I am voting for Obama.
Before you take out your guns, let me explain why.
I will begin by hopefully shattering some pre-conceived notions.
Guess who said this: “I’d love to see a point where Roe v. Wade is irrelevant, and could be repealed because abortion is no longer necessary. But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade, which would then force women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations.”
Yes. McCain said that. If you were going to vote for him because you think he’s pro-life, think again.
This is going to be a very long post. I’m including links – a lot of links – to back up everything I say.
This post may make you angry.
That’s okay. These issues have made me angry.
1. About the rumor mill: let’s start with Scripture. Proverbs 18:17: “The first to plead his case seems right, Until another comes and examines him.” Why does this matter? Because it means that for anyone to simply take a statement and run with it – BEFORE actually researching anything – makes him or her a fool.
Now before we get into “real” issues, I’m going to take a look at just a couple of the rumors flying around the internet.
A. Obama isn’t an American Citizen.
Okay, folks. Time for the facts. We have his birth certificate.
It’s fake, the rumor-mongers cry, and the circulated emails promptly make the following claims: the birth certificate doesn’t have a raised seal, it isn’t signed, there’s a strange halo around the letters, the certificate number is blacked out, the document is a “certification of birth,” not a “certificate of birth,” etc.
The proof says otherwise.
i. One: other people from Hawaii have the same “certificate of live birth,” including description problems like “White” and “Caucasian” both standing in as “Race” for parentage. Jeremy Sott Smith and Patricia Decosta.
ii. Two: there was a birth announcement in the paper: Close-up and the whole announcement.
iii. These people went and saw it in person. They took excellent photos of it, too.
It has the raised seal.
It has the signature.
It has the certificate number.
It has everything it needs. There’s even a photo of a man holding it, proving it is not simply a photoshopped image.
iv. Let’s not forget that the “lawsuit” regarding this paperwork has been thrown out of court as “frivolous and not worthy of discussion.”
v. If at this point you really believe that every document here “can be faked and therefore is faked,” then no proof will ever reach you. Then real facts don’t matter. Then nothing does except for your own bias.
B. Obama was sworn in as senator on a Koran.
Okay. Where’s the proof?
No, I’m serious. Show me the proof.
I have searched and searched and searched. Other people have searched and searched and searched. Are you going to tell me that a man can be sworn in as Senator of the United States on a Koran and that NOT ONE PERSON has a video or a photograph? That, in fact, there is not one single eye witness?
Well, there is a video – of a black Representative named Keith Ellison being sworn in on a Koran. Video here and article here.
However, that isn’t Obama.
Please, please don’t tell me that all black men look alike to you. Please don’t tell me that.
C. Most of the accusations, of course, are ridiculous. This one is typical of these attacks: Michelle Obama stayed at the Waldorf and ordered caviar and lobster!
Number one, she has every right to eat lobster and caviar. Nevertheless, this is being held up as proof that Obama isn’t willing to sacrifice the way “regular” Americans are. Somehow.
Number two, the New York Times has retracted its story.
The original email – in case you missed it and its inflammatory email. There’s even a “receipt.” Look at that – a photoshopped document. So I guess it’s not just the rabid liberals who are doing it.
2. Now for context issues. You remember that little word, “context?” Remember how taking something like a Bible verse OUT of context is how cults are created? Well, Obama’s words tend to be taken out of context. A LOT. I’m going to give you two of the biggies:
A. “I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”
This has been used to say that Obama is really a Muslim. However, the context of that quote comes in the wake of violence that surged in this country against anyone with dark skin after 9/11. I remember quite well; Hindus, Hispanics, and more were simply brutalized, even in my own neighborhood near Philadelphia, just because people thought they might be Muslim – and all Muslims were automatically terrorists now in the minds of those panicked thugs. Link and link and link and link and link.
What Obama said here – which you can see for yourself if you bother to check – is that if the political winds shifted (as they have in this country before, making it difficult for people who were NOT Caucasian or of a particular religion), he would stand by the side of those innocent Muslims who had nothing to do with 9/11, who were just people trying to make their way through life, who DID NOT DESERVE to be treated badly because of the color of their skin and the name of their scriptures.
That doesn’t say “Secret Muslim” to me. It says “civil rights advocate.”
Here’s the other biggie:
B. “But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society.” … “I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change and in some ways we still suffer from that.”
Ironically, this may not be familiar to you because it’s been so horribly misquoted. I’ve seen variations like, “it’s a tragedy that redistribution of wealth was not pursued.” But that isn’t what he said.
(By the way, according to the same people who claimed Obama was a Muslim, this also makes him a Marxist.
At the same time.
Never mind the fact that Marxism and Islam are so ideologically different that this suggestion is completely absurd.)
This statement of Obama’s is being spread around as “proof” that he is going to take money from the rich and give it to welfare addicts. Problem is, that isn’t what this means in context.
Obama here is discussing the case of Brown vs. the Board of Education in 1957, which ended segregation in public schools. Remember this?
Segregation of white and Negro children in the public schools of a State solely on the basis of race, pursuant to state laws permitting or requiring such segregation, denies to Negro children the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment — even though the physical facilities and other “tangible” factors of white and Negro schools may be equal.
In this circumstance, the government had to use something called punitive taxation – a threat of withholding federal funding – in order to get the school board to obey and provide fair services to those children who were not white.
What does this have to do with redistribution of wealth? I’ll tell you: nothing.
Obama was talking about the fact that redistributing federal funding is often an effective way to force institutions into following civil rights laws. That’s it. That’s the great big statement. This doesn’t make him a Marxist.
Let’s not forget that Reagan used punitive taxation (as this link among others shows). If Reagan could do it and not be a Marxist, I’d like to know why this statement makes Obama into one.
A fun little link on Obama and the socialism accusations: YouTube video. I have to agree with what he says here; this campaign IS getting to the point where people will say Obama is socialist because he shared his toys in kindergarten.
3. I hope by now that this has got you thinking. However, just to clear a few more things up -
A. Obama and Bill Ayers: no, there is no connection with Obama and terrorism. Link and link and link.
B. On Reverend Wright: no, Obama is not a racist. Link and link.
Honestly, I hate having to mention Wright at all. The fact is that just because someone connected with Obama made an inflammatory statement does not mean that Obama automatically believes it.
People at McCain’s rallies and Palin’s rallies regularly scream things like “nigger,” and Palin doesn’t even bother to correct them. Does that mean McCain is a racist?
Did you also forget that half of Obama’s family is white? Yeah, that looks like a hate-filled racist to me. Sure.
The fact is, you have to look at Obama’s record: what has he said? What has he done? Nothing to indicate Jeremiah Wright’s level of racism. Unless there is direct proof that Obama himself has the kind of prejudice that Wright demonstrated, then it’s ridiculous to claim that these two very different men believe the same things.
Now on to real politics.
1. Nuts and bolts time: Obama’s tax plan helps the majority of the country. Don’t tell me “it’ll only help welfare people,” because that’s nonsense. Most Americans make LESS than $200,000 – in fact, 60% make less than $67,000 – and will therefore benefit from this. That means, to make it clear, that Obama is actually representing his constituency.
Obama’s tax plan explained on YouTube.
McCain’s plan doesn’t take that into account. McCain’s, in fact, benefits only those who make more than $250,000.00, which is a very small percentage and leaves normal people like me, like my friends, like my family, my church people, out in the cold. In essence, McCain really thinks that if you give COMPANIES tax-breaks, they’ll pass that on to the employees.
Sure they will.
Have you seen the profits big companies have made lately? Exxon-Mobil made $1287.00 dollars profit per second in 2007 and more than 40 BILLION DOLLARS profit last year
For 2008, they’ve already shattered their record for quarterly earnings, with a net profit of 14 BILLION DOLLARS.
In fact, the top ten corporate quarterly earnings of all time all belong to Exxon-Mobile.
I’m still waiting for it to “trickle down” to the tax-payers.
Projected under McCain’s tax plan? An extra 3 billion dollars’ profit for the oil companies.
2. Obama’s plans for health insurance include little things like this: “No one will be turned away because of a pre-existing condition or illness.” Link and link. He also plans to cut rising health care costs.
McCain’s idea? Well, he hasn’t addressed pre-existing conditions at all, and what he intends to do is give a “$5,000 refundable tax credit” for couples and “half that” – $2500 – for individuals.
That’s nice. Unfortunately, health-care currently costs an average annual per-employee cost of $9,080.00 in 2008 with a projected average of $9,660.00 by 2009.
Check out figure 3 in that link. Look at how the cost has climbed every year. Look at the costs for families. Look at the fact that for retirees and their families, the projected cost is up to nearly $19,000.00 for 2009.
McCain also plans to tax any employer-paid health benefits.
I would love to know how $5000.00 is going to cover that.
Since McCain hasn’t mentioned anything about pre-existing conditions and since he hasn’t addressed preventing health care providers from charging whatever they want, privately purchased health care simply isn’t feasible for most of the population.
Companies can barely afford to give health care to their employees as it is. Once those benefits are taxed, it’s over.
3. McCain also plans to cut 1.3 TRILLION DOLLARS from Medicare and Medicaid. I have family who, right now, are only alive because of those programs; and the baby-boom generation is reaching the age where these programs are needed.
Then we have this:
Brian Williams: “No one is suffering more than the Palestinian people.” Do you stand by that remark?
Obama: Well, keep in mind what the remark actually, if you had the whole thing, said. And what I said is nobody has suffered more than the Palestinian people from the failure of the Palestinian leadership to recognize Israel, to renounce violence, and to get serious about negotiating peace and security for the region.
No, these are not in conflict.
These statements (among hundreds of others) show that Obama is considering both sides of this problem. While you may agree with Israel or not, I think you can at least acknowledge that wishing really hard won’t make problems go away. Neither will simply displacing one or the other group of people; all that’s going to do is make the conflict worse.
Give me a president who is going to strive for peace here. Not for one group or the other being tossed out.
And:
By the way, Obama’s supposed Muslim comrades are angry over this. He exhibits such strange behavior for a radical Muslim, doesn’t he?
5. Palin horrifies me.
Let me explain this. She claims to be a Christian; all right. Lots of people claim to be Christians.
a. However, she manages to do things like signing into law that rape victims have to pay for their own health kits. Link and link and yes, this is real, link and link.
Some people are trying to claim it’s debunked. Why? Because women weren’t actually charged during the time the law was on the books.
Here’s the problem with that: it doesn’t matter if the law was obeyed. It doesn’t even matter who followed it. What matters is she signed it into law, and that either means (a) she’s a monster, or (b) she doesn’t read what she signs.
b. The latter, by the way, seems to be true. She doesn’t read.
COURIC: And when it comes to establishing your world view, I was curious, what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this — to stay informed and to understand the world?
PALIN: I’ve read most of them again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media —
COURIC: But what ones specifically? I’m curious.
PALIN: Um, all of them, any of them that have been in front of me over all these years.
COURIC: Can you name any of them?
PALIN: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news.
Righto. Then we have this one:
COURIC: You’ve cited Alaska’s proximity to Russia as part of your foreign policy experience. What did you mean by that?
PALIN: That Alaska has a very narrow maritime border between a foreign country, Russia, and on our other side, the land– boundary that we have with– Canada. It– it’s funny that a comment like that was– kind of made to– cari– I don’t know, you know? Reporters–
COURIC: Mock?
PALIN: Yeah, mocked, I guess that’s the word, yeah.
COURIC: Explain to me why that enhances your foreign policy credentials.
PALIN: Well, it certainly does because our– our next door neighbors are foreign countries. They’re in the state that I am the executive of. And there in Russia–
COURIC: Have you ever been involved with any negotiations, for example, with the Russians?
PALIN: We have trade missions back and forth. We– we do– it’s very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where– where do they go? It’s Alaska. It’s just right over the border. It is– from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there. They are right next to– to our state.
Dear Heavens.
Let me remind you that the Republican party has had plenty of time since then to explain these statements away; they haven’t even tried. This woman does not belong in the White House. Is this really how you want Christians to be represented? Stupid but cheerful, cute but cruel, foolish and short-sighted, enthusiastic and dangerous? She makes the rest of us who claim to be Christians look like morons.
c. Another biggie. Palin says she wants to help children with disabilities, especially since her child is autistic. But then, she turns around and mocks “fruit fly research” – see the clip on YouTube – even though her OWN CHILD has benefited.
See for yourself:
Down Syndrome: Link and link and link and link.
Of course, that’s just her daughter. Her nephew has autism – and he’s benefited too: Link and link and link and link and link.
d. Another reason she terrifies me is this belief of hers: Someone else did it in government, therefore, I can do it.
CNN: Troopergate, whatever. …you violated the ethics. … But was it a mistake to allow him to use the governor’s office to that extent?
Palin: Not when you look at other governors’ track records when they had their spouse as for instance [former Alaska Gov. Frank Murkowski] had his spouse as his top adviser, and she was in meetings, she was in the office so, you know, kinda, of a double standard here.
So a double standard means it’s okay?
e. With that word “socialism” flying around all the time, I ought to make this clear: she pretty obviously doesn’t actually know what socialism means. Palin is the governor of a state that gives its citizens a check based on oil company profits. “We’re set up, unlike other states in the union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs.”
I’m not sure what she thinks that kind of policy is called. I’d love to know what name she’s given it.
f. She and McCain are already splintering apart over something as stupid as clothes. If this doesn’t worry you, it should: Link and link and link and link and link.
“A senior adviser to John McCain told CNN’s Dana Bash that the comments about her wardrobe “were not the remarks we sent to her plane this morning.” Palin did not discuss the wardrobe story at her rally in Kissimmee later in the day.”
6. The only issue regarding Obama that made me pause was abortion – and this is NOT as simple as you think.
a. Do you need the reminder that McCain supports stem-cell research? Where do you think the stem-cells come from? The number one source of is aborted fetuses.
b. McCain stated himself that he does NOT intend to overturn Roe vs. Wade during his presidency.
c. His wife doesn’t think it should be overturned, either.
d. Of course, other times, he says it should be overturned.
e. You know what? He doesn’t seem to be able to make up his mind at all
f. Oh, that’s just in the past, you say? Sure thing – except that he seriously considered a pro-choice running mate.
The fact is that McCain changes his answer depending on his audience. Don’t forget that the issue which put Bush ahead of him in the 2000 primaries was that McCain was pretty much pro-choice and has voted that way consistently prior to 2000.
[Personal rant]Time for a reality check: Roe vs. Wade cannot be overturned by any one president. THINK ABOUT THIS. Reagan couldn’t do it. Bush Sr. couldn’t. Bush Jr. couldn’t. Making the choice to vote SIMPLY ON THAT ONE ISSUE is a guarantee of failure. If you want to have a voice in this country, if you want people to LISTEN to you about abortion, then you need to stop putting people in the White House who are pro-life AND YET are willfully ignorant, shallow, and war-hungry.[/personal rant]
d. Obama’s stance: he states specifically that abortion is a tragic circumstance, one that should be avoided if at all possible. He has stated this throughout the entirety of his political career. Unlike McCain, he’s been consistent. He has said that he doesn’t know when life begins, and while I may disagree with him, I acknowledge and respect that even while being interviewed in churches, he has kept his answer the same.
Give me an honest man whose opinions I don’t agree with over a dishonest man who lies ANY DAY.
7. The War: McCain wants to keep going in Iraq. Obama, on the other hand, wants to pull OUT of Iraq and focus on the real issue: Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Link and link.
McCain speaks in generalities about Iraq, ignoring the $2,000,000.00 spent each day on this campaign when people in THIS COUNTRY cannot go to the doctor.
Obama is actually focusing on the terrorists – not on a country that had little to do with 9/11 and subsequent threats. Let me ask you something.
What have we accomplished in Iraq?
We removed Hussein. Great! What else?
Think hard about this answer.
What have we accomplished? What have we or Iraq gained?
Well, a lot of deaths.
Massive property damage.
A depleted military.
A country so sick of war that if we really needed to do it – against, say, some country hell-bent on developing a nuclear threat – it’s doubtful the American people would rise to the occasion.
An unstable government for Iraq, and a hated government for us.
Fear – have you noticed that the rest of the world is talking about us the way we used to talk about Big Bad USSR?
Oil… oh wait. Prices haven’t really gone down, outside of the usual pre-election slump. Not to mention some of the largest one-day stock-market losses in history.
What. Have. We. Gained?
At this point, I can think of very little that’s good.
8. McCain wants to put in place a SPENDING FREEZE.
This is incredibly frightening.
He won’t give the details on exactly what he plans to do here. Why? Because, as usual, he’s speaking in platitudes. He repeatedly says “everything will be all right,” mocks Obama’s remarks that a scalpel is needed instead of a hatchet, and then won’t give actual details.
A spending freeze? Regardless of the necessity of the program? Regardless of whom it would affect?
Guess the students are out in the cold.
9. It does bring me to a very big point: McCain relies on emotionalism.
Everything will be all right.
I’ll fix it, don’t worry.
Soothe. Soothe. Soothe.
That is how he answers most of his questions. When he’s asked for specifics, he either responds with nice platitudes, with a bunny-trail answer that has nothing to do with the question, or with mockery. Remember his “Robin Hood” comment in the last debate? That was very funny and all – but it didn’t address the question.
Obama, on the other hand, gives actual answers. Here’s a very good example from the second debate. The question:
Since World War II, we have never been asked to sacrifice anything to help our country, except the blood of our heroic men and women. As president, what sacrifices — sacrifices will you ask every American to make to help restore the American dream and to get out of the economic morass that we’re now in?
McCain’s answer leapt into something very strange about spending cuts, entitlements, earmarks, and defense. That was not the question. I’m sure it made people feel good to hear, but it had nothing to do with what individual Americans will be asked to sacrifice.
Obama’s answer went specifically to personal spending habits, the individual’s effect on the economy, what we each must do in our homes to care for the environment, and that we must be willing to go without some comforts in order to help the country back on its feet.
That was an answer. A specific one, addressing the question. These responses are very typical for both of them.
10. Last point for now. This one really is personal. I’m sick and tired of seeing it happening.
Fellow Christians, Do. Not. ASSUME. That simply because someone invokes the name of Jesus Christ that he or she is a good person.
I know you want it to be that way.
I know the world would be peachy if everyone who claimed to be a Christian actually was.
The fact is, they’re not. You and I are supposed to be wary of false prophets who are really ravenous wolves (Matt. 7:15). Remember?
You haven’t been wary. You’ve jumped at the fact that McCain claims to be pro-life (which his voting record proves he is not) and that Palin claims to be a Christian (even though she shows no signs of it.) You have made the name of Christ look foolish – all for the sake of the emotional charge you get when you think you’re “on top of the issues.”
Please stop. Just stop.
There are more reasons to vote for Obama, many more. I’ve only listed a few. No, he is not a perfect candidate. There is no perfect candidate. My husband and I have prayed over this, wrestled over it, and at least we know we are voting with our eyes open.
Whichever way you go, I hope you do the same.
Links time.
Obama’s redistribution quote in full.
Obama on economy:
“We measure the strength of our economy not by the number of billionaires we have or the profits of the Fortune 500, but by whether someone with a good idea can take a risk and start a new business, or whether the waitress who lives on tips can take a day off to look after a sick kid without losing her job – an economy that honors the dignity of work.”
MCCAIN ON ABORTION:link and link
Palin refuses to call bombers terrorist – as long as they’re not attacking the US Capitol and Pentagon
Obama and socialism: link.
More McCain Taxes: Link – a long, long report – and the shorter version, link.
Obama and dual citizenship:
“In other words, at the time of his birth, Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (or the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC. … Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.”
Link.
Why vote for Obama? Bush’s people recycled, taxes, health care, economy, energy, “The Surge,” and more: YouTube video: “Intelligent solutions, keeping Americans secure in a changing world.”
Share the wealth? That’s called The American Way.
Obama – distribution of wealth – link and link.
The conservative case for Obama.
Perfect sarcasm on McCain as president.
The myths of John McCain (Maverick, “lobbyist’s biggest enemy,” and more):
Why the last eight years suck.
On the hatred and bigotry of those claiming to be conservative:
“But even more important, when I see the hate-filled racists and right-wing yahoos braying at McCain and Palin rallies, when I hear people calling for Obama to be killed or lynched, and when I see the rabid hate mail circulating in email inboxes falsely labeling him as a secret Muslim, a terrorist, a Marxist and a black nationalist, I want to see the man resoundingly win this election.”
Jewish Alliance for Change link and some terrific Jewish comedians speak out on health care.
Don’t have time to watch? Then just read.
McCain voted for the bailout – but still calls Obama the socialist.
Reverse Robin Hood: Why McCain is wrong on health care.
{ 19 comments }
Ruthanne,
Obviously, you can vote anyway that you choose. I haven’t read any of the responses to your post so excuse me if someone else has already made this point… Setting aside your above logic, I would like to submit something you may not have considered. One of the most important things that a president does is appoint judges. There is a good chance that the next president will appoint up to 3 Supreme Court Justices in his term, not to mention all of the lower court justices that he will put in office. You mentioned abortion and the political reality is that Roe v. Wade will only be overturned by the Supreme Court. You and I both know that Obama will only appoint liberal justices to the High Court. Depending on their age and health, those justices will be around for 10, 20, or 30 years – long after Obama is gone. Try doing some research on the Clinton appointees and the decisions they are making today. Clinton is long gone, but his judges are still hard at work. Those of us in California are painfully aware of what liberal judges are capable of doing. They are also very hard to remove from office. I am also not all that crazy about McCain, but there is a clear distinction between the two men. McCain might appoint some bad judges, but Obama will appoint tons of them because that is the best way for liberals to advance their agenda. They have a long history of judical activism and they will not stop anytime soon.
Again, you can vote for the man of your choice and I’m sure that your vote will not tip the election either way. I only hope that if Obama wins, that you will not regret your decision later on in your life.
Eugene Henson
Eugene,
No matter who is in office they will end up nominating the same number of judges to the supreme court during the next 4 years as. I say nominate since just because the president nominates someone it doesn’t mean they go straight to the bench, they must appointed by and with the advice and consent of the Senate as per Article 2 of the Consitution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States#Nomination
Being as McCain is Conservative in this election and mostly Liberal in his lifetime, I’d be more worried about his nominee’s since depending on his audience he changes his answers. At least Obama’s word has been mostly trustworthy.
And yes, the Supreme Court is the final stand for these justices, when they stand down it’s permanent retirement or because they are dead, which I guess could be viewed as a form of retirement :)
But it really is impossible to know when the next vacancy is going to take place, it could be tomorrow for all we know in which case Bush Jr gets to make his nominees, but again it doesn’t mean they will be accepted.
Historically presidents on avg will have the chance to appoint at least one person to the bench usually two and rarely more.
In closing, you cannot tell me that Liberal Democrat Presidents are to blame for the judges we have in the supreme court.
Judges Still Serving in the Supreme Court:
Bush Jr = nominated 2 Justices still serving
Clinton = nominated 2 Justices still serving
Bush Sr = nominated 2 Justices still serving
Reagan = nominated 2 Justices still serving
Ford = nominated 1 Justice still serving
That would be 9 Justices still serving and only 2 appointed by Clinton the rest were by Republican Presidents. So by the numbers you can only blame Democrats for two of those Judges, the majory were nominated by Republican Presidents.
JP Stevens (Ford) and Ruth Bader Ginsburg (Clinton) are the two most likely upcoming retiree’s if you go purely by age but Ginsburg is only 3 years older than McCain, so don’t count on her retiring just yet. If McCain has the mental faculties to be President at 72 and serve a full 4 year term and then possibly go for re-election that would put him at 80 by the end of both terms.
Don’t forget that the vast majority of the Justices on the Supreme Court right now are John McCain’s age or younger and don’t appear to be looking to retire anytime soon.
For the “What If” people in the audience: Say Ginsburg retired at 80, that would be a job for the next term president in 2012, not the president for the next 4 years and is not a logical reason to purely vote against Obama now in 2008.
So I guess the real question is, how old is too old to serve as President and as Supreme Court Justice? I’ve known people in their 90′s that were sharp as a tack, quick as a whip and able to run circles around me. I’ve also met people in their 60′s barely able to maintain an intelligent conversation.
Anyhow, some food for thought. Everyone who can needs to get out there and vote tomorrow. I just hope and pray people do so based on research, study and facts and NOT based on lies, slander, gossip, conjecture and conspiracy theories combined with delusions of grandeur.
<3
Duane,
I am well aware of theconfirmation process that must take place in the Senate for a nominee to get to the bench. There have been many a nominee that has been “Borked” by the Senate. I am also aware that even Republican presidents nominate justices that I would not agree with either because they got bad info about that person or for other reasons. Also, I was not only writing about the Supreme Court, but all the lower courts as well. Presidents appoint judges at lower levels too. These guys can and do give us fits such as the decision to allow gay marriages in California. That decision was made by a lower court, not the Supreme Court. These lower courts are just walls of defense for for the liberal agenda. For example, the people of California by sixty-something percent voted a few years ago to only allow marriage between a man and woman to be valid in CA. Lower level activist judges overturned the will of the people again.
It was Obama that said that there might be up to 3 vacant seats in the high court during the next presidental term. I heard him myself in the last debate. Since he is so trustworthy I would expect what he says to come true. Which brings up a point… Hitler was very open, honest, and up front about his intentions to wipe out the Jewsish people. I would not respect him for that and I certainly wouldn’t want to vote for him simply because I respected his honesty… He was having innocent people killed because he deemed them to be less than human. Sound familiar? It should because Obama supports the same thing! He strongly supports the murder of innocent children that were created in the image of God. These are people that have not committed a crime and yet are executed by a private citizen no less. The execution is carried out without a trial, without a jury, withour a laywer, without even the accusation of a crime, without a judge to over see the process, without even the reading of their rights – oh that’s right they don’t have any rights because they are deemed to be less than human even though they are the offspring of two humans. Obama can speak in his platitudes about it being a bad thing and that it shouldn’t happen, but what is he doing to stop it? Nothing! He is actively and (honestly) promoting it. I don’t care about how much so-called research you have done you still can’t get past this fact that Obama champions the killing of innocent children and he will appoint judges at every level to maintain that as far out into the future as possible…
Grace and peace to you,
Eugene
Dear Ruthanne~
Wow…when did you decide to join the dark side?
I have been a part of your father’s church for 4 years…long enough to know that what you have posted here will pierce his heart. Publicly he will bravely say you are an adult making your own choices…and that God is Sovereign…which He is! But his heart will be pierced nonetheless. The news you have made here is already hitting the we-hate-Morey-blogs and will no doubt add to his pain. “Food for thought” as you say…
I have a few questions/points:
1) Why throw out ad-hom attacks such as “please don’t tell me that all black men look alike”…, Sarah Palin “doesn’t read” and why post quotes that include phrases such as “hate-filled racists”, “right-wing yahoos”…”calling for Obama to be killed or lynched”? Obama’s “typical white woman” comment is true racism!
2)Why are most of your links from far left sources such as NPR, CNN, CBS/Katie Couric and dailykos? Anyone could come on here with far right sources…which we don’t need to do…we just need to deal with Obama’s own comments which are scary enough! After all he promises to “bankrupt the coal industry”…
3)Alaskans owning resources and sharing in the wealth of that ownership is not socialism!
Obama’s “Joe the plumber” comments demonstrate true socialism.
4)Your statement:”You have made the name of Christ look foolish” is very offensive. And why do you say Sarah Palin shows no signs of being a Christian? She is a fallen sinner like all of us but a Proverbs 31 woman as well…
5)I don’t get your point on McCain and abortion. He was given a 0% by NARAL…that is he’s Pro-life (as shown in your link). I’m no huge fan of McCain but even if he gave me 50% of what I wanted towards life…isn’t that better than 100% death from Obama who promises to sign FOCA first thing when he gets to the oval office?
6)As for Wright’s church…Obama sat there for 20 years…how “different of men” could they be? And it was not “an inflammatory statement”, implying one…it is a lifestyle…a heart condition.
I could go on but it is almost 3am here. I pray that the Lord will grant you a change of heart.
God’s grace…
Duane & Ruthanne~
I heard myself Obama answering a question about abortion saying that a girl should not be PUNISHED with the baby. How can you vote for him with this statement alone? He couldn’t be anymore opposite than what Scripture/God says about children.
He is truly part of the Spirit of Antichrist.
Don’t vote for McCain / Palin if you dislike them so much, but don’t vote darkness.
If you need to make a statement, vote for a third party with a clear conscience.
So why are you voting for Obama? Not against McCain, but for Obama?
Are you like another supporter that says… I won’t have to worry about putting gas in my car or paying my mortgage?
Eugene,
By now this is all probably a mute point.
You are right, Obama has pledged to uphold Roe v. Wade and every single president that has come into office since it became law has upheld it as well because here we are, talking about it now after 8 years of Bush Jr, 4 years of Bush Sr and 8 years with Reagan. In the past decade McCain has gone back and forth from supporting aborting to opposing it depending on his audience. This year he stood in a church and stated that life starts at the moment of conception and that every life should be given equal representation, yet in the presidential debates he stated that he supports Roe v Wade and will not repeal it.
So if abortion is really the issue you’re voting on then McCain is in the same boat as Obama, they both will support Roe v. Wade, there is no difference here but at least you get a consistent honest answer from Obama where as McCain flops from one side to the other, for it, against it, limit it, wide open, it’s ok here, not ok there, that person yes, this person no, it’s a state issue not federal, he’s been on almost every side there is on this issue.
But to say that McCain does not support abortion is to be ignorant of the facts that McCain has said and done over the course of time in politics.
I personally am anti-abortion with a few exceptions. You better believe that if my wife had an ectopic pregnancy (tubal) I will keep my wife and lose the baby rather than lose the baby and the wife. How about a DNC after a miscarriage or should we just let that stay in there and rot? How about finding out several months into the pregnancy that the baby has died, has no head or brain, etc…, should we let that just fester in there & cause a life threatening infection? I sure hope not. All the above examples are technically abortions, yet I cannot imagine any sane Christian apposing them.
If life truly begins at the moment an egg is fertilized by sperm, then a close cousin to abortion is the holocaust going on at fertility clinics where people who desperately want to have children attempt to conceive with the help of medical professionals. Think about the sheer number of fertilized eggs being flushed down the drains there? Do those lives not count yet because they started in a test tube?
Abortion is a horrible thing, horrible. Sometimes it must be done, it doesn’t mean you’re happy about it but you grieve and move on and try again.
You’ve had the opportunity to post links to the research you have done but I don’t see any but you feel comfortable enough to equivocate Obama with Hitler and yet you completely ignore the fact that it’s not the Obama rallies that are shouting “kill the nigger” those are the rallies of the person you are voting for, John McCain and Sarah Palin. If you want to equivocate the hate and venom of Hitler, you need to apply it properly and open your eyes to the very events unfolding in front of you now.
Use facts, not emotionalism, study both sides looking accurately for all valid reasons of why to or not to vote for them, list all the pro’s and con’s, but be objective about it, try to limit your presuppositions about the candidates as much as you can and do your best to not listen to baseless accusations, gossip and slander. Pay careful attention to the context by which things are said and done for all candidates.
Neither Obama or McCain are ideal candidates by any stretch, both are imperfect, flawed and sinners for sure.
As Heather said last night, may God have mercy on us all. I don’t think there is a better way to say it.
Indeed, may God have mercy on us all.
Eugene,
If you have reputable news sources with which to back up your statements, I would be happy to read them. It is entirely possible that I have missed some things with the wealth of information out there. With that said, I have a few responses to your comments.
Again, you can vote for the man of your choice and I’m sure that your vote will not tip the election either way.
One of my most intelligent friends offered this on the subject of voting: “with voting, like so many things, it can feel like the things you do are utterly inconsequential compared to what everyone else does. Just remember that you are everyone else, to everyone else.”
It was Obama that said that there might be up to 3 vacant seats in the high court during the next presidental term. I heard him myself in the last debate. Since he is so trustworthy I would expect what he says to come true.
I feel that there is a fairly important difference between a man being trustworthy and a man being a clairvoyant. Trustworthiness is a character trait meaning that he will keep his word. Clairvoyance is an extrasensory ability meaning that he can see the future. Unless you are, of course, suggesting that he’s going to have three judges dragged out and shot to make way for his appointees, in which case I feel that semantics are not your greatest concern at the moment.
Which brings up a point… Hitler was very open, honest, and up front about his intentions to wipe out the Jewsish people. I would not respect him for that and I certainly wouldn’t want to vote for him simply because I respected his honesty… He was having innocent people killed because he deemed them to be less than human. Sound familiar? It should because Obama supports the same thing! He strongly supports the murder of innocent children that were created in the image of God.
Obama is not suggesting that we commit religiously or ethnically based genocide, and has in documented fact repeatedly said that he does not personally think abortion is an acceptable option in all but the most dire circumstances.
It might also be pointed out at this juncture that one thing Hitler was a very strong proponent of was the idea that his personal values and morals should be the standard to which everyone else was held. That his morals happened to include killing everyone who didn’t agree with him of course in no way resembles your morals happening to include forcing a woman to carry a life-threatening pregnancy to term or death, whichever happens first.
Reformed Mama,
Cute Star Wars pun.
I have been a part of your father’s church for 4 years…long enough to know that what you have posted here will pierce his heart. Publicly he will bravely say you are an adult making your own choices…and that God is Sovereign…which He is! But his heart will be pierced nonetheless. The news you have made here is already hitting the we-hate-Morey-blogs and will no doubt add to his pain. “Food for thought” as you say…
As long as we’re going to be comparing credentials here, please allow me to include my own. I have known Ruthanne for one year shy of a decade. In those years, I have spent days or even weeks at her house and in the church with her family. I have asked her my questions about Christianity, and when she did not feel able to explain them adequately, we both turned to her father with the trust that he would know how to help us both. I have had discussions with him about my own issues with religion- not simply with Christianity, but with most of the major world faiths- and never once has he tried to tell me that my opinions or experiences were wrong simply because they meant that I disagreed with him. One of the very things that cemented my friendship with Ruthanne, in fact, was that personal faith never got in the way of respect, open discussion, and caring about other people.
Dr. Morey and his wife comforted me when my own family was in trouble, welcomed me into their home during Thanksgiving, Christmas and Easter, and have been my family away from my family. When I was in danger of losing my job and home, I was offered a place in theirs. I was in Ruthanne’s wedding party. I have been her shoulder to cry on as she has been mine. We have spoken nearly every day in the past nine years.
So I think that I can say with a great deal of authority that not only does Dr. Morey encourage his children to think for themselves and disagree with him if they feel it to be right in public, but he teaches them to do so in private even more fiercely. He teaches them to research, to consider all sides of an issue, and to stand up for what they truly believe to be right and Christian no matter WHAT anyone else would say- all of which are qualities I believe are quite clearly exhibited in this post. I have trust in the man who raised my friend to never try and bully his children into changing their opinions on his say-so.
The only person who can say whether Ruthanne’s courageous decision to publicly air an opinion she knew would engender this kind of response has “pierced his heart” is Dr. Morey, and I truly believe that more than anything else, he is PROUD that she has grown into the kind of woman who would do so.
1) Why throw out ad-hom attacks such as “please don’t tell me that all black men look alike”…, Sarah Palin “doesn’t read” and why post quotes that include phrases such as “hate-filled racists”, “right-wing yahoos”…”calling for Obama to be killed or lynched”? Obama’s “typical white woman” comment is true racism!
First, if we are going to be bringing ad hominem attacks into this forum, we need look no further than your declarations that Ruthanne’s father would be emotionally wounded because his child did as he taught her with integrity and poise. I also have to take exception to your declaration that he would lie about his opinion of his own child in public simply to save face.
It becomes increasingly clear to me as I read your response that you did not, in fact, follow many of the links above, if indeed you read any of them at all. In order, then:
- The people saying that Barack Obama was sworn into office on a Koran were not true. They were, in fact, referring to another man entirely, who happens to be black. Thus, I can only conclude that the people who were spreading this rumor were doing one of three things: 1. They were deliberately lying. 2. They were spreading completely unverified rumors as fact, which I have been told any number of times by Ruthanne and during Dr. Morey’s sermons is specifically said to be unChristian in the scriptures, or 3. They somehow thought that a single black man being sworn in on a non-Christian text must be Barack Obama, despite the fact that they are of possessed of different weights, statures, and facial features. Therefore, that statement on Ruthanne’s part was in no way ad hominem, by definition of the term.
- Sarah Palin herself said that she reads whatever is put in front of her- that was not a report of an interview, or Katie Couric’s spin. That was a transcript, which is simply a full written copy of something. Those were her own words. It cannot be ad hominem if she said it herself.
- I have personally heard people say, in my presence, that Obama should be lynched. No reason was given other than that he is not John McCain- because there is absolutely no valid reason to ever declare something that violent, judgemental, and absolutely, unequivocally racially charged. That is also not ad hominem. It is a fact, for which I was present and which I heard with my own ears.
- Obama was speaking about his own grandmother in the comments to which I believe you are referring. (If I’m wrong, please feel free to link me to a correction. And again, this is a transcript, which is simply a text record of what was said.) He was speaking, in context, about the racism and fear that we have yet to remove from our culture. He was also speaking about the fact that we can care deeply about people with whose views or statements we do not agree. And Obama himself never used the phrase “typical white woman.”
2)Why are most of your links from far left sources such as NPR, CNN, CBS/Katie Couric and dailykos? Anyone could come on here with far right sources…which we don’t need to do…we just need to deal with Obama’s own comments which are scary enough! After all he promises to “bankrupt the coal industry”…
I would like to invite you to do exactly that. I am more than willing to read views that may differ from my own, and if I have missed something, as I said to Eugene, I very much want to have as much information as possible when I make my decisions.
3)Alaskans owning resources and sharing in the wealth of that ownership is not socialism!
Obama’s “Joe the plumber” comments demonstrate true socialism.
Actually, it is the exact definition of socialism.
1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
Joe the Plumber himself wants to start a community charity in which he will help people he deems needy. (Please note that this link is from Fox News, as you seem to be in favor of their reporting.) That, as well, is socialist, as defined in the two links above. Specifically, that “individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.”
I am not sure what specific comments by Obama you are referencing. Would you mind providing some sources in order to clarify for me?
4)Your statement:”You have made the name of Christ look foolish” is very offensive. And why do you say Sarah Palin shows no signs of being a Christian? She is a fallen sinner like all of us but a Proverbs 31 woman as well…
Really? Because the kind of woman I understand Proverbs 31 to be talking about is not the kind of woman who would make a rape victim make a decision to pay over a thousand dollars that she may or may not have to spend when recovering from a violently traumatic assault. She does not penalize the wronged party. She is compassionate and helpful, she “extends her hands to the needy.” She is not the kind of woman who would try and morally defend her daughter’s underage, out-of-wedlock pregnancy- her children are “clothed in scarlet” when it snows; they are well prepared for their lives because she “watches over the affairs of her household.” She does not sign a bill into LAW about which she is wilfully ignorant. She does not help spread rumor, lies, and slander about her political opponent. “She speaks with wisdom, and faithful instruction is on her tongue,” rather than mock the fruit-fly research that has directly benefited her developmentally disabled child. Sarah Palin is no more a woman of Proverbs 31 than are Amy Fisher or Heidi Fleiss.
It offends me, who has yet to commit to a faith, that Sarah Palin claims to be Christian for political gain while providing not a single example in her words or actions of the values that are explicitly stated in the Bible. It is offensive that she has contributed to an atmosphere in which intolerance is held up as a virtue and willful ignorance is considered being a good Christian. It is offensive that her claim to Christianity makes the faith look intolerant, bigoted, cruel, and woefully lazy about understanding their own beliefs.
5)I don’t get your point on McCain and abortion. He was given a 0% by NARAL…that is he’s Pro-life (as shown in your link). I’m no huge fan of McCain but even if he gave me 50% of what I wanted towards life…isn’t that better than 100% death from Obama who promises to sign FOCA first thing when he gets to the oval office?
Look again at the points above: McCain has never voted consistently pro-life. He has lied over and over and over about his views on abortion. She states it clearly: “Give me an honest man whose opinions I don’t agree with over a dishonest man who lies ANY DAY.” We as a country need another compulsive liar in the Presidential office like we need to be overrun by cicadas. What NARAL or any other group may say is vastly outweighed by his voting record, which makes it more than clear that he is not only inconsistent, he will change his stance on issues depending on what he thinks will help HIM.
6)As for Wright’s church…Obama sat there for 20 years…how “different of men” could they be? And it was not “an inflammatory statement”, implying one…it is a lifestyle…a heart condition.
How can I disagree with Dr. Bob after all these years and still care about him deeply? Same thing. You have no way of knowing if Obama sat there out of respect for the person while taking exception to the statements- which he says were never made in his presence- exactly as I have done in times past. My political and social views do not mean that someone is a lesser person for not agreeing with me, and your insinuation that it does is offensive to me, my friends, and the very cause you are trying to advance.
Wow. What a lot of pseudo-logical dueling, trying to out do each other. If the replies get any bigger I may throw-up. The enemy is not each other, it is Satan and his ungodly forces. One would think otherwise with this collective claptrap. We should pray for each other, not vent our frustrations. As for you Ruthanne and Duane, it is very apparant that Obama has won the presidency, and I abjure you to keep an eye on him now more than ever to see if he lives up to the expectations given to him, thank you. The Lord will steer him as He does everyone else, so I am not worried. May His will be done. And will you all please get a grip.
Goodness, Paul, I would certainly hate to upset someone so clearly calm, unbiased, and polite as yourself. From now on I will take care to keep my debates with people who viciously attack my dear friends out of your computer browser.
Dear 32 Flavors,
The comment was not meant for you, I was actually addressing Ruthanne with my questions.
We do, however, agree on the Moreys kind hearts and that Ruthanne is her own person. It’s just that many of us here in CA grow weary of seeing Dr. Bob hurt through a variety of drama.
I did indeed look at all the links. Don’t care about Obama and the Koran or Birth Certificate stories…at all.
Sorry, you can’t put me in a right-wing, extremist, Fox News watching box. I don’t even like McCain…he is not my “cause”. My cause is Christ and Him crucified. Christ is not a Republican or a Democrat…but He is against baby-murder aka abortion. You are both correct, McCain has a spotty record. But, I’ll take whatever I can get for the preborn rather than side with death. Lesser of two evils as they say. Obama has promised to sign FOCA first thing. For that…tonight…I grieve.
You misunderstood my thoughts and misconstrued some facts but it matters little now. Your guy is in! You clearly do not understand Scripture just as it states that you won’t…for “spiritual things are spiritually discerned”.
Ruthanne has my permission to give you my email address if you are truly interested in the other side or would ever like to talk further.
You can visit me on biblicalthoughtdotcom as well…I recently posted an article on abortion WITH links =)
Dearest Ruthanne,
I don’t need to respond to the other folks on this blog. Just to you.
There are some people dear heart that wear their light around their shoulders. That beam pure unconditional love and acceptance. Christians call that Christlike. It is those people who are generous of heart and soul who truly transform the world.
Those that would condemn the daughter for the father I think are not seeing the whole picture. They are incapable of seeing your light.
Ruthanne. Never in my entire life have I met a Christian who fully defines what it is to be light bringer. Then Ruthanne, I met you. When people speak against Christianity I bring up you. I explain that there are some Christians who are open and loving and honest and sincere.
Reap the beautiful bounty that you have helped to sow my love, and let the chafe fall by the wayside.
Dear 32 Flavors,
The comment was not meant for you, I was actually addressing Ruthanne with my questions.
I am well aware, but as you addressed those questions to her in a public forum, you have opened yourself to public response.
We do, however, agree on the Moreys kind hearts and that Ruthanne is her own person. It’s just that many of us here in CA grow weary of seeing Dr. Bob hurt through a variety of drama.
Indeed, so am I, which is why I again request that you cease in causing it. Any disagreements between Dr. Bob and Ruthanne are just that- between them. Your insistence on inserting yourself into the issue to declare Ruthanne a bad daughter- because it is hardly difficult to understand that such is your insinuation- is not only unwarranted, it is viciously aggressive.
I did indeed look at all the links. Don’t care about Obama and the Koran or Birth Certificate stories…at all.
Then if you don’t care about them, why did you accuse Ruthanne of using them for ad hominem attacks? You can’t have it both ways.
Sorry, you can’t put me in a right-wing, extremist, Fox News watching box. I don’t even like McCain…he is not my “cause”. My cause is Christ and Him crucified.
Which is exactly what I was referring to when I said it. Deliberate ignorance, intolerance, and exclusionism hurt the cause of Christianity more than anything else I have ever seen.
Christ is not a Republican or a Democrat…but He is against baby-murder aka abortion. You are both correct, McCain has a spotty record. But, I’ll take whatever I can get for the preborn rather than side with death. Lesser of two evils as they say. Obama has promised to sign FOCA first thing. For that…tonight…I grieve.
Grieve if you must. I, personally, will celebrate the election of a man who sticks to his word even when it is unpopular, who refuses to throw his family and friends by the wayside over disagreements, and who is trying to fix the problems in this country rather than maintaining the broken status quo.
You misunderstood my thoughts and misconstrued some facts
Again, if I did, please explain to me how. I would honestly like to know. I certainly don’t want to misunderstand you, and I very definitely don’t want to have the facts wrong.
but it matters little now. Your guy is in! You clearly do not understand Scripture just as it states that you won’t…for “spiritual things are spiritually discerned”.
And I want to learn and understand more, which is why- as Dr. Bob can tell you- I have always been open with my questions about the bible. Did I somehow misunderstand Proverbs 31? Was there another specific portion of the scripture about which I was confused?
I found the Proverbs 31 text which I used as the basis of my previous reply at Biblegateway.com. They also have 1 Corinthians 2, which is what I think you are referring to here.
From what I understand, this passage is specifically about the sacrifice Christ made upon submitting to the cross. The part to which you are referring is as follows, “But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.”
Now, reading the full verse, I understand that it is discussing experiential faith- that is, that there are certain things that someone, in this case the “natural man,” who has not accepted and experienced Christianity in their lives and heart cannot completely understand, with which I certainly agree. I couldn’t completely understand scuba diving until I had done it, nor could I completely understand marriage until I had been married. However, some things are understandable to anyone who can read. “Jacob crossed the river” means that Jacob, an individual, crossed a moving body of water. Understanding this, there is no way you can say that I do not understand Proverbs 31, because I have been, currently am, and will continue to be experiencing life as a woman. Perhaps not as a Christian woman, but Proverbs 31 does not specify that the woman in question is Christian until the very end, and it is set forth as a separate, though certainly desirable, trait. In addition, the language in those verses is exceptionally straightforward; there is no way to misinterpret “she opens her arms to the poor and extends her hands to the needy.” This passage is explicit: this is what a good woman is, these are the things a good woman does. It is not open to interpretation.
What you seem to be saying is that because I have not yet committed to identifying myself as a Christian, my attempts to understand the Bible as fully as I can are invalid. And if you are going to declare that one must be a member of a faith to be a legitimate scholar of that faith, I believe that Dr. Bob would have some things to say to you about belief versus scholarship.
Ruthanne has my permission to give you my email address if you are truly interested in the other side or would ever like to talk further.
I am certainly interested in your dissenting opinion. However, you brought this discussion to this forum, and therefore I would again invite you to continue it where it was started.
You can visit me on biblicalthoughtdotcom as well…I recently posted an article on abortion WITH links =)
And while you did indeed include links, none of them are relevant to the discussion at hand. You were the person who declared that you “could come on here with far right sources…which we don’t need to do…” and I have yet to see these links that support your arguments. Again, by all means, change my mind. I am willing to be proven wrong if I truly think that the proof is sufficient.
Wow, I didn’t expect this thread to explode quite in this way!
Thank you everyone for speaking up. Let me make this clear: opinions are always welcome here.
I am saddened by some of the wild accusations and assumptions that have gone on here. Oddly enough, pretty much everything that I would’ve said has already been said.
Let me just add this.
One of the lessons I learned from my father was the belief that all claims should be researched. That it is not enough to simply believe what one’s leader says. That, like the Bereans, we are to “search and see if these things are true.”
No, I do not think having Obama in the White House will “pay my mortgage,” nor do I believe for one moment that he is the spirit of the Anti-christ.
What I do believe is that we had imperfect choices ahead of us this year, but that several important factors made me and Duane decide the way we did.
1. Consistency. Obama has been consistent – including in the places where he said he doesn’t know the answer. McCain has NOT been consistent, and neither has Palin.
2. Rarely in my life have I seen the kind of drama and smears and lies that this campaign has generated. When it comes down to facts – real, documented facts – there are unfortunately only two ways to look at them:
(1) either every document is forged, every testimony (NOT hearsay) is a lie, and every word out of Obama’s mouth is also a lie, which everyone including the Supreme Court has backed – and in that case, not to be crude, we’re already screwed, so why are you fussing?
(2) The facts bear out that Obama is not what others have claimed him to be. He is not, in fact, any more socialist (insert wicked word of choice here) than many past, good presidents. He’s certainly better than both Bush presidents. Do I need to mention Clinton?
No, he’s not Reagan. I miss Reagan. We do not HAVE Reagan. Reagan is dead. Instead of pining for someone who isn’t here, we need to focus on who IS and decide accordingly.
The fact is that we are responsible for our votes in this country, and that means we are responsible for verifying as much as we can ourselves. Not simply accepting a single news report and running with it. There’s a reason I usually incorporated 3-4 sources at a time.
Two more things. One – ad-hominem means an attack on a person instead of on facts. That means, just so we’re clear, that “dark side” and “won’t have to worry about putting gas in my car” are both ad hominem. Like my dad before me, I always find it funny when someone does exactly what he or she is accusing another of doing.
Lastly, I remind you of this: “Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. Therefore he who resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.”
Remember that? Romans 13:1-2. To put it in perspective, Paul is here speaking of the self-same government that put Jesus to death.
Oddly enough, it sounds like someone else’s words from last night. “I urge all Americans — (applause) — I urge all Americans who supported me to join me in not just congratulating him, but offering our next president our good will and earnest effort to find ways to come together, to find the necessary compromises, to bridge our differences, and help restore our prosperity, defend our security in a dangerous world, and leave our children and grandchildren a stronger, better country than we inherited.”
McCain said that – in possibly the most gracious concession speech I have ever heard in my life.
The country has plenty of problems. The problem is that trying to make the government “law” them all away is only going to backfire.
Every time a law is made that affects morality, it can and usually does backfire. Instead of trying to get laws that dictate morality, we need to live in a way that shows the light and love of Christ and makes those around us yearn for what we have.
I know that God is in control, and I intend to look at this as a good thing. We are leaving behind a president who made illegal wiretaps. A president who justified TORTURE.
I think no matter what happens, we’re already twenty steps ahead of that.
If America was wrong about Obama – including my little part of it here in NH – then we’ll have to pay the price. At least I know that I voted with a clean conscience before God – and as long as you did, too, then we can both hold our heads up high.
32 Flavors,
I never suggested that Obama was planning any kind of genocide. If you actually take the time to read my post you will see that I am making the point that Hitler and pro-choice spupporters such as Obama use the same reasoning to justify killing people – they define them as less then human. Once someone has lost the special dignity of being human, then it is much easier to abuse or even kill them. If you would like to debate me that the Jews were not human or that an unborn child is not human, then I will take that debate in a second. What else can an unborn child be OTHER than human. They are the offspring of two humans. If you examined the remains of an unborn child, what would find? You would find human tissue, human blood, human hair, human bone, and human DNA. Need I explain the process of human reproduction? It makes humans!
What about the innocence of the unborn child? Can you honestly say that ANY unborn child has committed a crime that worthy of the death penality? Who can be more innocent than an unborn child?
Based on the above two points, I have established that an unborn child is both human and innocent. This brings me to my reason for opposing abortions in all but the most extreme cases. The issuse is justice. It is unjust to kill innocent human life. This is the crux of the issue. Pro-choice proponents always couch the issue as a one of freedom for the mother. They say that a woman has the right (freedom) to do with her body whatever she wants. Of course, this is not true… she can’t inject illegal drugs into her body, she can’t fill her body with alcohol and get behind the wheel of a car while drunk, and she can’t sell her body for sex. Besides, it is not her body that is being killed during the abortion procedure…
So this brings us to a decision, which is more important justice or freedom? This is not all that easy to decide. Both concepts are are vitally important to our society, but which is more important? I think the best way to answer this question is to figure out if you can have one without the other… Can you have freedom without justice or… can you have justice without freedom? I think that it can be demonstrated that you can indeed have justice without freedom, but you can not have true feeedom without justice. Justice is foundational to freedom and therefore more important. If we don’t have justice for everyone in this country including the unborn, can we truely have freedom? I don’t think so…
After explaining my position and my reasons for holdinng to it, let me now respond to your last comment.
It might also be pointed out at this juncture that one thing Hitler was a very strong proponent of was the idea that his personal values and morals should be the standard to which everyone else was held. That his morals happened to include killing everyone who didn’t agree with him of course in no way resembles your morals happening to include forcing a woman to carry a life-threatening pregnancy to term or death, whichever happens first.
Why would you assume that “my morals” would force a woman that truely is in a life-threatening situation to give up her life. If my I had to choose between my wife and the unborn child that would kill her, I would choose my wife’s life in a heartbeat. I know also that we would do everything in our power (short of harming my wife) to also preserve the life of the child if at all possible. We would take the pregnancy as far as possible in an effort to protect both my wife and the child. However, my wife would always have first priority. We would do whatever we could to sustain both lives and leave the rest to God. Does that sound like Hitler to you? I would never want to kill anyone, but if I had to kill someone to defend my own life or the life of my family members, I would do it without hesitation and it would be totally justified. We all have the God-given right to self defense.
Now will you honestly try to make the point that all abortions performed in this country are to to protect the life of the mother? You and I both know that the vast majority of abortions have nothing to do with the health of the mother, but are carried out because the mother does not want the responsibility of having a child, doesn’t want the stretch marks, doesn’t want the hassle, or whatever… in other words, they want a life without consequences. So they choose to kill their own child… their OWN child. They want freedom without justice.
I hope that this helps to explain my position and I hope and pray that just maybe it gets you to think about this issue a little more than just on the surface.
Thank you for your response.
Grace and peace to you,
Eugene Henson
Duane,
See my above post…
Eugene
Eugene,
First of all, peace be upon you, because I think this issue gives you little.
Second of all abortion is a much complicated issue than you think. I grew up in urban New Jersey where it was common for a sixteen year old girl to hold down a job, raise a child go to school *and* take care of an ailing grandparent…with NO health care. These girls often did not choose abortion. Those that did did not do it for the stretch marks, trust me on it. They did it because they had been raped or because they couldn’t afford to feed another mouth.
It seems very easy to damn the mother to save a child. Abortion often comes down to the race and class of the mother. Poor Black and Latina women have more abortions. Why? Lack of sex education in public schools and higher risk homes. Would you tell a fifteen year old to keep her baby if that baby is going to get her killed or ruin her chance at a future? I sure as hell wouldn’t. It’s something I’ve seen with my own eyes. I know these girls, they’re my friends and neighbors. They weren’t proud of what they did, and later on many of them became good wives and mothers.
Also, lest you think an actual abortion is some painless experience, it isn’t. It’s horribly painful, and the doctor’s don’t make that a secret.
Hopefully the next time you talk about abortion you’ll go and find the women who are actually at risk of getting them. Get to know them. Ask them to tell you why they did it. Most of the time they’ll feel alone and ashamed, but they thought it was necessary. Not a single woman I know who has had an abortion doesn’t feel remorse for her lost child. Doesn’t miss what could have been, and yet to save herself and her future children she had to make an unfortunate sacrifice.
Eugene,
The person who brought up Hitler to begin with is you. So if there was any lack of clarity as to exactly which attributes of Hitler were to supposed to be held in common with Obama, that burden rests squarely on your shoulders. Hitler was a horrible man who is responsible for some of the worst crimes and atrocities of all time. So perhaps if you are going to use Adolf Hitler, a white German fascist and former leader of Germany, as the mirror image of Barack Obama, a black American part capitalist/socialist/pacifist but 100% patriot/husband/father and your new President, perhaps some clarification is in order.
While I appreciate the continuing dialog, what started off as a friendly discussion has quickly turned nasty. Abortion is a hot topic that can easily escalate to bad things. Lets try to keep this civil, we may not always agree but we can at least try to be civil (this goes for everyone).
Much of what you say sounds more to be an appeal to someone else’s morality or values. The problem with this is you will find some people to have a sane approach to their world view and yet others can safely be labeled as out of their mind. But again even this is subjective and entirely based upon my point of view and not of someone else’s. My morality and values are different from my neighbor, and his neighbor and so on around the entire globe. So while I may not see eye to eye with my neighbor I can at least put the effort to find some common ground and come to a compromise in this democracy (not a theocracy).
I have read and re-read your posts, here is what you have said:
You went from talking about Supreme Court seat availability and the estimate that there could be up to 3 seats (which is an estimate by the way, not some foreseer of the future and knower of all things) that come up for vacancy in the next 4 years to invoking the name of Hitler to prove your point.
There is a long standing internet debate rule that states the first person to bring up Hitler to prove their point, loses the debate. It’s an extension of Godwin’s law and you can find it on Wikipedia, but it’s just an extension of Godwin’s law. I’m not going to hold you to that rule but it’s hard to imagine how you went from talking about a Democracy of the people, by the people and for the people to a Fascist regime that the world went to war against and narrowly defeated.
In the 3rd Presidential Debate between McCain and Obama there was a question about abortion that came up.
Obama Said:
With respect to partial-birth abortion, I am completely supportive of a ban on late-term abortions, partial-birth or otherwise, as long as there’s an exception for the mother’s health and life, and this did not contain that exception. … The last point I want to make on the issue of abortion. This is an issue that — look, it divides us. And in some ways, it may be difficult to — to reconcile the two views.
But there surely is some common ground when both those who believe in choice and those who are opposed to abortion can come together and say, “We should try to prevent unintended pregnancies by providing appropriate education to our youth, communicating that sexuality is sacred and that they should not be engaged in cavalier activity, and providing options for adoption, and helping single mothers if they want to choose to keep the baby.”
Those are all things that we put in the Democratic platform for the first time this year, and I think that’s where we can find some common ground, because nobody’s pro-abortion. I think it’s always a tragic situation.
OBAMA: We should try to reduce these circumstances.
Full Transcript can be found AT THIS LINK HERE
I think that is very well said and about the best possible bridge of both sides as you could ask for in a democracy (again not a theocracy). Because none of the last 4 presidents spanning last 28 years has set out to repeal roe v wade and outlaw abortion completely.
Quick Side Note:
I highly suggest you read the full transcript, it was a great debate and McCain made it very clear that he fully supports stem-cell research. You really should do some research on stem cells and how and where they are harvested, where the preferred cells come from and how they get them and the proposed methods and ways to acquire and harvest the best quality cells for this research.
Anyhow, I fail to see how his words in this debate can be anything close to what Hitler was, stood for or did in his regime. Obama has been consistently against late term and partial birth abortions and only has wanted to make an exception for the health of the mother so that as a last resort it would be an option, again, as a last resort.
Now…
I don’t believe anybody in this thread has even tried to deny the fact that an unborn baby is just that, the product of two humans combining egg and sperm and the creation of a unique and special human life.
With regards to innocence. You really need to define that term better. Because it could appear to some as if you were saying that innocence = having done nothing wrong, i.e.: sinless or without sin.
As you and I both know, scripture says:
1) that there are none righteous no not one (Romans 3:10)
2) that we are all sinners (see Genesis through Jude)
3) that while yet still in the womb we are sinners (1 Cor 15:22, Romans 5, Psalm 51:5)
4) that the wages of sin are death (Romans 6:23)
You go on to say “So this brings us to a decision, which is more important justice or freedom?”
A very excellent point and I hope you have actually considered the truth depth of this statement. If the conclusion is that in the case of unborn babies keeping the life is justice and abortion is freedom then I ask you this.
How far do you carry that? What if you apply that same statement and logic to other things in life? Things going on right now as a matter of fact.
A) What about in the case of the war in Iraq where life is ending hand over fist, soldiers and “innocent” civilians are dyeing every single day? Please keep in mind that we are there as the result of bad information and faulty intel that said Saddam had WMD’s which we have not found any of to this date (btw, Iraq is now longer in duration than WW2). So which side is Justice here, and who represents Freedom? War is indeed a horrible thing and is sometimes necessary but is not to be celebrated except when over, but when you continue to fight a war after you know you went in there as a pre-emptive strike and not retaliation for the attack on the World Trade Center like Afghanistan was, and entirely for the wrong reasons, is it still right? Is that justice? How is this freedom? Or are these lives, the lives of the soldiers and “innocent” civilians somehow less precious, less valuable, less important because they are post-birth?
B) The Patriot Act: Americans have given up their freedom in order that justice prevail against suspected terrorists (or anyone else we don’t agree with). Do you agree with the Justice > Freedom here? Is justice counting someone as guilty without trial? I sure don’t.
If you can provide clarity on the use of Hitler, the use of the word innocent, and how far you are willing to take the justice vs. freedom statement and where the logical conclusion ends.
Tell me if you agree to this:
1. It’s very clear that abortions continue to happen whether they’re legal or not. The answer to this is not trying to impose a blanket all yes or all no government restriction. This will eliminate the procedures I listed earlier in this thread as they are technically abortions.
2. In order to prevent abortions, the key is preventing unwanted pregnancies. This means better education for young women and men, better access to contraceptive measures, and more options available for those women who DO become pregnant and cannot or do not want to keep the child. Not to mention having the men who took part in making this child responsible for their actions and to take on their fair share of the responsibility.
3. While it would be nice to live in a Christian world in which we could magically stop all unwed sex or in which all men & women would simply obey the law, that is not only unreal – it is unrealistic and dangerous. Having the government define what is and is not allowable in the bedroom or in the women’s clinic won’t stop anything. What will is helping women & men alike (a) to avoid pregnancy, (b) to understand that it IS a real child with a soul, and (c) to give them more options. Currently, they don’t have many. Pro-lifers have a very bad habit of only protecting the baby when it’s in the womb; once it’s born, they stop caring, and yet someone has to care for that child.
Comments on this entry are closed.
{ 1 trackback }