.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: scottinoc

I’ve been reading Ms. Parker for a few years now and have long detected a fondness for government bureaucracy and a very subtle dislike for the grassroots of the Republican party.

However, in the last couple of months she’s really shred her mask and revealed herself to be an anti-Christian bigot and an open hater of your everyday sort of person.

Her articles are full of mockery, but there is no real intellectual nuance, so she should refrain from her self-adulation.


138 posted on 11/19/2008 2:26:30 PM PST by ShiveringShegetz (Yes, I'm Shivering!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: angkor
>>>>If you don’t understand that this country was founded on Biblical Christian principles, that just neatly explains the problem.<<<<<<

This is such a stupid assertion that you have to be trolling.

And so just what does this mean...

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,..."

Biblical Christianity. Sigh. But you know what the Declaration of Independence says. It just isn't important to you.

139 posted on 11/19/2008 2:39:34 PM PST by TruthConquers (Delendae sunt publici scholae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: angkor

“We used to have that party and it was called “the GOP.””

That isn’t an answer to what I asked. It’s not even true, but it’s still not an answer.

I think you wouldn’t start that party because it would fail. You want to call it the fiscal conservative party, but it would really be the secular humanist conservative party.

You’re not ranting about conservative Evangelicals ‘fiscal’ beliefs you’re ranting against their religious beliefs. Maybe they don’t like your political atheism? Maybe ‘you’ should have to get out of the tent? And KP?


140 posted on 11/19/2008 2:51:46 PM PST by ReneeLynn (Socialism, it's the new black.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar

McCain is the exact type of politician these idiots are calling for. That didn’t turn out too well.


141 posted on 11/19/2008 2:53:33 PM PST by Terry Mross ( It's just a matter of time before we're all 'GUILTY' of hate speech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar

She makes some good points but misses the mark.

It’s not religion or religious people that are the problem. It’s those that believe that their religion gives them the right to dictate the behavior of others that don’t subscribe to the same beliefs.

Abortion is the perfect case in point. In the 1970s and 80s, conservatives were up in arms over how liberals were using the judiciary to force others to allow abortion. Forcing others to follow their beliefs.

And now it’s the exact opposite, religious conservatives are trying to outlaw abortion, forcing those that believe in it to cease and desist.

Most recently, it’s also ‘gay marriage’. We see that a good number of states passed constitutional amendments defining the status of marriage.

Why?

Because gay/lesbians were using the courts to force the citizenry to do their bidding - ie: gay marriage.

And now is the backlash against it. In time, we’ll most likely see religious conservatives try the reverse. And there will be the corresponding backlash to that.


The point is that one *CANNOT* legislate morality. One can only hope to influence people enough to have them change their beliefs. And once they change, their behavior changes as well.


142 posted on 11/19/2008 3:25:19 PM PST by gogogodzilla (Live free or die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: o_zarkman44

Morality is something you get from your parents and your religious institution.

It is *NOT* something you should find in governmental law!

That is the problem with Evangelicals.


143 posted on 11/19/2008 3:28:54 PM PST by gogogodzilla (Live free or die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
Are you losing your mind? Without Evangelicals and conservative Catholics there is no Republican Party. Yon and Ms Parker wouldn't have enough votes to win any state.

But I understand that it is the evil Evangelicals and or Catholics that beat up old women and smash their signs when a vote doesn't go their way.

Or was that the secular homofascists?

144 posted on 11/19/2008 3:33:34 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RetiredArmy

There’s no whiskey or prostitutes in heaven...

;-P

(Makes ya think... one man’s heaven is another’s hell.)


145 posted on 11/19/2008 3:34:46 PM PST by gogogodzilla (Live free or die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: gogogodzilla
The point is that one *CANNOT* legislate morality.

I'll kill this right now. The only thing that legislators do is legislate morality. There is no law that doesn't have some moral component imprinted on it. Including traffic laws.

elections are about whose morailty gets imprinted.

146 posted on 11/19/2008 3:36:51 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: gogogodzilla

I resent being categorized as an “evangelical”. It is almost as a slur grouping all religious conservatives as an extreme right. But remember, the extreme right is supposed to counterbalance the extreme left.

The left wants no part of balance.

The only law that pertains to religion in the Constitution is that the State cannot make any one religion official as a preference. If there is nothing that distinguishes right from wrong how can there be anything but anarchy?


147 posted on 11/19/2008 3:39:32 PM PST by o_zarkman44 (Since when is paying more, but getting less, considered Patriotic?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: TruthConquers
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

---

Yes, yes... amazing that.

That this is *NOT*:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by Jesus..."

Note the difference...

148 posted on 11/19/2008 3:46:24 PM PST by gogogodzilla (Live free or die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

You make my point.

You can’t legislate morality. But morality influences legislation.

What evangelicals would like is the legislation of morality. Ban abortion, ban homosexuality, etc, etc.

I don’t believe in either of those examples, but I’m not going to force my beliefs on those that believe otherwise... and I will fight to my last breath to stop others from forcing their beliefs on *ME*.

Remember that little phrase we were supposed to learn as kids? You know, I think it was called something... something like, oh! I remember... the GOLDEN RULE.

“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you!”


Would you want liberals forcing *THEIR* beliefs on you? Then you shouldn’t be forcing yours on them!


149 posted on 11/19/2008 3:52:43 PM PST by gogogodzilla (Live free or die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
I see your "Rhino Rampage" ...

... and raise you one oogedy boogedy "Ooga Booga."

150 posted on 11/19/2008 3:57:07 PM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-215 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson