Free Republic

“Child sacrifice.”

We’ve already started with that one. Abortion is the sacrifice of children to the gods of convenience and hedonistic pleasure.

The next battle politically will be some form of polygamy, but it won’t be associated with plural wives, but rather a sort of group marriage. The feminists would consider the legalization of plural wives to be a form of social oppression, so I wouldn’t see a move to legalize group marriage and polyandry while keeping polygyny illegal, but polygyny certainly will not be the focus of the battle in any case.

Advocacy for lowering of the age of consent will take at least a decade or two to become commonplace. Sodomite relations will have to be much more normalized than they are now to push further. At least all of the blue states will have had to have legalized sodomite marriage, along with a few major purple states.

I pray for national repentance before any of this happens. On the other side of this national nightmare is disaster should we go through with this horrible deed.

My head is still spinning that this guy is practically the nominee. The only hope for this country’s political future is a miracle.

Where are you getting bogus information? You really think Bishops who, 15 years before, were maimed at the hands of the Roman Empire would cave to Constantine, who eventually rejected their teachings anyway (he was baptized by an Arian)? And where on earth are you getting this patently false idea that Nicaea denies the resurrection, especially considering this is one of the lines of the Creed:

On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures

Now, I advise you go and preach your blasphemous heresy elsewhere and quit lying about what the Orthodox believe.

Why do we give them 19 delegates? I mean, I can understand throwing them a bone and giving them 6, but 19 is just plain ridiculous when the GOP candidate can’t break 20% in an awesome year. They make Hawaii look competitive.

Note: Even if you add Newt and Santorum’s votes together in FL and NV, Romney still would have beat Gingrich. The same cannot be said for many of Santorum’s close losses.

I was behind Gingrich from SC through the Santorum Trifecta. The Trifecta showed the race had come down to Santorum and Romney. Ever since then, Gingrich has only stood in the way of Santorum’s momentum, gobbling up just enough votes in key states to cause Santorum to lose.

Super Tuesday would have been 6-4 Santorum without Gingrich in the race, and 4 or 5 of those Santorum wins would have been blowouts, and Romney’s wins insignificant blips on the radar (ID, MA, VA, VT). This whole race would have been different with a united conservative front in the races after the Trifecta. Instead of Santorum trying desperately for a “comeback kid” moment in WI, MD would be the battleground tonight with Romney on his heels.

Oh...no...I’m so scared. Obama might win a second term! Guess what? The odds of that are just as high if we nominate the GOP’s version of John Kerry as if we fight it to the convention. If you want to back the liberal flip-flopper from Mass., go ahead, but don’t expect me to hop on your bandwagon out of fear of Obama.

That could very well happen. Voter apathy on the Romney side because of “inevitably” might result in a lower turnout and a Santorum victory. It’s not “delusional” to say that could happen. Of course, there are at least equal odds that the reverse will happen. I’m still hoping to stop Mittens. Call me “delusional” all you want, but I’m not quite ready to give up all hope.

LOL...I’ve been in that exact situation. My father had lost his job and I had an anaphylactic reaction to a nut back when I was 14. The ER knew exactly what was going on when I got there, and they didn’t even have us fill out paperwork, they just wheeled me straight to the nearest fully-equipped room.

No doctor or nurse cares about insurance in those situations. All they see is someone who is going to die if they do not do something right away. Insurance and bills come in later.

Yeah, this so-called “conservative” also wants to get rid of male-preference primogeniture in the succession law and disestablish the Church of England. Next thing you know, the Tories will be advocating for independence for Scotland, Wales, and to give up Northern Ireland to the Republic. All in the name of winning votes. This is the way the GOP is heading: Total abandonment of our constitution, and by that I mean the foundations of our society and not just the written one that was given up a long time ago.

Paul didn’t drop out until June last go around. That was 3 full months after McCain “officially” wrapped it up with a win in Texas. Paul won’t drop out until well after Romney has secured 1144. Heck, if he never does, his delegates will be the most stubborn people on the floor and their 100 or so votes will be really annoying in a close race since they won’t be up for grabs.

The whole Santorum campaign is premised on him winning WI. Without that, there is really no way for him to seize enough momentum to crush Romney. The thing is that most of Santorum’s wins from here on out need to be crushing, while Romney’s need to be much closer. If Santorum can crush Romney in PA (20+ points, more preferred), and then maybe pickup DE, and hold Romney below a majority in NY, that will put him in pretty good shape for May, when only Oregon should show much promise to the Romney campaign.

Preventing Romney from winning outright is going to be a close call unless some massive scandal erupts or momentum shifts in a massive way. However, it is still not in the realm of the impossible.

To deny Romney the nomination Santorum must win WI, and it would be optimal for him to deny Romney a majority in NY (thus making it proportional) and win several districts there, thus evening the delegate count. This nomination is going to be so close that states like DE could help decide it. Combining denying a majority in NY with winning DE will give Santorum enough of a lift to fight it out to California, where he won’t need to win, but he would need to hold Romney down to around 100-120 delegates or so. Blowing Romney out of the water in places like TX, NC, and KY are also very important in this scheme.

Also to be followed closely are the state convention delegate selections. If the anti-Romney’s unite, Romney might lose upwards of 90 delegates from his current count. WA is especially important on that front. If he gets denied those, Not Romney will have more wiggle room, but they would still need to deny him delegates in primary states.

Thankfully, the May calendar is so heavily conservative that it should give Santorum enough momentum to steal a lot of delegates in CA. During May, Santorum needs to basically camp in CA while sending out his surrogates and some ad money to the conservative states during that time to run up the margins.

Then, we fight on to Tampa.

Zondervan tanked years ago. Half the “Evangelical” publishing houses these days won’t even wince at publishing outright heresy.

I’m not staying home on election day (well, I will, but that’s because I will vote absentee). I’ll be voting GOP for almost every other office on the ballot. I’ll just lodge my protest against Romney. But for Senate here in VA, I’ll vote George Allen for Senate, I’ll probably vote for whoever the GOP Congressional nominee is, etc.

Furthermore, I wasn’t saying Romney is worse than Obama. Indeed, I think he is better. However, “better” is a relative term: He’s better than Obama because he will drive us off the cliff closer to the speed limit. Either way, they’re both reckless drivers heading towards a cliff. For that reason, I cannot vote for either in good conscious, and I will not go against my conscious.

I was simply pointing out that Jesus did not have to speak about the subject for it to be morally binding since the teaching is found elsewhere in God’s revelation. As you point, Jesus does not talk about everything that is immoral, so to say Jesus not mentioning something means it is automatically morally upright is a fallacious notion if you have an orthodox view of the canon of Scripture.

“Truly - I would vote for Mickey Mouse before Obama.”

The problem for me is I would vote for Mickey Mouse over Romney too. While I might vote for Romney sooner than I’d vote for Obama (i.e., put a gun to my head and say vote Obama or Romney, I’ll pick Romney in a heartbeat), he still does not pass my “Mickey Mouse test” that I have constructed, so I can’t vote for him under any reasonably foreseeable circumstance.

As Creator of the universe, Jesus did not have to speak about marriage. He already had when created it between a man and a woman.

Also, I can’t believe Carter is an “Evangelical” when I’m on the Pope’s side against him.

No, the Marxist’s favorite conservatives are the ones who vote for a guy like Romney who will only help them enact their agenda in the long run anyway.

This game is long term. We must look beyond the next four years. The world will not end and God will not leave His throne because Obama or Romney are elected. Our future is not dependent on either of these liberal “progressives.”

What we need to do is protest Romney and vote for conservatives down ballot who will help stave off Obama’s worst policy ideas. Hopefully the Supreme Court will help us with this by striking down Obamneycare this June. If that happens, I will be even less afraid of what Obama would do over the next few years should he pull off a Clintonian plurality.

This is exactly the way they want you to think. Fear as a rationalization for action like this leads to all sorts of irrational outcomes...like conservative Republicans voting for a Massachusetts liberal who will not even carry his home state on the grounds that he is the best to beat Obama and will stave off the day of calamity. The day of calamity is upon us whether we elect Romney or Obama this November. The question is: Will we have enough faith to stand on principle rather be sucked into some nonsense about Romney being “better than Obama” when they both lead us to the same place, one simply slower and more painful to watch?