Christian Democrats?

[classical5]

I read it. Are you sure you did? You are still putting your own biased spin on it and pretty much making stuff up that is not in there. And really, what is unchristian about gun control laws?

So the Democrats for example do not support unregulated abortion? Democrats do not support partial birth abortion? Democrats do not want to force people (through taxation) who vehemently oppose abortion on religious grounds to fund abortions? Democrats do not want to force employers who oppose abortion on religious grounds to provide abortion services (through health insurance) to employees?

Your denial fools no one.

<>

The history of gun control is that it is a major step in enslaving and terrorizing a population. Every tyrant through all of human history disarms the people they want to enslave.

In 1 Samuel 13:19-21 - Now no blacksmith could be found in all the land of Israel, for the Philistines said, “Otherwise the Hebrews will make swords or spears.” So all Israel went down to the Philistines, each to sharpen his plowshare, his mattock, his axe, and his hoe.

That was roughly 1,000 BC.

The Democrats are no exception. Everything they have done in gun control was to disarm the population. They enacted gun safety permits and gun purchase permits claiming it was for public safety, but they made the process so expensive and burdensome most people could not complete the process. Read "Emily Gets her Gun" for a detailed story of the steps she had to take to get a gun in DC.

After Sandy Hook, there could have been universal background checks but Schumer killed it. Yes, Democrat Schumer killed it. Schumer-Toomey required background checks be performed at an FFL so there would be a detailed paper trail, Republicans stated that was unacceptable because it was too close to being a national gun registry. R's countered saying let each person do the background check over the internet (just like FFLs do it), and the seller keeps the paperwork and is responsible for it. Schumer said no way, he demanded the government accessible registry.

You could have gotten your universal check. But thats not the objective, a registry of gun owners was the objective. Registry always preceeds gun confiscation.

<>

And there is this great big glaring fact -
From the FBI UCR Table 20 (Weapons) -
rifles account for 3.5% of all weapon related homicide
Shotgun 1.9%
hands/feet 5.8%
knives 14.4%
handguns 62.1%

If Democrats are so interested in public safety, why are they so fanatical about banning long guns (so-called "assault weapons") but ignore handguns?

Because its not about public safety. Its about enslaving people.

 

[comana]

So the Democrats for example do not support unregulated abortion? Democrats do not support partial birth abortion? Democrats do not want to force people (through taxation) who vehemently oppose abortion on religious grounds to fund abortions? Democrats do not want to force employers who oppose abortion on religious grounds to provide abortion services (through health insurance) to employees?

Your denial fools no one.

<>

The history of gun control is that it is a major step in enslaving and terrorizing a population. Every tyrant through all of human history disarms the people they want to enslave.

In 1 Samuel 13:19-21 - Now no blacksmith could be found in all the land of Israel, for the Philistines said, “Otherwise the Hebrews will make swords or spears.” So all Israel went down to the Philistines, each to sharpen his plowshare, his mattock, his axe, and his hoe.

That was roughly 1,000 BC.

The Democrats are no exception. Everything they have done in gun control was to disarm the population. They enacted gun safety permits and gun purchase permits claiming it was for public safety, but they made the process so expensive and burdensome most people could not complete the process. Read "Emily Gets her Gun" for a detailed story of the steps she had to take to get a gun in DC.

After Sandy Hook, there could have been universal background checks but Schumer killed it. Yes, Democrat Schumer killed it. Schumer-Toomey required background checks be performed at an FFL so there would be a detailed paper trail, Republicans stated that was unacceptable because it was too close to being a national gun registry. R's countered saying let each person do the background check over the internet (just like FFLs do it), and the seller keeps the paperwork and is responsible for it. Schumer said no way, he demanded the government accessible registry.

You could have gotten your universal check. But thats not the objective, a registry of gun owners was the objective. Registry always preceeds gun confiscation.

<>

And there is this great big glaring fact -
From the FBI UCR Table 20 (Weapons) -
rifles account for 3.5% of all weapon related homicide
Shotgun 1.9%
hands/feet 5.8%
knives 14.4%
handguns 62.1%

If Democrats are so interested in public safety, why are they so fanatical about banning long guns (so-called "assault weapons") but ignore handguns?

Because its not about public safety. Its about enslaving people.

I do agree with the platform. I agree that abortion should be between a woman and her doctor and no one else. Late term abortions are rare and done for tragic reasons. They are not taken lightly by the mother or f doctor.

I get why Christian’s cannot abide by that but the Republican Party is also not going to make it illegal. It’s their golden goose of conservative votes. They will continue to string you along with a restriction here or there that they know will not hold up in court. They can say they tried but the evil judges threw it out as unconstitutional. It’s not going away no matter who you vote for. If you truly want to reduce abortions then focus on how to help pregnant women to feel secure that they can raise a child. Focus on easy access to low/no cost contraception. Fix the deficiencies in our society that lead women to choose abortion. Unfortunately Republicans aren’t really interested in fixing the problems that make raising a child financially difficult and undesirable.

If I had my way it would be near impossible to qualify for a gun purchase. The Democratic platform, however, does not seek to go anywhere near as extreme as I’d like. Your fears of guns becoming illegal and the populace being disarmed are unfounded. Guns are the scourge of this country but they are here to stay.

Your disagreement with the Democratic platform is not the issue I ever had with your posts but rather you hyperbolic assignment of absurd motivations to what the Democratic Party wants to bring to this country. It’s impossible to take you seriously.

 

[tulc]

(snip)
You cannot be a Christian and be in the Democrat party, they are mutually exclusive.

Sorry you think that. Because again: Christian and a Democrat.
tulc(just thought that should be pointed out)

 

[tulc]

You may have accepted Jesus as your savior,(snip)

I have, which means your belief that someone can't be a Christian and a Democrat is already shown to be wrong. So...thanks for proving my point for me.

(snip) When you stand before Jesus at the Bema Seat you will answer for your actions. (snip)

You know someone's lost the argument when they bring "the judgement seat" in to it.
tulc(is going to get more coffee)

 

[Arcangl86]

So the Democrats for example do not support unregulated abortion? Democrats do not support partial birth abortion? Democrats do not want to force people (through taxation) who vehemently oppose abortion on religious grounds to fund abortions? Democrats do not want to force employers who oppose abortion on religious grounds to provide abortion services (through health insurance) to employees?

Pretty much the only part of this screed that can be supported by the Democratic Party platform is the repeal of the Hyde Amendment, which I don't see as a big deal. If abortion is recognized as a legal medical procedure, why should poor people be prevented from having them? Because that's all the Hyde Amendment does, keep abortions out of the reach of the poor, who often want an abortion for that very reason, knowing they cannot support a child. And as "forcing" people to fund abortions, there are plenty of things that my tax dollars are spent on I disagree with. DOesn't mean i expect a veto on those issues.

If Democrats are so interested in public safety, why are they so fanatical about banning long guns (so-called "assault weapons") but ignore handguns?

Because long guns are more often used for mass shootings, which attract a lot of news coverage and as such are more politically important.

Because its not about public safety. Its about enslaving people.

How exactly is taking away certain kinds of long gun "enslaving people", especially since as you pointed out there are a large prevalence of handguns in this country.

 

[classical5]

I do agree with the platform. I agree that abortion should be between a woman and her doctor and no one else. Late term abortions are rare and done for tragic reasons. They are not taken lightly by the mother or f doctor.

I get why Christian’s cannot abide by that but the Republican Party is also not going to make it illegal. It’s their golden goose of conservative votes. They will continue to string you along with a restriction here or there that they know will not hold up in court. They can say they tried but the evil judges threw it out as unconstitutional. It’s not going away no matter who you vote for. If you truly want to reduce abortions then focus on how to help pregnant women to feel secure that they can raise a child. Focus on easy access to low/no cost contraception. Fix the deficiencies in our society that lead women to choose abortion. Unfortunately Republicans aren’t really interested in fixing the problems that make raising a child financially difficult and undesirable.

If I had my way it would be near impossible to qualify for a gun purchase. The Democratic platform, however, does not seek to go anywhere near as extreme as I’d like. Your fears of guns becoming illegal and the populace being disarmed are unfounded. Guns are the scourge of this country but they are here to stay.

Your disagreement with the Democratic platform is not the issue I ever had with your posts but rather you hyperbolic assignment of absurd motivations to what the Democratic Party wants to bring to this country. It’s impossible to take you seriously.

Thank you for proving my point.

 

[classical5]

Pretty much the only part of this screed that can be supported by the Democratic Party platform is the repeal of the Hyde Amendment, which I don't see as a big deal. If abortion is recognized as a legal medical procedure, why should poor people be prevented from having them? Because that's all the Hyde Amendment does, keep abortions out of the reach of the poor, who often want an abortion for that very reason, knowing they cannot support a child. And as "forcing" people to fund abortions, there are plenty of things that my tax dollars are spent on I disagree with. DOesn't mean i expect a veto on those issues.

This is not a Republican vs Democrat subject, it is whether Christianity and the Democrat party are compatible. Democrat party positions and Christianity are mutually exclusive.

Because long guns are more often used for mass shootings, which attract a lot of news coverage and as such are more politically important.

But have little to do with public safety. As you just wrote, gun control is all about politics. Democrats use the rare - and they are not that common - mass shooting to scare people and fire up their base so Democrats can get elected and enact their larger agenda.

How exactly is taking away certain kinds of long gun "enslaving people", especially since as you pointed out there are a large prevalence of handguns in this country.

As I pointed out in my previous post, Democrats want to disarm the nation.

In the 1970's they did focus on handguns because that was the legitimate public safety arguement. And Democrats got trashed over it, a huge majority refused to give up their handgun.

So the gun banners changed their tune and stopped pushing for a handgun ban and went the "public safety" route claiming people should have to pass a safety class and have some proficiency with the firearm, and the govt should do something to prevent "criminals" from getting a gun. That was the start of the firearm purchase permit and safety permit.

They made safety permits so difficult to get that it was a de facto gun ban.

They also started prosecuting people for justified self-defense. You had to retreat if there was any way you could retreat, you could only use a firearm in selfdefense if you were completely trapped.

All that led to the backlash in the late 1980's with the stand your ground laws, castle doctrine, shall issue instead of may issue on carry permits, etc.

Having lost that arena, the Democrats then moved to the AR-15 because it looked so menacing and they could manufacture a story that it was a "military weapon". Thats where we are now.

Its just a stepping stone to Democrats. Immediately after Sandy Hook, when Democrats thought their gun control was a sure thing, some of them starting calling for a ban on hunting rifles. They labeled hunting rifles "sniper rifles" and claimed nobody needed a "sniper rifle".

And read the "assault weapons" that are to be banned under the current Democrat legislation. Almost every semiautomatic rifle and shotgun, and any rifle or shotgun that can use a detachable magazine, are to ba banned. Plus handguns that use a detachable magazine that could hold more than 10.

Why disarm the people? To enslave them. Every tyrant disarms the population. Read the justification for gun control laws in Germany in the 1920's and 1930's - they say the exact same things the Democrats and gun banners in teh USA say.

 

[tulc]

(snip)Thats what you are claiming.

No, what I'm telling you is I'm both a Christian (47 years) and a Democrat (32 years).
tulc(is also a coffee drinker)

 

[comana]

Thank you for proving my point.

Alright, you win. Christians can’t vote with The Democratic Party or else they lose their “Christian Card” and the Republican Party is a shining beacon of all that glorifies God. Got it.

 

[classical5]

not flippant, that's an accurate observation of my experience in these sorts of discussions. Wait...you don't think you're the first poster on CF who's claimed people "can't be a Christian if they don't believe/think like I do!" do you? Because I can assure you, you aren't. And generally the discussion goes: A) "I believe this." followed by B) "anyone who doesn't agree/believe/vote like I do can't be a Christian!" and when people point out several times that B) simply isn't true and will never be true no matter how many times the claim is made we usually get C) in response: "Well you'll just have to learn the hard way when you stand before the "JUDGEMENT SEAT!!". At which point it's pretty clear they've lost the argument and are now looking to try and silence people by calling down Gods judgement on anyone who disagrees with them. wash, rinse repeat as needed.
tulc(is just sayn')

It’s not “my belief”, it’s what is clearly stated in the Bible. If you read your Bible you would be familiar with it.

You admit other Christians have mentioned their concerns to you and you ignore them also.

Possibly you should study Gods word instead of ignoring it.

 

[classical5]

Alright, you win. Christians can’t vote with The Democratic Party or else they lose their “Christian Card” and the Republican Party is a shining beacon of all that glorifies God. Got it.

You don’t read very well.

Never did I post the Republican Party was good, in fact I have posted in this very thread that the R party is pretty bad.

The R and D parties are both corrupt, their legislation is often unconstitutional. The difference - the D party is openly hostile to Christianity, actively promotes antiChristian values, and uses the govt to force onto Christians rules that are contrary to fundamental Christian beliefs.

 

[comana]

You don’t read very well.

Never did I post the Republican Party was good, in fact I have posted in this very thread that the R party is pretty bad.

The R and D parties are both corrupt, their legislation is often unconstitutional. The difference - the D party is openly hostile to Christianity, actively promotes antiChristian values, and uses the govt to force onto Christians rules that are contrary to fundamental Christian beliefs.

Christians are not forced to go against their beliefs.

man’s if you haven’t noticed, our Congress pretty much because neither side can agree to compromise on anything. I really wouldn’t worry about either party platform because we pay these knuckleheads to sit around and accomplish nothing year after year.

 

[tulc]

It’s not “my belief”, it’s what is clearly stated in the Bible. If you read your Bible you would be familiar with it.

Very familiar with it.

You admit other Christians have mentioned their concerns to you and you ignore them also.

Not ignored, studied to see if they were right and found they weren't. Nothing you've said in your posts is anything I haven't examined, prayed about and came to a different conclusion than you did. You want to believe anyone who thinks differently from YOU (even when you try and dress it up as "you're not arguing with me you're arguing with THE LORD!!!" (tm)) feel free to do so, but people will continue to point out it simply isn't true.

Possibly you should study Gods word instead of ignoring it.

that's actually a very good suggestion for all of us!
tulc(is going to need more coffee soon)

 

[classical5]

Christians are not forced to go against their beliefs.

man’s if you haven’t noticed, our Congress pretty much because neither side can agree to compromise on anything. I really wouldn’t worry about either party platform because we pay these knuckleheads to sit around and accomplish nothing year after year.

Really? So nothing ever changes because of the federal government? Open borders? Creation of a massive “bubble of everything” because of QE and ZIRP and printing money? The crash of 2008 was not caused by fed financial rule changes allowing banks to excessively leverage? The 20 year war that Bush started and Biden just lost didn’t affect half the world?

 

[SarahsKnight]

You know someone's lost the argument when they bring "the judgement seat" in to it.

It's a mere threat, sir, because they have nothing more substantial in an argument, so they'll just arbitrarily claim God has their back in some way or another and of course you can't go against Him! Therefore argument over. You see this resort tactic in debates between Christians on differing doctrines all the time: "Well, just you wait until God gets a hold of you ....! Then you'll see I was right!"

 

[Say it aint so]

This is not a Republican vs Democrat subject, it is whether Christianity and the Democrat party are compatible. Democrat party positions and Christianity are mutually exclusive.





But have little to do with public safety. As you just wrote, gun control is all about politics. Democrats use the rare - and they are not that common - mass shooting to scare people and fire up their base so Democrats can get elected and enact their larger agenda.



As I pointed out in my previous post, Democrats want to disarm the nation.

In the 1970's they did focus on handguns because that was the legitimate public safety arguement. And Democrats got trashed over it, a huge majority refused to give up their handgun.

So the gun banners changed their tune and stopped pushing for a handgun ban and went the "public safety" route claiming people should have to pass a safety class and have some proficiency with the firearm, and the govt should do something to prevent "criminals" from getting a gun. That was the start of the firearm purchase permit and safety permit.

They made safety permits so difficult to get that it was a de facto gun ban.

They also started prosecuting people for justified self-defense. You had to retreat if there was any way you could retreat, you could only use a firearm in selfdefense if you were completely trapped.

All that led to the backlash in the late 1980's with the stand your ground laws, castle doctrine, shall issue instead of may issue on carry permits, etc.

Having lost that arena, the Democrats then moved to the AR-15 because it looked so menacing and they could manufacture a story that it was a "military weapon". Thats where we are now.

Its just a stepping stone to Democrats. Immediately after Sandy Hook, when Democrats thought their gun control was a sure thing, some of them starting calling for a ban on hunting rifles. They labeled hunting rifles "sniper rifles" and claimed nobody needed a "sniper rifle".

And read the "assault weapons" that are to be banned under the current Democrat legislation. Almost every semiautomatic rifle and shotgun, and any rifle or shotgun that can use a detachable magazine, are to ba banned. Plus handguns that use a detachable magazine that could hold more than 10.

Why disarm the people? To enslave them. Every tyrant disarms the population. Read the justification for gun control laws in Germany in the 1920's and 1930's - they say the exact same things the Democrats and gun banners in teh USA say.

"As I pointed out in my previous post, Democrats want to disarm the nation."

There is nothing in the Democratic platform about disarming the nation. Obama never held that view, Biden doesn't hold that view. Assault weapons were under a ban in America, it was done under a Republican president. Obama had the chance to continue the ban upon expiration, he choose not to.

 

[Say it aint so]

You don’t read very well.

Never did I post the Republican Party was good, in fact I have posted in this very thread that the R party is pretty bad.

The R and D parties are both corrupt, their legislation is often unconstitutional. The difference - the D party is openly hostile to Christianity, actively promotes antiChristian values, and uses the govt to force onto Christians rules that are contrary to fundamental Christian beliefs.

The Democratic party is NOT hostile to Christianity. What it is hostile to is intolerance. If one's religion is seeped in intolerance, specially when claiming to be a follower of someone who railed against intolerance, then said religion needs to be reevaluated.

 

[FreeinChrist]

ADVISOR HAT

This thread is closed! The site rules include:
​

• 
  
  • Stating or implying that another Christian member, or group of members, are not Christian is not allowed.

YES, THIS INCLUDES POLITICAL GROUPS LIKE REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS!

​

 

[HARK!]

MOD HAT ON

There has been some cleanup in this thread. There might be more to come.

MOD HAT OFF​