|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Aug 20, 2008 9:06:31 GMT -5
saunterelle, thank you for posting the Saddleback Forum videos since I wasn't able to watch any of it last weekend.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Aug 20, 2008 22:17:32 GMT -5
Remember that next time you are tempted to use some of your favorite terms, Mink. Words like "Bushies" and "pubies" and 'neo-cons." Oh, I forgot again - the left can do or say anything because they are the repository of the Revealed Truth. So their words and acts are true and righteous altogether. Nice turn around. First you say that it is unacceptable for it to be held at a church. Now you are saying that there is nothing wrong with it. then you turn around and contradict yourself again and say "Regarding politics and church (Big Dog), yes, polling places are held in churches, true. That should be the limit. " So, which is it? No contact at all as you posted earlier? OK for polling places but nothing else? OK as a stage for debates? Hmmm.....here is one for you - should the Dahli Lama be allowed to give a lecture at a state university? That seems to be a serious breech of the 'wall of separation' so prized by the left. So far I have seen no proof of those claims. Other than the left whining that because McCain is a 'pubie' to use one of your favorite terms, Mink, that he obviously can't think, so he must have cheated. Once again the left is confusing what they want and how they feel with reality. May I correct you here? The term I use for Republicans is "pubbies", not "pubies".......just for the record  quote: "should the Dahli Lama be allowed to give a lecture at a state university? That seems to be a serious breech of the 'wall of separation' so prized by the left" The Dalai Lama is not running for office when/if speaking at a state university. People attending would be his followers or those curious for how the compassionate Holiness would handle their dilemnas. His influence would not be to push his philosphy or religion, but to offer peace. Voting polls held at churches are just that. People vote. They are not influenced in any way because it is a polling place, not influenced by a particular religion. The Evangelical Church is Republican oriented and although I disagree with a political forum held there, Obama did quite well and actually was received quite well, given the odds. As for the any party claiming to be righteous, that would be the Evangelical Republican. Not all Republicans are of that religion, but recently, Evangelicals have had heavy influence as to whom should lead the country. They really messed up this last time, didn't they?! |
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Aug 20, 2008 22:37:03 GMT -5
Mink wrote: "The Dalai Lama is not running for office when/if speaking at a state university. People attending would be his followers or those curious for how the compassionate Holiness would handle their dilemnas. His influence would not be to push his philosphy or religion, but to offer peace."
It wouldn't matter if he was running for office or not, Mink. You seem to be saying that as long as he stayed away from his philosophy, his religion, anything to do with his beliefs, it would be fine. OTOH, you also say "People attending would be his followers or those curious for how the compassionate Holiness would handle their dilemnas" which seems to say that he WILL be pushing his beliefs. So, in effect, you are saying that it is OK for a non-Christian, whom you happen to agree with, may violate that wall of separation.
As for the evangelicals 'screwing up last time' yes and no. The past 30 years have seen a steady assault by the left to remove any hint of Christianity from public view. To the extent of teachers telling kids in school that fasting during lent is stupid, telling kids to not have a cross outside their clothing, that they can't make the sign of the Cross before they eat, etc. is it any wonder they push back hard when their free exercise is under constant attack? Seems like the left only wants free exercise for their shamanist, animist, or other non-western beliefs. (note here, and no offense to any fundamentalist or evangelical Christians who may read this, I find their view of Christianity to be somewhat suspect and not in keeping with Holy Scripture or Tradition. )
|
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Aug 20, 2008 23:26:32 GMT -5
Subdjoe: "It wouldn't matter if he was running for office or not, Mink. You seem to be saying that as long as he stayed away from his philosophy, his religion, anything to do with his beliefs, it would be fine. OTOH, you also say "People attending would be his followers or those curious for how the compassionate Holiness would handle their dilemnas" which seems to say that he WILL be pushing his beliefs. So, in effect, you are saying that it is OK for a non-Christian, whom you happen to agree with, may violate that wall of separation."
Anytime the Dalai Lama is speaking, I would think it would be a speech of peace. He doesn't tell people not to eat pork or that they should not fight in a war. He discusses peace. If he was to discuss his religion, i would think it would be in private, however, I would love to hear his views. I was born/raised a Catholic, but that doesn't stop me from hearing another's religion.
I happen to disagree with most of my own religions' POV as it is hypocritical. Another thread is calling, not that I would want to discuss hypocrisy.......if you catch my drift.
The Dalai Lama is peaceful, but that doesn't make me want to become a vegetarian.
As for the nonsense going on in our schools today whether we say Merry Christmas or not is just plain stupid. I don't know of any Catholic kid who is expected to fast during lent while attending school, nor have I ever seen a kid saying prayers before lunch and I went to public school with children that attendied cathechism with me on Saturday mornings, so your argument holds no water. If schools have changed during the years since I've attended and these things are made issues, then parents who object, should enroll their kids in the religious school that observes their beliefs. Personally, I think politics in schools need to foucs on academics and religion belongs in church.
Back to the Saddleback Forum, it is being suggested that Mccain was not in the proposed cone of silence, but rather in his car, where he could have access to the questions beforehand. Talk about a double crutch here. Needlessly to say, he needs all the help he can get and as the election gets closer, every tool will be used, as evident here.
|
|
|
|
Post by harpman1 on Aug 21, 2008 15:58:21 GMT -5
Nice try, but debunked by Rick Warren.
In fact, Sydney got 2 questions in advance, & Hussein got 3.
Facts have a nasty way of upsetting the narrative.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Aug 21, 2008 22:31:20 GMT -5
I see, how is Rick Warren debunking whatever it is you are referring to? What I said was suggested, not fact. Where did you get your fact/s from?
|
|
mrbose
Senior Member
Posts: 898
|
Post by mrbose on Aug 22, 2008 10:26:40 GMT -5
A President's Pension
A president's pension currently is $191,300 per year, until he is 80 years old.
Assuming the next president lives to age 80. Sen. McCain would receive ZERO pension as he would reach 80 at the end of two terms as president.
Sen. Obama would be retired for 26 years after two terms and would receive $4,973,800 in pension.
Therefore it would certainly make economic sense to elect McCain in November.
How's that for non partisan thinking???
Have a Great Day
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Aug 22, 2008 12:59:14 GMT -5
We will save a lot more than $4,973,800 when the war in Iraq is swiftly brought to an end.
|
|
|
|
Post by jgaffney on Aug 22, 2008 15:14:51 GMT -5
We will save a lot more than $4,973,800 when the war in Iraq is swiftly brought to an end. And, then what? What do you see for the future of Iraq if the war were brought to a swift conclusion? |
|
