Trump tells Christians their 'religion will be in tatters' if Biden wins: 'We answer to God in Heaven'

[Adam56]

While I'm sure it would never happen, to base legislature on religious laws and not secular, it would leave the door open for things like Sharia law.

You do realize Sweden is far closer to Sharia law than the USA and that’s an extremely secular country?

 

[Aaron112]

Didn't realize that, no. Is Sweden more secular than the usa ? ?

Or other countries ?

You do realize Sweden is far closer to Sharia law than the USA and that’s an extremely secular country?

 

[Aaron112]

No, our values are to stand up for the unborn.

I think it was said "we" (who choose what is right by God)
CAN live by our (God's) values;

the country (usa and others) obviously do not.

We (followers of Jesus) are indeed persecuted daily, put to death even, as Jesus says, as He was.

 

[rturner76]

Can we agree that these things need to be looked at, and perhaps some reform?

When there's school districts that spend in the neighborhood of $20k per student, per year; and the dropout rate is through the roof, and many of the graduates can barely read, maybe lack of money isn't the problem

I see absolutely no problem with examining staff effectiveness, examining and auditing expenses. I also think that there should be some form of national standards review. That doesn't mean standardized testing but some form of checks and balances to ensure that independent school districts are providing an education on par with the other school districts.

I spent years working in an urban school district and I realized that different schools have different needs. I was in the schools when the "No Child Left Behind" program was introduced. I remember public school teachers and teacher's assistants being glad that there were going to be some national standards but also finding it difficult to prepare students for standardized testing. While standardized testing looks good on paper (if your students are prepared for it) there is the factor of students learning and testing in different ways. Some students may fail the multi-choice test but be proficient at an oral test. It's because some learn visually, and some learn by listening. I for example did better when I could both listen and read at the same time.

So, to make a long story longer, I think we need some kind of national standards but teachers also need to be free to teach and test their students the way that the individual learns best. I worked in urban Minnesota and in a rural community in North Carolina. Now this was around the turn of the millennium so it may be different now but basically the black kids went to public school and the white kids went to private school. The public school had no resources, technology, or classes for special needs students. The private school gave out scholarships to "certain kids" and they were much better funded but they could choose who to take in and who to reject leaving the black families (and the poor white ones) out in the cold. Many white families ended up not wanting to send their kids to an all black school so they were"home-schooled" which basically meant they didn't go to school.

With this idea of cutting funding for public schools and financing vouchers for private, that unbalanced school system will spread all through the South. The bottom line is that I would like to see every child regardless of state, rural, or urban community have an equal chance of an equal education. Sorry for droning on and on but it's something I feel very passionate about having worked in suburban, inner-city, and rural schools in the North, the South and the Southwest. The school quality varies so much, I would like to see a Federal stansard.

 

[rturner76]

No, our values are to stand up for the unborn.

And you (we) are in the minority. The problem with democracy is the minority can't rule the majority.

 

[rturner76]

You do realize Sweden is far closer to Sharia law than the USA and that’s an extremely secular country?

Um not sure about that but I'm pretty sure it's illegal to execute a woman for having an affair or sex out of wedlock

 

[Adam56]

Didn't realize that, no. Is Sweden more secular than the usa ? ?

Or other countries ?

Sweden is one of the most secular countries on Earth.

 

[Adam56]

Um not sure about that but I'm pretty sure it's illegal to execute a woman for having an affair or sex out of wedlock

Sweden is closer to Sharia law. Infested with Muslims.

And you (we) are in the minority. The problem with democracy is the minority can't rule the majority.

Well Roe vs. Wade was overturned. There are states banning abortion despite many not wanting it banned.

 

[Aaron112]

Sweden is one of the most secular countries on Earth.

By what standard ? And , if perhaps someone visits, and finds Sweden more acceptable to live in than other countries, as if it is ruled better, is that good ?

 

[Aaron112]

Well Roe vs. Wade was overturned. There are states banning abortion despite many not wanting it banned.

Was that God's Doing ? Has the abomination of pham-greed/protected by law/ been addressed by government , or even by churches !?

 

[Adam56]

Was that God's Doing ? Has the abomination of pham-greed/protected by law/ been addressed by government , or even by churches !?

Pham-greed?

 

[okay]

Infested with Muslims.

This is dehumanizing language. Muslims are human beings made in the image of God, not insects or rodents.

 

[Aaron112]

"Greedy drug lords

Note: The search results do not provide a comprehensive list of all greedy drug lords, but rather highlight some of the most notorious examples."

 

[Aaron112]

language

1. Philippians 3:2
   Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision.
   In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations
2. Revelation 22:15
   For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.

 

[Adam56]

This is dehumanizing language. Muslims are human beings made in the image of God, not insects or rodents.

I didn’t say Muslims were insects or rodents. Stop your whining. I will describe the situation in an accurate manner. Just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean you can just shout “dehumanizing” and negate the fact that Muslims are flooding Europe in insanely big numbers.

 

[RileyG]

The topic easily gets lost in the semantics of vanity, pitting the life of the mother against the life of her child. Note that there are two different meanings for the term "life" at play, biological life, and one's life-time.

It's therefore going to be a major decision in the woman's personal life who finds herself with an unwanted pregnancy, because she is the one who will either be moved to share life, or not share life; Just as it is a major personal decision in one's life whether to get a divorce when people joined as one find themselves in an unwanted marriage.

So, the issue is whether the government should be involved in the personal life changing reasons why a woman wants to or doesn't want to have a baby.

It’s not just about the woman though, it affects a whole host of people. No one has the right to end the life of another because they are inconvenient or unwanted.

 

[rturner76]

Protestants are against abortion as well.

But there are non religious people against abortion, it’s not as if pro choice is the *clear cut* secular choice.

Right, and if enough Christians and non-Christians get together and vote in anti-abortion politicians, they will be more likely to get abortion made illegal. Why? Because in a democratic constitutional republic the majority rules. I would rather risk a negative law about abortion than risk majority rule. Religion itself cannot control a democratic constitutional republic. It's up to the majority no matter what their religious beliefs are, or non-religious beliefs for that matter

 

[rturner76]

Sweden is closer to Sharia law. Infested with Muslims.

You have not posted any proves data that Sweden bases their laws on one particular religious belief. It would be edifying for me to read that Sweden's laws are based on religion like Sharia, please share.

Well Roe vs. Wade was overturned. There are states banning abortion despite many not wanting it banned.

Well, we have a democratically elected constitutional republic. Even though the Senate refused to confirm any of President Obama's judicial picks in the last full year of his presidency, Trump's picks were confirmed in the first 90 days of his presidency. That fact does illustrate how certain political groups can hijack the government. If Obama had been allowed to do his job, we would have had more adherants to the constitution in the Supreme Court. Since he wasn't allowed to appoint judges who followed the constitution, Trup was freed to appoint activist judges who put their religion over the letter of the rights laid out in the constitution.

Nothing can be done about that now but we can learn the lesson the Conservatives are more concerned with wielding power than protecting American citizens constitutional rights. The Supreme Court is running wild right now placing religion in front of rights but history will bear that out.

 

[Adam56]

. I would rather risk a negative law about abortion than risk majority rule.

What does this mean?

You have not posted any proves data that Sweden bases their laws on one particular religious belief. It would be edifying for me to read that Sweden's laws are based on religion like Sharia, please share.

Sweden is closer to Sharia law because of Demographics.

Sharia law comes from large amounts of Muslims.

Well, we have a democratically elected constitutional republic. Even though the Senate refused to confirm any of President Obama's judicial picks in the last full year of his presidency, Trump's picks were confirmed in the first 90 days of his presidency. That fact does illustrate how certain political groups can hijack the government. If Obama had been allowed to do his job, we would have had more adherants to the constitution in the Supreme Court. Since he wasn't allowed to appoint judges who followed the constitution, Trup was freed to appoint activist judges who put their religion over the letter of the rights laid out in the constitution.

No they didn’t. Stop lying.

Nothing can be done about that now but we can learn the lesson the Conservatives are more concerned with wielding power than protecting American citizens constitutional rights. The Supreme Court is running wild right now placing religion in front of rights but history will bear that out.

 

[rturner76]

What does this mean?

It means that I would rather a law be passed based on a majority rule than set up the minority to be allowed to change laws based on a minority opinion that the democratic majority opinion. If you still don't understand, that means that the majority rules, not the self-righteous minority. even if we agree on the minority's opinion on abortion or other laws, in fact it is the majority that rules a democracy. Do you disagree with the basic rules of democracy?

Sweden is closer to Sharia law because of Demographics.

Sharia law comes from large amounts of Muslims.

So you don't have any evidence that the majority of Swedes wish for Sharia law. If you could prove that were true, why would you choose not to? Could it be because you believe Conservative Right-Wing propaganda rather than the objective truth? By not posting any Swedish Sharia laws, are you admitting that the concept is right-wing propaganda or will you produce proof that the Swedish live by Sharia law? You can't so you won't. BUT you will post unfounded propaganda. Is this not true? If you can't produce evidence of Sweden following Sharia Law in their national government I think you would produce that proof. Are you ready to admit that you can't? I'm waiting with bated breath for your evidence.

No they didn’t. Stop lying.

With the death of Antonin Scalia in February 2016 in the beginning of a presidential election year, the Republican majority in the Senate made it their stated policy to refuse to consider any nominee to the Supreme Court, arguing that the next president should be the one to appoint Scalia's replacement.[7] Obama nominated Merrick Garland for the open Supreme Court seat, but the Senate did not consider the nomination.

Barack Obama judicial appointment controversies - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Question....Are you capable of accepting information that is contrary to your political bias? Most people aren't. They believe that they are spoon-fed by their masters and turn a blind eye to anything that may disrupt their political bias. This link shows explicitly that the Republican Part who was the majority in the Senate came up with a policy to not approve anything that Obama did. Your party bends the rules of government and with Trump stated "there will be no need for elections." Conservative Republicans are now supporting dictatorship which is the complete opposite of what the founding fathers stood for. Totalitarian Faschism is not the best way forward. I choose Democracy