[Carry_Okie]

The CP, like the JBS, seems to believe (however "unofficially") that the United States has taken over from Israel as the "chosen nation": that the US is a special, unique, chosen nation founded by chr*stians (like Thomas Jefferson, the bible mangler?). This is both Anglo-Israelism and henotheism, two ideologies to which I am adamantly opposed.

Replacement theology is the bankrupt invention of Martin Luther who, after having been rejected by those Jews whose support he was seeking, cooked up totally unsupported teaching in a fit of pique. It was a total misinterpretation of Rav Shaul in both Romans, Corinthians, and Galatians.

Please understand that I am not one of those people who thinks that the First Amendment forbids the states from having official religions of their own.

Your interpretation is both legally and historically correct. I'm all for people instituting rules among them by which they prefer to live as a blessing of liberty... except the Muzzies of course, who have no intention of respecting the rights of those practicing any other religion. By violating that social contract, they are undeserving of its protections.

However, voting for the candidate of an anti-Israel party that has no chance of winning an election in such a crucial year strikes me as not the thing we need to do.

In States like California where there is no chance a Republican would carry the State, voting for the CP candidate is worth more than a wasted vote on a RINO.

[libdestroyer]

I for one am glad Martin Luther broke away from the incorrect teachings of the man-led Catholic Church.

[xzins]

The Constitution Party’s last candidate, Chuck Baldwin, was a premillenialist for who replacement theology is totally rejected.

However, I’m sure there are presbyterian and other denominations represented in the CP as well as other parties. They tend toward replacement theology.

So, replacement theology by some members of the Republican Party means that the Republicans reject Israel?