The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: truth_seeker on July 10, 2017, 06:39:55 pm
-
The Foolishness of Never Trumpers
Bruce Bialosky Posted: Jul 09, 2017 12:01 AM
Note: On January 22, 2017 I wrote a column that made clear that the claim 17 intelligence agencies agreed that Russia was responsible for the interference in the election was a lie. Last week, both the NYT and AP retracted their statements and stated only three intelligence agencies were involved in the issue. Only the NSA, FBI and the CIA were involved. Nice to know the Coast Guard was protecting our coast and not reviewing Hillary’s emails.
You might have thought that once the election was over that the Never Trumpers would have wised up and at least have abided by the old rule, “If you cannot say something nice, then don’t say anything at all.” It seems that at least some of them have not wised up at all and realized they are enabling their own political adversaries by besmirching a Republican president.
Their misguided thinking was recently exemplified by Jonah Goldberg, one of the leaders of the Never Trump movement. On May 26th, Goldberg wrote (in his stream of consciousness published by National Review every Friday): “I have no problem with the President firing Jim Comey. I have no objection, in principle, to Trump declassifying information. I loved his counterprogramming to the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. But the way Trump does these things and so many others is counterproductive precisely because he doesn’t know how to do them to his advantage — and that’s because he doesn’t know where the lines are. The Invisi-Fences are like the security lasers in some ridiculous heist movie. Every time Trump crosses one, he gets cut and bleeds a little more political capital, in part because his missteps undercut his image as a mastermind who thinks six steps ahead.”
Jonah, don’t you get it? It is not the manner he does it, it is that he does it, period. Goldberg apparently is unaware of the Left-Right Principle. If Trump says left, they will say right. If he says blue, they will say red. They hate him and they hate what Republicans and Conservatives stand for. They feel (and I use that word precisely) that after eight years of Obama they have a birthright to lurch this country toward socialism, single-payer health insurance and confiscation of all guns owned by citizens. Trump by any other name (Kasich, Rubio, Bush) would get similar treatment, just with a little different coloring.
snip
https://townhall.com/columnists/brucebialosky/2017/07/09/the-foolishness-of-never-trumpers-n2351294
-
And some more common sense, from a source which has remained conservative, not some bs from Politico, NYT etc.
-
OK, you're pushing my limit here @truth_seeker :nometalk:
-
OK, you're pushing my limit here @truth_seeker :nometalk:
I hope you're just warming up @truth_seeker ..... It's past time for some facts and truth to see the light of day!
Thank you! :beer:
-
I'm not a never Trumper, but I can't understand this shut up and be good little sheeple nonsense. I loved Ronald Reagan and I still voiced my opinion and hoped my viewpoint would be heard and considered when it was different than Reagan's.
-
I hope you're just warming up @truth_seeker ..... It's past time for some facts and truth to see the light of day!
Thank you! :beer:
Amen, sister! :beer: @Right_in_Virginia
-
Same finger-pointing and conservative-bashing, different day.
Same "the media, they're the real enemy, it doesn't matter what Trump does because of that" argument, different day.
Same inability to get over the fact that we don't owe him our votes, different day.
-
I hope you're just warming up @truth_seeker ..... It's past time for some facts and truth to see the light of day!
Thank you! :beer:
Oh, you Trumpers are Good now you've got everyone talking about the foolishness of #nevertrumpers (whatever that is) and no one is talking about Don Jr. meeting Russians and Dad's most recent ridiculous tweet about Comey....damn I wish we had such brilliant people on our team.
-
I'm not a never Trumper, but I can't understand this shut up and be good little sheeple nonsense. I loved Ronald Reagan and I still voiced my opinion and hoped my viewpoint would be heard and considered when it was different than Reagan's.
The job of the public/voter is to question their leaders and not follow lock-step behind everything they say.
-
(http://i.imgur.com/Bqee14c.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/B43Hw6V.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/oMYko5n.png)
I'd rather be a fool than a traitor.
-
They act like Trump is the most delicate snowflake ever.
-
Oh, you Trumpers are Good now you've got everyone talking about the foolishness of #nevertrumpers (whatever that is) and no one is talking about Don Jr. meeting Russians and Dad's most recent ridiculous tweet about Comey....damn I wish we had such brilliant people on our team.
3-D chess *****rollingeyes*****
-
They act like Trump is the most delicate snowflake ever.
Kinda funny.
Early this morning on twitter I saw a "Frog Whistle" calling for all Pepes to stand ready to protect and defend "God Emperor Trump".
-
This thread better stay on track and not resort to insulting ea other or I will personally lock it.
-
The job of the public/voter is to question their leaders and not follow lock-step behind everything they say.
This is true @mystery-ak . Just as it is also true that the job of the public/voter is to not get trapped in the emotional rewards of group think.
Cold hard facts and accomplishments ---- they are the best decision-making tools a voter has. And they're the fodder for good, solid, thoughtful political debate.
-
This thread better stay on track and not resort to insulting ea other or I will personally lock it.
The source of the article is a well respected conservative source. Any "insults" would be due to the behavior of members, themselves.
-
Comeon Briefers WE can do this, please check your insult tendencies at the door, and empty your pockets of all matches and lighters, cause the smell of gasoline is strong in here. There are those among us that think it can't be done I have more faith in my fellow Briefer.
-
The source of the article is a well respected conservative source. Any "insults" would be due to the behavior of members, themselves.
That's exactly what I am talking about.
-
Comeon Briefers WE can do this, please check your insult tendencies at the door, and empty your pockets of all matches and lighters, cause the smell of gasoline is strong in here. There are those among us that think it can't be done I have more faith in my fellow Briefer.
The very title is an insult as is the intent of the "article".
-
You might have thought that once the election was over that the Never Trumpers would have wised up and at least have abided by the old rule, “If you cannot say something nice, then don’t say anything at all.”
There was never any such 'rule' regarding political discourse in this country about our leaders. You can read Adams and Jefferson and discover that yourself.
Telling us to 'shut up' about our elected rulers or we can be counted as enemies of the state is what tyrants and their mobs of supporters do.
It seems that at least some of them have not wised up at all and realized they are enabling their own political adversaries by besmirching a Republican president.
I will besmirch any president or politician from any party at any damn time I decide they say or do something stupid, harmful, egregious or contrary to liberty and my principles.
They hate him and they hate what Republicans and Conservatives stand for.
Trump is no Conservative, and never has been. He is a lifelong NYC Liberal Democrat and outspokenly proud of that fact. He is an opportunist and at best a Progressive Populist.
His daughter whom we did not elect, is pushing policy to enact PAID maternity leave for both fathers and mothers as law. Trump is seating her at the table of international leaders so he can pimp her Foundation Initiatives and pay for it with our tax dollars. Not exactly a Conservative thing to do.
And, given the Republican party's efforts to save ObamaCare and make it their own and renege on the promise to repeal the tyranny 'root and branch' - the Republican party itself no longer stands for things Conservatives do. Republicans now stand for what Democrats and Populists do.
They feel (and I use that word precisely) that after eight years of Obama they have a birthright to lurch this country toward socialism, single-payer health insurance...
Exactly what the Republican party itself is supporting and enabling to happen. Rather than repeal Socialism's Main avenue of permanence in the country - they want to make it their own with 'fixes' to only lower the threshold of pain to make it bearable until the entire purpose of the act reaches its fruition.
and confiscation of all guns owned by citizens.
Where is that particular legislation at? The scare-tactic doesn't work.
I can't understand this shut up and be good little sheeple nonsense.
That is all that the Trump Militant stands for. The public demand that we all must sing hosannas about Trump - genuflect Trump and his greatness, or shut up, go away and be ashamed - because if you dare opine anything that disses his regal highness in the White House, you are a traitor that serves the left - and you must be declared as such.
-
The very title is an insult as is the intent of the "article".
True Dat @Cripplecreek but when did 'their' opinion of US ever matter?
-
We are just so proud to have a president that insults another man's wife and insults a former President's daughter.
Our hearts just go pitter patter every time he gets his twitter going.
-
Jonah Goldberg is another in a long line of do nothing ivory tower NY/DC types over at National Review. They have done nothing to promote and institute any of the ideas they get payed by the word to vomit on their computer screens. The whole place is an irrelevant shambles since Buckley assumed room temp.
In short they are out of touch and suck.....
(https://www.nationalreview.com/sites/default/files/cover_overlay_120910.jpg)
(https://www.nationalreview.com/sites/default/files/uploaded/cover_20160215_toc.jpg)
-
The Foolishness of Never Trumpers
Never Trump Critics Look Foolish Today
Two articles with almost the same title saying almost the same thing posted by the same person...If I didn't know better I would say that this poster is trying to incite a fight on the forum...but that's just me... *****rollingeyes*****
-
The Foolishness of Never Trumpers
Never Trump Critics Look Foolish Today
Two articles with almost the same title saying almost the same thing posted by the same person...If I didn't know better I would say that this poster is trying to incite a fight on the forum...but that's just me... *****rollingeyes*****
Good eye at detecting the pattern.
-
My vote would be to lock them all now and immediately move them to the Archives... :tongue2:
-
The Foolishness of Never Trumpers
Never Trump Critics Look Foolish Today
Two articles with almost the same title saying almost the same thing posted by the same person...If I didn't know better I would say that this poster is trying to incite a fight on the forum...but that's just me... *****rollingeyes*****
Is that the reason neither you, nor @rangerrebew posted them? :laugh:
-
The Foolishness of Never Trumpers
Never Trump Critics Look Foolish Today
Two articles with almost the same title saying almost the same thing posted by the same person...If I didn't know better I would say that this poster is trying to incite a fight on the forum...but that's just me... *****rollingeyes*****
It ain't just you, sister. 888high58888
-
My vote would be to lock them all now and immediately move them to the Archives... :tongue2:
Why not just pass the thread by without posting on it....especially now that it upsets your sensibilities? @corbe
-
The Foolishness of Never Trumpers
Never Trump Critics Look Foolish Today
Two articles with almost the same title saying almost the same thing posted by the same person...If I didn't know better I would say that this poster is trying to incite a fight on the forum...but that's just me... *****rollingeyes*****
I simply reviewed and posted recent material, from a leading conservative source (Townhall). (Not Politico, NYT etc. as has often been the case here, to support a #nevertrump agenda)
Can GOPBR members address viewpoints from conservative sources? Or is overt profanity, genital references, required?
-
The Foolishness of Never Trumpers
Never Trump Critics Look Foolish Today
Two articles with almost the same title saying almost the same thing posted by the same person...If I didn't know better I would say that this poster is trying to incite a fight on the forum...but that's just me... *****rollingeyes*****
The notion that any criticism of a person automatically makes you an opponent of that person is the type of thought process that characterizes liberal Progressives, not conservatives.
-
Why not just pass the thread by without posting on it....especially now that it upsets your sensibilities? @corbe
@DCPatriot I'm OK with this, and the other threads your compatriot posted, all within the span of 20 minutes, This is what Free Speech looks like. Rarely do I insult anyone here, it's not in my DNA AND also against established RULES!
-
@DCPatriot I'm OK with this, and the other threads your compatriot posted, all within the span of 20 minutes, This is what Free Speech looks like. Rarely do I insult anyone here, it's not in my DNA AND also against established RULES!
Can we hold you to that?
-
The notion that any criticism of a person automatically makes you an opponent of that person is the type of thought process that characterizes liberal Progressives, not conservatives.
Don't come in here with that notion that it's "any" criticism. That's bullshit and a game with words.
-
The Foolishness of Never Trumpers
Never Trump Critics Look Foolish Today
Two articles with almost the same title saying almost the same thing posted by the same person...If I didn't know better I would say that this poster is trying to incite a fight on the forum...but that's just me... *****rollingeyes*****
My first thought was, "Troll much?"
-
Oh, you Trumpers are Good now you've got everyone talking about the foolishness of #nevertrumpers (whatever that is) and no one is talking about Don Jr. meeting Russians and Dad's most recent ridiculous tweet about Comey....damn I wish we had such brilliant people on our team.
....you left out Ivanka sitting in for Trump @ G20. I believe credit should be given when due, but the aforementioned is troubling.
-
I simply reviewed and posted recent material, from a leading conservative source (Townhall). (Not Politico, NYT etc. as has often been the case here, to support a #nevertrump agenda)
Can GOPBR members address viewpoints from conservative sources? Or is overt profanity, genital references, required?
I posts from all sites everyday to give readers both sides and to be fair to all members..sorry you haven't seen them.
-
Can we hold you to that?
Absolutely, other than a couple of spats with my mentor @Frank Cannon I'm pretty clean, check my posting history.
Earlier in another one of your Threads I complimented and Thanked You for being a part of this.
-
Absolutely, other than a couple of spats with my mentor @Frank Cannon I'm pretty clean, check my posting history.
Earlier in another one of your Threads I complimented and Thanked You for being a part of this.
Don't listen to anything this poster says. My unnamed sources tell me he is a plant from the Dept of Interior here to push the Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians, West Fork Russian River Bank Stabilization and Habitat Restoration.
Very diabolical.
-
Don't listen to anything this poster says. My unnamed sources tell me he is a plant from the Dept of Interior here to push the Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians, West Fork Russian River Bank Stabilization and Habitat Restoration.
Very diabolical.
And don't believe a damn thing @Frank Cannon ever posts, his wife emailed me and told me he voted for Hillary.
-
And don't believe a damn thing @Frank Cannon ever posts, his wife emailed me and told me he voted for Hillary.
Which wife?
-
Which wife?
The one you left in Utah with the 4 others and 18 kids.
-
****drummer
-
Discussing your sexual proclivities always makes people feel better about themselves @Frank Cannon
-
The one you left in Utah with the 4 others and 18 kids.
I had to leave them. The Mormons kicked me out of the club house because I wasn't related to any of the wives.
-
Which wife?
I've always known Frank, that you would be the one person in America who had a harem. I have to admire it. I imagine it takes a lot of alcohol and a whole bunch of personal crazy to have the testicular fortitude to deal with more than one woman under one roof so-to-speak.
-
I'm just envious of @Frank Cannon my love life is circulating the drain right now and he's always got more than he can handle.
-
I posts from all sites everyday to give readers both sides and to be fair to all members..sorry you haven't seen them.
Apparently not enough, to stir things up like these selections from Townhall, is a reliably conservative source.
-
Apparently not enough, to stir things up like these selections from Townhall, is a reliably conservative source.
That's not true...go look at my posting history...I do townhall all the time, NRO[which screws with my browser] Gateway Pundit...etc etc etc...and RUSH!
-
I've always known Frank, that you would be the one person in America who had a harem. I have to admire it. I imagine it takes a lot of alcohol and a whole bunch of personal crazy to have the testicular fortitude to deal with more than one woman under one roof so-to-speak.
A close friend of mine, Ted Bundy, once told me that there were 2 ways of handling out of line wives. One was divorce. For the life of me I can't remember the 2nd.
-
That's not true...go look at my posting history...I do townhall all the time, NRO[which screws with my browser] Gateway Pundit...etc etc etc...and RUSH!
But I guess it's never enough!
-
That's not true...go look at my posting history...I do townhall all the time, NRO[which screws with my browser] Gateway Pundit...etc etc etc...and RUSH!
That is because you're not posting essays and Op-Ed pieces intended to shove a finger into the eye sockets of Conservatives who will not bend the knee to Trump and shower him with hosannas. That is sacrilege.
It's a stick in their craw that anyone on this board would have issues with anything Trump says, does, tweets or who sits in for him at G-20 summits while doling out taxpayer funds to support his daughter's foundation initiative. Those kinds of discussions need to be derailed with cheerleading the greatness of Trump that we enemies of the state fail to acquiesce to.
-
That is because you're not posting essays and Op-Ed pieces intended to shove a finger into the eye sockets of Conservatives who will not bend the knee to Trump and shower him with hosannas. That is sacrilege.
It's a stick in their craw that anyone on this board would have issues with anything Trump says, does, tweets or who sits in for him at G-20 summits while doling out taxpayer funds to support his daughter's foundation initiative. Those kinds of discussions need to be derailed with cheerleading the greatness of Trump that we enemies of the state fail to acquiesce to.
When I first started TBR I did almost all the posting...finally after many years members have taken up that charge which I very much appreciate. I still go through all my bookmarks everyday to find articles that will be of interest,,not counting breaking political news....I am not asking for any kudos but By God to accuse me of not posting the right articles sticks in my craw.
-
I've noticed another thing about your postings @mystery-ak you do have a tendency to put Editorial/Opinions pieces in the appropriate section as I try to do also and you rarely, if ever, post incendiary stuff, as I and @truth_seeker are guilty of.
-
The problem is, any criticism of the man puts you in the NT or Globalist category. It's the reason I split from TOS where they're regularly begging for money and regularly offline.
-
Whatever Trump's done in the past, at this point - with Haley at the U.N. Mattis as Sec Def, Sessions as AG, Pruitt at EPA, DeVoss at Fed Ed - I'm having trouble desperately clinging to his Not being my first choice.
He was a this that and the other.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zh2DeQtVyJM
-
I've noticed another thing about your postings @mystery-ak you do have a tendency to put Editorial/Opinions pieces in the appropriate section as I try to do also and you rarely, if ever, post incendiary stuff, as I and @truth_seeker are guilty of.
So positive material about the Republican President, on a site named "GOP" with a Reagan picture on the masthead, is "Incendiary?"
-
So positive material about the Republican President, on a site named "GOP" with a Reagan picture on the masthead, is "Incendiary?"
No @truth_seeker I didn't say that and that was not the intention of my 'quite factual' post. These are clearly opinion pieces allowed, by the way, to stay in Politics and in spite of the way Trumpers feel about them, they are quite incendiary to some of us as has been noted by some members, that you would readily classify as nevertrumpers (whatever that is).
It's all good, this place is middle of the road I can post my stuff that would appear to you and your buddies as nevertrump stuff and you can post yours....see how simple that is?
As far as you bringing up that ol Reagan in the Masthead BS again, it's crap in my book and used way to often here by some members as an attack on this Board.
-
So positive material about the Republican President, on a site named "GOP" with a Reagan picture on the masthead, is "Incendiary?"
Of course not, but I'm sure you're not so obtuse not to know, since you posted two different articles with similarly worded titles, that articles about foolish Never Trumpers can be incendiary.
-
Of course not, but I'm sure you're not so obtuse not to know, since you posted two different articles with similarly worded titles, that articles about foolish Never Trumpers can be incendiary.
I posted several articles, not just two. They came from Townhall, a reliable conservative source. I didn't write them.
If that is obtuse, so be it.
-
If that is obtuse, so be it.
Indeed.
-
The Foolishness of Never Trumpers
Never Trump Critics Look Foolish Today
Two articles with almost the same title saying almost the same thing posted by the same person...If I didn't know better I would say that this poster is trying to incite a fight on the forum...but that's just me... *****rollingeyes*****
That was my opinion as well, and why I have not bothered to comment on this bit of cheerleading.
Where's the wall?
Obamacare is still in effect.
Hillary is still at large.
Etc.
Etc.
Etc.
Y'all don't hurt your arms patting your selves on the back. He has done some good.
But there are 3 1/2 more years in this term yet, and a lot of unresolved issues.
-
That was my opinion as well, and why I have not bothered to comment on this bit of cheerleading.
Where's the wall?
Obamacare is still in effect.
Hillary is still at large.
Etc.
Etc.
Etc.
Y'all don't hurt your arms patting your selves on the back. He has done some good.
But there are 3 1/2 more years in this term yet, and a lot of unresolved issues.
You know what they say about arguing on the Internet and the Special Olympics (as offensive as the saying may be).
-
Don't come in here with that notion that it's "any" criticism. That's bullshit and a game with words.
I'll tell you what's "bullshit": the notion that any of us who dare criticize Trump for any reason whatsoever are undeserving of reasoned arguments to the contrary, as opposed to false accusations and ad hominem attacks.
That's not only bullshit, it is cultist behavior.
I happen to like quite a number of things that Trump has done, but do not dare tell me to refrain from criticizing him when I think he deserves it.
It is a common and very human mistake to view as "enemies" those whose only transgression is to recognize the flaws in your heroes.
-
You might have thought that once the election was over that the Never Trumpers would have wised up and at least have abided by the old rule, “If you cannot say something nice, then don’t say anything at all.”
Is this person crazy? He actually believes Americans should refrain from criticizing a president?
Maybe he'd be happier living in a monarchy.
-
I'll tell you what's "bullshit": the notion that any of us who dare criticize Trump for any reason whatsoever are undeserving of reasoned arguments to the contrary, as opposed to false accusations and ad hominem attacks.
That's not only bullshit, it is cultist behavior.
I happen to like quite a number of things that Trump has done, but do not dare tell me to refrain from criticizing him when I think he deserves it.
It is a common and very human mistake to view as "enemies" those whose only transgression is to recognize the flaws in your heroes.
Well said! :da man:
-
I simply reviewed and posted recent material, from a leading conservative source (Townhall). (Not Politico, NYT etc. as has often been the case here, to support a #nevertrump agenda)
@truth_seeker
Is there a list of approved sources we should post from? Conservative Treehouse, Gateway Pundit, maybe a couple of others....because I want to promote the correct agenda.
-
The notion that any criticism of a person automatically makes you an opponent of that person is the type of thought process that characterizes liberal Progressives, not conservatives.
@andy58-in-nh
Even if it did, that would be fine. It's perfectly okay not to like Trump, even though it's often portrayed as a character failing/spiritual problem or whatever.
-
When I first started TBR I did almost all the posting...finally after many years members have taken up that charge which I very much appreciate. I still go through all my bookmarks everyday to find articles that will be of interest,,not counting breaking political news....I am not asking for any kudos but By God to accuse me of not posting the right articles sticks in my craw.
@mystery-ak
You deserve kudos Myst. I thank you every day for the on-line life preserver after the rude (anti-conservative) purge at TOS.
This place is far superior to TOS, and you have done a lot to make it a pleasurable site.
-
@mystery-ak
You deserve kudos Myst. I thank you every day for the on-line life preserver after the rude (anti-conservative) purge at TOS.
This place is far superior to TOS, and you have done a lot to make it a pleasurable site.
Thank you that means a lot to me.
-
When I first started TBR I did almost all the posting...finally after many years members have taken up that charge which I very much appreciate. I still go through all my bookmarks everyday to find articles that will be of interest,,not counting breaking political news....I am not asking for any kudos but By God to accuse me of not posting the right articles sticks in my craw.
There are many articles I'd love to post but the poor old gerbil running my poor old iPad has just about had it. She can't/copy paste at all. I've asked for two things for my birthday this summer: My kids' baptism portraits formally matted and framed and a new iPad. If the latter occurs, watch out TBR!
-
There are many articles I'd love to post but the poor old gerbil running my poor old iPad has just about had it. She can't/copy paste at all. I've asked for two things for my birthday this summer: My kids' baptism portraits formally matted and framed and a new iPad. If the latter occurs, watch out TBR!
LOL! We're ready.
-
@RoosGirl @Sanguine
I agree, we need more of a woman's prospective here, the reek of testosterone is sometimes overwhelming.
-
@RoosGirl @Sanguine
I agree, we need more of a woman's prospective here, the reek of testosterone is sometimes overwhelming.
It's OK from a slight distance.
-
I'll tell you what's "bullshit": the notion that any of us who dare criticize Trump for any reason whatsoever are undeserving of reasoned arguments to the contrary, as opposed to false accusations and ad hominem attacks.
That's not only bullshit, it is cultist behavior.
I happen to like quite a number of things that Trump has done, but do not dare tell me to refrain from criticizing him when I think he deserves it.
It is a common and very human mistake to view as "enemies" those whose only transgression is to recognize the flaws in your heroes.
Get off your high horse, Andy. Nobody is telling you to refrain from criticizing anybody.
My point was clear. Stop deflecting.
-
72 posts into the thread ... and no discussion, pro or con, on the actual substance of the article. For instance, are there no thoughts on this passage from the article:
One of my favorite statements from the Never Trumpers is that Trump is not really a conservative. This is after his successful appointment of Neil Gorsuch, his nomination of many other judges who have not been questioned as to their conservative credentials and enacting what some believe is the single most conservative cabinet in U.S. history. Just by appointing Scott Pruitt at EPA, Betsy DeVos at the Education Department and Scott Gottlieb at the FDA -- not to mention Ajit Pai at the FCC -- is enough to warm the hearts of any Republican. His constant campaigning for Republican candidates and the victories has no effect on the Never Trumpers. His tax proposal and move to dismantle Obamacare does not mollify them. His moves at the border causing the reduction of illegal entries does not seemingly encourage them. None of these have given solace to the Never Trumpers.
I've been saying this for months now .... has no one else a thought on this:
If the Never Trumpers were paying attention, they would be reading the attacks on Vice President Pence. In the Left’s dream scenario, Trump will either resign or be impeached. They are already softening the ground that Pence walks on with attacks on him. If there ever was proof positive that it isn’t Trump, Google Pence and read the multitude of columns attacking the possibility of him being president.
-
72 posts into the thread ... and no discussion, pro or con, on the actual substance of the article.
BRRZZZZZZZZZTTTT!!!!!
WRONG.
Go back up to reply No. 19. The article was quoted from the snippets provided and replied to directly.
You overlooked it.
Or chose to ignore it, but there was discussion about the actual substance of the article made.
But let's get to your chosen snippets:
...and enacting what some believe is the single most conservative cabinet in U.S. history
some believe...
I'm not one of the 'some'. Their fruits are yet to be determined.
But 'Conservative'??
Trump's daughter, who apparently has some kind of office in his cabinet is suggesting policy mandates (i.e.: paid family leave) along with sitting in for her daddy among world leaders when he has to go tinkle and just after he urged them to pony up taxpayer funds for her foundation initiative that he said he was giving 50 million in taxpayer bucks to 'jumpstart' it.
...is enough to warm the hearts of any Republican. His constant campaigning for Republican candidates and the victories has no effect on the Never Trumpers.
That would be explicitly due the fact we are not Republicans first and foremost. We are Conservatives first and foremost. Some of us - are no longer part of your inept, corrupt and useless party.
His tax proposal and move to dismantle Obamacare does not mollify them.
He tosses a few crumbs to placate Conservative notions? (after threatening to primary the members of the Freedom Caucus that opposed his total support for the first GOP ObamaCare rewrite), and suddenly we're supposed to kiss his ass in devotionals forevermore??? I find this hilarious since just about every Conservative on this board thumbed-up Trump's call to totally repeal ObamaCare after the rewrite of ObamaCare looked to fail once again in the Senate, and the Trump Militant disparaged the thumbs up from those they now consider 'enemies'. Or as they all said to us last year - they did not want, nor need our help.
His moves at the border causing the reduction of illegal entries does not seemingly encourage them. None of these have given solace to the Never Trumpers.
Do we really want to start citing all his walk backs from The Wall to deporting Dreamers to slowing the rates of Muslim 'refugees' that has not happened yet?
As to the worries over Trumps resignation or impeachment and worries over Pence - I don't even bother to pay that crap any mind or attention at all.
Might as well threaten us that the Democrats will take all our guns away if impeachment articles are filed in the House against Trump.
-
72 posts into the thread ... and no discussion, pro or con, on the actual substance of the article. For instance, are there no thoughts on this passage from the article:
I've been saying this for months now .... has no one else a thought on this:
I do @Right_in_Virginia
One of my favorite statements from the Never Trumpers is that Trump is not really a conservative.
He's not, he's just playing one and I will add somewhat successfully cause a lot of people believe him.
This is after his successful appointment of Neil Gorsuch, his nomination of many other judges who have not been questioned as to their conservative credentials and enacting what some believe is the single most conservative cabinet in U.S. history. Just by appointing Scott Pruitt at EPA, Betsy DeVos at the Education Department and Scott Gottlieb at the FDA -- not to mention Ajit Pai at the FCC -- is enough to warm the hearts of any Republican.
This has as much to do with that nutless wonder McConnell finally growing a set as Trump nominating them
His constant campaigning for Republican candidates and the victories has no effect on the Never Trumpers.
Don't forget his Threats of primaring, just recently, members of the HFC
His tax proposal and move to dismantle Obamacare does not mollify them.
Yea get back to me when something worthwhile actually happens.
His moves at the border causing the reduction of illegal entries does not seemingly encourage them. None of these have given solace to the Never Trumpers.
Four letters DACA
-
Low hanging fruit there @INVAR GMTA :beer:
-
I do @Right_in_Virginia .../
Good start @corbe But if you can move past the emotion and stay with the facts, you and I could have some meaningful discussions.
I'm looking forward to it. :beer:
-
Is this person crazy? He actually believes Americans should refrain from criticizing a president?
Maybe he'd be happier living in a monarchy.
After the primaries, After what has been one of most incredible campaigns of smears and lies, to try to throw that rule, of all rules, in our faces is laughable. Oh, Hell NO! :silly:
If I can't say anything good, I will still call 'em as I see 'em.
-
I wish that were so @Right_in_Virginia and the hangup is clearly on my end, I just never developed a fondness for NY Liberals, regardless of the party that nominates them and the labels everyone plasters all over them.
Hopefully after his reelection yall will set up camps for my reeducation, tax free of course covered by Trumpcare.
-
This thread calls for one of these:
(https://basspro.scene7.com/is/image/BassPro/1969090_1211200228?defaultImage=noimage_avail&&layer=comp&hei=90&wid=90&fit=constrain,1&wid=85&hei=85&fmt=jpg)
-
I wish that were so @Right_in_Virginia and the hangup is clearly on my end, I just never developed a fondness for NY Liberals, regardless of the party that nominates them and the labels everyone plasters all over them.
Hopefully after his reelection yall will set up camps for my reeducation, tax free of course covered by Trumpcare.
Did you forget the sarcasm tag @corbe :pondering:
-
Single most conservative cabinet? Shall we discuss Rex Tillerson then?
-
No sarcasm, @Right_in_Virginia by then I will be ready:
removed incendiary picture for Forum decorum.-edit
-
No sarcasm, @Right_in_Virginia by then I will be ready:
(https://pics.me.me/i-for-one-welcome-our-new-orange-overlord-12474245.png)
Allrighty then .... I'm going to quietly leave this thread @corbe and pray you do not follow me. :whistle:
-
The job of the public/voter is to question their leaders and not follow lock-step behind everything they say.
(https://cdn.meme.am/cache/instances/folder840/64155840.jpg)
-
We are just so proud to have a president that insults another man's wife and insults a former President's daughter.
Our hearts just go pitter patter every time he gets his twitter going.
Does this mean that those who climax at every one of Donaldus Minimus's self-destructive tweets are simply Twitterpated? ;)
-
After the primaries, After what has been one of most incredible campaigns of smears and lies, to try to throw that rule, of all rules, in our faces is laughable. Oh, Hell NO! :silly:
If I can't say anything good, I will still call 'em as I see 'em.
@Smokin Joe
And a hallelujah from this corner...
-
Bruce Bialosky Posted: Jul 09, 2017 12:01 AM
You might have thought that once the election was over that the Never Trumpers would have wised up and at least have abided by the old rule, “If you cannot say something nice, then don’t say anything at all.” It seems that at least some of them have not wised up at all and realized they are enabling their own political adversaries by besmirching a Republican president.
I thought this was what Donaldus Minimus's sycophancy said during the election campaign, too, and well enough before the
primaries ended and the general campaign began.
You have not converted a man because you have silenced him.---John Viscount Morley.
Their misguided thinking was recently exemplified by Jonah Goldberg, one of the leaders of the Never Trump movement. On May 26th, Goldberg wrote (in his stream of consciousness published by National Review every Friday): “I have no problem with the President firing Jim Comey. I have no objection, in principle, to Trump declassifying information. I loved his counterprogramming to the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. But the way Trump does these things and so many others is counterproductive precisely because he doesn’t know how to do them to his advantage — and that’s because he doesn’t know where the lines are. The Invisi-Fences are like the security lasers in some ridiculous heist movie. Every time Trump crosses one, he gets cut and bleeds a little more political capital, in part because his missteps undercut his image as a mastermind who thinks six steps ahead.”[/b]
It's not for nothing that even some of Donaldus Minimus's otherwise staunchest supporters shake their heads
while reminding themselves and us that his own actual worst enemy is himself.
-
Good start @corbe But if you can move past the emotion and stay with the facts, you and I could have some meaningful discussions.
And that right there is a perfect example of why a "meaningful discussion" is impossible with GOP Party Loyalists and Trump acolytes.
Why bother?
Because just like the Left - a "Meaningful discussion" or "Dialog" requires that we drop any opposition or critical observations whatsoever, because you folks deem it 'emotional' and 'without basis in facts', without citing any facts beyond insistent statements made as though they are holy writ.
You decry that there was no 'discussion' "pro-or con' about the substance of the Op-Ed. You were told that was not true because a direct reply to the author's points was already made earlier in the thread.
Now you suggest we must move past 'emotion' and 'stay with facts' in order to have a 'meaningful discussion'?
What "facts" would those be? That some state Trump is the greatest Conservative since George Washington and Ronald Reagan? Those kinds of 'facts' I read ad nauseum from those writing hit pieces against anyone not walking in lock-step with your leader?
This is just like the arguments one would have with a Climate Change nutcase. No amount of logic, proof of fraud or or common sense will detract the True Believer from declaring everyone who does not walk in lockstep with their leaders and agenda to be a 'heretic' or worse.
"Meaningful discussions' are as elusive with them as you are illustrating them to be with Always Trump.
-
You have not converted a man because you have silenced him.---John Viscount Morley.
All it means is that you don't hear when they mass against you to march.
-
I was a little chilly tonight. Good to see the fire still burning.....
(http://i2.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/021/521/DumpsterFire2.jpg)
-
All it means is that you don't hear when they mass against you to march.
Plus ça Change, Plus c'est la Même Chose
From the Silent Majority to the Silenced Majority? NO!
-
Single most conservative cabinet? Shall we discuss Rex Tillerson then?
Oh yes lets discuss Tillerson and his homosexual agenda
-
Oh yes lets discuss Tillerson and his homosexual agenda
Tillerson---the man who said Russia and America have the same objectives in Syria? And that where we differ, Russia might be correct?
That dude is in over his head.
-
Oh yes lets discuss Tillerson and his homosexual agenda
What homosexual agenda? For many years Tillerson headed a company that held the line against this onslaught.
-
Tillerson---the man who said Russia and America have the same objectives in Syria? And that where we differ, Russia might be correct?
That dude is in over his head.
Trump’s Sec. of State Rex Tillerson Lobbied For Gay Youth in Boy Scouts
http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-w-chapman/trumps-sec-state-rex-tillerson-lobbied-gay-youth-boy-scouts
“No youth may be denied membership in the Boy Scouts of America on the basis of sexual orientation or preference alone.”
-
Trump’s Sec. of State Rex Tillerson Lobbied For Gay Youth in Boy Scouts
http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-w-chapman/trumps-sec-state-rex-tillerson-lobbied-gay-youth-boy-scouts
“No youth may be denied membership in the Boy Scouts of America on the basis of sexual orientation or preference alone.”
His position at ExxonMobil was direct opposite. He even mentioned he would not crater to pressure to provide same sex benefits, when other companies were caving.
-
His position at ExxonMobil was direct opposite. He even mentioned he would not crater to pressure to provide same sex benefits, when other companies were caving.
Why, do you suppose, he allowed the allowed the celebration of homosexual pride at the State Dept. last month?
-
Why, do you suppose, he allowed the allowed the celebration of homosexual pride at the State Dept. last month?
Good question. All I know as CEO at ExxonMobil he was not homo-friendly. How or why he changed? I have no idea.
-
His position at ExxonMobil was direct opposite. He even mentioned he would not crater to pressure to provide same sex benefits, when other companies were caving.
@catfish1957
@Cripplecreek
That's true. If you read about Tillerson and the Boy Scouts, some claim "pragmatism " led him to lobby for gays to be admitted. So that's comforting.
It's also said he prayed about it and believed he was led to the right decision for the boys' sakes. No doubt...
-
@catfish1957
@Cripplecreek
That's true. If you read about Tillerson and the Boy Scouts, some claim "pragmatism " led him to lobby for gays to be admitted. So that's comforting.
It's also said he prayed about it and believed he was led to the right decision for the boys' sakes. No doubt...
He also joined Ivanka Trump in "recognizing" gay pride.
-
Good question. All I know as CEO at ExxonMobil he was not homo-friendly. How or why he changed? I have no idea.
One's a corporation, deemed "a person" by law. The CEO ultimately speaks and acts on behalf of the shareholders, and can lawfully deny them recognition.
The other is the government that wrote the discrimination laws. More importantly, enforces them.
It's a matter of being held to a higher standard, whether one likes it or not.
-
@catfish1957
@Cripplecreek
That's true. If you read about Tillerson and the Boy Scouts, some claim "pragmatism " led him to lobby for gays to be admitted. So that's comforting.
It's also said he prayed about it and believed he was led to the right decision for the boys' sakes. No doubt...
Perhaps, he has a close family member or friend who've given him a broader perspective?
-
Perhaps, he has a close family member or friend who've given him a broader perspective?
@DCPatriot
That could be, although I wouldn't call it having a broader perspective. I'd call it allowing personal involvement to sway one away from what he knows is right.
-
@DCPatriot
That could be, although I wouldn't call it having a broader perspective. I'd call it allowing personal involvement to sway one away from what he knows is right.
I've got gay relatives and they haven't "broadened" my perspectives despite me treating them like any other family members.
-
I've got gay relatives and they haven't "broadened" my perspectives despite me treating them like any other family members.
Same would be true for me. I have a friend whose sister got tired of men and decided she was a lesbian. This chick turned into a tyrant, bullying any family member who didn't approve, threatening to remove her presence forever. My friend gave in and took her three daughters to the lesbian's "wedding". The girls are in a conservative Catholic school, so reconciling the wedding with school/church teaching must be challenging.
-
@DCPatriot
That could be, although I wouldn't call it having a broader perspective. I'd call it allowing personal involvement to sway one away from what he knows is right.
Or, perhaps, personal involvement that swayed him to the conclusion that myth-based discrimination against homosexuals isn't right.
It is perhaps unfortunate that the SCOTUS ruled as quickly as it did; the public's acceptance of civil equality for homosexuals was increasing rapidly as more and more folks realized that they knew homosexuals at work, at church, and in their own families. States were lining up to change their laws, and employers were lining up to change their benefit practices.
Familiarity is the true enemy of intolerance.
-
myth-based discrimination
@Jazzhead
Still "disaffected", I see, lol.
-
I've got gay relatives and they haven't "broadened" my perspectives despite me treating them like any other family members.
Well, that's a start, @Cripplecreek .
^-^
-
@Jazzhead
Still "disaffected", I see, lol.
My opposition is to discrimination, not religion.
-
My opposition is to discrimination, not religion.
LOL! Religion is discriminating.
-
One's a corporation, deemed "a person" by law. The CEO ultimately speaks and acts on behalf of the shareholders, and can lawfully deny them recognition.
The other is the government that wrote the discrimination laws. More importantly, enforces them.
It's a matter of being held to a higher standard, whether one likes it or not.
So a gov't agency hositng a gay pride month is what is necessary to uphold discrimination laws?
-
My opposition is to discrimination, not religion.
Discrimination is bad or good depending on the issue at hand. People discriminate every day in order to make correct choices.
-
dis·crim·i·nate
dəˈskriməˌnāt/Submit
verb
1.
recognize a distinction; differentiate.
"babies can discriminate between different facial expressions of emotion"
synonyms: differentiate, distinguish, draw a distinction, tell the difference, tell apart; separate, separate the sheep from the goats, separate the wheat from the chaff
"he cannot discriminate between fact and fiction"
-
My opposition is to discrimination, not religion.
Right.... that 'myth-based' thing you supposedly don't discriminate against.
I choose to discriminate against those opposed to discrimination.... with prejudice.
-
Trump is an idiot and an embarrassment to this nation as are his followers...
I ignored politics for the most part for the last eight years with Obama so its not difficult to do the same with Trump. :shrug: :shrug:
I must say I can't help looking in on the threads his acolytes post to get my morning chuckle...keep it up guys and girls your efforts are not in vain :tongue2:
-
My opposition is to discrimination, not religion.
You refer to Christianity as a myth and then claim not to discriminate :silly: :silly: :silly:
-
Or, perhaps, personal involvement that swayed him to the conclusion that myth-based discrimination against homosexuals isn't right.
It is perhaps unfortunate that the SCOTUS ruled as quickly as it did; the public's acceptance of civil equality for homosexuals was increasing rapidly as more and more folks realized that they knew homosexuals at work, at church, and in their own families. States were lining up to change their laws, and employers were lining up to change their benefit practices.
Familiarity is the true enemy of intolerance.
The only time there is "myth-based discrimination against homosexuals" is when Liberals such as yourself claim that gays are denied the same rights as straight people.
It's not only a myth...it's a lie.
-
Perhaps, he has a close family member or friend who've given him a broader perspective?
I hesitated about even looking at this thread for a couple of days but I've read all 4 or 5 pages and been amazed at the civility shown by all. Congrats!
I wasn't tempted to post a reply until I saw your post here.
There is nothing like having one's own child or someone you care deeply for get into behavior you previously despised. It certainly makes you think and get perspective.
You can either lose the person or broaden your own horizons.
-
I may have spoken too soon about civility because I didn't read Page 5 when I posted.
There is nothing like a discussion of homosexuality to bring out the beast in people.
-
LOL! Religion is discriminating.
I can recall a time when being thought of as a "discriminating" person was considered a compliment.
-
I may have spoken too soon about civility because I didn't read Page 5 when I posted.
There is nothing like a discussion of homosexuality to bring out the beast in people.
It's only nasty when people try to falsely claim discrimination and bigotry that doesn't exist.
-
So a gov't agency hositng a gay pride month is what is necessary to uphold discrimination laws?
More like being 'extremely flexible', aka politically correctness.
Nobody wants anyone screaming discrimination, in a courtroom, or to the NYT.
-
It's only nasty when people try to falsely claim discrimination and bigotry that doesn't exist.
You'll have to be a little clearer ...I just got up.
-
More like being 'extremely flexible', aka politically correctness.
PC has been one of the Liberal minefields that has led to the downfall of this country. It's a form of speech control.
Nobody wants anyone screaming discrimination, in a courtroom, or to the NYT.
And yet they'll do it anyway.
-
You'll have to be a little clearer ...I just got up.
Certain people here are under the false notion that gays are discriminated against and somehow denied their Constitutional rights that you and I enjoy. Said person ascribes that to the "bigotry and discrimination" of Christians.
This person has a very hard time comprehending that there is not one Constitutional right that a gay person is being denied.
His responses to this fact are what bring on the ugliness.
-
This thread calls for one of these:
(https://basspro.scene7.com/is/image/BassPro/1969090_1211200228?defaultImage=noimage_avail&&layer=comp&hei=90&wid=90&fit=constrain,1&wid=85&hei=85&fmt=jpg)
@Smokin Joe
It warms my graybeard heart to see someone who realizes the etymology of the term "troll". A "troll" is someone who "trolls for reactions" by dragging bait through the forum.
-
Trump is an idiot and an embarrassment to this nation as are his followers...
I ignored politics for the most part for the last eight years with Obama so its not difficult to do the same with Trump. :shrug: :shrug:
I must say I can't help looking in on the threads his acolytes post to get my morning chuckle...keep it up guys and girls your efforts are not in vain :tongue2:
I guess they must have missed this.
Yet, being grouped as "haters" brings out the MODs or the Boss herself.
I can be called an idiot? I can be called an embarrassment to the nation?
...BFD! Suck it up, DC.
But call members whose posting history contains 98% negativity and criticism of everything Trump...or God forbid, his family..."Haters"?
-
I guess they must have missed this.
Yet, being grouped as "haters" brings out the MODs or the Boss herself.
I can be called an idiot? I can be called an embarrassment to the nation?
...BFD! Suck it up, DC.
But call members whose posting history contains 98% negativity and criticism of everything Trump...or God forbid, his family..."Haters"?
(https://www.drugs.com/images/pills/fio/BAY01630.JPG)
-
Certain people here are under the false notion that gays are discriminated against and somehow denied their Constitutional rights that you and I enjoy. Said person ascribes that to the "bigotry and discrimination" of Christians.
This person has a very hard time comprehending that there is not one Constitutional right that a gay person is being denied.
His responses to this fact are what bring on the ugliness.
Look out. When you refer to other people like that, someone here is likely to call you Passive-Aggressive.
I believe that some people are born gay and I don't hate them for it. I think gay marriage may be a step in the right direction .... eventually ... to promote a healthy lifestyle for gays.
It's not what they can't help that annoys people. It's what they can help, but don't.
As a matter of fact, it has not been THAT long since they were discriminated against. That famous mathematician who broke the German code in WW2 was legally discriminated against in England.
There's always a period ... way too long in some case ... after people who were discriminated against get rights ... that those people become the haters themselves. Look how long it's lasted with Black people.
I have way too many dear friends and relatives who are gay to hate them. And I'm not going around feeling virtuous because I 'treat them well.'
Posh! You can break your arm if you keep patting yourself on the back too long and hard.
-
Look out. When you refer to other people like that, someone here is likely to call you Passive-Aggressive.
I believe that some people are born gay and I don't hate them for it. I think gay marriage may be a step in the right direction .... eventually ... to promote a healthy lifestyle for gays.
It's not what they can't help that annoys people. It's what they can help, but don't.
As a matter of fact, it has not been THAT long since they were discriminated against. That famous mathematician who broke the German code in WW2 was legally discriminated against in England.
There's always a period ... way too long in some case ... after people who were discriminated against get rights ... that those people become the haters themselves. Look how long it's lasted with Black people.
I have way too many dear friends and relatives who are gay to hate them. And I'm not going around feeling virtuous because I 'treat them well.'
Posh! You can break your arm if you keep patting yourself on the back too long and hard.
You nor Jazz can point to one right in the Constitution that gays are prevented from enjoying that you and I do.
This whole myth that they are somehow being denied rights is stupid.
Trying to compare the struggle of an ethnic race to someone who chooses a sexual lifestyle is a disgrace to all those that struggled for Civil Rights for that ethnic group.
There is nothing normal about the gay lifestyle and gay "marriage" certainly doesn't promote normality...it simply puts a spotlight on something that is certainly an abomination to what marriage is supposed to be all about.
-
The job of the public/voter is to question their leaders and not follow lock-step behind everything they say.
#NeverTrump is used too broadly and is wrongfully used to describe both the far-left democrats , socialist and paid protestors, - and those on the right who consider themselves conservatives but just couldn’t vote for Trump among all the other candidates right up to the election. The vast majority of the later (including myself) do not consider themselves NeverTrumps – and will compliment his achievements when it’s deserved and in all honesty hope he proves us wrong about him in his 4 years. But we will also hold his feet to the fire and be highly critical of him when it warrants, as we do with the members of congress. There are very few “conservatives” that are truly truly #NeverTumps. There are a couple here on TBR that tend to be very vocal, and if we want to hang the Fool sign on them, so be it, but outside of that I don’t run into any.
-
You nor Jazz can point to one right in the Constitution that gays are prevented from enjoying that you and I do.
This whole myth that they are somehow being denied rights is stupid.
Trying to compare the struggle of an ethnic race to someone who chooses a sexual lifestyle is a disgrace to all those that struggled for Civil Rights for that ethnic group.
There is nothing normal about the gay lifestyle and gay "marriage" certainly doesn't promote normality...it simply puts a spotlight on something that is certainly an abomination to what marriage is supposed to be all about.
Laws about marriage have changed over the years. You know that. Interracial marriage was once illegal. Multiple wives in the Mormon community was legal.
The saddest thing about marriage now is the lack of commitment. Too many divorces ... too many selfish people unwilling to compromise and make it work.
So, yeah, you may think in this particular time and place that you know without a doubt what 'marriage is supposed to be all about' but you don't.
And to say that gays 'chose a different lifestyle' is wrong. Most people know that. There has always been a small percentage of the population that is gay. Why would anyone 'choose' a lifestyle that has so many problems and generates so much hate?
Hey, I respect your opinions but I must strongly disagree with you on this issue.
-
You refer to Christianity as a myth and then claim not to discriminate :silly: :silly: :silly:
I do not consider Christianity to be a "myth". I urge any Christian who believes homosexuality to be a sin not to practice it. What I objected to was myth-based discrimination against homosexuals. The Bible does not counsel one to discriminate against homosexuals. To the contrary, it counsels one to love one's brother as one would oneself.
-
There is nothing like having one's own child or someone you care deeply for get into behavior you previously despised. It certainly makes you think and get perspective.
You can either lose the person or broaden your own horizons.
When my own kids got into behavior that I despised, I never 'broadened my horizons' to condone and embrace those behaviors which will harm them and cause them misery and pain. Every parent I know who was stupid enough to 'broaden their horizons' and accept destructive and perverted behavior ended up losing their kid to the miseries and consequences of those behaviors that they never bothered to steer them away from, because they were 'open minded' enough to accept bad behavior.
There are consequences to bad and perverted behavior. My kids were warned of the consequences and they were warned we would not be there to bail them out of the consequences they earned for bad behavior.
They know we love them, and they also know we love them enough not to nod our heads and accept those things that we find unacceptable.
If I had a kid doing drugs the idea of 'broadening my horizons' is beyond ludicrous. If I "lose" them because they want to have their good time, and don't like the fact I think their choices and lifestyle are wrong, I'm at least not going to have to look myself in the mirror at their funeral and regret I condoned their behavior rather than point them to the direction of life and happiness as God defines it.
-
#NeverTrump is used too broadly and is wrongfully used to describe both the far-left democrats , socialist and paid protestors, - and those on the right who consider themselves conservatives but just couldn’t vote for Trump among all the other candidates right up to the election. The vast majority of the later (including myself) do not consider themselves NeverTrumps – and will compliment his achievements when it’s deserved and in all honesty hope he proves us wrong about him in his 4 years. But we will also hold his feet to the fire and be highly critical of him when it warrants, as we do with the members of congress. There are very few “conservatives” that are truly truly #NeverTumps. There are a couple here on TBR that tend to be very vocal, and if we want to hang the Fool sign on them, so be it, but outside of that I don’t run into any.
I see a slight change for the better in the NeverTrump mentality here. Trump, himself, has helped by being better than people expected and doing so many things that conservatives are for.
But there are still a lot of people who view everything through a prism ... maybe not a hate prism, but a doubt prism. They still think Trump is bad and anything he does we like may be grudgingly approved while reserving the right to criticize him if he puts a foot wrong.
The annoying thing about those people is their constant congratulating themselves on their virtue in not being a Trump lover.
-
Laws about marriage have changed over the years. You know that. Interracial marriage was once illegal. Multiple wives in the Mormon community was legal.
The saddest thing about marriage now is the lack of commitment. Too many divorces ... too many selfish people unwilling to compromise and make it work.
So, yeah, you may think in this particular time and place that you know without a doubt what 'marriage is supposed to be all about' but you don't.
And to say that gays 'chose a different lifestyle' is wrong. Most people know that. There has always been a small percentage of the population that is gay. Why would anyone 'choose' a lifestyle that has so many problems and generates so much hate?
Hey, I respect your opinions but I must strongly disagree with you on this issue.
:amen:
-
Laws about marriage have changed over the years. You know that. Interracial marriage was once illegal. Multiple wives in the Mormon community was legal.
A law is not a Constitutional right.
Two guys "marrying" is not even in the same ball park as whether a whit woman and a black man can marry.
It's 110% dishonest to try and compare the two.
The saddest thing about marriage now is the lack of commitment. Too many divorces ... too many selfish people unwilling to compromise and make it work.
Agree with you there. We have the advent of the no-fault divorce in 1969 to thank for the 50% divorce rate in the U.S.
So, yeah, you may think in this particular time and place that you know without a doubt what 'marriage is supposed to be all about' but you don't.
I obviously understand what it's about more than you do.
And to say that gays 'chose a different lifestyle' is wrong.
No it's not. It's quite accurate actually.
Most people know that.
Bull.
There has always been a small percentage of the population that is gay.
Yes 2-3%. And that minute minority is trying to force the majority of the country to accept their sexual preference as normal.
Why would anyone 'choose' a lifestyle that has so many problems and generates so much hate?
For the same reason someone chooses a red head or a blond...or someone with a nice butt or a big chest.
It's what they prefer. It's what they seek out in a partner.
Hey, I respect your opinions but I must strongly disagree with you on this issue.
Hate to tell you but on this your opinion is just flat out wrong.
-
:amen:
888buttkisser
-
I do not consider Christianity to be a "myth". I urge any Christian who believes homosexuality to be a sin not to practice it. What I objected to was myth-based discrimination against homosexuals. The Bible does not counsel one to discriminate against homosexuals. To the contrary, it counsels one to love one's brother as one would oneself.
I would respond with factual contradictions on what you typed, but others have done so unsuccessfully in the past. You're lost. I pray you find your way.
-
:amen:
Thanks. That's probably the only favorable comment I'll get so I appreciate it.
-
I would respond with factual contradictions on what you typed, but others have done so unsuccessfully in the past. You're lost. I pray you find your way.
I love it when people are so sure they know exactly what Jesus would do and sanctimoniously say they'll pray for others to see things exactly as they do.
Why don't people ever say, "I'll pray for myself that I get a better understand of others."
-
I do not consider Christianity to be a "myth". I urge any Christian who believes homosexuality to be a sin not to practice it. What I objected to was myth-based discrimination against homosexuals. The Bible does not counsel one to discriminate against homosexuals. To the contrary, it counsels one to love one's brother as one would oneself.
You are as ignorant of scripture as you are of the Constitution or deliberately deceitful. You deliberately confuse 'love' with acknowledgement and acceptance. That is not 'love'. That is license.
But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually perverted or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people. - I Corinthians 5:9-12
-
When my own kids got into behavior that I despised, I never 'broadened my horizons' to condone and embrace those behaviors which will harm them and cause them misery and pain. Every parent I know who was stupid enough to 'broaden their horizons' and accept destructive and perverted behavior ended up losing their kid to the miseries and consequences of those behaviors that they never bothered to steer them away from, because they were 'open minded' enough to accept bad behavior.
There are consequences to bad and perverted behavior. My kids were warned of the consequences and they were warned we would not be there to bail them out of the consequences they earned for bad behavior.
They know we love them, and they also know we love them enough not to nod our heads and accept those things that we find unacceptable.
If I had a kid doing drugs the idea of 'broadening my horizons' is beyond ludicrous. If I "lose" them because they want to have their good time, and don't like the fact I think their choices and lifestyle are wrong, I'm at least not going to have to look myself in the mirror at their funeral and regret I condoned their behavior rather than point them to the direction of life and happiness as God defines it.
A good friend decided to cut his son off due to a series of poor decisions the young man refused to learn from. Long story short, they are reunited and the young man is in Army intelligence. He is in jump school now because he wants to do spec ops. It took the young man about nine months of suffering to realize that dad was right about his life and that he was cut off out of love. My in-laws refuse to cut off brother-in-law and he now continues to make poor decisions. He is 42 and has still never purchased a car. My in-laws have given him every car he's ever had. They supplement his income even though, on paper, he makes enough to live responsibly. They have been doing this for 20 years now.
The reason we are in this mess is because we attempted to "broaden horizons" instead of treating the mentally ill as what they are. It's cruel, actually, to tell homosexuals that their lifestyles are acceptable.
-
I hesitated about even looking at this thread for a couple of days but I've read all 4 or 5 pages and been amazed at the civility shown by all. Congrats!
I wasn't tempted to post a reply until I saw your post here.
There is nothing like having one's own child or someone you care deeply for get into behavior you previously despised. It certainly makes you think and get perspective.
You can either lose the person or broaden your own horizons.
Yes, adhering to a set of standards means you will almost certainly lose some people as you go through life.
If something is wrong, it's wrong whether you do it or your son/daughter does it or some guy you've never met does it.
And, we do need to be compassionate, but compassion does not mean changing core principles because we may offend or alienate someone close to us.
-
I love it when people are so sure they know exactly what Jesus would do and sanctimoniously say they'll pray for others to see things exactly as they do.
Why don't people ever say, "I'll pray for myself that I get a better understand of others."
Based on your response then you do know what Jesus wants? Here's a hint: We have a guide to Christianity with which to base our decisions. Yep. Some people a long time ago thought to write stuff down and we now call it the Bible. But you know that.
Cut the bs and admit you're only here to troll. That's the only thing you do. You go on threads and make passive aggressive comments to get people all riled up and then sit back and play the little ol' me card. Go back to TOS or get a different hobby.
-
When my own kids got into behavior that I despised, I never 'broadened my horizons' to condone and embrace those behaviors which will harm them and cause them misery and pain. Every parent I know who was stupid enough to 'broaden their horizons' and accept destructive and perverted behavior ended up losing their kid to the miseries and consequences of those behaviors that they never bothered to steer them away from, because they were 'open minded' enough to accept bad behavior.
There are consequences to bad and perverted behavior. My kids were warned of the consequences and they were warned we would not be there to bail them out of the consequences they earned for bad behavior.
They know we love them, and they also know we love them enough not to nod our heads and accept those things that we find unacceptable.
If I had a kid doing drugs the idea of 'broadening my horizons' is beyond ludicrous. If I "lose" them because they want to have their good time, and don't like the fact I think their choices and lifestyle are wrong, I'm at least not going to have to look myself in the mirror at their funeral and regret I condoned their behavior rather than point them to the direction of life and happiness as God defines it.
Equating doing drugs with homosexuality is ridiculous. Nuff said.
-
Equating doing drugs with homosexuality is ridiculous. Nuff said.
Right, a better comparison would be pre-marital sex or sex outside of the marriage of one man and one woman. You could also use adultry.
-
Yes, adhering to a set of standards means you will almost certainly lose some people as you go through life.
If something is wrong, it's wrong whether you do it or your son/daughter does it or some guy you've never met does it.
And, we do need to be compassionate, but compassion does not mean changing core principles because we may offend or alienate someone close to us.
I know that, but if someone we love does something formerly considered unacceptable, we do have to look at it. Sometimes it does help us to see things differently. I'm not talking about real core values but lifestyle values.
I once thought it was wrong to co-habit before marriage, but it's accepted behavior now and I no longer think it's wrong. What I still think is wrong is giving up on one's marriage because of insignificant things.
-
Equating doing drugs with homosexuality is ridiculous.
Why? Because YOU say so?
Drugs may kill the brain and body - homosexuality kills the soul.
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who submit to or perform homosexual acts - I Corinthians 6:9
-
You nor Jazz can point to one right in the Constitution that gays are prevented from enjoying that you and I do.
This whole myth that they are somehow being denied rights is stupid.
Trying to compare the struggle of an ethnic race to someone who chooses a sexual lifestyle is a disgrace to all those that struggled for Civil Rights for that ethnic group.
There is nothing normal about the gay lifestyle and gay "marriage" certainly doesn't promote normality...it simply puts a spotlight on something that is certainly an abomination to what marriage is supposed to be all about.
I don't know about Jazz but I never claimed that gays are denied rights under the constitution. But they were denied a civil right to marry and now that they have that right, a lot of people are ticked off about it.
-
Based on your response then you do know what Jesus wants? Here's a hint: We have a guide to Christianity with which to base our decisions. Yep. Some people a long time ago thought to write stuff down and we now call it the Bible. But you know that.
Cut the bs and admit you're only here to troll. That's the only thing you do. You go on threads and make passive aggressive comments to get people all riled up and then sit back and play the little ol' me card. Go back to TOS or get a different hobby.
I am here to give my opinion and discuss issues rationally. You only call it trolling because you don't agree with me.
Why don't you just ignore me if I upset you so much? And if you don't have the willpower to do that, put me on ignore.
-
I love it when people are so sure they know exactly what Jesus would do and sanctimoniously say they'll pray for others to see things exactly as they do.
Why don't people ever say, "I'll pray for myself that I get a better understand of others."
You are a good and wise person. Don't listen to the insults. You are one of the beacons on this board.
-
I don't know about Jazz but I never claimed that gays are denied rights under the constitution. But they were denied a civil right to marry and now that they have that right, a lot of people are ticked off about it.
Gay "marriage" is not a civil right. Neither is marriage between a woman and a man. I don't have the "right" to marry. So essentially what you and others advocate for is something that straight couples are denied.
-
You are a good and wise person. Don't listen to the insults. You are one of the beacons on this board.
No one likes a suck up.
-
You are a good and wise person. Don't listen to the insults. You are one of the beacons on this board.
Spoken as a 'truly' tolerant person @Jazzhead
-
Equating doing drugs with homosexuality is ridiculous. Nuff said.
So is equating it to the struggle blacks went through for equality in this country. Nuff said.
-
I once thought it was wrong to co-habit before marriage, but it's accepted behavior now and I no longer think it's wrong.
It was also once thought wrong to kill infants in the womb, but now it's accepted behavior and people no longer think that wrong either.
And while today we might think killing an elderly person because they are no longer useful to society is wrong, once it becomes accepted behavior, people will no longer think that is wrong either.
Shouldn't be a surprise since principles mean jack to most Americans today. It's only what they FEEL now in the moment that matters.
As Scripture says plainly - a little leaven, leavens the entire lump.
-
Gay "marriage" is not a civil right. Neither is marriage between a woman and a man. I don't have the "right" to marry. So essentially what you and others advocate for is something that straight couples are denied.
That totally does not make any sense at all.
-
It was also once thought wrong to kill infants in the womb, but now it's accepted behavior and people no longer think that wrong either.
And while today we might think killing an elderly person because they are no longer useful to society is wrong, once it becomes accepted behavior, people will no longer think that is wrong either.
Shouldn't be a surprise since principles mean jack to most Americans today. It's only what they FEEL now in the moment that matters.
As Scripture says plainly - a little leaven, leavens the entire lump.
I am one of the fiercest advocates for pro-life on this forum.
You are extrapolating, a common tactic here. Like, if we let gays marry, pretty soon people will be able to marry their dogs.
-
No one likes a suck up.
Wrong again. I like a suck up when I'm the object of it.
See how often you've been wrong on this thread????
-
It was also once thought wrong to kill infants in the womb, but now it's accepted behavior and people no longer think that wrong either.
And while today we might think killing an elderly person because they are no longer useful to society is wrong, once it becomes accepted behavior, people will no longer think that is wrong either.
Shouldn't be a surprise since principles mean jack to most Americans today. It's only what they FEEL now in the moment that matters.
As Scripture says plainly - a little leaven, leavens the entire lump.
Once people start buying into this "accepted behavior" crap...then it's anything goes. We've already seen Pedophiles justify their perversion and use the same justifications as homosexuals and Polygamists and polyamorists use gay "marriage" as justification as to why their "unions" should be legally recognized.
Justice Scalia was 100% correct in his comment about a slippery slope.
-
That totally does not make any sense at all.
Of course it doesn't to you.
Bless your heart.
-
You are extrapolating, a common tactic here. Like, if we let gays marry, pretty soon people will be able to marry their dogs.
People denied that gay "marriage" was going to become a reality after the Lawrence v Texas decision.
Yet here we are. As I pointed out a couple posts ago...polygamists and pedophiles are already glomming onto the gay "rights" movement to justify their lifestyles.
-
Gay "marriage" is not a civil right. Neither is marriage between a woman and a man. I don't have the "right" to marry. So essentially what you and others advocate for is something that straight couples are denied.
@txradioguy
I used to have a hairstylist who was a gay man, and he was also a friend so we talked. He once said to me that the idea of two men or two women getting married was crazy to him. I know, his opinion didn't extend beyond that, but take it for what it's worth.
There's a reason why we feel grossed out when we see two women standing at the altar kissing, or two men. Or when we see them running hand in hand down the aisle. It's unnatural, and the response we have is visceral. I think there are many on the left who would never admit to having such a reaction, but I would bet money they do have it.
-
There's a reason why we feel grossed out when we see two women standing at the altar kissing, or two men. Or when we see them running hand in hand down the aisle. It's unnatural, and the response we have is visceral. I think there are many on the left who would never admit to having such a reaction, but I would bet money they do have it.
I think you'd find that many young people don't have the slightest hint of that reaction.
One could have said the same about interracial couples. A large portion of the population had a visceral disgust at the thought, and now that portion is smaller.
-
@txradioguy
@CatherineofAragon
I used to have a hairstylist who was a gay man, and he was also a friend so we talked. He once said to me that the idea of two men or two women getting married was crazy to him. I know, his opinion didn't extend beyond that, but take it for what it's worth.
My ex's uncle and his partner been together 20+ years...same thought on getting "married".
Look if this was strictly about hospital visitations...property ownership...wills...etc..a civil union would do all that.
But we both know that's not what this whole agenda is about and why the push for a "marriage" ina Church has been so important to the folks pushing the gay agenda.
There's a reason why we feel grossed out when we see two women standing at the altar kissing, or two men. Or when we see them running hand in hand down the aisle. It's unnatural, and the response we have is visceral. I think there are many on the left who would never admit to having such a reaction, but I would bet money they do have it.
They won't ever admit it because at the end of the day for a Liberal...party and politics rule the over personal beliefs and upbringing.
And for a group that continually likes to chant about "stay out of the bedroom"...they sure have no problem bringing what they do in the bedroom out in public and shove it in people's faces and tell them to accept it or else.
-
I think you'd find that many young people don't have the slightest hint of that reaction.
One could have said the same about interracial couples. A large portion of the population had a visceral disgust at the thought, and now that portion is smaller.
A lot of young people still feel that way...peer pressure and political correctness forces them to keep their views to themselves in public.
-
A good friend decided to cut his son off due to a series of poor decisions the young man refused to learn from. Long story short, they are reunited and the young man is in Army intelligence. He is in jump school now because he wants to do spec ops. It took the young man about nine months of suffering to realize that dad was right about his life and that he was cut off out of love. My in-laws refuse to cut off brother-in-law and he now continues to make poor decisions. He is 42 and has still never purchased a car. My in-laws have given him every car he's ever had. They supplement his income even though, on paper, he makes enough to live responsibly. They have been doing this for 20 years now.
The reason we are in this mess is because we attempted to "broaden horizons" instead of treating the mentally ill as what they are. It's cruel, actually, to tell homosexuals that their lifestyles are acceptable.
@goodwithagun
Interesting post, and I agree. It's killing them to tell them they can go on risking AIDS as long as they use a condom, but unpleasant truth is worse than death to some these days.
We have a similar situation going on with my husband's brother's kid. The boy started messing up from the time he vandalized his cousin's Christmas presents as a child, but he never saw a single consequence. My in-laws, his grandparents, indulged him and bought him everything he wanted in an effort to make him happy. When he got his license, they bought him a car. He trashed it so they bought him another. He's 22 now, has never held a job, and has a police record as long as a man's arm, including an armed hostage situation. My in-laws had their lawyers bail him out of every arrest. And for all of that, he hates his grandparents with a burning passion, instead of being grateful for the time and money they wasted on his useless behind.
-
I think you'd find that many young people don't have the slightest hint of that reaction.
One could have said the same about interracial couples. A large portion of the population had a visceral disgust at the thought, and now that portion is smaller.
Yes, most people were opposed to interracial marriage until the 1990s. Gay marriage seems to be headed in the same direction, with 40 and 47% of GOP members supporting it in recent polls. It's just a matter of time before the party platform is changed ... 2024 would be my guess. That is going to be a nasty fight.
-
A lot of young people still feel that way...peer pressure and political correctness forces them to keep their views to themselves in public.
Yeah, a lot do. But most don't.
Same with interracial couples.
Frankly, marriage should be separated from the government. It's a church thing and shouldn't have been crossed over into the civil realm... Remember, "traditional marriage" can mean merging kingdoms. It can mean an arranged marriage. It can mean polygamy. Etc.
We should do it like Germany, having separate civil bonds.
-
I know that, but if someone we love does something formerly considered unacceptable, we do have to look at it. Sometimes it does help us to see things differently. I'm not talking about real core values but lifestyle values.
I once thought it was wrong to co-habit before marriage, but it's accepted behavior now and I no longer think it's wrong. What I still think is wrong is giving up on one's marriage because of insignificant things.
If you let what is publically accepted determine your moral compass you have none. Right and wrong do not change.
-
My ex's uncle and his partner been together 20+ years...same thought on getting "married".
Look if this was strictly about hospital visitations...property ownership...wills...etc..a civil union would do all that.
But we both know that's not what this whole agenda is about and why the push for a "marriage" ina Church has been so important to the folks pushing the gay agenda.
They won't ever admit it because at the end of the day for a Liberal...party and politics rule the over personal beliefs and upbringing.
And for a group that continually likes to chant about "stay out of the bedroom"...they sure have no problem bringing what they do in the bedroom out in public and shove it in people's faces and tell them to accept it or else.
@txradioguy
Yep, agree with you completely. Walking naked down the street in a pride parade isn't really my idea of keeping your practices in the bedroom. If you bring it out and shove it in my face, you're going to get a reaction.
I can't remember the statistics, but I saw a report that said a small minority of gays actually marry.
-
Yes, most people were opposed to interracial marriage until the 1990s. Gay marriage seems to be headed in the same direction, with 40 and 47% of GOP members supporting it in recent polls. It's just a matter of time before the party platform is changed ... 2024 would be my guess. That is going to be a nasty fight.
I was a young person during the late 80's early 90's and never knew anyone in my age group that was opposed to interracial marriage much less interracial dating.
Maybe it's where I was raised out in W Texas...but no one I knew had a problem with it.
-
Yes, most people were opposed to interracial marriage until the 1990s. Gay marriage seems to be headed in the same direction, with 40 and 47% of GOP members supporting it in recent polls. It's just a matter of time before the party platform is changed ... 2024 would be my guess. That is going to be a nasty fight.
That will be when any remaining conservatives leave the Republican Party for good
-
You are extrapolating, a common tactic here. Like, if we let gays marry, pretty soon people will be able to marry their dogs.
Indiana Woman Wants to Marry Her Pet Dog – Tries to Rally Support From Gay Rights’ Activists (http://www.dividedstates.com/indiana-woman-wants-marry-her-pet-dog-tries-to-rally-support-from-gay-rights-activists/)
Woman divorces her husband and marries her dog. (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/woman-marries-dog-totally-b-h-article-1.1717772)
Pandora's box was opened when marriage became a license to fulfill whatever perversion one wanted to be 'married' to.
MAN WHO WANTS TO MARRY COMPUTER SUES KIM DAVIS (http://www.wnd.com/2016/07/man-who-wants-to-marry-computer-sues-kim-davis/)
That said - what we continue to argue about is the foundational principles that most Americans have absolutely no use for - and consider anyone refusing to surrender those foundational principles to be an enemy of the good or an agent of evil.
Exactly as Jesus said we would be.
-
I was a young person during the late 80's early 90's and never knew anyone in my age group that was opposed to interracial marriage much less interracial dating.
Maybe it's where I was raised out in W Texas...but no one I knew had a problem with it.
I was aware of people having a problem with it in the 80s but it wasn't something anyone I knew put a lot of thought into.
-
Frankly, marriage should be separated from the government. It's a church thing and shouldn't have been crossed over into the civil realm... Remember, "traditional marriage" can mean merging kingdoms. It can mean an arranged marriage. It can mean polygamy. Etc.
We should do it like Germany, having separate civil bonds.
I'd have no problem with that.
IMO when you go to a JP to get married as opposed to a minister or a priest in a church you're entering into a civil union.
Mine has worked quite well for the last 15 years.
-
I think you'd find that many young people don't have the slightest hint of that reaction.
One could have said the same about interracial couples. A large portion of the population had a visceral disgust at the thought, and now that portion is smaller.
@Suppressed
Not the same. The Bible condemns the latter, strongly and often, but not the former.
If kids don't have that reaction at all, something's missing. But I would say that's probably the case with many of them, and it's regrettable.
-
I was a young person during the late 80's early 90's and never knew anyone in my age group that was opposed to interracial marriage much less interracial dating.
Maybe it's where I was raised out in W Texas...but no one I knew had a problem with it.
Exactly my point.
Yet go back 100 years, and you would have a significant portion of the population who would feel physically sick and angry. But that revulsion wasn't something inherent.
Just because some people feel uncomfortable with homosexuality (and I admit having that reaction at one time, and to some extent now) doesn't mean it's an integral part of us.
-
More like being 'extremely flexible', aka politically correctness.
Nobody wants anyone screaming discrimination, in a courtroom, or to the NYT.
@DCPatriot. What a bunch of nonsense. You suggest catering to a certain group to be on the safe side and shut them up. How about we have an Undocumented Immigrant pride day? Special treatment of any group is never the correct answer.
-
If you let what is publically accepted determine your moral compass you have none. Right and wrong do not change.
:amen:
If we call a dog's tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have? Four. Calling a tail a leg does not make it a leg. Same with mental illness. Calling homosexuality an accepted and tolerated lifestyle does not make it right.
-
@DCPatriot. What a bunch of nonsense. You suggest catering to a certain group to be on the safe side and shut them up. How about we have an Undocumented Immigrant pride day? Special treatment of any group is never the correct answer.
@RoosGirl
Veterans Day
Mothers Day
Valentines Day
.
.
.
.
.
-
Gay "marriage" is not a civil right. Neither is marriage between a woman and a man. I don't have the "right" to marry. So essentially what you and others advocate for is something that straight couples are denied.
I never said gay marriage (or straight marriage for that matter) is a civil right. Marriage equality is a matter of the equal protection of the law. Once the state offers valuable benefits and protections to couples who marry, those benefits and protections must be extended to both same sex and opposite sex couples.
And this has nothing to do with slippery slopes or religion. This is about the benefits and protections afforded by the state to civil marriage. Every church has the right to decide for itself whether to solemnize and respect a civil marriage. It's perfectly common, for example, for a rabbi to refuse to perform a wedding between a Jew and a non-Jew, or to require that the couple agree to raise their kids in the Jewish faith. But that couple can be married in the eyes of the civil law regardless.
-
@Suppressed
Not the same. The Bible condemns the latter, strongly and often, but not the former.
If kids don't have that reaction at all, something's missing. But I would say that's probably the case with many of them, and it's regrettable.
@CatherineofAragon
Yet in former days, there would have been no disgust over a 39 year old man marrying a 15 year old (in fact, it was considered abnormal for a girl to marry a young man, as he hadn't demonstrated he could provide for her!). Or a 12 year old female marrying. Was there something wrong with us then?
How about eating sheep's eyeballs? Visceral disgust by many. Or cat? Same.
The visceral reaction comes from physiology and culture more than the Bible. I don't know many people who get physically ill at the thought of envy, though it's in the Ten Commandments!
-
Exactly my point.
Yet go back 100 years, and you would have a significant portion of the population who would feel physically sick and angry. But that revulsion wasn't something inherent.
But again I will point out that it's very intellectually dishonest to try and compare a racial issue with a sexual preference issue.
They are apples and oranges. The two have absolutely nothing to do with each other.
Just because some people feel uncomfortable with homosexuality (and I admit having that reaction at one time, and to some extent now) doesn't mean it's an integral part of us.
If you truly understand right and wrong you should always be uncomfortable with people who try to pass of their deviant sexual preference as something that is normal and should be accepted.
-
@RoosGirl
Veterans Day
Mothers Day
Valentines Day
.
.
.
.
.
Last I checked Fed Gov does not mandate that I accept, tolerate, and actively participate in the celebrations that you listed. But Fed Gov mandates "pride" events, pushes homosexuality in schools, and create laws giving homosexuals extra rights. Fed Gov does the same with other mental illnesses including "transgenderism."
-
I'd have no problem with that.
IMO when you go to a JP to get married as opposed to a minister or a priest in a church you're entering into a civil union.
Mine has worked quite well for the last 15 years.
I'm also OK with getting the state out of marriage as much as possible.
People like to claim that marriage licenses existed in the days of Washington but what George and Martha Washington had was a legal contract dealing with the distribution of property and debt.
Poor people often had a church sanctioned marriage but lacked any state issued paperwork. On the frontier many never had even a church marriage. They were considered married by simple virtue of having been together for a long time.
Seems that I read that the first true marriage licenses arose in the Kansas Territory shortly before the civil war. White abolitionists were marrying blacks to make them landowners and tilt the scales in favor of abolition.
-
But Fed Gov mandates "pride" events, pushes homosexuality in schools, and create laws giving homosexuals extra rights.
The federal government does none of those things.
-
I never said gay marriage (or straight marriage for that matter) is a civil right. Marriage equality is a matter of the equal protection of the law. Once the state offers valuable benefits and protections to couples who marry, those benefits and protections must be extended both same sex and opposite sex couples.
You have indeed cited it as a right in the past...even tried rather lamely to say it's a Constitutional right.
You're wrong in both areas.
And this has nothing to do with slippery slopes or religion. This is about the benefits and protections afforded by the state to civil marriage. Every church has the right to decide for itself whether to solemnize and respect a civil marriage.
Then get a civil union and be done with it.
Don't try forcing an abomination to the term "marriage" onto the public and try and force us to accept a perversion as normal.
Then don't get all butt hurt when people push back against what you're trying to force them to accept.
And Ministers and Priests don't conduct "civil marriages" there's no such thing inside of a church.
Civil marriages/unions are conducted buy a Judge or a Justice of the Peace.
-
Last I checked Fed Gov does not mandate that I accept, tolerate, and actively participate in the celebrations that you listed. But Fed Gov mandates "pride" events, pushes homosexuality in schools, and create laws giving homosexuals extra rights. Fed Gov does the same with other mental illnesses including "transgenderism."
I was responding to " Special treatment of any group is never the correct answer." when in fact such a blanket statement cannot be supported.
-
The federal government does none of those things.
@Jazzhead
Wanna bet? I'll bet your membership on TBR that you're 100% wrong.
-
The federal government does none of those things.
Um, have you read a modern public school sex ed book? Do a quick web search and prepare to be proven wrong.
As for the other stuff, what was this celebrating again? Oh yeah, homosexuals being granted extra rights.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
I was responding to " Special treatment of any group is never the correct answer." when in fact such a blanket statement cannot be supported.
Ahh. Sorry. I misunderstood the context.
-
Marriage equality is a matter of the equal protection of the law. Once the state offers valuable benefits and protections to couples who marry, those benefits and protections must be extended to both same sex and opposite sex couples.
And this has nothing to do with slippery slopes or religion.
We had equal protection, any man could marry any woman. What changed is that any man/woman can now marry any thing they say they want to. Setting the stage for poly marriages, marriage to animals and as one activist stated, a tree stump.
-
But again I will point out that it's very intellectually dishonest to try and compare a racial issue with a sexual preference issue.
They are apples and oranges. The two have absolutely nothing to do with each other.
@txradioguy
The intersection is that "visceral reaction" was being used to support the idea that homosexuality is unnatural. I've demonstrated that the phenomenon does not support that conclusion. I hope you can see that and will withdrawn your accusation of intellectual dishonesty, as I take that very seriously.
If you truly understand right and wrong you should always be uncomfortable with people who try to pass of their deviant sexual preference as something that is normal and should be accepted.
"Right" and "wrong" defined by whom?
Who is the arbiter of "deviant"?
-
@RoosGirl
Veterans Day
Mothers Day
Valentines Day
.
.
.
.
.
What about them? Aside from Veteran's Day, which as far as I am concerned should be the month long celebration, none of those days are special events hosted within a gov't agency. And since there wouod not be veterans if not for the gov't I think they have jurisdiction over that special day.
-
@txradioguy
The intersection is that "visceral reaction" was being used to support the idea that homosexuality is unnatural. I've demonstrated that the phenomenon does not support that conclusion. I hope you can see that and will withdrawn your accusation of intellectual dishonesty, as I take that very seriously.
I take it very seriously too. So let me restate that to try and compare gay "rights" and gay "marriage" to the struggle Blacks or any minority ethnic group went through to attain equality in this country is intellectually dishonest.
"Right" and "wrong" defined by whom?
Who is the arbiter of "deviant"?
God.
You want new Testament or Old Testament passages to show what is right and what is wrong about homosexuality?
-
I take it very seriously too. So let me restate that to try and compare gay "rights" and gay "marriage" to the struggle Blacks or any minority ethnic group went through to attain equality in this country is intellectually dishonest.
The discussion was on visceral reactions, not racial struggles, etc. Trying to change the subject is a red herring that's been sitting out in the sun for days.
Talk about intellectual dishonesty.
-
@txradioguy
The intersection is that "visceral reaction" was being used to support the idea that homosexuality is unnatural. I've demonstrated that the phenomenon does not support that conclusion. I hope you can see that and will withdrawn your accusation of intellectual dishonesty, as I take that very seriously.
"Right" and "wrong" defined by whom?
Who is the arbiter of "deviant"?
How about the fact that only 1-2% of the population participates in it? If it were natural wouldn't it be in the center of the bell curve?
Or that since it prevents reproduction?
-
Exactly my point.
Yet go back 100 years, and you would have a significant portion of the population who would feel physically sick and angry. But that revulsion wasn't something inherent.
Just because some people feel uncomfortable with homosexuality (and I admit having that reaction at one time, and to some extent now) doesn't mean it's an integral part of us.
@Suppressed
I think it does, though. Two men all over each other kissing is gross. It just is. It makes you want to look away because of the feeling you get in your gut. There's nothing wrong with acknowledging it, and it has nothing to do with a lack of compassion for gay people. I've known some gay guys who were really sweet people.
You know, I don't think I'm ready to agree that older generations' reactions to interracial couples was the same. I'm sure some were ticked off, but that was about it.
I
-
The discussion was on visceral reactions, not racial struggles, etc. Trying to change the subject is a red herring that's been sitting out in the sun for days.
Talk about intellectual dishonesty.
I'm not changing anything. You brought race into it with your talk of inter-racial marriages. And how people reacted to them 50-60 years ago.
Trying in any way to equate race and sexual preference is dishonest in any way shape or form.
Keep your red herring...I don't need it. You seem to be fishing with it quite well.
-
@Jazzhead
Wanna bet? I'll bet your membership on TBR that you're 100% wrong.
And what will you bet in return?
-
And what will you bet in return?
I'll put the same thing on the line.
-
(https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.L7qBX8Dvlpk3dRhMX0UNRAEYEY&w=184&h=181&c=7&qlt=90&o=4&dpr=1.5&pid=1.7)
-
@txradioguy
The intersection is that "visceral reaction" was being used to support the idea that homosexuality is unnatural. I've demonstrated that the phenomenon does not support that conclusion. I hope you can see that and will withdrawn your accusation of intellectual dishonesty, as I take that very seriously.
"Right" and "wrong" defined by whom?
Who is the arbiter of "deviant"?
For me and my house the arbiter of deviant is the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob and His only begotten Son as revealed in the Bible.
-
For me and my house the arbiter of deviant is the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob and His only begotten Son as revealed in the Bible.
One here insists that such declarations of deviancy from the bible are 'myth- based".
-
One here insists that such declarations of deviancy from the bible are 'myth- based".
Their choice. My standard stands and is eternal. I do not bend to popular opinion or changing societal acceptance and never will. That will sooner rather than later leave me and those who believe as I do a persecuted hated minority. So be it.
-
Their choice. My standard stands and is eternal. I do not bend to popular opinion or changing societal acceptance and never will. That will sooner rather than later leave me and those who believe as I do a persecuted hated minority. So be it.
Yes. And having seen what real persecution looks like up close and personal - I would say the vast majority of Americans are not ready to endure what I saw and was grieved to experience.
And, you are correct to indicate that those who want to declare the eternal words of Life a 'myth', is absolutely their choice.
My problem with said individual is the they lie about who and what they really are.
I do not believe they are confused or ignorant. I believe they are deliberately deceitful for a nefarious purpose.
-
@Jazzhead
Wanna bet? I'll bet your membership on TBR that you're 100% wrong.
This is just plain wrong and I don't like it...
-
This is just plain wrong and I don't like it...
Well someone needs to teach him not to let his alligator mouth write checks his twenty bird butt can't cash.
-
I'd have no problem with that.
IMO when you go to a JP to get married as opposed to a minister or a priest in a church you're entering into a civil union.
That's why we had 2 wedding ceremonies. First by the judge. Second by the priest.
-
That's why we had 2 wedding ceremonies. First by the judge. Second by the priest.
I think as Christians soon we will have a ceremony in front of clergy not recognized by the state. Civil marriage separate and optional. Seeing the mockery civil marriage is becoming I would opt out personally. The covenant marriage is the only one that matters
-
Well someone needs to teach him not to let his alligator mouth write checks his twenty bird butt can't cash.
No....that isn't up to you on this forum.
-
No....that isn't up to you on this forum.
I understand that trust me :)
Besides...his silence proved my point.
-
One here insists that such declarations of deviancy from the bible are 'myth- based".
They are not 'myth based' but they are certainly open to interpretation and the Old Testament is very different from the New.
Christians are guided by the New Testament. We respect the Old Testament but it contained a lot of cruelty and things we no longer advocate.
A lot of people cast stones while failing to remember Jesus' admonition to 'let he who is without sin cast the first stone.'
-
They are not 'myth based' but they are certainly open to interpretation and the Old Testament is very different from the New.
Christians are guided by the New Testament. We respect the Old Testament but it contained a lot of cruelty and things we no longer advocate.
A lot of people cast stones while failing to remember Jesus' admonition to 'let he who is without sin cast the first stone.'
All you did was illustrate how biblically illiterate you are.
-
All you did was illustrate how biblically illiterate you are.
Well then....take it to our RELIGIOUS category....OH WAIT! That's right...we don't have one!
This thread isn't about the virtues of homosexuality, etc..
The subject of this thread is NEVER TRUMPERS. And THEIR "foolishness". ^-^
-
Well then....take it to our RELIGIOUS category....OH WAIT! That's right...we don't have one!
This thread isn't about the virtues of homosexuality, etc..
The subject of this thread is NEVER TRUMPERS. And THEIR "foolishness". ^-^
It hasn't been about that for the last hundred posts.
-
Well then....take it to our RELIGIOUS category....OH WAIT! That's right...we don't have one!
This thread isn't about the virtues of homosexuality, etc..
The subject of this thread is NEVER TRUMPERS. And THEIR "foolishness". ^-^
Worth repeating ....
-
It hasn't been about that for the last hundred posts.
Yeah, funny how that works, huh? :whistle:
-
Yeah, funny how that works, huh? :whistle:
We should consider starting a pool for the date this thread will be locked---not given a time out --- but locked.
I'll go with July 20. :laugh:
@DCPatriot
-
We should consider starting a pool for the date this thread will be locked---not given a time out --- but locked.
I'll go with July 20. :laugh:
@DCPatriot
July 12.....if I post
-
July 12.....if I post
LOL! 888high58888
@driftdiver
-
That's why we had 2 wedding ceremonies. First by the judge. Second by the priest.
Exactly. A same sex marriage is entitled to equal protection under the civil law, but whether it is recognized by the church is no business whatsoever of the state.
-
We should consider starting a pool for the date this thread will be locked---not given a time out --- but locked.
I'll go with July 20. :laugh:
@DCPatriot
I'm surprised it hasn't yet. First off, how did this get so far off track, and two, why am I agreeing with the Trump caucus (not on the original topic, but on the direction of this thread)?
-
A few thoughts on the topic thread -
The Trump Jr. e-mails ensure that the "Russia connection" meme isn't going away, and probably now takes on the whiff of a true scandal. The best possible spin at this point is that Trump Jr, Manafort and Kushner were just vetting an offer of possible political dirt that was quickly dismissed as bullsh1t. Remember, at about the same time (July 2016), Russia was peddling crapola, through another British intermediary, about a "dossier" on Trump including his antics in a Russian hotel room. The Dems tried to push that one for a few days, but it quickly became clear that it was disinformation.
Well, the Russians appear to have been at it again, pushing disinformation to the Trump campaign and counting on that campaign's naivity and inexperience. Their apparent intermediary, Goldman, spelled out the source of the information and "Russia's support" for Trump, bait that Trump Jr. eager responded to with the words "I love it". The stuff was crap, but the Russians achieved what they wanted - an e-mail string apparently showing the Trump campaign's eagerness to get dirt even from "Russian government" sources.
It's a huge leap from "we did not collude" to "we were eager to collude but there was nothing there". Now some, like the NYPost, are calling Trump Jr. an idiot. But there's nothing idiotic with vetting offers of political dirt. But this dirt was tainted from the start with a Russian label. What is idiotic is to have a story out there that doesn't wash. Trump Jr. is being transparent now, but why didn't the President get those e-mails out there months ago to bolster its point that it didn't collude, even though Russian baddies were trying to get to the campaign with false promises of "support"?
Trump seems convinced of the notion that any acknowledgement of Russian dirty tricks will somehow cast aspersions on the legitimacy of his election. To the contrary, what may destroy his Presidency is months of denials undermined by e-mails indicating his own son was eager to get opposition research even if labeled plainly as being of Russian origin. Trump should have gotten in front of this months ago by releasing the e-mails as evidence of Russian disinformation attempts that were vetted and REJECTED. Instead, the current news will, to most observers, be just seen as contradicting the Administration's own denials. And that could, in the end, prove fatal.
-
A few thoughts on the topic thread -
The Trump Jr. e-mails ensure that the "Russia connection" meme isn't going away, and probably now takes on the whiff of a true scandal. The best possible spin at this point is that Trump Jr, Manafort and Kushner were just vetting an offer of possible political dirt that was quickly dismissed as bullsh1t. Remember, at about the same time (July 2016), Russia was peddling crapola, through another British intermediary, about a "dossier" on Trump including his antics in a Russian hotel room. The Dems tried to push that one for a few days, but it quickly became clear that it was disinformation.
Well, the Russians appear to have been at it again, pushing disinformation to the Trump campaign and counting on that campaign's naivity and inexperience. Their apparent intermediary, Goldman, spelled out the source of the information and "Russia's support" for Trump, bait that Trump Jr. eager responded to with the words "I love it". The stuff was crap, but the Russians achieved what they wanted - an e-mail string apparently showing the Trump campaign's eagerness to get dirt even from "Russian government" sources.
It's a huge leap from "we did not collude" to "we were eager to collude but there was nothing there". Now some, like the NYPost, are calling Trump Jr. an idiot. But there's nothing idiotic with vetting offers of political dirt. But this dirt was tainted from the start with a Russian label. What is idiotic is to have a story out there that doesn't wash. Trump Jr. is being transparent now, but why didn't the President get those e-mails out there months ago to bolster its point that it didn't collude, even though Russian baddies were trying to get to the campaign with false promises of "support"?
Trump seems convinced of the notion that any acknowledgement of Russian dirty tricks will somehow cast aspersions on the legitimacy of his election. To the contrary, what may destroy his Presidency is months of denials undermined by e-mails indicating his own son was eager to get opposition research even if labeled plainly as being of Russian origin. Trump should have gotten in front of this months ago by releasing the e-mails as evidence of Russian disinformation attempts that were vetted and REJECTED. Instead, the current news will, to most observers, be just seen as contradicting the Administration's own denials. And that could, in the end, prove fatal.
@Jazzhead
Of course the Russian meme isn't going away. Its a lever the DNC and eGOP is using to attack Trump. It doesn't matter that theres no crime and nothing there. Its the seriousness of the charge. Nor does it matter that the DNC & Hillary were doing exponentially worse things to sell out America in exchange for power.
Trump is a threat to the elite power brokers running this country into the ground.
-
@Jazzhead
Of course the Russian meme isn't going away. Its a lever the DNC and eGOP is using to attack Trump. It doesn't matter that theres no crime and nothing there. Its the seriousness of the charge. Nor does it matter that the DNC & Hillary were doing exponentially worse things to sell out America in exchange for power.
Trump is a threat to the elite power brokers running this country into the ground.
All true. But this is a serious turn for the worse. As Gerald Seib wrote this morning in the WSJ:
Whatever else the stunning e-mail chain released by Donald Trump Jr. did or didn't show, it undermined the argument that the idea of Russian collusion with the Trump campaign is so ludicrous that it shouldn't be taken seriously. Instead, in black and white, were messages showing that someone offered help from the top of the Russian government to distribute damaging information about Hillary Clinton - and that the President's own son, in his own words, was eager to get it. Indeed, he scheduled a meeting to receive it.
This is gas on the fire, folks. At stake is the entire GOP agenda.
-
All true. But this is a serious turn for the worse. As Gerald Seib wrote this morning in the WSJ:
This is gas on the fire, folks. At stake is the entire GOP agenda.
@Jazzhead
More accurately it illustrates the concept of the big lie. If you tell a lie, a really big lie, and keep telling it, staying on topic, always in front of people, why then people will start to believe it.
The GOP doesn't have an agenda under Trump. The GOPs agenda is globalism, same as the DNCs. For all of his faults, Trump has thrown a wrench into their plans to force a global dictatorship down our throats and they are desperate to stop him.
-
All true. But this is a serious turn for the worse. As Gerald Seib wrote this morning in the WSJ:
This is gas on the fire, folks. At stake is the entire GOP agenda.
I agree with you, @Jazzhead. This is very concerning and may have very serious ramifications.
-
Well then....take it to our RELIGIOUS category....OH WAIT! That's right...we don't have one!
This thread isn't about the virtues of homosexuality, etc..
The subject of this thread is NEVER TRUMPERS. And THEIR "foolishness". ^-^
As with nearly every thread that attempts to shame, ridicule and disparage Conservatives who do not genuflect to Trump - an intense argument about core Principles and either adhering to them or abandoning them for political pragmatism always ensues.
This is because we are currently in a war among ourselves attempting to either REDEFINE Conservatism and its principles or SAVE the foundational principles of Conservatism.
Homosexuality, abortion, fiscal irresponsibility, government run healthcare, the Nanny state - these things are now being grafted into the definition of what 'Conservatism' apparently stands for by Republican party hacks. Arguing over those core principle issues takes us directly to the SOURCE of traditional Conservative thought and principles: the bible. The Book that so many despise and do not want to hear mentioned in any discussion.
Well, Conservatism is not a political ideology contrary to what you might assert.
Conservatism is a way of life and thinking. And as such - the core tenets of the bible shape the way Principled Conservatives look at the world, look at people and issues and look at government.
It's no wonder the Republican party and Self-identifying Conservatives ridicule principles that do not empower their candidates or causes. That which motivates our core thoughts and beliefs is as despised by Republicans as assuredly as the Godless Left will despise it.
But since we are discussing foolishness, I can think of nothing more foolish than ejecting both God, scripture and principles regarding the issues that have fundamentally transformed us into something we were never intended to be as a nation. 'Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools' - Romans 1:21-22
-
I'm surprised it hasn't yet. First off, how did this get so far off track, and two, why am I agreeing with the Trump caucus (not on the original topic, but on the direction of this thread)?
I think @txradioguy and I share the blame starting on page 5. I posted on page 5 for the first time and remarked on how relatively civil the discourse had been so far. And then radio guy referred to another poster without mentioning his name who always twisted things when it came to homosexuals. I replied with my feelings about gays and it went downhill from there and poor Trump was left behind all together.
I am totally innocent but I seemed to have rubbed a few people the wrong way and got some undies in a bunch.
I am a new person today, one who is determined to play well with others.
-
Why? Because YOU say so?
Drugs may kill the brain and body - homosexuality kills the soul.
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who submit to or perform homosexual acts - I Corinthians 6:9
No, hatred kills the soul.
-
So is equating it to the struggle blacks went through for equality in this country. Nuff said.
I didn't equate it, I compared it.
-
I didn't equate it, I compared it.
There is no comparison.
-
Thank you both for staying on topic.
*****rollingeyes*****
-
Don't listen to anything this poster says. My unnamed sources tell me he is a plant from the Dept of Interior here to push the Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians, West Fork Russian River Bank Stabilization and Habitat Restoration.
Very diabolical.
@corbe
@Frank Cannon
Well you may not know it but this man's a spy
He's an undercover agent for the FBI
And he's been sent down here to infiltrate the Ku Klux Klan
I said would you believe this man has gone as far
As tearin' Wallace stickers off the bumpers of cars
And he voted for George McGoveren for president
Well he's a friend of them long-haired hippie type pinko bleep
I betcha he's even got a Commie flag
Tacked up on the wall inside of his garage
He's a snake in the grass I tell ya guys
He may look dumb but that's just a disguise
He's a mastermind in the ways of espionage
-
There is no comparison.
Maybe not, but I didn't equate it.
-
@corbe
@Frank Cannon
Well you may not know it but this man's a spy
He's an undercover agent for the FBI
And he's been sent down here to infiltrate the Ku Klux Klan
I said would you believe this man has gone as far
As tearin' Wallace stickers off the bumpers of cars
And he voted for George McGoveren for president
Well he's a friend of them long-haired hippie type pinko bleep
I betcha he's even got a Commie flag
Tacked up on the wall inside of his garage
He's a snake in the grass I tell ya guys
He may look dumb but that's just a disguise
He's a mastermind in the ways of espionage
LOL. That is one of my top Charlie Daniels songs. The other is In America because it is up tempo.
-
A few thoughts on the topic thread -
The Trump Jr. e-mails ensure that the "Russia connection" meme isn't going away, and probably now takes on the whiff of a true scandal. The best possible spin at this point is that Trump Jr, Manafort and Kushner were just vetting an offer of possible political dirt that was quickly dismissed as bullsh1t. Remember, at about the same time (July 2016), Russia was peddling crapola, through another British intermediary, about a "dossier" on Trump including his antics in a Russian hotel room. The Dems tried to push that one for a few days, but it quickly became clear that it was disinformation.
Well, the Russians appear to have been at it again, pushing disinformation to the Trump campaign and counting on that campaign's naivity and inexperience. Their apparent intermediary, Goldman, spelled out the source of the information and "Russia's support" for Trump, bait that Trump Jr. eager responded to with the words "I love it". The stuff was crap, but the Russians achieved what they wanted - an e-mail string apparently showing the Trump campaign's eagerness to get dirt even from "Russian government" sources.
It's a huge leap from "we did not collude" to "we were eager to collude but there was nothing there". Now some, like the NYPost, are calling Trump Jr. an idiot. But there's nothing idiotic with vetting offers of political dirt. But this dirt was tainted from the start with a Russian label. What is idiotic is to have a story out there that doesn't wash. Trump Jr. is being transparent now, but why didn't the President get those e-mails out there months ago to bolster its point that it didn't collude, even though Russian baddies were trying to get to the campaign with false promises of "support"?
Trump seems convinced of the notion that any acknowledgement of Russian dirty tricks will somehow cast aspersions on the legitimacy of his election. To the contrary, what may destroy his Presidency is months of denials undermined by e-mails indicating his own son was eager to get opposition research even if labeled plainly as being of Russian origin. Trump should have gotten in front of this months ago by releasing the e-mails as evidence of Russian disinformation attempts that were vetted and REJECTED. Instead, the current news will, to most observers, be just seen as contradicting the Administration's own denials. And that could, in the end, prove fatal.
Good post. It could only prove fatal if it succeeded in destroying the Trump administration, but, really, the general public is just not that interested in this whole Russian thing.
The people who are pushing it are part of what Rush was saying this morning: "There is a coup underway -- being led by the media with accomplices in the Democrat Party and a number of international players -- to reject the outcome of the election, to undermine the presidency of Donald Trump, and, if the wish list were realized, to get rid of him."
At least that's my opinion about the Russian thing .... based mostly on my own interactions with people who are interested in politics and on my Facebook page.
My Facebook page has become totally political. I'm missing the kitty pictures and the recipes but people just want to talk politics and they are about 90% conservative.
Not once have I seen an article posted about Russia interfering with elections.
-
As with nearly every thread that attempts to shame, ridicule and disparage Conservatives who do not genuflect to Trump - an intense argument about core Principles and either adhering to them or abandoning them for political pragmatism always ensues.
This is because we are currently in a war among ourselves attempting to either REDEFINE Conservatism and its principles or SAVE the foundational principles of Conservatism.
Homosexuality, abortion, fiscal irresponsibility, government run healthcare, the Nanny state - these things are now being grafted into the definition of what 'Conservatism' apparently stands for by Republican party hacks. Arguing over those core principle issues takes us directly to the SOURCE of traditional Conservative thought and principles: the bible. The Book that so many despise and do not want to hear mentioned in any discussion.
Well, Conservatism is not a political ideology contrary to what you might assert.
Conservatism is a way of life and thinking. And as such - the core tenets of the bible shape the way Principled Conservatives look at the world, look at people and issues and look at government.
It's no wonder the Republican party and Self-identifying Conservatives ridicule principles that do not empower their candidates or causes. That which motivates our core thoughts and beliefs is as despised by Republicans as assuredly as the Godless Left will despise it.
But since we are discussing foolishness, I can think of nothing more foolish than ejecting both God, scripture and principles regarding the issues that have fundamentally transformed us into something we were never intended to be as a nation. 'Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools' - Romans 1:21-22
Conservatism is about limited government, the free enterprise system, lower taxes, states rights and adhering to the constitution.
It is not about Bible thumpers who thrive on hate and have no inkling of what Jesus Christ tried to bring to the world.
-
Conservatism is about limited government, the free enterprise system, lower taxes, states rights and adhering to the constitution.
It is not about Bible thumpers who thrive on hate and have no inkling of what Jesus Christ tried to bring to the world.
:amen:
-
Thank you both for staying on topic.
*****rollingeyes*****
@DCPatriot I was just doing my part to help @driftdiver win the bet. :smokin:
-
Conservatism is about limited government, the free enterprise system, lower taxes, states rights and adhering to the constitution.
It is not about Bible thumpers who thrive on hate and have no inkling of what Jesus Christ tried to bring to the world.
I agree with you partially. The idea of an individual human being having value on their own and not just as a part of the clan, tribe, nation, whatever, is a pretty much uniquely Judeo-Christian idea. And, that, is what sets us apart from all other forms of society. You just can't neatly excise Judeo-Christianity from conservatism.
-
I agree with you partially. The idea of an individual human being having value on their own and not just as a part of the clan, tribe, nation, whatever, is a pretty much uniquely Judeo-Christian idea. And, that, is what sets us apart from all other forms of society. You just can't neatly excise Judeo-Christianity from conservatism.
That's true and maybe I should have added individual rights. But zealots who claim to be Christians may do more harm than good for Judeo-Christianity.
-
Conservatism is about limited government, the free enterprise system, lower taxes, states rights and adhering to the constitution.
It is not about Bible thumpers who thrive on hate and have no inkling of what Jesus Christ tried to bring to the world.
Calling sin what it is is not hate. Wrong is wrong period. But calling out sin is an act of love not hate. I do not hate homosexuals, I work with plenty of them and not one of them would tell you I hate them or have ever been unkind. Hater is like racist - its the word liberals throw when they have no other arguement
I would also argue that those who are not "Bible thumpers" - those who do not read and study the Bible - are the ones that have no inkling what Jesus Christ brought into the world - He did not try and fail.
However, the only reason I brought up religion is a poster asked what defined deviancy. I replied with the only answer I can give for myself. Others have other standards. But please get over the hate crap.
-
That's true and maybe I should have added individual rights. But zealots who claim to be Christians may do more harm than good for Judeo-Christianity.
What is your definition of a zealot? Someone who actually believes what they profess and is willing to stand up for it? The world seems to love Christians and conservatives who smile and wink at the principled position, then climb into the sewer with everyone else.
-
What is your definition of a zealot? Someone who actually believes what they profess and is willing to stand up for it? The world seems to love Christians and conservatives who smile and wink at the principled position, then climb into the sewer with everyone else.
@Mom MD
Matthew 7:24-27
24 “Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. 26 And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. 27 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell, and great was the fall of it.”
That verse always reminds me of the principled Conservatives versus the "wink and nod" crowd. .
-
Good conversation. These terms and concepts need to be explored.
-
Calling sin what it is is not hate. Wrong is wrong period. But calling out sin is an act of love not hate. I do not hate homosexuals, I work with plenty of them and not one of them would tell you I hate them or have ever been unkind. Hater is like racist - its the word liberals throw when they have no other arguement
I would also argue that those who are not "Bible thumpers" - those who do not read and study the Bible - are the ones that have no inkling what Jesus Christ brought into the world - He did not try and fail.
However, the only reason I brought up religion is a poster asked what defined deviancy. I replied with the only answer I can give for myself. Others have other standards. But please get over the hate crap.
Callin' it like I see it, sweetie. But there is a good reason for separation of Church and State.
Religion is personal and, within the personal, one can espouse any view or interpretation of the Bible that makes sense to us.
But religion is not something we can agree on. That's why there are so many churches and denominations.
I once sat in a Bible study class where we spent two hours discussing the meaning of the Parable of the Prodigal Son. At the end of the time, there were as many opinions as to the true meaning as there were participants. But we weren't fighting ... it just spoke to us differently.
-
Callin' it like I see it, sweetie. But there is a good reason for separation of Church and State.
Religion is personal and, within the personal, one can espouse any view or interpretation of the Bible that makes sense to us.
But religion is not something we can agree on. That's why there are so many churches and denominations.
I once sat in a Bible study class where we spent two hours discussing the meaning of the Parable of the Prodigal Son. At the end of the time, there were as many opinions as to the true meaning as there were participants. But we weren't fighting ... it just spoke to us differently.
Thats OK cupcake. You can see things anyway you want. I take umbrage at the hate term being thrown - not your personal religious beliefs.
-
@Mom MD
Matthew 7:24-27
24 “Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. 26 And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. 27 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell, and great was the fall of it.”
That verse always reminds me of the principled Conservatives versus the "wink and nod" crowd. .
You know that Jeff Foxworthy bit where he does the "You might be..." thing.
You might be a zealot if you tend to quote Paul instead of Jesus.
You might be a zealot if you wink and nod at "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
Jesus knew we are all sinners.
-
Callin' it like I see it, sweetie. But there is a good reason for separation of Church and State.
Religion is personal and, within the personal, one can espouse any view or interpretation of the Bible that makes sense to us.
But religion is not something we can agree on. That's why there are so many churches and denominations.
I once sat in a Bible study class where we spent two hours discussing the meaning of the Parable of the Prodigal Son. At the end of the time, there were as many opinions as to the true meaning as there were participants. But we weren't fighting ... it just spoke to us differently.
One point - religion is not equal to church. They are two different words because they mean different things.
-
What is your definition of a zealot? Someone who actually believes what they profess and is willing to stand up for it? The world seems to love Christians and conservatives who smile and wink at the principled position, then climb into the sewer with everyone else.
For this is a rebellious people, lying children, children who refuse to hear the law of the LORD; who tell the seers, "Do not see for us," and to the prophets, "Do not prophesy to us right things. Tell us pleasant things, smooth things. Prophesy deceits.
"But get out of the way! Turn aside from the path! We do not want to hear any more from the Holy One of Israel!"
Therefore thus says the Holy One of Israel, "Because you despise this word, and trust in sin and perverseness, and rely on it; this iniquity shall be to you like a breach ready to fall, swelling out in a high wall, whose breaking comes suddenly in an instant. - Isaiah 30:9-13
You will be hated by everyone because of me, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. - Matthew 10:22
-
Thats OK cupcake. You can see things anyway you want. I take umbrage at the hate term being thrown - not your personal religious beliefs.
I apologize. You are right. I should not be so free with the hate word. I need to find a more acceptable term but it bugs me when people feel so free to condemn others and exonerate themselves from sin.
-
I apologize. You are right. I should not be so free with the hate word. I need to find a more acceptable term but it bugs me when people feel so free to condemn others and exonerate themselves from sin.
None of us like being being told we are wrong! That doesn't mean we aren't wrong though.
-
One point - religion is not equal to church. They are two different words because they mean different things.
True, but we cannot separate religion and state. We can separate church and state.
-
True, but we cannot separate religion and state. We can separate church and state.
And, if the founders had wanted to separate religion from state, they would have used that word.
-
None of us like being being told we are wrong! That doesn't mean we aren't wrong though.
Hahahahaha. So true. But being on this forum keeps me humble.
-
I apologize. You are right. I should not be so free with the hate word. I need to find a more acceptable term but it bugs me when people feel so free to condemn others and exonerate themselves from sin.
Thanks for the apology. And I don't think anyone here condemns others while exonerating themselves. If they do they are foolish and deceiving themselves. I will (and do) freely admit I am a deeply flawed vessel. But that does not absolve us of the responsibility to stand for what is right.
-
Hahahahaha. So true. But being on this forum keeps me humble.
Me too.
-
As a religious person you might be surprised to find I am a huge proponent of keeping church and state separate. That includes tax breaks for churches as well. I do not want the state anywhere near my faith - and any concession by the state gives them power over the church. I do not want them telling my church who they can or have to marry, who they have to hire, etc. Also all of a sudden the church is afraid to say anything because they may lose their tax break or other support. Giving the feds a toe hold in any private enterprise is a bad idea. Churches most of all, because as things go Christians will find themselves in direct opposition to the government at some point.
-
I apologize. You are right. I should not be so free with the hate word. I need to find a more acceptable term but it bugs me when people feel so free to condemn others and exonerate themselves from sin.
First off "separation of church and state" is a liberal idea of what the Constitution actually says.
Secondly, I have not seen anyone here exonerate themselves from sin during any discusion of the homosexual driven agenda, since that has been a focus in many posts lately with regard to our supposedly conservative President and his "most conservative cabinet evah", that we are all being assaulted with.
-
As a religious person you might be surprised to find I am a huge proponent of keeping church and state separate. That includes tax breaks for churches as well. I do not want the state anywhere near my faith - and any concession by the state gives them power over the church. I do not want them telling my church who they can or have to marry, who they have to hire, etc. Also all of a sudden the church is afraid to say anything because they may lose their tax break or other support. Giving the feds a toe hold in any private enterprise is a bad idea. Churches most of all, because as things go Christians will find themselves in direct opposition to the government at some point.
Exactly true. Keep the State out of the Church for both of their sakes.
-
I do not want the state anywhere near my faith - and any concession by the state gives them power over the church. I do not want them telling my church who they can or have to marry, who they have to hire, etc.
And this was the major point of the first amendment. They were most concerned about the gov't controlling the church.
-
First off "separation of church and state" is a liberal idea of what the Constitution actually says.
Secondly, I have not seen anyone here exonerate themselves from sin during any discusion of the homosexual driven agenda, since that has been a focus in many posts lately with regard to our supposedly conservative President and his "most conservative cabinet evah", that we are all being assaulted with.
It is implicit in some of the posts here that the posters believe themselves to be superior morally to the ones they criticize.
The constitution words it differently, of course, but I don't know why you think separation of Church and State is a liberal idea.
It is a conservative idea.
-
You know that Jeff Foxworthy bit where he does the "You might be..." thing.
You might be a zealot if you tend to quote Paul instead of Jesus.
You might be a zealot if you wink and nod at "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
Jesus knew we are all sinners.
And you might not know as much as you think you do and you're not near as clever as you give yourself credit for if you assume I'm a "zealot".
-
It is implicit in some of the posts here that the posters believe themselves to be superior morally to the ones they criticize.
The constitution words it differently, of course, but I don't know why you think separation of Church and State is a liberal idea.
It is a conservative idea.
Well, don't all of us think our ideas are superior? Why would we keep them if we didn't think so?
-
And this was the major point of the first amendment. They were most concerned about the gov't controlling the church.
You bring up a great point.
When the Framers wrote section in the 1st Amendment about the establishment of religion...they were doing that to prevent another Church of England situation in the newly founded U.S.A. where the head of the Church was also the head of state and could declare certain religious faith's illegal.
They did not write it to prevent the 10 Commandments from being displayed in a courthouse...or to prevent a Nativity scene from being erected on a court house lawn.
I think the Framers as well as the Founders would be horrified to see how misused the Establishment Clause is today.
-
And you might not know as much as you think you do and you're not near as clever as you give yourself credit for if you assume I'm a "zealot".
Hey, I don't think you're a zealot.
And, it's perfectly obvious that I'm not as clever as I think I am. No one could be !!!
LOL
-
And this was the major point of the first amendment. They were most concerned about the gov't controlling the church.
Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists was to reassure them that government wouldn't interfere with Church matters (like marriage)
-
You will be hated by everyone because of me, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. - Matthew 10:22
@INVAR
Matthew 10:22 is not a license to treat everyone with disdain and alienate them.
-
You bring up a great point.
When the Framers wrote section in the 1st Amendment about the establishment of religion...they were doing that to prevent another Church of England situation in the newly founded U.S.A. where the head of the Church was also the head of state and could declare certain religious faith's illegal.
They did not write it to prevent the 10 Commandments from being displayed in a courthouse...or to prevent a Nativity scene from being erected on a court house lawn.
I think the Framers as well as the Founders would be horrified to see how misused the Establishment Clause is today.
The Founders would be annoyed, if not horrified, but they were trying to avoid Churches being in authority, specifically the Church of England. That's why people came here. My people came here in 1651 as Baptist missionaries from Wales.
But conservatives are partly to blame for the anti-religion sentiment of the left. They see us as mean nannies trying to keep people from having fun.
-
Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists was to reassure them that government wouldn't interfere with Church matters (like marriage)
Quoting Jefferson is always a good idea.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
And, if the founders had wanted to separate religion from state, they would have used that word.
I believe the 1st amendment intended to create space between spiritual, religious and churches life, and civil life.
Some Founders were deists, not strict adherents to specific denominations.
-
The Founders would be annoyed, if not horrified, but they were trying to avoid Churches being in authority, specifically the Church of England. That's why people came here. My people came here in 1651 as Baptist missionaries from Wales.
But conservatives are partly to blame for the anti-religion sentiment of the left. They see us as mean nannies trying to keep people from having fun.
Thats like blaming the girl for being raped.
-
Thats OK cupcake. You can see things anyway you want. I take umbrage at the hate term being thrown - not your personal religious beliefs.
It has recently been pointed out to me that @CatherineofAragon and I posted similar messages to @Emjay within about 24 hours of each other. Not planned, but certainly interesting. She's only here to stir the pot. If you had posted the opposite concept, emjay would have disagreed with that, too. It's best just to ignore the troll.
-
I agree with you partially. The idea of an individual human being having value on their own and not just as a part of the clan, tribe, nation, whatever, is a pretty much uniquely Judeo-Christian idea.
I think humanism woukd argue for the same.
-
Quoting Jefferson is always a good idea.
If you have a friend who thinks its ok to kill babies, is that good enough reason?
Or how about if that 'friend' thinks its ok for the govt to take control of your property to build a shopping mall?
Or maybe that friend thinks its ok to take 92% of your income as taxes?
Are any of those good enough reasons to withdraw?
-
It has recently been pointed out to me that @CatherineofAragon and I posted similar messages to @Emjay within about 24 hours of each other. Not planned, but certainly interesting. She's only here to stir the pot. If you had posted the opposite concept, emjay would have disagreed with that, too. It's best just to ignore the troll.
Don't brag about being in alliance with @CatherineofAragon. She has despised me forever and I'm not sure why. She told me she had put me on ignore because I 'wasn't worth messing with.' And then she denied it.
My concepts have not changed. You just don't like them and you're only answer is to lash out. You cannot discuss things on a rational level.
-
If you have a friend who thinks its ok to kill babies, is that good enough reason?
Or how about if that 'friend' thinks its ok for the govt to take control of your property to build a shopping mall?
Or maybe that friend thinks its ok to take 92% of your income as taxes?
Are any of those good enough reasons to withdraw?
That's for you to decide. I was just quoting Jefferson.
-
Poor people often had a church sanctioned marriage but lacked any state issued paperwork. On the frontier many never had even a church marriage. They were considered married by simple virtue of having been together for a long time.
And as a point of order, many of those frontier unions were interracial.
-
I think humanism woukd argue for the same.
As I understand humanism the worth lies in the race not in the individual, but I could be wrong. Also the worth comes from inside not outside in humanism. There is no objective truth or value other than preservation of the race.
-
Thats like blaming the girl for being raped.
What? No. No, it's not. I'm just trying to explain how much of the left sees conservatives. I'm not agreeing with them.
-
Exactly true. Keep the State out of the Church for both of their sakes.
And the Church out of the State.
-
And the Church out of the State.
Yep!
-
They are not 'myth based' but they are certainly open to interpretation and the Old Testament is very different from the New.
NO, they are not.
-
What? No. No, it's not. I'm just trying to explain how much of the left sees conservatives. I'm not agreeing with them.
Evil will attack good no matter what good does. That doesn't mean all conservatives are good or that all liberals are evil. But evil has taken control of the liberal/democrat agenda and is calling the shots.
-
Evil will attack good no matter what good does. That doesn't mean all conservatives are good or that all liberals are evil. But evil has taken control of the liberal/democrat agenda and is calling the shots.
Unfortunately we are not far from being able to say the same of the conservative agenda
-
It is implicit in some of the posts here that the posters believe themselves to be superior morally to the ones they criticize.
This is complete nonsense, repeated ad nauseum, by the Trump supporters, who seem to get in a tizzy because some of us are not pragmatic enough for their taste. They actually hate that other people won't set aside some or all of their ideals so we can "win". And when they don't get their way they get all pissy and start yammering on using words like self-righteous and superior morals.
The constitution words it differently, of course, but I don't know why you think separation of Church and State is a liberal idea.
It is a conservative idea.
You incorrectly read what I wrote.
-
And the Church out of the State.
Sadly I don't think your interpretation of that squares with the majority of the people here.
-
NO, they are not.
Your post is ambiguous. To what does "they" refer?
-
LOL. That is one of my top Charlie Daniels songs. The other is In America because it is up tempo.
@Frank Cannon
Didja ever hear Uneasy Rider '88?
Fits right into this thread...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1AL2V02oTw
-
Don't brag about being in alliance with @CatherineofAragon. She has despised me forever and I'm not sure why. She told me she had put me on ignore because I 'wasn't worth messing with.' And then she denied it.
@Emjay
Watch who you accuse of lying, understand? Especially when you seem to have problems with the truth yourself.
First of all, you and I had some very friendly conversations for quite a while. Then you started bucking for the position of forum scold/nanny, doing nothing but going from thread to thread and trying to tell people what they should and shouldn't post. I had a problem with that, I told you so, and you didn't take it well. At all.
If I were going to use the ignore button, I would use it for you, even though your posts aren't worth the click. I don't use that feature, however. But whether I do or don't isn't a damn bit of your business, so stop obsessing about it. And for God's sake spare the rest of us your endless, miserable poor-me victim moaning.
Yeah, I know. Too much to ask. Three days from now you'll still be crying about our exchange here.
Go put a ribbon on your dog or something.
-
It is not about Bible thumpers who thrive on hate and have no inkling of what Jesus Christ tried to bring to the world.
One whose ignorance of Biblical matters, having already been determined, really should not assume to know what Jesus Christ DID bring into this world.
-
I would also argue that those who are not "Bible thumpers" - those who do not read and study the Bible - are the ones that have no inkling what Jesus Christ brought into the world - He did not try and fail.
Exactly right - GMTA! LOL!
-
Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists was to reassure them that government wouldn't interfere with Church matters (like marriage)
@Cripplecreek Thank you for clarifying that better than I did. Sometimes I have a mental block about those types (Danbury Baptists) of details.
-
It is implicit in some of the posts here that the posters believe themselves to be superior morally to the ones they criticize.
That is the refuge of those who refuse to hear the Truth and actually hate and despise those who stand for the Truth that they reject.
@INVAR
Matthew 10:22 is not a license to treat everyone with disdain and alienate them.
Matthew 10:22's prophetic significance is illustrated on this very thread.
This is complete nonsense, repeated ad nauseum, by the Trump supporters, who seem to get in a tizzy because some of us are not pragmatic enough for their taste. They actually hate that other people won't set aside some or all of their ideals so we can "win". And when they don't get their way they get all pissy and start yammering on using words like self-righteous and superior morals.
Well stated and gets to the root of the entire political argument on this thread.
A majority in this country today cannot stand anyone who refuses to surrender truths and principles that they no longer have any use for and consider an obstacle and an evil.
The zeitgeist is no longer germane to Democrats and the Left.
-
Watch who you accuse of lying, understand? Especially when you seem to have problems with the truth yourself. First of all, you and I had some very friendly conversations for quite a while. Then you started bucking for the position of forum scold/nanny, doing nothing but going from thread to thread and trying to tell people what they should and shouldn't post. I had a problem with that, I told you so, and you didn't take it well. At all. If I were going to use the ignore button, I would use it for you, even though your posts aren't worth the click. I don't use that feature, however. But whether I do or don't isn't a damn bit of your business, so stop obsessing about it. And for God's sake spare the rest of us your endless, miserable poor-me victim moaning. Yeah, I know. Too much to ask. Three days from now you'll still be crying about our exchange here.
Go put a ribbon on your dog or something.
@CatherineofAragon
Some of your posts deserve medals - this is one of them (put a ribbon on your dog or something).
-
As a religious person you might be surprised to find I am a huge proponent of keeping church and state separate. That includes tax breaks for churches as well.
The reason churches have always been exempt from taxation is precisely to prevent the state from influencing the Church - Which it has now got around with onerous duties to retain 503c status, or be taxed... whereupon the next step is to tax the crap out of those who do not bow to the state and retain 503c.
No, those 'tax breaks' are necessary... and should be reinstated as before.
-
@INVAR
Matthew 10:22 is not a license to treat everyone with disdain and alienate them.
@driftdiver
It is funny how people don't even recognize love anymore.
-
@driftdiver
It is funny how people don't even recognize love anymore.
"Love" these days means people accept the anything goes mentality that has taken over the country and anything less than that is automatically considered "hate".
The belief of love the sinner hate the sin is a foreign concept to too many people these days.
-
@driftdiver
It is funny how people don't even recognize love anymore.
Love = not hurting anyones feelings
Do I need the tag? No, I didn't think so either. ;)
-
That is the refuge of those who refuse to hear the Truth and actually hate and despise those who stand for the Truth that they reject.
Matthew 10:22's prophetic significance is illustrated on this very thread.
You do not own the "Truth". I believe you are misusing Matthew 10:22. Its not a license to be offensive or to be prideful. Some people use it as a stick to pridefully hold themselves as better than others.
-
Your post is ambiguous. To what does "they" refer?
The 'old' and 'new' testaments. They are not different. Yahweh does not change.
-
Next time a MOD tells me to stay on topic He/She can KMA! :smokin:
-
Next time a MOD tells me to stay on topic He/She can KMA! :smokin:
All I know is when the conversation turns to religion, I RUN!!!!!!
Things get uglier, and things get said that can't be unsaid.
-
"Love" these days means people accept the anything goes mentality that has taken over the country and anything less than that is automatically considered "hate".
The belief of love the sinner hate the sin is a foreign concept to too many people these days.
No doubt. Admonishment is an act of love... Especially with eternal souls at stake.
-
"Love" these days means people accept the anything goes mentality that has taken over the country and anything less than that is automatically considered "hate".
The belief of love the sinner hate the sin is a foreign concept to too many people these days.
@txradioguy @roamer_1
The insinuation being that you are showing love by telling people the right way. Sometimes thats true. Sometimes you're just being an ass.
If you speak to people with love and grace then I would agree. If you're using it as a stick to prove your superiority then I would disagree.
Matthew 13 - Jesus used parables to help people understand rather then beat them into submission.
-
Love = not hurting anyones feelings
Do I need the tag? No, I didn't think so either. ;)
That's right. :)
-
Next time a MOD tells me to stay on topic He/She can KMA! :smokin:
@DCPatriot :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin:
Thats the demon
-
America's Separation of Church was based in part, on England's Civil War experiences, and the colonial American experience.
Precaution of Quakers, by Puritans, was only one example.
snip
"Persecution of Quakers in Colonial New England"
"Of all Protestant sects the Quakers went furthest in stripping off from Christianity its non-essential features of doctrine and ceremonial. Their ideal was not a theocracy but a separation between church and state. They would abolish all distinction between clergy and laity, and could not be coaxed or bullied into paying tithes. They also refused to render military service, or to take the oath of allegiance. In these ways they came at once into antagonism both with church and with state."
snip
http://www.worldspirituality.org/persecution-quakers.html
-
@driftdiver
It is funny how people don't even recognize love anymore.
@roamer_1
Love is not beating someone into submission. Nor is it an effective way to open their mind or heart. Instead it tends to harden most people against your message.
This is one of the fundamental reasons so many traditional churches are losing members and will soon cease to operate. There are other ways to communicate.
-
Evil will attack good no matter what good does. That doesn't mean all conservatives are good or that all liberals are evil. But evil has taken control of the liberal/democrat agenda and is calling the shots.
It totally has ...they have always been crazy but Trump has driven them stark, raving mad.
-
Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists was to reassure them that government wouldn't interfere with Church matters (like marriage)
And the Everson case which introduced the words of that letter into our judicial case record was a losing case for the secular extremists. The direct result of Everson was that public school buses could be used to bus kids to Catholic schools.
Funny how the secularists and humanists fail to mention that each time those words are brought up.
-
"Persecution of Quakers in Colonial New England"
In my genealogical circles, one of my colleagues calls my West MA 17th century puritans ancestors the "American Taliban"
Probably not far from the truth.
-
@roamer_1
Love is not beating someone into submission. Nor is it an effective way to open their mind or heart. Instead it tends to harden most people against your message.
This is one of the fundamental reasons so many traditional churches are losing members and will soon cease to operate. There are other ways to communicate.
"There are other ways to communicate."
(https://soundofdoctrine.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/puritan.jpg?w=500)
-
The insinuation being that you are showing love by telling people the right way.
There is no insinuation, It should be well known here that I (and others) are disciples of Yeshua Ha' Mashiach
Sometimes thats true. Sometimes you're just being an ass.
Admonishment sucks... There is no way to admonish folks without being an ass, according to them.
If you speak to people with love and grace then I would agree. If you're using it as a stick to prove your superiority then I would disagree.
I have done no such thing, nor has my brother @txradioguy , nor even my brother @INVAR
Matthew 13 - Jesus used parables to help people understand rather then beat them into submission.
No one is beating anyone.
@driftdiver
-
This is complete nonsense, repeated ad nauseum, by the Trump supporters, who seem to get in a tizzy because some of us are not pragmatic enough for their taste. They actually hate that other people won't set aside some or all of their ideals so we can "win". And when they don't get their way they get all pissy and start yammering on using words like self-righteous and superior morals.
You incorrectly read what I wrote.
Or, you incorrectly wrote what I read. Why is this suddenly about Trump supporters? No one is asking you to put away your ideals. Ideals are good. Unless one is forcing one's own ideals on other people.
-
I believe the 1st amendment intended to create space between spiritual, religious and churches life, and civil life.
Perhaps you should try reading what it actually says. The ONLY thing Amendment I does is place limitations on the legislative branch of the Federal government.
-
In my genealogical circles, one of my colleagues calls my West MA 17th century puritans ancestors the "American Taliban"
Probably not far from the truth.
I have ancestors, on both sides of many conflicts throughout our nation's history. One such gxxx grandfather, was one "Rev. Hatevil Nutter," truly a Puritan zealot, that had Quakers whipped.
"Hatevil Nutter Was A Cruel Religious Hypocrite
Hatevil Nutter had had enough. An elder in Puritan church in Dover, N.H., he objected to the way the three Quaker women “beset” Congregationalist minister John Reyner when he worshiped in public. He didn’t like the way they bedeviled the Puritan minister when he was at home. He believed their teachings were wrong and their methods pernicious.
For six weeks in 1662, the women had held meetings and services at various homes around town. The Quaker women, my 11th great grandfather cruelly reasoned, had the liberty to go elsewhere, but they failed to exercise that liberty. Instead, they tried to spread their beliefs in Dover, preaching against professional ministers, restrictions on individual conscience, and the established customs of church-ruled settlements. Something had to be done.
Nutter, who filled the pulpit on occasion, sprung into action. He helped to get Dover citizens to sign a petition “humbly craving relief against the spreading & the wicked errors of the Quakers among them.” According to a Quaker historian, Hatevil (pronounced just like you think, Hate Evil) stirred up crown magistrate Captain Richard Walderne to issue an order to the constables of surrounding jurisdictions.
A little background may be necessary. Many of the Puritans who settled in New England in the 1660s did not believe in a separate church and state. They fled Europe, in many cases, because they believed the Church of England had strayed from its basic principles. They refused to tolerate dissent.
Walderne’s order required the constables “in the King’s name” to take “these vagabond Quakers, Ann Coleman, Mary Tomkins, and Alice Ambrose,” tie them fast to a cart’s tail, and “whip their naked backs, not exceeding ten stripes apiece on each of the them, in each town; and so to convey them from constable to constable, till they are out of this jurisdiction.”
The medieval-style punishment was severe, even by Colonial standards. The order called for whippings in at least 11 towns. It would require travel over 80 miles in bitterly cold weather. The first stop was Dover, to which Nutter had come from England 30 years before. The women were seized on a frigid winter day by constables John and Thomas Roberts. George Bishop recorded the events:
“Deputy Waldrom caused these women to be stripped naked from the middle upwards, and tied to a cart, and after awhile cruelly whipped them, whilst the priest stood and looked and laughed at it.”
Hatevil thought it was a real laugh-riot as well, according to Sewell, another witness. “All this whipping of the Quaker women, by the Constables (in front of the meeting-house) was in the presence of one Hate-Evil Nutwell (Nutter), a Ruling Elder, who stirred up the Constables (John and Thomas Roberts) to this wicked action, and so proved that he bore a wrong name (Hate Evil).”
According to Sewell’s History of the Quakers, the women were carried next to Hampton, where the constable wanted to whip the women with their clothes on. But they said, “‘set us free, or do according to thine order.’ He then spoke to a woman to take off their clothes. But she said she would not for all the world. Why, said he, then I’ll do it myself…So he stripped them, and then stood trembling whip in hand, and so he did the execution.
“Then he carried them to Salisbury through the dirt and the snow half the leg deep; and here they were whipped again. Indeed, their bodies were so torn, that if Providence had not watched over them, they might have been in danger of their lives.”
Once the women got to Salisbury, one Walter Barefoot convinced the constable to swear him in as a deputy. He received the women and the warrant and put a stop to the persecution. Dr. Barefoot dressed their wounds and returned them to the Maine side of the Piscataqua River.
Barefoot had the support of the town’s people, who were guided by the influential Major Robert Pike, one of the leaders of the lower Merrimac valley. According to history books, Pike stood far in advance of his time. He advocated religious freedom and opposed ecclesiastical authority. He even courageously wrote to the court at Salem, objecting to the witchcraft trials.
Eventually, much to Nutter’s chagrin, the Quaker women returned to Dover and established a church. More than a third of Dover’s citizens eventually became Quakers.
The Nutter connection to the Thompson family comes through Grandmother Marie (Meanie) Elise Kruttschnitt’s grandfather, Frederick Manthano Pickering (1862-1945), who was born in Portland, Me. Intrepid family genealogist Sue Wolfe discovered the connection several years ago and documented it with a set of papers more than an inch thick.
Sue discovered that Hatevil was born in 1598, probably in Harlington, Bedford, England, and came to the United States in the mid 1630s. According to the history of Dover, N.H., he did not arrive with the first wave of immigrants in 1633. He probably showed up a little later. Public records show that in 1637 he bought a lot from one Captain Thomas Wiggin. Over the years, he received various land grants from the town.
Hatevil was part owner of a sawmill at Lamprey River, and he owned a ship yard on the shore of the Fore River. He helped organize the First Church in November 1638 and served in various official capacities during his lifetime.
“His house stood on the east side of High Street, about 15 or 20 rods from the north corner of the meeting house-lot,” reads the history of Dover. “An old pear tree stands (1923) in the hollow, which was part of the cellar.”
Nutter was by no means alone in his hatred of Quakers. Laws were passed during his time imposing fines on the master of any vessel who brought a Quaker into the colony. Quakers who managed to set foot in the Colonies were supposed to be sent immediately to a house of correction, where they would receive 20 stripes and be confined to hard labor.
A later act levied a 40-shilling fine against anyone who harbored a Quaker for one hour. After the first conviction, the offender, if a man, would lose one ear; and upon the third conviction, the other ear. Offending women would be whipped each time. After four convictions, offenders–men and women alike–would have their tongue bored through with a hot iron.
Many Quakers came to America to escape religious persecution in Europe. They found it in new forms once they arrived."
https://thompsongenealogy.com/2011/04/hatevil-nutter-was-a-cruel-religious-hypocrite/
-
@roamer_1
Love is not beating someone into submission. Nor is it an effective way to open their mind or heart. Instead it tends to harden most people against your message.
This is one of the fundamental reasons so many traditional churches are losing members and will soon cease to operate. There are other ways to communicate.
Absolutely incorrect. And the reason traditional churches are losing membership is because they have lost their savor. Understanding how salt loses it's savor would be enlightening.
In the mean time, Biblical and fundamentalist based churches are growing in leaps and bounds -Bursting at the seams...
-
I believe the 1st amendment intended to create space between spiritual, religious and churches life, and civil life.
Some Founders were deists, not strict adherents to specific denominations.
You may believe that, but the facts say otherwise.
-
Or, you incorrectly wrote what I read. Why is this suddenly about Trump supporters? No one is asking you to put away your ideals. Ideals are good. Unless one is forcing one's own ideals on other people.
You think an article about foolish Never Trumpers would not include discussion of Trump supporters?! In fact, by you and others calling anyone who does not genuflect to the orange throne things such as "holier than thou" "morally superior" "self righteous", etc you are indeed asking people to put away their ideals. And in fact, I force my ideals on my 5 year old all the time; people who are immature (in any aspect) need education on proper behavior. And I'm sure if we were eating in the same restaurant you would thank me for forcing my ideals on at least one person.
-
@Emjay
Watch who you accuse of lying, understand? Especially when you seem to have problems with the truth yourself.
First of all, you and I had some very friendly conversations for quite a while. Then you started bucking for the position of forum scold/nanny, doing nothing but going from thread to thread and trying to tell people what they should and shouldn't post. I had a problem with that, I told you so, and you didn't take it well. At all.
If I were going to use the ignore button, I would use it for you, even though your posts aren't worth the click. I don't use that feature, however. But whether I do or don't isn't a damn bit of your business, so stop obsessing about it. And for God's sake spare the rest of us your endless, miserable poor-me victim moaning.
Yeah, I know. Too much to ask. Three days from now you'll still be crying about our exchange here.
Go put a ribbon on your dog or something.
First of all, you did lie. And it was totally unnecessary. I remember it well. Not word for word but you said you were through with me and were putting me on ignore because 'I wasn't worth messing with."
I don't know why you choose to lie about that because it was an okay thing to say and do if that's the way you felt.
When I see your posts, I make a real effort NOT to respond to them because you take it so personally. I've disagreed with many people here and some of them don't like me that much but you're the only one with a vendetta. And your clown friend @goodwithagun
Let's do this. Let's just ignore each other.
My dog is pretty enough without a ribbon.
-
"Love" these days means people accept the anything goes mentality that has taken over the country and anything less than that is automatically considered "hate".
The belief of love the sinner hate the sin is a foreign concept to too many people these days.
Then, Love isn't never having to say you're sorry? Dopiest movie line ever.
-
I think humanism woukd argue for the same.
With the big exception that humanism removes God from the equation and says that humans can be perfected if only they would give up their individuality and work together.
-
No one is beating anyone.
@roamer_1
Oh I disagree with that 100%
-
You think an article about foolish Never Trumpers would not include discussion of Trump supporters?! In fact, by you and others calling anyone who does not genuflect to the orange throne things such as "holier than thou" "morally superior" "self righteous", etc you are indeed asking people to put away their ideals. And in fact, I force my ideals on my 5 year old all the time; people who are immature (in any aspect) need education on proper behavior. And I'm sure if we were eating in the same restaurant you would thank me for forcing my ideals on at least one person.
True, but we left Trump a long time ago in this discussion ... like 10 pages ago.
I certainly don't expect anyone to genuflect to Trump. He is not personally an ideal person.
And, I would hope you would keep your ideals to yourself in a restaurant so that we could all have a pleasant meal.
-
Next time a MOD tells me to stay on topic He/She can KMA! :smokin:
LOL !!!!! I don't even remember what the topic was here, but we've had an interesting discussion.
-
BTW, @Emjay, I like your Aslan avatar. I used a similar one for a time.
-
BTW, @Emjay, I like your Aslan avatar. I used a similar one for a time.
Thanks, I like Him too.
-
You do not own the "Truth". I believe you are misusing Matthew 10:22. Its not a license to be offensive or to be prideful. Some people use it as a stick to pridefully hold themselves as better than others.
Again. This is the refuge for those who despise the Truth and do not want to hear, see or know that it exists outside someone's own thoughts, which they should keep to themselves. God forbid that they are governed by that Truth instead of surrendering it to advance political objectives so as not to be 'offensive' to those who want everyone to accept their behaviors and ideas.
What you are essentially saying is Jesus' words "Go and sin no more" is now 'offensive'. To call sin what it is, regarded as alienation and pride.
So remaining silent and surrendering principles is now expected in order to avoid 'offenses'. This is a proof of the absolute corruption of this people.
Love is not beating someone into submission.
Love is telling someone the unabashed truth when their path and behaviors will lead them and the nation to death. I find it very telling that when anyone speaks the unabashed truth that not only is it decreed to be offensive it is considered to be beating someone 'into submission'.
Nor is it an effective way to open their mind or heart. Instead it tends to harden most people against your message.
Show us where accommodating/placating sin and bad behavior has ever opened anyones mind and heart to reject evils they enjoy and return to the faith once delivered? Likewise, show us where accommodating Socialism and Statism has ever opened this people's minds to those evils and gotten them to eschew it for the foundational principles that established us?
If people harden their hearts against the message of repentance and admonishment to return to the path that leads to life, it is because they do not want to follow that path and choose the wide gate to destruction they prefer.
This is one of the fundamental reasons so many traditional churches are losing members and will soon cease to operate. There are other ways to communicate.
Persecuted churches are growing in the third world.
Here, churches that preach the 'prosperity gospel' are full. Traditional bible-based churches are shrinking. We were foretold this would happen and that in our prosperity the church itself would not endure sound doctrine. As a people we are being given over to our own lusts and consequences, having made God over into our own perverted image instead of transforming ourselves into His. Not unlike the fact this people are giving themselves over to Socialism and Statism rather than insisting the government be confined within the foundations that established us.
It is why Populist Socialism is the new Conservatism and tolerant debauchery is the new Christianity.
-
@INVAR I truly hope you are perfect. Otherwise, you're in for a rude awakening.
-
And, I would hope you would keep your ideals to yourself in a restaurant so that we could all have a pleasant meal.
Aren't you precious. The next time you dine next to a screaming kid remember that you are getting what you hoped for.
-
@INVAR I truly hope you are perfect. Otherwise, you're in for a rude awakening.
Thanks for illustrating and bolstering all of my points dear.
-
I have ancestors, on both sides of many conflicts throughout our nation's history. One such gxxx grandfather, was one "Rev. Hatevil Nutter," truly a Puritan zealot, that had Quakers whipped.
Thanks for sharing. I truly enjoy these accounts of ancestors. Here is one of mine. This lady is wife of a 9 great uncle John Osgood. His brother my 8 great grandfather Hooker Osgood was one of several that signed the petition to free her. (Sadly the link is dead that has a copy of that petition) Somehow she escaped the 1692 carnage.
Mary Clemment- daughter of Robert of Haverhill married John Osgood (1630-1693) 11-15-1653. John was the son of John Osgood, b. 7-23-1598 Wherwell Hampshire England, and Sarah Booth.
Mary was one of the unfortunes accused of witchcraft during the time of the Salem Witch Trials. As the notes by Charlotte Helen Abbot put it- "Her husband John, who was also scared but loyal, denied her admission and said that she was all right and was too frightened to know what she was saying. She recanted her confession on Oct. 16, 1692, before Increase Mather, and testified that she had been browbeaten."
"She confesses that about eleven years ago, when she was in a melancholy stste and condition, she used to walk abroad in her orchard ; upon a certain time she saw the appearance of a cat, at the end of the house, which she thought was a real cat."
"She sais further, that about two years agone, she was carried through the air, in company with deacon Frye's wife, Ebenezer Barker's wife, and Goody Tyler, to five-mile pond, where she was baptized by the devil."
*Excerpts from "the examination and confession (September 8, 1692) of Mary Osgood, wife of Capt, John Osgood, of Andover, taken before John Hawthorne and other Majesties' Justice."
-
@roamer_1
Oh I disagree with that 100%
Knock yourself out. :seeya:
-
Way More Than the Scarlet Letter: Puritan Punishments
In their rigid enforcement of community standards, Puritan New Englanders often resorted to unusual punishments such as the bilbo, the cleft stick, the brand, the ear crop and the letter, scarlet and otherwise.
puritan-whippingIn Massachusetts, New Plymouth, Connecticut and New Haven Colony, the Puritans were more concerned with moral behavior and clean living than they were with property rights. They took their laws from the Bible, rather than English precedent, and people were less likely to be punished for larceny than to be punished for blasphemy, idolatry, drunkenness, lewdness, fornication, cursing or smoking.
Long-term incarceration was unknown, thought capital punishment for 12 crimes – including blasphemy, counterfeiting and witchcraft – accepted. Puritan law recognized the principle that no one should be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process, and explicitly limited government power. They prohibited unlawful search and seizure, double jeopardy and compulsory self-incrimination while guaranteeing bail, grand jury indictment and trial by jury.
Rhode Island was an exception, and took nearly all of its laws from English precedent.
snip
(http://www.newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/puritan-whipping-300x300.jpg)
http://www.newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/way-more-than-the-scarlet-letter-puritan-punishments/
-
Aren't you precious. The next time you dine next to a screaming kid remember that you are getting what you hoped for.
I would never accost the parents of a screaming kid. They are suffering enough.
I would just order another martini, double the vodka.
-
With the big exception that humanism removes God from the equation and says that humans can be perfected if only they would give up their individuality and work together.
Exactly right.
The biggest lie of all is that ANY of our problems can be fixed without adherence to the root our country was founded upon.
Each and every 'conservative' who advocates fixing our nations problems, even with conservative solutions, begs the lie if they also eschew the Judeo-Christian Ethic.
There is not a SINGLE issue that can be fixed without first fixing the moral turpitude running rampant in our nation. Not a one.
-
Thanks for sharing. I truly enjoy these accounts of ancestors. Here is one of mine. This lady is wife of a 9 great uncle John Osgood. His brother my 8 great grandfather Hooker Osgood was one of several that signed the petition to free her. (Sadly the link is dead that has a copy of that petition) Somehow she escaped the 1692 carnage.
Mary Clemment- daughter of Robert of Haverhill married John Osgood (1630-1693) 11-15-1653. John was the son of John Osgood, b. 7-23-1598 Wherwell Hampshire England, and Sarah Booth.
Mary was one of the unfortunes accused of witchcraft during the time of the Salem Witch Trials. As the notes by Charlotte Helen Abbot put it- "Her husband John, who was also scared but loyal, denied her admission and said that she was all right and was too frightened to know what she was saying. She recanted her confession on Oct. 16, 1692, before Increase Mather, and testified that she had been browbeaten."
"She confesses that about eleven years ago, when she was in a melancholy stste and condition, she used to walk abroad in her orchard ; upon a certain time she saw the appearance of a cat, at the end of the house, which she thought was a real cat."
"She sais further, that about two years agone, she was carried through the air, in company with deacon Frye's wife, Ebenezer Barker's wife, and Goody Tyler, to five-mile pond, where she was baptized by the devil."
*Excerpts from "the examination and confession (September 8, 1692) of Mary Osgood, wife of Capt, John Osgood, of Andover, taken before John Hawthorne and other Majesties' Justice."
Interesting, @catfish1957 .... those stories make me glad I am living now instead of then.
-
Thanks for sharing.
Genealogy led me to study of history, and the facts of history informed me about many aspects of our nation's paths, culture, religions, etc.
There is an important difference between the romantic notion "Puritans went to Holland," and my gxxx grandfather Puritan Rev. Nutter, whipped Quaker women, and laughed about it.
-
Genealogy led me to study of history, and the facts of history informed me about many aspects of our nation's paths, culture, religions, etc.
There is an important difference between the romantic notion "Puritans went to Holland," and my gxxx grandfather Puritan Rev. Nutter, whipped Quaker women, and laughed about it.
Absolutely. You might really like Genealogy Bank and Newspapers.com. These have OCR scanned papers back into the early 1700's, with good search capabilities. Just last week, I found where a 4-great grandfather in western MA as a selectman evicted a new couple to their town for the fact that their character was unsavory. And this is 1798 not 1692.
-
Absolutely. You might really like Genealogy Bank and Newspapers.com. These have OCR scanned papers back into the early 1700's, with good search capabilities. Just last week, I found where a 4-great grandfather in western MA as a selectman evicted a new couple to their town for the fact that their character was unsavory. And this is 1798 not 1692.
I will check those out. I get chuckles about those, that instruct me I must interpret things the way they see them.
I have a gxxx uncle killed by those who opposed abolitionists. I have two gxxx grandfathers, killed by Indians. Maine, Indiana.
I have a gxxx uncle that traded a barrel of wine, to Brigham Young, for a wagon. Without his wagon, my ancestor came in the next (2nd) train across the plains. (Of course my ancestor wound up with the wine.)
-
Knock yourself out. :seeya:
Overall church attendance is going down. 4000 churches close their door every year.
-
Overall church attendance is going down. 4000 churches close their door every year.
In my area, we are already "built out" and therefore infill building is the game.
Prime sites for new small subdivisions,, are now church facilities. the sizes of the congregations have dwindled. they need less space.
They sell the site, get a bundle of money, and rent space elsewhere.
I am a real estate broker, and another agent told me she has developed a specialty for a few builders. Several examples now exist.
This is in traditionally conservative Orange County CA, home of Chuck Smith's Calvary, Saddleback, Crystal Cathedral, and many others.
Building new churches is not a growth industry.
-
Overall church attendance is going down. 4000 churches close their door every year.
So what? I have hardly set foot in a 'church' for nigh on 20 years.
What's your point?
-
So what? I have hardly set foot in a 'church' for nigh on 20 years.
What's your point?
If you don't worship with others then you aren't following Jesus's directions.
-
If you don't worship with others then you aren't following Jesus's directions.
Wherever two or more of you are gathered, I am among you.
-
How the heck did this thread on Nevertrumpers get turned into a thread on churches? Not even going to page back to see how and where this got started.
-
So what? I have hardly set foot in a 'church' for nigh on 20 years.
What's your point?
I would have to note that the decline in church attendance does corresponds with the decline of our culture, even though there are a lot of home churches and small fellowships that have sprung up.
Societal acceptance of things antithetical to basic biblical morality more or less illustrate the trend to secular humanism and self gratification rather than reverence and obedience towards God.
-
How the heck did this thread on Nevertrumpers get turned into a thread on churches? Not even going to page back to see how and where this got started.
Has to do with what is foolishness and why principles and morals no longer matter in defining today's Conservatism.
We're getting down to arguing about foundations and root causes - which led us to discussing religion and churches.
Because at one time, Morality and Religion were central tenets of Conservatism.
Not any more.
So we're debating that.
-
How the heck did this thread on Nevertrumpers get turned into a thread on churches? Not even going to page back to see how and where this got started.
"NeverTrump Foolishness" is not a popular topic of discussion around here. :smokin:
@NavyCanDo
-
I would have to note that the decline in church attendance does corresponds with the decline of our culture, even though there are a lot of home churches and small fellowships that have sprung up.
Societal acceptance of things antithetical to basic biblical morality more or less illustrate the trend to secular humanism and self gratification rather than reverence and obedience towards God.
Sure. there is a winnowing. Presbyterian USA is hemorrhaging, While Presby OPC and PCA are growing. The Epissmeoffcapals are dying, where the Anglicans are growing. Examples abound.
I fully expect persecution, but I will pray for revival. Do not forget, where evil abounds grace doth much more abound...
-
Anti-Mormonism
Anti-Mormonism is discrimination, persecution, hostility or prejudice directed at members of the Latter Day Saint movement, particularly The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church). The term is often used to describe persons or literature that are critical of their adherents, institutions, or beliefs, or physical attacks against specific Mormons or the LDS Church as a whole.
Opposition to Mormonism began before the first Latter Day Saint church was established in 1830 and continues to the present day. The most vocal and strident opposition occurred during the 19th century, particularly during the Utah War of the 1850s, and in the second half of the century when the practice of polygamy in Utah Territory was widely considered by the U.S. Republican Party as one of the "twin relics of barbarism" along with slavery.[1]
Modern-day opposition generally takes the form of websites offering alternative views about Mormonism or non-violent protest at large Latter-day Saint gatherings such as the church's biannual General Conference, outside of Latter-day Saint pageants, or at events surrounding the construction of new LDS temples. Opponents generally believe that the church's claims to divine origin are false, that it is non-Christian, or that it is a religion based on fraud or deceit on the part of its past and present leaders.
snip
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Mormonism
-
"NeverTrump Foolishness" is not a popular topic of discussion around here. :smokin:
@NavyCanDo
@Right_in_Virginia
Okay, I'll bite. The majority of people on this forum, and I would say beyond it, are willing to judge Trump on a day-to-day basis...recognize his successes and condemn his screw-ups. How do those people qualify as "NeverTrumpers?" Even if they dislike the man, as I do, doesn't NeverTrump mean you refuse to give him credit if he does something decent?
-
Anti-Mormonism
So what?
-
@roamer_1
Love is not beating someone into submission. Nor is it an effective way to open their mind or heart. Instead it tends to harden most people against your message.
This is one of the fundamental reasons so many traditional churches are losing members and will soon cease to operate. There are other ways to communicate.
Love is also not letting someone continue in grave sin or error without pointing that out. You would not let your toddler play in traffic because you did not want to hurt her feelings by telling her it was dangerous. Christians live in dynamic tension in many areas, and one of those is how to speak the Truth in Love. Both elements are necessary
-
Love is also not letting someone continue in grave sin or error without pointing that out. You would not let your toddler play in traffic because you did not want to hurt her feelings by telling her it was dangerous. Christians live in dynamic tension in many areas, and one of those is how to speak the Truth in Love. Both elements are necessary
I hope the mods squash this thread soon. Arguments about religion seldom end well.
-
I hope the mods squash this thread soon. Arguments about religion seldom end well.
Sorry, I was unaware I was arguing. But yes, I think the horse being beaten at this point is truly and thoroughly dead.
-
Sorry, I was unaware I was arguing. But yes, I think the horse being beaten at this point is truly and thoroughly dead.
You weren't arguing. (my apologies)... Just a random post in the middle of the mess.
-
@Right_in_Virginia
Okay, I'll bite. .../
I was stating an opinion, not looking for anyone to "bite".
Thanks anyway @CatherineofAragon
-
I hope the mods squash this thread soon. Arguments about religion seldom end well.
We are arguing fundamental principles of which biblical morality and religion is central to having any Conservative discussion regarding liberty.
Morality pertaining to the culture, to society and onwards to what kind of government rules us is essential to discuss, otherwise we might as well abandon Conservatism for Socialism and get it over with.
Because a government without our biblical and moral foundations gets us European-styled Mobocracy and Welfare State.
-
I hope the mods squash this thread soon. Arguments about religion seldom end well.
You mean like ...
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
So what?
A couple of more chapters, for your "So what?"
"Anti-Catholicism"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Catholicism
"Antisemitism"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism
"Baptists helping town overcome reputation as KKK birthplace"
http://www.bpnews.net/2913/baptists-helping-town-overcome-reputation-as-kkk-birthplace
-
"NeverTrump Foolishness" is not a popular topic of discussion around here. :smokin:
@NavyCanDo
Neither are Trump suck ups
-
In my area, we are already "built out" and therefore infill building is the game.
Prime sites for new small subdivisions,, are now church facilities. the sizes of the congregations have dwindled. they need less space.
They sell the site, get a bundle of money, and rent space elsewhere.
I am a real estate broker, and another agent told me she has developed a specialty for a few builders. Several examples now exist.
This is in traditionally conservative Orange County CA, home of Chuck Smith's Calvary, Saddleback, Crystal Cathedral, and many others.
Building new churches is not a growth industry.
My own church, the Episcopal Church, has suffered a severe decline with Presbyterians right behind us.
It's a shame because Episcopalians are big on scripture but also scholarly. And the Churches and rituals are beautiful.
But the Episcopal Church became far too political and too liberal. I never left but I got severely ticked off.
-
Neither are Trump suck ups
Oh, c'mon. Not everyone who is willing to give Trump a chance to keep his promises is a Trump suck up. You could probably find a more elegant phrase if you tried.
-
I was stating an opinion, not looking for anyone to "bite".
Thanks anyway @CatherineofAragon
@Right_in_Virginia
Can't answer that one, huh?
Understandable. :laugh:
-
My own church, the Episcopal Church, has suffered a severe decline with Presbyterians right behind us.
It's a shame because Episcopalians are big on scripture but also scholarly. And the Churches and rituals are beautiful.
But the Episcopal Church became far too political and too liberal. I never left but I got severely ticked off.
At one point in time, I was the only conservative in my Church, except for one friend. She stopped going to the Bible Class because it was totally liberal. I hung in there but I actually heard a priest's wife say that she wished there was some way we could stop the Koch Brothers from taking Communion. I kid you not.
And nobody said a dam word.
-
At one point in time, I was the only conservative in my Church, except for one friend. She stopped going to the Bible Class because it was totally liberal. I hung in there but I actually heard a priest's wife say that she wished there was some way we could stop the Koch Brothers from taking Communion. I kid you not.
And nobody said a dam word.
But my friend died and I left the Mainland so who the heck knows what goes on there now.
-
But my friend died and I left the Mainland so who the heck knows what goes on there now.
You might try the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod. Conservative biblical teaching with the beautiful traditional liturgies
-
@Right_in_Virginia
Can't answer that one, huh? Understandable. :laugh:
Nah, @CatherineofAragon I've read a few of your posts today ... and you are in a fighting mood! I'm not.
Thanks. :seeya:
-
@Right_in_Virginia
Okay, I'll bite. The majority of people on this forum, and I would say beyond it, are willing to judge Trump on a day-to-day basis...recognize his successes and condemn his screw-ups. How do those people qualify as "NeverTrumpers?" Even if they dislike the man, as I do, doesn't NeverTrump mean you refuse to give him credit if he does something decent?
You speak of the 2 polor opposites both of which are drowning in their own hatred of others not like them. The true Nevertrumpers....people that really really hate the man and everything he does.Most of those are on the Left, but not all. Then you have those that hold him up as a messianic figure, who can do no wrong, and anyone who speaks ill of him is doing the devils work.
-
You might try the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod. Conservative biblical teaching with the beautiful traditional liturgies
Thanks. There is a good Episcopal Church here and it's entirely different. One drawback. It is the Church by the Sea and it is outdoors with stone benches for pews and not enough shade. I haven't been able to go all summer. They open the service with a conch shell and do every fourth Sunday in Hawaiian.
-
Sounds lovely!
-
Sounds lovely!
It is beyond beautiful in every way. Unfortunately, I'm not able to stand the heat anymore. It should start getting cooler in September.
-
Nah, @CatherineofAragon I've read a few of your posts today ... and you are in a fighting mood! I'm not.
Thanks. :seeya:
@Right_in_Virginia
Yeah, taking crap isn't my thing, never will be. But my post to you was a simple question, not a fight. You're trying to misrepresent it because you're at a loss for an answer.
Like I said, I get it.
-
Wherever two or more of you are gathered, I am among you.
So you sit around your house talking about only you have the Truth. ah yep tell me again how much evangelical and fundamentalist churches are growing using this model?
-
You speak of the 2 polor opposites both of which are drowning in their own hatred of others not like them. The true Nevertrumpers....people that really really hate the man and everything he does.Most of those are on the Left, but not all. Then you have those that hold him up as a messianic figure, who can do no wrong, and anyone who speaks ill of him is doing the devils work.
@NavyCanDo
True. I would add that, to some, anything less than unqualified praise translates to NeverTrump status.
-
So you sit around your house talking about only you have the Truth. ah yep tell me again how much evangelical and fundamentalist churches are growing using this model?
Well, don't you have to have some kind of truth in order to have a religion?
-
Neither are Trump suck ups
@txradioguy
Where are the suckups? I haven't seen that behavior for a couple months,
-
@Right_in_Virginia
Yeah, taking crap isn't my thing, never will be. But my post to you was a simple question, not a fight. You're trying to misrepresent it because you're at a loss for an answer. Like I said, I get it.
You proved my point @CatherineofAragon ... you're in a fighting mood. There's nothing wrong with that ... but I am growing weary of fighting.
Insult me .. goad me ... ridicule me if you must, but you will not change my mind.
Again, thank you. :seeya:
-
It is beyond beautiful in every way. Unfortunately, I'm not able to stand the heat anymore. It should start getting cooler in September.
You could bring back the parasol! (I think Melania would look lovely with one as well)
-
At one point in time, I was the only conservative in my Church, except for one friend. She stopped going to the Bible Class because it was totally liberal. I hung in there but I actually heard a priest's wife say that she wished there was some way we could stop the Koch Brothers from taking Communion. I kid you not.
And nobody said a dam word.
@Emjay
I was an elder in a Presbyterian USA church. I walked out after they rejected buying bibles for the kids but were openly discussing accepting abortion and homosexual leaders. There is a falling away happening and its all tied to the same behaviors. The leftists have used the same tactics against the church as they have against conservatism. The same old tired tactics continue to fail on both sides.
Demonize the sinner and force them out.
-
@txradioguy
Where are the suckups? I haven't seen that behavior for a couple months,
That would be the people that fawn over everything Trump does and thinks he walks on water.
Same people defend everything he says and does.
-
@Emjay
I was an elder in a Presbyterian USA church. I walked out after they rejected buying bibles for the kids but were openly discussing accepting abortion and homosexual leaders. There is a falling away happening and its all tied to the same behaviors. The leftists have used the same tactics against the church as they have against conservatism. The same old tired tactics continue to fail on both sides.
Demonize the sinner and force them out.
Actually I think the mainline churches are losing because they now celebrate the sin and try to win popularity contests with the worldly
-
That would be the people that fawn over everything Trump does and thinks he walks on water.
Same people defend everything he says and does.
@txradioguy
Again, I remember seeing those people. Haven't seen any lately. I do think the hyperventilating over every little thing is a stupid waste of time.
-
Actually I think the mainline churches are losing because they now celebrate the sin and try to win popularity contests with the worldly
@Mom MD
The tactics i was referring to are the "fundamentalist" tactic of showing 'love' by beating them with their sin. In most cases it hardens peoples heart and turns them away. Delivery is everything of course.
The research I did along with that of far more knowledgable church leaders point to a couple of reasons for the overall decline. Part of it is what you mentioned. They start accepting sin and saying it isn't sin. That turns people away. The very traditional service also is a factor. Older people like what they are comfortable with but the younger generation is bored to death and you cannot engage them. One pastor explained it that God gave us the words but left delivery to us (words vs music). You simply cannot reach people if you cannot engage them.
To try and bring this back on topic, the typical Conservative expect people to listen because our ideas make sense. They are tried and proven and are what has made this country great. Whereas the left plays on emotion and what feels good. Its much easier to win people over if you tell them your way is easy vs telling them its hard work.
Conservatives must change our messaging if we are to win over the younger generation. History has also shown that people will vote in the socialist policies. I believe it was Jefferson who noted that the country will be lost when people discover they can vote themselves money from the govt.
To bring someone to Jesus takes an average of 9 interactions where the concept of salvation is introduced. A similar number is typical in any sales process. Our children are not taught conservative ideals in public schools. If we want to keep our country we need to change our approach.
-
A couple of more chapters, for your "So what?"
Again, what's your point?
-
@Mom MD
The tactics i was referring to are the "fundamentalist" tactic of showing 'love' by beating them with their sin. In most cases it hardens peoples heart and turns them away. Delivery is everything of course.
The research I did along with that of far more knowledgable church leaders point to a couple of reasons for the overall decline. Part of it is what you mentioned. They start accepting sin and saying it isn't sin. That turns people away. The very traditional service also is a factor. Older people like what they are comfortable with but the younger generation is bored to death and you cannot engage them. One pastor explained it that God gave us the words but left delivery to us (words vs music). You simply cannot reach people if you cannot engage them.
To try and bring this back on topic, the typical Conservative expect people to listen because our ideas make sense. They are tried and proven and are what has made this country great. Whereas the left plays on emotion and what feels good. Its much easier to win people over if you tell them your way is easy vs telling them its hard work.
Conservatives must change our messaging if we are to win over the younger generation. History has also shown that people will vote in the socialist policies. I believe it was Jefferson who noted that the country will be lost when people discover they can vote themselves money from the govt.
To bring someone to Jesus takes an average of 9 interactions where the concept of salvation is introduced. A similar number is typical in any sales process. Our children are not taught conservative ideals in public schools. If we want to keep our country we need to change our approach.
I think society and the young are crying out for firm values and solid ground. They recognize we are drifting aimlessly and the smart ones at least recognize the need for a firm foundation and real values. Maybe I'm kidding myself but I think we need to hold firm and the truth will speak for itself. But yes we need to deliver the message patiently lovingly and often. And young people will know and recognize hypocrisy and scamming them instantly
-
So you sit around your house talking about only you have the Truth. ah yep tell me again how much evangelical and fundamentalist churches are growing using this model?
Who said I 'sit around my house'?
-
You speak of the 2 polor opposites both of which are drowning in their own hatred of others not like them. The true Nevertrumpers....people that really really hate the man and everything he does. Most of those are on the Left, but not all. Then you have those that hold him up as a messianic figure, who can do no wrong, and anyone who speaks ill of him is doing the devils work.
In absolute fairness, Donaldus Minimus isn't even close to being the first president to whose sycophancy
no wrong can be done and no criticism can be honest or honourable. Nor is he the first president to whose
opposition no credit whatsoever can be due. And, alas, he won't be the last.
Since there seems to be an epidemic of whataboutism here and elsewhere, I'll contribute only by reminding
anyone who cares that we saw the same syndromes attached to the sycophancies and oppositions to His
Excellency Al-Hashish Field Marshmallow Dr. Barack Obama Dada, President Lips II, and Droopy-Drawers
Clinton, to name merely three. To their sycophancies, they could do no wrong. To their opponents, they
could do no right.
The real problem---aside from the president himself, who seems to have a genius for following one or two
reasonable doings with one or two hundred (if not thousand) unreasonable ones---is that we're still stuck
in presidential cult mode, gazing upon the office and its holder as some sort of temporal saviour . . . if not
our boss. The sooner we cease to live in presidential cult mode, the sooner we might actually see a tangible
turn toward, you know, restoring things that really matter.
Things like freedom.
Things like individual rights and responsibilities.
Things like a properly-construed government---you know, one whose sole legitimate business
(aside from protecting us from enemies actual or provably iminent abroad and predators at home,
real predators if you please, not mere vicemongers) is staying the hell out of your business,
my business, every person's business, until or unless one would obstruct or abrogate another's
equivalent rights---as opposed to the improperly-consecrated State that makes every damn last bit of
human business its own business whether it is competent or Constitutionally sanctioned to do so.
Donaldus Minimus is neither God, Jr. nor Beelzebub incarnate. He's only a man, he's only a president,
he's no more the nation's saviour than any other president, he's no more the devil incarnate than any
manperson seeking even a degree of a place in the nation's largest organised crime family. And he---like
his predecessors---sure as hell is not our national father, no matter what delusions he, like no
few of his predecessors, hosts in his actual or alleged brain.
But we're not going to make America "great" again until we make America America again.
-
Good post. It could only prove fatal if it succeeded in destroying the Trump administration, but, really, the general public is just not that interested in this whole Russian thing.
The people who are pushing it are part of what Rush was saying this morning: "There is a coup underway -- being led by the media with accomplices in the Democrat Party and a number of international players -- to reject the outcome of the election, to undermine the presidency of Donald Trump, and, if the wish list were realized, to get rid of him."
At least that's my opinion about the Russian thing .... based mostly on my own interactions with people who are interested in politics and on my Facebook page.
My Facebook page has become totally political. I'm missing the kitty pictures and the recipes but people just want to talk politics and they are about 90% conservative.
Not once have I seen an article posted about Russia interfering with elections.
Considering the propensity of the Left to project, to immediately accuse people of what they, themselves, have done, and that many of these were Hillary people, I'd wager any collusion with the Russians was by Hillary's camp to scuttle Sanders.
-
Actually I think the mainline churches are losing because they now celebrate the sin and try to win popularity contests with the worldly
Christianity is based upon attraction rather than promotion. Unfortunately, it is filled with people who promote the starting line without a clue on where to go from there.
“Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do he will do also; and greater works than these he will do, because I go to My Father."
John 14:12
-
In absolute fairness, Donaldus Minimus isn't even close to being the first president to whose sycophancy
no wrong can be done and no criticism can be honest or honourable. Nor is he the first president to whose
opposition no credit whatsoever can be due. And, alas, he won't be the last.
Since there seems to be an epidemic of whataboutism here and elsewhere, I'll contribute only by reminding
anyone who cares that we saw the same syndromes attached to the sycophancies and oppositions to His
Excellency Al-Hashish Field Marshmallow Dr. Barack Obama Dada, President Lips II, and Droopy-Drawers
Clinton, to name merely three. To their sycophancies, they could do no wrong. To their opponents, they
could do no right.
.............
:thumbsup: @EasyAce
-
That would be the people that fawn over everything Trump does and thinks he walks on water.
Same people defend everything he says and does.
He didn't say WHO are they....he said WHERE are they. Are you so anxious to trash us fawners, you can't read anymore?
-
You could bring back the parasol! (I think Melania would look lovely with one as well)
Good idea. I'll have to order one on Amazon. Sometimes it's funny to see people do the 'shade shuffle' As the sun moves over the palm trees, the shade shifts and so do we.
-
(http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/702/514/12c.jpg)
-
You do not own the "Truth". I believe you are misusing Matthew 10:22. Its not a license to be offensive or to be prideful. Some people use it as a stick to pridefully hold themselves as better than others.
It's funny how some people (not saying anyone here, necessarily) who get to Matthew 10:22 skip right over Matthew 10:14...
"If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet."
@driftdiver
-
Good idea. I'll have to order one on Amazon. Sometimes it's funny to see people do the 'shade shuffle' As the sun moves over the palm trees, the shade shifts and so do we.
The sun hasn't moved over palm trees in this neck of the woods since there were dinosaurs roaming around. :silly:
-
It's funny how some people (not saying anyone here, necessarily) who get to Matthew 10:22 skip right over Matthew 10:14...
"If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet."
@driftdiver
@Suppressed
Are you being passive aggressive?
-
(http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/702/514/12c.jpg)
Is that a troll under the happy little tree? :silly:
-
Is that a troll under the happy little tree? :silly:
Yes! And it ain't the only one around!
-
I think this thread finally died of its own weight leaving just the dregs.
-
(http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/702/514/12c.jpg)
@RoosGirl
*grin*
-
I think this thread finally died of its own weight leaving just the 'unfunny' dregs.
LOL
-
I think this thread finally died of its own weight leaving just the 'unfunny' dregs.
LOL
And yet here you are...bumping it back to the top...
-
And yet here you are...bumping it back to the top...
:smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin:
-
It certainly started out with a BANG and if I recall correctly - It was never locked and I don't remember any mods hanging around for any extended period of time 17 pages. I knew we were capable of it.
-
And yet here you are...bumping it back to the top...
Hey, sue me. I was just curious to check in and see if it was still going.
And .... here YOU are ... arguing with me still.
Why don't we both leave and see what happens.
-
It certainly started out with a BANG and if I recall correctly - It was never locked and I don't remember any mods hanging around for any extended period of time 17 pages. I knew we were capable of it.
I know .... I'm so proud. No lives were lost in the making of this thread.
-
And yet here you are...bumping it back to the top...
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
I am hoping that ... some day ... we know not when, you learn words.
-
(https://s3media.247sports.com/Uploads/Assets/437/97/3097437.jpg)
-
@RoosGirl
(https://media.giphy.com/media/exnY8mKcVb6I8/giphy.gif)
-
I know .... I'm so proud. No lives were lost in the making of this thread.
No animals were harmed in the making of this thread, either? :smokin:
-
No animals were harmed in the making of this thread, either? :smokin:
Nope. I squashed a gnat that landed on my screen and in between posts I shot a bunny that had the audacity to nibble on my Swiss chard.
-
Nope. I squashed a gnat that landed on my screen and in between posts I shot a bunny that had the audacity to nibble on my Swiss chard.
I hate chard. The bunnies can have mine.
-
I hate chard. The bunnies can have mine.
I can take it or leave it, but I sell pounds at the farmers market. Peter Rabbit was cutting in on my profits :smokin:
-
18 pages, no locks yaaaaaayyyy
My guess would be that this weekend sometime @truth_seeker will complain that he post relevant articles and the #nevertrumpers are just to stupid to care.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zp-LBD_q0sQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zp-LBD_q0sQ)
-
18 pages, no locks yaaaaaayyyy
My guess would be that this weekend sometime @truth_seeker will complain that he post relevant articles and the #nevertrumpers are just to stupid to care.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zp-LBD_q0sQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zp-LBD_q0sQ)
Why are you so determined to start shit, @corbe ?
Get a life.
-
@DCPatriot
(https://cdn.meme.am/instances/36125442.jpg)
-
I can take it or leave it, but I sell pounds at the farmers market. Peter Rabbit was cutting in on my profits :smokin:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGhQ2BDt4VE