How can supporting Roy Moore be consistent with Christianity?

[SoldierOfTheKing]

You mean like being Muslim?

Not at all.

 

[JGG]

Not at all.

What would you propose is included and not included in one's 'personal life'?

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

Adherence to totalitarian political ideology whose aim is the subjugation of destruction of all things outside itself is just about the worst example of personal matter that I can think of.

 

[JGG]

Adherence to totalitarian political ideology whose aim is the subjugation of destruction of all things outside itself is just about the worst example of personal matter that I can think of.

I wasn't thinking that being a Republican was a personal matter...

Was that in response to my question?

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

You were thinking that being a Muslim was.

In any case, question concerned how a man's sex life pertains to his fitness for public office.

 

[JGG]

You were thinking that being a Muslim was

And it's not? But being a Republican is?

 

[Albion]

You're trying to take away the most favorite tactics of deflection among conservatives who support the current president though. Whenever the current president's behavior or his leadership is being criticized, these are some of the deflections that seem to be the most popular ones used.

Just like the Democrats who deflect when mention is made of their tacit approval of Bill and Hillary Clinton's behavior, and that of a number of other corrupt Dem pols. Some are now even urging Sen. Franken not to resign after he admitted to his offenses and said he was going to leave Congress.

No, "umbrabates" was correct that neither political party has clean hands when it comes to this stuff.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

And it's not? But being a Republican is?

I've just explained to you why being a Muslim is anything but personal. Being a Republican, on the other hand, means nothing in particular. It's name, nothing more.

 

[JGG]

I've just explained to you why being a Muslim is anything but personal. Being a Republican, on the other hand, means nothing in particular. It's name, nothing more.

So Adherence to totalitarian political ideology whose aim is the subjugation of destruction of all things outside itself is just a personal matter?

 

[Albion]

Another "So...." post in which the poster deliberately puts words or ideas into the other person's comments.

We can do better than this, folks!

 

[JGG]

Another "So...." post in which the poster deliberately puts words or ideas into the other person's comments.

We can do better than this, folks!

Well I can't very well use telepathy! I would need to know his exact current location to do that!

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

The meaning of my post was clear. If you aren't understanding it, that is because you don't want to understand it.

That as you please...

 

[JGG]

The meaning of my post was clear. If you aren't understanding it, that is because you don't want to understand it.

That as you please...

Mine is quite clear as well. Why is Adherence to totalitarian political ideology whose aim is the subjugation of destructionof all things outside itself just a personal matter if you're a Republican but not if you're a Muslim?

 

[Albion]

You're making a speech, not commenting on the other post or clarifying your earlier remarks.

 

[JGG]

You're making a speech, not commenting on the other post or clarifying your earlier remarks.

The question mark on the end of my query begs to differ.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Jesus will get rid of pro choice when He returns.

Jesus will get rid of all choice when He returns.

 

[Albion]

In regards to the OP's question - an issue that hasn't been brought up yet is the relevance of a candidates personal life to his fitness for public office.

In the midst of all the claims and counter-claims revolving around Roy Moore, this point of yours is worth some thought. When Bill Clinton perjured himself and impeachment charges were brought against him, the Democrats argued that he should not be distracted from continuing to do the business of the presidency. In other words, HIS past was not supposed to matter. But in Roy Moore's case (and in Donald Trump's), his past WAS supposed to matter, even though the charges were never proven. And, in addition, I wouldn't think that every misdeed in anyone's past should count equally.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Well, the support for Roy Moore is consistent with modern far-right evangelicalism (at least based on the stances they've had since the 80's).

They seem to want to break "sin" out into a two-tier system.
A) The ones involving abortion or alternative sexual preferences (IE: abortion and LGBT stuff)
B) Everything else

The ones in A), they typically want to forbid using the force of federal law, where they take a blase stance on the ones in B) and just prefer to let people make their own decisions on it.

In order to win their vote, a person just merely needs to have the "right" stance on A)...the rest doesn't really matter.

What it basically boils down to is a case where they want strict regulations against the "sins" that they, personally, have an easy time abstaining from, while they have a much more laid-back stance when it comes to the ones they may occasionally want to engage in.

That's why they'll push for laws banning gay marriage, yet, I've never heard a Christian say they want laws banning cigarettes or fast food, (even though the latter two are collectively responsible for half a million preventable deaths every year).

I've heard of Christian bakers wanting to refuse service to people who have a "sinful" lifestyle in one regard, yet, I'm not aware of any who want to refuse service to obese people on the grounds of gluttony being a sin (even though I'd guarantee that every bakery in America encounters more fat people than gay people)

 

[bhsmte]

Two things:

The support Moore got had to do with the fact we are talking about Alabama.

Next, in today's silo mentality in politics, it is also about holding your nose and just voting against the other party.

 

[FireDragon76]

Well, the support for Roy Moore is consistent with modern far-right evangelicalism (at least based on the stances they've had since the 80's).

They seem to want to break "sin" out into a two-tier system.
A) The ones involving abortion or alternative sexual preferences (IE: abortion and LGBT stuff)
B) Everything else

American conservative evangelicals focus a lot on sexual purity and the proper control of bodies, and the symbols of abortion and gay marriage are potent ones for them, since they both involve attacks on patriarchy that is taken as sacrosanct among conservative, fundamentalist Protestants.

In contrast, a powerful man sexually objectifying a young woman's body is much more easily excused, even with pseudo-religious justifications if need be.