(01/08) Who would you like to see as the next President of the United States?

**bhess25** · 01-18-2008, 08:58 AM

morals...a fortune 100 company cant be run on morals why would the country be run on them?

it needs to be run more like a business..and less like bush's quikie mart!!

**1968** · 01-18-2008, 11:26 AM

Originally Posted by KStraker

I agree 100% with the pandering sentiment. I guess that's politics. I live in SC just outside Greenville. As I stated earlier, people in this area will vote on moral grounds as defined within a Christian framework. Most do not have an education that is on par with the members of this board. They may only use that one criteria to choose who to vote for. I want to make sure that they have sufficient knowledge to make a more intelligent choice, even if it is based on a single criteria.

I never thought I would have to say this, but I think you are underestimating the intelligence of Christians. I don’t see how stating “Don’t vote for Romney because he is not a Christian” would give people sufficient knowledge to make an intelligent choice. I think it would be more informative to point out that Romney once considered himself to be pro-choice but now considers himself to be pro-life. That position could be good, bad, or ugly depending on a voter’s point of view.

Originally Posted by KStraker

On cults: None of the patriarchs were ever convicted of fraud. None of them said that their word superceded the teachings of Jesus Christ because they came more recently. None of them claimed that by doing good works you can become a god person on another planet. These aren't my opinions. Google "Book of Abraham" and see what comes up. Or, go ask your pastor about the fundamental doctrinal differences between Christians and Mormons. You may be surprised. I'm not some kind of screaming Bible thumping lunatic. As I said, this is a large factor in my area and many people seem confused.

By definition, “Christianity” is "religion or faith centered on the life and teachings of Jesus Christ". To state that one brand of Christianity is true Christianity and another brand is pseudo-Christianity seems a bit arbitrary to me. One needs to redefine “Christianity” to have it encompass what they want it to encompass (e.g. this person is a prophet who truly was touched by God, but his person is a fraud who only says he was touched by God) to make a distinction between what is “true” and what is “pseudo”.

**Grubendol** · 01-18-2008, 11:37 AM

By definition, “Christianity” is "religion or faith centered on the life and teachings of Jesus Christ". To state that one brand of Christianity is true Christianity and another brand is pseudo-Christianity seems a bit arbitrary to me. One needs to redefine “Christianity” to have it encompass what they want it to encompass (e.g. this person is a prophet who truly was touched by God, but his person is a fraud who only says he was touched by God) to make a distinction between what is “true” and what is “pseudo”.

Not to mention that it drips of what was the cause of the Thirty Years War and the current battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims. When you fight over what is the "true" form of any religion you're just asking for problems.

**chip anderson** · 01-18-2008, 01:34 PM

Grubendol:
You must be rather young. Haven't you learned that everyone thinks thier religion is the only one, and the only path to God?
Everyone else is a heathen with the wrong approach.
Methodists and Baptists will say of each other: "I guess they are Christians but...
When "sects" become more diverse than this they won't even conceed this.
Often a denomonation that has real wine at communion is condemed for mearly this and nothing more.

Chip

Dey all be wrong but me, I really understand God.

**KStraker** · 01-18-2008, 01:40 PM

First off, if you read closer you'll see that I was referring the education level of persons in my geographic area, not Christians.

That's a very Webster's definition of Christianity. It also encompasses a very basic set of doctrinal framework. At that level, the LDS church is very, very different.

I'm not the one who said Joseph Smith was a fraud. That was the conclusion of the court. The "Book of Abraham" has been evaluated by independent Egyptologists and scientists of many types and proven to be a completely inaccurate translation. Again, not my conclusions.

As I said, this is a large issue in my area. If you want to see local opinion you can check greenvilleonline.com and read the editorials. With the primary coming soon, the paper is full of this kind of thing.

I'm sure Mormons are great people. I don't want to come off as hating on members of another religion. Follow whatever you want. Vote for whoever you think will do the best job. I like Obama.

Obviously many of you disagree with me. That's OK. Let's return to the regularly planned discussion and stop talking about religion. I know, I'm the one that brought it up. :hammer:

**Grubendol** · 01-18-2008, 02:03 PM

Originally Posted by chip anderson

Grubendol:
You must be rather young. Haven't you learned that everyone thinks thier religion is the only one, and the only path to God?
Everyone else is a heathen with the wrong approach.
Methodists and Baptists will say of each other: "I guess they are Christians but...
When "sects" become more diverse than this they won't even conceed this.
Often a denomonation that has real wine at communion is condemed for mearly this and nothing more.

Chip

Dey all be wrong but me, I really understand God.

I’ll let you decide if I’m young, but I would say I know that there are flaws in the way EACH religion views other religions, and that’s a BIG reason why I don’t follow any faith and distrust the idea of religion.

I’m 34 btw, 35 in a month and a father in about the same amount of time. I have a Bachelor’s degree from a Jesuit college, I have studied a few “Christian” faiths, Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, and Native American faiths. I think I may have a larger view than you may appreciate. Stating what should be does not mean I don’t understand what is.

**Steve Machol** · 01-18-2008, 02:32 PM

Originally Posted by rbaker

No . . . It's just that I would rather have my grandchildren playing with Mitt's grandchildren than Mike's. It's got something to do with what I personally consider family values and social responsibility. It has nothing to do with religion or politics.

I was joking. Personally I agree with you. Of the two, Romney would be the preferred neighbor though I can't say I would really want either one living near me. :)

**KStraker** · 01-18-2008, 03:15 PM

I thought this was an interesting read:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...1.36c8162.html

**1968** · 01-18-2008, 05:30 PM

Originally Posted by Steve Machol

I was joking. Personally I agree with you. Of the two, Romney would be the preferred neighbor though I can't say I would really want either one living near me. :)

I wouldn't mind having any of the candidates live next door to me... although I might have a word with Mr. Huckabee if he played his bass guitar late into the night.

**Grubendol** · 01-18-2008, 05:57 PM

Sounds like a fun game….

Candidates I would most like to have living next door:

Edwards (he’d let me play in his yard)
Kucinich (he’d take care of his yard, and probably mine too, plus his wife is exotic and world traveled)
Richardson (one phrase: Viva La Raza)
McCain (he’s an ol’ coot, but watching him on Daily Show he at least has a sense of humor)

**1968** · 01-18-2008, 06:59 PM

Originally Posted by Grubendol

Sounds like a fun game….

Candidates I would most like to have living next door:

Edwards (he’d let me play in his yard)
Kucinich (he’d take care of his yard, and probably mine too, plus his wife is exotic and world traveled)
Richardson (one phrase: Viva La Raza)
McCain (he’s an ol’ coot, but watching him on Daily Show he at least has a sense of humor)

Hmmmm......

Paul (he’d would mind his own business)
Clinton (the Secret Service detail for the First Man would help keep the riff raff out of the neighborhood)
Thompson (well, not so much him but rather his wife)

**rinselberg** · 01-18-2008, 08:11 PM

Originally Posted by Grubendol

Sounds like a fun game….

Candidates I would most like to have living next door:

Edwards (he’d let me play in his yard)
Kucinich (he’d take care of his yard, and probably mine too, plus his wife is exotic and world traveled)
Richardson (one phrase: Viva La Raza)
McCain (he’s an ol’ coot, but watching him on Daily Show he at least has a sense of humor)

Kucinich? You want to live next door to a UFO magnet?

**bhess25** · 01-18-2008, 08:13 PM

Originally Posted by rinselberg

Kucinich? You want to live next door to a UFO magnet?

ohh man..the word "probing" just came to mind.

**Pete Hanlin** · 01-19-2008, 07:04 PM

Just had to make one more comment referring back to the issue some folks seem to have with Gov. Romney being an adherent to the Mormon faith (its not often that I get to make practical application of the comparative theology course I took in college :^)...

Namely, if one groups Catholics & Protestants within the Christian faith, it would be very difficult to rationalize a definition by which Mormonism is not also included in the Christian faith.

The primary difference between Protestants and Mormons is the question of special revelation. The "filters" for determining which books would be included in the New Testament used by Protestants were 1.) the book had to be written by someone who was in the company of Christ during His lifetime (even there, an exception is made for Paul on the basis that he saw Christ in a vision during his journey on the Damascus road- remember this in a few moments), and 2.) the book must refer back to the Old Testament. Therefore, Paul was the last person to receive "special revelation" (that is, direct revelation from God which was put into written form).

Mormons believe special revelation continued through Joseph Smith (through a vision), and- unless I'm mistaken- that it continues through prophets to this day. Therefore, you have the Book of Mormon- which is used in addition to the New Testament.

Even the Bibles used by Catholics and Protestants differ in that Catholics include the works of the Apocrapha in their Bible- whereas Protestants do not. I find that many people confuse Mormonism with the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses. It is far easier to discern a difference in belief between Christianity and the Jehovah's Witness movement, because there is a definite difference regarding the concept of who Christ was (the Jehovah's Witness do not believe Christ was God incarnate- and therefore do not believe in the Trinity-concept held by Christian faiths).

Not that any of this matters, because we do not live in a theocratic society (which was a concept explicitly laid down by the founders of our government)- therefore, a person's faith shouldn't really matter much when it comes to the political arena. Apparently, Jesus himself had no problem with a government of his day- which was (of course) not led by Christians. "Pay unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's" comes to mind.

**1968** · 01-19-2008, 11:57 PM

Update: Duncan Hunter is out.

**rbaker** · 01-20-2008, 01:03 AM

Peter - Thanks, you point out some facts which many seem to conveniently forget.

I get all confused when people discuss religions and as a result find that I must judge people (and I guess by inference, their religion) on their behavior; either individually (or as a group.)

In recent years with the acquisition of a "vacation" home in Southern Oregon I have found myself living in a community with a very large percentage of members of the LDS church. It is like a new world to me. I have never met a more honest, hardworking and especially family oriented group of people in my life. Jane and I have never been accepted more warmly than among our new friends. Now, I am sure that there are a few jerks, thief's and bunco artists among them but I haven't met them yet. Whatever they believe it is conducive to living a good Judeo/Christian life style and always "doing the right thing."

When the mob started operations in Las Vegas in the forties they hired Mormons to manage the money side of the business and they are still performing in that role due to their honesty and character. Whats good for the Mafia is good enough for the White House. At least the dry cleaning bills and the cigar supply wouldn't take a beating.

**chip anderson** · 01-20-2008, 09:46 AM

Howard Hughes said; "You can trust 'em (Mormans).
From what I have seen of thier (the Morman's) television spots they seem to only promote what is best about family and community life. Never say: That they are the only ones with a way to God or anything. Just instructions on how to be good neighbor, parent, etc.
I have read and heard that if one of them gets in trouble (house/barn or whatever burns down, they help each other and get the person in trouble back on his feet), which is a damn site more than we do for each other.
I can remember when Jackson had "the hundred year's flood" and I had just moved here. The only person who called and said: "What do you need? Was a Jewish friend from Houston." I didn't need anything but he ment free money that I didn't have to pay back. None of my prodestant friends called or even asked how we were.

Chip

Some people that ain't like you, just might even be bettern' you.

**Pete Hanlin** · 01-21-2008, 10:45 PM

I once managed a laboratory in a store that featured an atheist, a Jewish person who was Orthodox, an observant Roman Catholic, a Protestant and 3 Jehovah's Witnesses (who worked in the lab with me). It was humorous, because the Catholic and the JWs were all Hispanic, and they would get into theological arguments in Spanish- then come back and ask my "opinion" (sometimes forgetting that I do not speak the Spanish language :^).

Anyway, one of the LDS adherents was named Eliu, and he was among the nicest, hardest-working fellows I've ever had the pleasure to meet.

Everyone believes what s/he will (everyone works out their own salvation with fear and trembling- to paraphrase the NT), and I've found gems and jerks to be pretty equally divided among all faiths- and races for that matter. In fact, one of the most annoying people with whom I've worked made a very big show of bringing her Bible to work each day (some of her actions made me wonder at times if she ever actually opened it).

Regarding Romney, I guess I have to paraphrase the NT again "Can any good thing come out of Massachusetts?" Seriously, if the people who keep electing Kennedy to the Senate voted for this guy, there's got to be something amiss!
:o

**rbaker** · 01-21-2008, 11:37 PM

There is indeed something amiss in Massachusetts. The Kennedy's rank above the Pope as moral arbiters of the time. They can do no wrong.

Will someone please get me another Chevas?

**bhess25** · 01-21-2008, 11:43 PM

Originally Posted by Pete Hanlin

I once managed a laboratory in a store that featured an atheist, a Jewish person who was Orthodox, an observant Roman Catholic, a Protestant and 3 Jehovah's Witnesses (who worked in the lab with me). It was humorous, because the Catholic and the JWs were all Hispanic, and they would get into theological arguments in Spanish- then come back and ask my "opinion" (sometimes forgetting that I do not speak the Spanish language :^).

i cant help but see a joke hiding in there somewhere!!

**1968** · 01-22-2008, 04:51 PM

Originally Posted by 1968

Update: Duncan Hunter is out.

As is Fred Thompson.

**1968** · 01-22-2008, 11:27 PM

Originally Posted by 1968

As is Fred Thompson.

On that note, Thompson has been one of the Optiboard favorites on the Republican side. Any Thompson supporters care to share their new pick? Will you go with McCain if Thompson gives his blessing?

**chip anderson** · 01-22-2008, 11:35 PM

Like the man said: "If McCain is the nominee, I'll just sit right here on the porch." In fact, I don't see anyone running worth getting off the porch for on either side.

Chip

**Grubendol** · 01-23-2008, 10:33 AM

Originally Posted by chip anderson

Like the man said: "If McCain is the nominee, I'll just sit right here on the porch." In fact, I don't see anyone running worth getting off the porch for on either side.

Chip

Fine by me. I have two candidates I really like alot on the Dem side, and either one should have an easy victory if the Repubs "sit on the porch"

**1968** · 01-23-2008, 06:01 PM

Chip sees it coming. Grub sees it coming. Rush sees it coming....

Rush Limbaugh: May Not Support GOP Nominee

Conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh stunned his listeners by announcing that he might not support the Republican presidential nominee in this year’s election.

Limbaugh said on Monday’s show: "I can see possibly not supporting the Republican nominee this election, and I never thought that I would say that in my life."

The reason: “You don’t have a genuine down-the-list conservative” among the GOP candidates.

“Wherever you go here in this roster of candidates, you're going to be able to point out ‘not conservative, what he did there is not conservative’” Rush said.

The Republican front-runners want the nomination “because it's their turn,” he also stated. “We tried that in '96 with Bob Dole and now they're running the same scenario…

"I'm telling ya, it's gonna come down to which guy do we dislike the least. And that's not necessarily good."

After Rush’s pronouncements, Los Angeles Times blogger Andrew Malcolm wrote: “Across the country, people were dropping their coffee cups, choking on sandwiches, fainting and driving off the road. The king of conservative talk radio not supporting the Republican nominee?”

But Limbaugh’s remarks are not quite so surprising in light of statements he made about GOP candidates Mike Huckabee and John McCain last week:

“I'm here to tell you, if either of these two guys get the nomination, it's going to destroy the Republican Party. It's going to change it forever, be the end of it. A lot of people aren't going to vote. You watch.”

© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/R.../22/66498.html