Bush doing a good Job

Moon

So you are saying that the Ten Commandments along this all those other ‘laws’ of the Old Testament don’t count anymore? This seems unusual in a Christian sect, can you tell me which version of Christianity you say you are a follow of?

As to Jesus and stoning isn’t it open to interpretation, did Jesus mean that only those that had not committed the sin of adultery could stone? Or was it that any sin committed counted? What about original sin, and if Jesus washed away that sin what then, could people then go back to stoning? Was he talking about all executions or just stoning, was this just a reprieve for a first offence, etc etc, I could go on for a while and that is often the problem there can be many interpretations of religious texts.


So as you have already said that what the OT says about homosexuality can be discounted so we supposedly must look to the NT and once again it can be open to interpretation.

The Christian Scriptures, in their original Greek do not contain any clear references to consensual homosexuality within a committed relationship, and certainly do not contain any unambiguous condemnation of gay and lesbian sexual activity. However, after having been filtered through the belief systems of the translators, many English versions of the Bible clearly condemn homosexual behavior. Now that the famous "anti-homosexual" passages of 1 Corinthians 6:9 and Romans 1:18 have been so long identified as being critical of homosexual activity, it would be impossible for Bible translators to offer alternative explanations; their Bible wouldn't sell.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibc6.htm

Biblical judgements against homosexuality are not relevant to today's debate.. should in no way be a weapon to justify refusal of ordination, not because the Bible is not authoritative, but simply because it does not address the issues involved".

'The New Testament and Homosexuality'

By Robin Scroggs, professor of New Testament, Union Theological Seminary,

http://www.lionking.org/~kovu/bible/section09.html

**

So why is it you have chosen to pick on this interpretation? of gays?

This brings us back to the question of prejudice and thinking for oneself.

My religion has everything to do with my political views. That is why I say these things in the political forum... But anyhow, I see why you would say that. But I'm sorry, it probably wont stop me from talking about my religion when I'm posting on the political forum (which is almost never except for the past couple of days, btw). My religion is too much a part of my political views for me not to include it into almost every aspect.

But since there are different interpretations the bible and what Christianity means how do you decide on what your ‘religion’ ‘says’ about contemporary political issues? Have you in any way looked at the questions and interpretations in a rational way, have you looked at your views and wondered and questioned if they may be based on your own or others prejudice?

There is the idea in some religions of a ‘god given free will’ which means people have the ability to choose a path, but I would think that this just doesn’t mean that no thought should be given over which path to take. I would think it was very important to look into an issue weight up the differing viewpoint and in your case the interpretations given in your religious framework.

So putting aside my question (that you still haven’t answered) about what rational basis you have for your belief, it seem pertinent to ask why you have your viewpoint when it is clear that not all Christians hold it.

 

To the original poster:

Bush doing a good job? give me a break!

any other presidental administration would have taken similar or the same steps the bush administration did after 9/11. it would be political suicide not to. who know- osama would probably be locked up in a small room with no doors or windows if george w. were not in the white house. 9/11 probably never would have occured if we had a different president at the time. think about it.

the economy is picking up (only just a little bit) only because election time is right around the corner. How was bush doing before 9/11? Does anyone even know? just take a look at unemployment, gas prices, THE ENVIROMENT! THE DEFICIT!!!! Bush doing a good job? smell the roses buddy.

all you bush supporters feel free to argue with me on this. i and others on this site would be happy to give you detailed, accurtate specifics on how this administration has done so much harm to our beloved country. its all there. the facts dont lie

bush is not a moral president ( a label he gave himself). this administrtation is money hungry and full of corruption. just open your eyes.

take action: censure bush
God bless America! we need it

 

I have to disagree with you Moonjava. It dont think it is in God's Hands. Perhaps it would be if people did not succumb to Satan(ego). If Jesus came back right now as pure and enlightened as he is, do you think he would support the war? The killing of innocents??? Do you think Jesus would be holding hands with Bush and brushing it off because people are ignorant to think this is for the better:




That little baby had more Jesus in them than you,Bush, or I can ever try to manifest. You need to look hard in yourself and remember who Jesus really is. Not a supporter of war, but a being of love and compassion. We humans claim to be the most intelligent civilized creatures, yet when it comes to solving world problems we murder eachother!! Bush is wearing the mask of being religious and a follower of Jesus. He is not, he is a pawn of Satan.

 

How did this thread get so big without me noticing? Damn, I thought it was just a me vs. Balbus thing, who started it up again?

And why can there never be any intelligent right-winger on the forum to throw off the liberal balance of power? I'd probably dislike them just as much as I do the left-wingers, but at least there's be more good debate. Why? Is it too much to ask? Why did Maverick have to be banned!!?? Am I being punished? Damn, this pisses me off.

But back on topic, wow, so much to talk about. First, to the religious fellows: Don't talk about religion on a political forum. You can't prove God exists. Your views are based on belief, which, by it's very nature, is unexplainable in human terms. To use it as support for a war, laws, or anything else political is stupid. Besides, I personally can't see how anyone can put so much stock into a book that has been translated hundreds if not thousands of times by human authors. Come on, the message can't possibly be the same as it was 2,000 or even 500 years ago. In ancient Greek to walk "on water" meant almost the same thing as to walk "by water." So logically, Jesus could have just taken a walk down the beach, and now he's being hailed as a godly figure. I suggest you read a book called "Holy Blood, Holy Grail." I haven't finished it yet but it's a pretty good look into Jesus "humanity" and all the stuff that the Church may have "glossed over" through the years.

As for the War in Iraq, yeah, Bush was wrong. Accept it. The CIA blew, and the FBI was no better. But hey, what kind of intelligence do you expect organizations like the CIA and FBI to come up with when their funding is being handed out to Bush's buddies? I still agree with the war, but not for the reasons Bush gave. I think the democratic, free world has a responsibility to get rid of people like Saddam. We can go around loving freedom and saying "peace" to each other, all the while there are others around the world that are living under opression and tyranny, and we do nothing except attend marches and go to protests that nobody gives a shit about (and ironically, protesters have to get permission from the very people whom they are protesting against in order to protest. Think about that). So far no one, especially not the UN, has done anything for the disadvantaged of this world. 10,000 innocent Iraqis dies in the war, but if the war hadn't happened, over 20,000 Iraqis would have died under Saddam over the next few years.

And really, how much better would Qusay or Uday have been? If either one took power, over a million Iraqis would have died over the next 20 or 30 years. Makes 10,000 dead not seem like that many dosen't it?

 

Yeah, obviously I think it is inappropriate. The war is far from over, sorry to inform you. Just because Bush got all dressed up, landed on an aircraft carrier and announced that major combat was over, it means nothing to the soldiers and Iraqis still losing their lives. Tell this to my two cousins who are about to head over there, or my cousin who already is over there.
Some people don't have that much of a choice but to join the army due to poverty etc. and when they do they should be able to trust that our government will not send them into harms way needlessly. This "war on terror" is just a recipe for never-ending war. A preemptive war is only justifiable if an attack is imminent, but there was no reason to believe we were to be attacked.

I love America, but I don't like our current government. Therefore I will do what I can to change it, trust me, many Americans are dissatisfied with our government. There's no connection between 9/11 and Iraq. Face it. It's frustrating how uninformed you are. Many people thought as you do a long time ago, but have now admitted that the war was a mistake.

You cannot justify this war with past wars.

Well, you're right about that.
How can you be so enthusiastic about others making that sacrifice?

We're not safe. But we are sorry. Very sorry.

 

Like Max said, religion really doesn't have much of a place in validating political ends, no matter how convinced you may be that your particular religion is correct. I'm not meaning to target you or anything simply because you have Christian beliefs, but because you just insist that you "know" your God exists and thus somehow it makes your political opinions correct. To believe in God is one thing, that's totally fine. But to say you "know" he exists, not only in your personal inner-something world but on a level that it dictates the realm of the real world and matters such as politics is just plain silly and dogmatic. It doesn't make you much better, mentality-wise, than the fundamentalist terrorists who say they believe their religion validates their every action.

Hehe, nope completely different ballpark Moon, it's nothing to do with any belief in Lucifer/Satan. 'Lucifer Sam' is simply the name of a song from Pink Floyd's debut album The Piper at the Gates of Dawn.

Um, well if you put it that way, if it weren't for war, Great Britain might not have even been in America. If you wish to present hypothetical cases of the world sans wars, you're gonna have to go way way further back than the 1700s.

 

I know I haven't replied in a while, and I'll get to it, but this I just couldn't pass up.

Ok, so it's obvious you feel as if you were lied to. But who is to say that the commision that came to the conclusion that Iraq and 9/11 had no connection isn't lieing to you? It's frustrating how quickly you will dismiss something at the drop of a dime when someone says "ok this is fact, everyone has to believe it".

 

Anyone who has bothered doing more than relying upon mainstream tv news and press since well before this admin took office knew there was no connection and that claims of such originated from Chalabi and his cohorts long before the Congressional 911 commission (with its dubious composition and laughably limited scope of enquiry) reiterated the fact.

"9-11" is merely the latest paradigm through which a new era of MIC led abuse of power and grasping global hegemony can be filtered and justified to an unquestioning populace. Iraq and Afghanistan were simply the two easiest and most profitable victims with which to begin the PNAC agenda of "might makes right".

 

Hey 9/11 would have happened no matter who was in office. Its not planned over night. This was years in the making. I'm not a big fan of Bush. But i believe he is doing a pretty good job. He was given faulty intelligence and ran with it. I don't believe there was a conspiracy or that he lied. The economy is on the rise. Unemployment is not bad. And the gas prices are fine if you look at what the rest of the world and what they pay. Its amazing that we kept the prices so low for such a long period of time. And with high gas prices just maybe people will find alternative means of travel and power sources. What i've seen of Kerry he not much of a alternative. Its to bad Howard Dean fucked up. At least he had some passion and some alternative ideas.

 

It's because I am a woman. Say I'm living in the past, but I think combat is a man's job.

 

I'm glad we have a brave president.

 

Oh dude, I'm sorry. Eeeeek! I'm not a big listener of Pink Floyd.

 

You are so blind

 

So do you also believe that a woman's place is in the kitchen and not the workplace? That young girls should be taught "home economics" instead of math and science? If not, then you are a hypocrite. If women are supposed to be equal or better than men, and if true gender equality should be a goal of this country, then why is it only a man's job to fight and die for his country?

Don't forget that the idea of "chivalry" revolved solely around the idea that men are superior to women.

 

...............I'll let LickHERish rip you apart for that one.

 

Right right, just like how he... valiantly kept our nation's coasts under his watchful eye in the days of 'Nam.

 

Max, there comes a time when certain persons show themselves so willfully blind that its pointless to continue bothering to explain the reality of matters to them. Moonjava is just one such duly spun drone who repeats the mainstream mantras with near religious fervor.