How the Democratic Party opposes Christian Principles

[PassionFruit]

To mpok1519, christalee4, and PassionFruit

The verbs used by mpok1519, christalee4, and PassionFruit are control, restrict, destroy, force, etc. When I write, I use the word advocate. I do not advocate controlling, restricting, destroying, forcing, etc.

Christians should advocate (be salt and light), Civil Law should control, restrict, destroy, force, etc. Christians should advocate that which is good and healthy for society as described in the Bible. Civil Law should control, restrict, destroy, force, etc. that which is harmful (disease, death and destruction) to society. Congress (as the representatives of the people) defines Civil Law. If the laws that Congress defines are consistent with the Christian Lifestyle (God's Law), the people who practice evil will suffer. If the laws that Congress defines are consistent with the Atheistic Lifestyle, everyone will suffer. Civil Law consistent with the Atheistic Lifestyle cause suffering for everyone because the Christens suffer under the law, and the Atheists suffer because of the sin they practice. Romans 6:23 states, "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

Separation of Church and State means the Church should not execute, control, restrict, destroy, force, etc. and the State should not legalize sin by legalizing those things that the Bible clearly calls evil.

God does not control, restrict, destroy, force, etc. When God produced the Ten Commandments. God presented a warning and people have the right to disobey, but they also need to be aware there are consequences.

This all comes back to the three central questions.

Does the Bible define a plan (Christian Lifestyle) for Christian living?

Can man define a better plan (Atheistic Lifestyle) than God?

Is the Christian Lifestyle better than the Atheistic Lifestyle for the individual, the nation and the world?

Let's be clear here, you don't seem to be getting the message. The government has not right to place what it considers the "Christian lifestyle" into my life. I don't want your so-called idea of the "Christian lifestyle" into my life. Are we clear? So are you in favor of executing people who are homosexuals?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Let's be clear here, you don't seem to be getting the message. The government has not right to place what it considers the "Christian lifestyle" into my life.

Furthermore, should the government ever attempt to do so, anything that has any meaning to the "Christian lifestyle" will die right then are there.

if all the government is going to do is enforce an arbitrary set of prohibitions, where's the lifestyle? Where's the love? Where's the life?

 

[dlamberth]

Even Christians are deceived by the propaganda of the Democrats. Universal Health Care sounds good till you realize that the main purpose of Universal Health Care is to force the responsible to pay for the mistakes of the irresponsible, and using your words, "evil". The mistakes of the irresponsible are the evil that the Bible says to avoid.

I believe that if Christians do not support helping the poor and those in need of help, that they ARE being totally irresponsible. Jesus was very clear about the need to help the poor and those in need. This is not a Democrat ONLY issue. Morally, as a nation, we need to be re-directing our focus away from war and look towards how we can help those in need. There is something terribly wrong when 13 million children do not have health care and people like you call those children, evil and irresponsible. Sheesh!!!

.

 

[Rudolph Hucker]

This guy is right .....

http://www.i-am-bored.com/bored_link.cfm?link_id=18076

isn't he?

 

[clirus]

Nathan Poe quote

And yet, Jefferson was elected, and much to the surprise of nobody, civilization did not come to a screeching halt. We indeed need more like Jefferson. Where are they now?


Response

Are your referring to the Jefferson that owned slaves?

If one looks into the Bible, God is longsuffering.

Exodus 34:4-7, states, "And the hewed two tables of stone like unto the first; and Moses rose up early in the morning , and went up into mount Sinai, as the LORD had commanded him, and took in his hand the two tables of stone. And the LORD descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the LORD. And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth. Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation."

Some people take God's longsuffering as a sign that God does not exist. I think that is a very dangerous way of thinking.

Some say religion should be kept out of government, but I believe there can be no civilization (and no good government) without the Christian religion and the Christian Principles taught by the Christian Religion.

The Church should teach Christian Principles and the State should establish laws based on Christian Principles.

 

[clirus]

dlamberth quote

I believe that if Christians do not support helping the poor and those in need of help, that they ARE being totally irresponsible. Jesus was very clear about the need to help the poor and those in need. This is not a Democrat ONLY issue. Morally, as a nation, we need to be re-directing our focus away from war and look towards how we can help those in need. There is something terribly wrong when 13 million children do not have health care and people like you call those children, evil and irresponsible. Sheesh!!!

Response

Should Christians support those with self inflicted needs?

Should there be more effort put into prevention than cure?

The 13 million children without health care are not evil and irresponsible, but their parents probable are. Should there be more effort put into prevention than cure?

There is a big difference between helping the poor and subsidizing sin. Subsidizing sin just causes more sin and more needy people. That does not solve problems, that creates more problems. You must change the heart of the person to really help the person.

Some people just refuse to acknowledge the necessity of separating good from evil, then promoting good while rejecting evil.

America recognized smoking was evil and now smoking is rejected. There are a lot of issues in America that need to be treated the same way.

Republicans have yet to prove to me that they really support Christian principles, but democrats have proven they do "not" support Christian Principles.

 

[Rudolph Hucker]

....
Some say religion should be kept out of government, but I believe there can be no civilization (and no good government) without the Christian religion and the Christian Principles taught by the Christian Religion.
...

I for one believe that religion has no place in government.

States that have or have had government by religion have a bad track record.

Can you name one good government based on religion?

 

[clirus]

PassionFruit quote

Let's be clear here, you don't seem to be getting the message. The government has not right to place what it considers the "Christian lifestyle" into my life. I don't want your so-called idea of the "Christian lifestyle" into my life. Are we clear? So are you in favor of executing people who are homosexuals?

Response

Do you believe God will judge people reality to the Christian Principles of the Christian Lifestyle as described in the Bible?

 

[Fantine]

This is how I see the OP's comments.

Jesus said, "You cannot serve God and mammon."

At least the Democrats attempt to serve mammon.

The Republicans, by putting big business first, are exploiting mammon.

 

[KarateCowboy]

Jefferson wanted a picture of the Jews leaving Egypt as the National Seal. Is that a violation of church & state?

 

[blueapplepaste]

dlamberth quote

I believe that if Christians do not support helping the poor and those in need of help, that they ARE being totally irresponsible. Jesus was very clear about the need to help the poor and those in need. This is not a Democrat ONLY issue. Morally, as a nation, we need to be re-directing our focus away from war and look towards how we can help those in need. There is something terribly wrong when 13 million children do not have health care and people like you call those children, evil and irresponsible. Sheesh!!!

Response

Should Christians support those with self inflicted needs?

Should there be more effort put into prevention than cure?

The 13 million children without health care are not evil and irresponsible, but their parents probable are. Should there be more effort put into prevention than cure?

There is a big difference between helping the poor and subsidizing sin. Subsidizing sin just causes more sin and more needy people. That does not solve problems, that creates more problems. You must change the heart of the person to really help the person.

Some people just refuse to acknowledge the necessity of separating good from evil, then promoting good while rejecting evil.

America recognized smoking was evil and now smoking is rejected. There are a lot of issues in America that need to be treated the same way.

Republicans have yet to prove to me that they really support Christian principles, but democrats have proven they do "not" support Christian Principles.

You're making quite a blanket statment in saying that anyone who can't afford healthcare is living in sin. I have no doubt that a good amount of those people who have no health care are hard-working devout Christians who are on hard times. I guarantee that Jesus would help them, even the sinners as he repeatedly did.

Yet again, you seem to be ignoring His teachings. Why do you ignore or dismiss Jesus's teachings so readily? (And if you think you are, will you please explain to me how Jesus would be against universal health care)

 

[Nathan Poe]

Are your referring to the Jefferson that owned slaves?

I'm certianly not referring to the Abraham that owned slaves.

If one looks into the Bible, God is longsuffering.

If one looks into the Bible, God tends to smite people on the spot for crossing him. Given that if one looks into the Bible, it says God does not change, one has a hard time reconciling all of that.

Some people take God's longsuffering as a sign that God does not exist. I think that is a very dangerous way of thinking.

I think that outlawing dangerous thought doesn't make it go away.

Some say religion should be kept out of government, but I believe there can be no civilization (and no good government) without the Christian religion and the Christian Principles taught by the Christian Religion.

The Church should teach Christian Principles and the State should establish laws based on Christian Principles.

Under the government as it currently exists, you have as much right to believe that as I do to think such beliefs are rubbish.

How much right would I have to do so under your Christian government?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Do you believe God will judge people reality to the Christian Principles of the Christian Lifestyle as described in the Bible?

No.

 

[dlamberth]

dlamberth quote

I believe that if Christians do not support helping the poor and those in need of help, that they ARE being totally irresponsible. Jesus was very clear about the need to help the poor and those in need. This is not a Democrat ONLY issue. Morally, as a nation, we need to be re-directing our focus away from war and look towards how we can help those in need. There is something terribly wrong when 13 million children do not have health care and people like you call those children, evil and irresponsible. Sheesh!!!

Response

Should Christians support those with self inflicted needs?

Should there be more effort put into prevention than cure?

The 13 million children without health care are not evil and irresponsible, but their parents probable are. Should there be more effort put into prevention than cure?

There is a big difference between helping the poor and subsidizing sin. Subsidizing sin just causes more sin and more needy people. That does not solve problems, that creates more problems. You must change the heart of the person to really help the person.

Some people just refuse to acknowledge the necessity of separating good from evil, then promoting good while rejecting evil.

America recognized smoking was evil and now smoking is rejected. There are a lot of issues in America that need to be treated the same way.

Republicans have yet to prove to me that they really support Christian principles, but democrats have proven they do "not" support Christian Principles.

Prevention would be ideal and is something to strive for. Helping those 13 million children with healthcare is prevention, and in the long run will save the rest of us a lot of dollars. In all sorts of ways, it will be a very Christian principled and moral ideal to have some sort of government provided healthcare for those children who have no healthcare.

Now, you make all sorts of judgments about the poor and those in need. Did Jesus tell us to make the kinds of judgments about other people that you are making when He told us to help the poor and those in need? No where do I see Jesus instructing us to do as you are arguing. I don't see where He told us anywhere to judge others. Clearly, in my opinion, to judge people like you are is a totally non-Christian principle. As jobs have moved off shore, millions of Americans have lost their jobs and medical insurance.

13 million innocent children with no health care IS a sin!! It’s shameful and looks real bad on our country. We have the means to do something about it. To not help those children who are in need is not a principled OR a moral Christian ideal.


.
.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

The key elements of the Atheistic Lifestyle are extreme environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion and homosexuality. By supporting/advocating these issues the Democratic Party is opposing Christian Principles.

could some one please explain to me in what way environmentalism and feminism are not in line with Christian thought?

 

[EnemyPartyII]

but I believe there can be no civilization (and no good government) without the Christian religion and the Christian Principles taught by the Christian Religion.

Rather makes me wonder about all those civilisations BC... not to mention Hindu, Budhist, Shinto and Amerindian civilisations...

 

[tulc]

Rather makes me wonder about all those civilisations BC... not to mention Hindu, Budhist, Shinto and Amerindian civilisations...

shhhh don't confuse the poor guy with history!
tulc(back from the wilds of western Illinois!)

 

[PassionFruit]

PassionFruit quote

Let's be clear here, you don't seem to be getting the message. The government has not right to place what it considers the "Christian lifestyle" into my life. I don't want your so-called idea of the "Christian lifestyle" into my life. Are we clear? So are you in favor of executing people who are homosexuals?

Response

Do you believe God will judge people reality to the Christian Principles of the Christian Lifestyle as described in the Bible?

No, have you seen my faith icon?

 

[mindlight]

How the Democratic Party opposes Christian Principles

The key elements of the Atheistic Lifestyle are extreme environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion and homosexuality. By supporting/advocating these issues the Democratic Party is opposing Christian Principles.

Extreme environmentalism is opposed to Christian Principles when nature is worshiped instead of God. God states man is to have dominion over the world.

Socialism requires the person worship the government instead of God.

Feminism deceives a woman and destroys the Christian Family concept that is a cornerstone of the Christian Lifestyle.

Pornography deceives the man and destroys the Christian Family concept that is cornerstone of the Christian Lifestyle.

Abortion denies the value of life taught by the Bible and denies that God has ownership over all people.

Homosexuality denies the word of God and represents total defiance of God.

Democrats attempt to pass hate crime legislation that would prevent Christians from preaching/teaching God's word.

Democrats attempt to pass homosexual marriage/civil union legislation when they get control of the government. A recent example of this was the state of Oregon that went from Republican Control to Democratic Control in 2006. Just as soon as the Democrats were in control, they passed civil union legislation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_partnership_in_Oregon

Domestic partnership in Oregon
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In April and May 2007, following a previous attempt in 2005, the Oregon state legislature passed legislation to make virtually all of the rights afforded to married couples available to same-sex couples. The new status will be referred to in Oregon law as a domestic partnership, avoiding the use of the terms marriage or civil union. Governor Ted Kulongoski signed the bill on May 9, 2007, and it is scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2008.

However, after the November 2006 mid-term elections Democrats won a majority of the formerly Republican-controlled house[4], and in early 2007, Democrats was re-introduced a bill in the House similar to the 2005 legislation. The bill adopted the term "domestic partnership" to describe these unions; the terms "marriage" or "civil union" were absent. This bill enjoyed a relatively easy passage through the legislature, when compared to its 2005 predecessor. Passed by the House on April 17, 2007 (by a vote of 34-26) and by the Senate on May 2, 2007 (by a vote of 21-9), Governor Kulongiski signed the Oregon Family Fairness Act on May 9, 2007. The law is not scheduled to take effect until January 1, 2008.

-----------------------------------

Democrats are very good at selling the Atheistic Lifestyle. Pornography is freedom of speech, abortion is a woman's right to choose and homosexuality is a civil right. One of the most hypocritical statement is: "I would not do that, but I would not object to others doing it". That is like saying: I would not seduce your children, but I would not mind someone else seducing your children. If it is wrong, it is wrong for all people. Christians should not vote for people that condone or advocate evil.

Even Christians are deceived by the propaganda of the Democrats. Universal Health Care sounds good till you realize that the main purpose of Universal Health Care is to force the responsible to pay for the mistakes of the irresponsible. The mistakes of the irresponsible are the evil that the Bible says to avoid.

I agree with many of your points and admire a lot about the religious right and the Republican party of the USA but I have a few questions about it also:

1) Is it Chrisian to show favouritism to rich people over poor people n the tax system or indeed to show no concern for the widow or orphan in their distress. One could argue a strong case that this has been a fruit of the current Republican administration.

2) Is it a Christian thing to be an irresponsible steward - as with the incompetence of the current administrations response to the Hurricane Katrina fiasco and its previous refusal of funds for better flood defences for New Orleans.

3) Is it a Christian thing to promote the irresponsible wasting of oil resources by keeping the taxes on petrol low and by the ways in which George Bushs agenda has been hyjacked by oil companies. IN doing so Americas trade deficit with the rest of the world has been magnified as expensive oil has been imported from abroad

4) The neocon assumptions that governed much of the early part of the Iraq invasion were wrong e.g. that Iraq would welcome invasion and be grateful for its liberation. They failed to prepare the USA for the aftermath of invasion and neocons have not been that wise with the situation they found there. If Christian governance rather than neocon influence had been more prominent maybe the administration would not ave made so many mistakes here.

The Republicans may well be the more historically Christian of your parties but they are far from perfect and have forfeited a lot of Christian respect by some of their policies.

 

[LilGeorgiaPeach81]

I agree with many of your points and admire a lot about the religious right and the Republican party of the USA but I have a few questions about it also:

1) Is it Chrisian to show favouritism to rich people over poor people n the tax system or indeed to show no concern for the widow or orphan in their distress. One could argue a strong case that this has been a fruit of the current Republican administration.

2) Is it a Christian thing to be an irresponsible steward - as with the incompetence of the current administrations response to the Hurricane Katrina fiasco and its previous refusal of funds for better flood defences for New Orleans.

3) Is it a Christian thing to promote the irresponsible wasting of oil resources by keeping the taxes on petrol low and by the ways in which George Bushs agenda has been hyjacked by oil companies. IN doing so Americas trade deficit with the rest of the world has been magnified as expensive oil has been imported from abroad

4) The neocon assumptions that governed much of the early part of the Iraq invasion were wrong e.g. that Iraq would welcome invasion and be grateful for its liberation. They failed to prepare the USA for the aftermath of invasion and neocons have not been that wise with the situation they found there. If Christian governance rather than neocon influence had been more prominent maybe the administration would not ave made so many mistakes here.

The Republicans may well be the more historically Christian of your parties but they are far from perfect and have forfeited a lot of Christian respect by some of their policies.

The tax system massively punishes the rich for their higher income with much higher tax rates. And it is not the place of the government to solve everyone's problems, it is the place of the community to help its own through the church!

The problems following the hurricane also come from people depending on the government to do everything and fix everything for them. Charity has done and will always do a lot more to that end.

As for Iraq, we should have gone in with a lot more force than we did. We should have overwhelmed and whiped out the enemy in one stroke. But now that we are where we are in that, we have to finish the job.