You got what down who?
Posted on 12/03/2008 4:59:24 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Do we need God in politics?
Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker recently penned a provocative column titled "Giving Up on God," wherein she suggested that the Republican Party ditch G-O-D. The piece so rankled James Dobson (Ph.D. in divine insight) that he compared Parker to that seditious bum Benedict Arnold.
Among factions of conservatism, there is a general willingness to coexist and -- sporadically -- win elections. Dobson, conversely, employs a saintly litmus test that marginalizes large swaths of his own party. He has redefined "traditional values," an essential ingredient for Republican victory, to mean illogical rigidity.
Californians, Dobson rationalizes, proved that values voters still matter, because "many who pulled the lever for the 'change' (Obama) espoused also pulled it for the stability provided by marriage as recognized for millennia in all civilized societies."
Actually, if California voters proved anything, it is that voters don't feel the need to vote Republican, even if they happen to recognize the stability provided by the millennia-long need to be hassled by a clingy do-gooder from the opposite sex.
And despite perceptions, Barack Obama did not support gay marriage. In fact, few national Democrats of note explicitly back gay marriage -- notwithstanding their demonizing conservatives. Democrats have made social issues irrelevant by simply ignoring them. Abortion may elicit passionate quarrels among online commentators, but on the ground, policy has scarcely stirred in decades.
Those Californians who voted for Obama and also against gay marriage signaled that social issues are, at the very least, of secondary political importance. Nationally, polls ranging from USA Today/Gallup to CBS News/New York Times to NBC News/Wall Street Journal to Fox News/Opinion Dynamics bear this out. Factors such as "improving the economy," "creating jobs" and "stabilizing the nation's financial institutions" were on the tops of voters' minds this time around, while values issues brought in the rear with other subjects Americans pretend to care about, such as "helping the environment."
Sure, there are citizens who oppose gay marriage not out of bigotry or irrational loathing but out of a sense of tradition and faith. The problem is that the Dobson wing hinders Republicans from offering any feasible counter-solutions. Dobson opposes not only man-on-man matrimony but also civil unions. He opposes adoption for gay couples. Let's face it; he opposes the existence of gays.
Good luck with that.
These are not so much ideologically "conservative" positions as they are moral injunctions. Dobson may grouse in conservative jargon about a court undermining the will of the people. But does anyone believe that Dobson will pound the dais similarly when judicial activism falls his way -- as it has on issues ranging from free speech to medical marijuana?
Aren't Republicans also (hypothetically) the party of limited government and individual freedom?
Dobson claims that Parker and other secular conservatives are trying to marginalize Christian voters, when, in effect, he has it backward. Poor Rudy Giuliani once dressed up as a woman. And Mitt Romney, yeah, he was born into a cult. And this one was divorced too many times, and the other one well, pleasing James Dobson can be a holy hassle.
No, evangelicals are not "ailing" the Republican Party, as Parker contends, but the acceptance of the traditional values wing should not be a prerequisite for being a "real" conservative.
Unless Jesus is going to rectify the stock market, Republicans are in for a lonely ride. And as long as the Dobson wing fools itself into believing political fortunes can be resuscitated by ruining Billy and Bobby's honeymoon, they are in for a decade-long surprise.
Kind of a leap there, but hey !
Anything to get rid of the ooogety boogety branch of the GOP- divide and conquer, you know.
“...victim role very well.” “ ... I look at your strategy is one of surrender. You cannot possibly have a plan of victory by taking your ball and going home.” “...You are a lot closer to victory with the Republican party than any other political party.”
You got all that from what I said? I happen to think the time is ripe for conservatives to get back control of the GOP. Obama will present us with an opportunity greater than what we had after Carter and greater than what we had in 94, but we’ve got to get the RINOs out of the way before 2010 and 2012, or we’ll have a repeat of the last two elections. I don’t mean to sound defeatist, just realistic.
One question though: Where is the reference to "Yates Rough Beast" from ? I am not familiar with it.
So, because you are lukewarm---neither hot nor cold---I am about to spit you out of my mouth"
Tell me. If I listen to you, will you teach ME how to hate in the name of love, too?. The most zealous people in the NT were Pharisees.... Hateful, uncompromising, bigoted, self righteous, unyeilding, ignorant of the message of Scripture while quoting reams of it.
You are a real piece of work, Guenevere. You remind me of why I used to hate God....., and then I figured out that God was really different than lots of people who speak in his name.
Neither, your interpretation of God's will, nor the Declaration of Independence are legally binding. And thus, are irrelevant. No matter how cogent and poignant they may be.
There is no room for secularism. There is no room for many gods. There is only room for ONE. THE Creator. In reverence, they didn't speak his Name
And this makes you irreverent?
It would be nice if we could say it and it would be so, but it isn't and won't be. The 1950's are never going to be revisited. If that is the minimum condition for restoration of the US, then no restoration is possible.
However, as I see it, God will be fine if we just get back around to believing, and acting like it. Perhaps that is being too optimistic.
Anyway, as the electorate is about 180 million strong, your block of 30 million is a sizable but non-controlling piece of the pie. And this is not by accident.
Its folks like you, who propose to enshrine Christianity in the governance of this great country who supply all of the support necessary for the march of Secular Humanism.
You overreach and you get nothing. This is the way it goes.
Find a better goal, where everyone isn't trying to figure out how to trip you.. and you have more success.
I propose to you.. its God in people's hearts and not in government. God welcome in any building in the Country but no one's interpretation of God's will in control.
It could be worse. At least we do not have the rainbow warrior coalition of posters and staff like Lucianne.
I’m not ignorant of the message of Scripture...that’s why I quoted it.
Clearly the pro-life message doesn't hurt candidates, or the Democrats wouldn't have gone out recruiting pro-life Democrats to run against Republicans in so many places, and WON!
Sorry for the late reply.
From this poem.
The Second Coming
—William Butler Yeats
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in the sands of the desert
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
It always kinda struck me as being a decent description of what we are facing in this modern age.
We in the west face a choice. Islam, Fascism, or Christianity. The hard men of the left will in time embrace Fascism as Communism has largely been discredited. They will not call it Fascism, but that is what it will be.
Islam is on the advance and a Milquetoast centrist secularism will not hold the tide against them as they hold tolerance and multi-multiculturalism as the pre-eminent principles. This is easily utilized by Islam to gain power and the secularists can only combat them by rejecting their own belief system. This they will not do.
You’re on the list. Hope you find the info useful.
The incongruity of that remark is in the comparison of it with my original complaint. You had said:
[HighlyOpinionated:] Dobson and other Evangelicals, Pentecostals and Charismatics need to preach to their audiences about living the Christian, God-fearing, Biblical moral and ethical life “twenty-four-seven-fifty-two-three-sixty-five (or six). Link
While SoConPubbie had asked if you had ever listened to Dobson, my question asked if you had ever listened to Evangelicals, Pentecostals and Charismatics.
If you are equating Evangelicals, Pentecostals and Charismatics with "mainline Protestant preachers who do not preach the Word but rather preach a 'dumbed down' watery weepy religion which does not hold a person accountable for his actions", then I cannot do anything but hold your comments as invalid.
Evangelicals, Pentecostals and Charismatics are not considered to be "mainline", in the first place, even though their combined numbers probably dwarf the liberalized mainline branches.
Secondly, those particular three branches are the most conservative of all the rest- They are easily the most likely to be doing exactly what you suggest they should- "Preaching to their audiences about living the Christian, God-fearing, Biblical moral and ethical life “twenty-four-seven-fifty-two-three-sixty-five"
If you are simply railing against T.V evangelists, It is my estimation that the Catholic presentations on television are no less "watered down"- If anyone is preaching the Word on television (as a group), I would tend to hand that award to the Baptists... And no, I am not a Baptist. All the rest do tend toward an homogenized message, a universal "God is Love" kind of thing, and "Peace and Brotherhood" tend to prevail, I will agree with you there.
You got what down who?
Abortion has not been a major issue in the past few years, but wait until the RATs and the Evil One pass “Freedom of Choice Act”
Great!! I'm on board.
Reagan would lose the Republican primaries because he wouldn't be as *overt* about religion as a televangelist.
I don’t think that religion belongs in politics but I think that religious people should have the right to keep their religion even though they’re in politics. And people of all faiths should be able to support candidates who agree with their principles. Every time a Christian makes his political leanings public or tries to raise support for a candidate for moral reasons, the world cries foul.
Where are all these people when Rev. Wright talks politics?
Nicely said.
G-d belongs in the hearts of men. Then, men can form government.
But G-d shouldn’t be inshrined into government, as it will be done so by the hand of man. Who, as we all know, is imperfect.
Your belief is what I’ve been arguing *for* this entire time!
But those who have responded to my posts find it offensively anti-Christian.
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.