The Absolute Best Reason to Vote for Romney

[GoodGame]

Believe it or not, her opinions weigh exactly zero point zero percent on my current voting opinions.

 

[Leoreth]

Obama's "State's rights" arguments on not voting for this were BS considering that he never cared about that before, and Ron Paul, who does, voted for this law.

There shows Paul's admirable "consistency" again. I guess state rights are only important when you don't want to enforce your views on a national level

Oh, and by the way:

On an issue like partial birth abortion, I strongly believe that the state can properly restrict late-term abortions. I have said so repeatedly. All I’ve said is we should have a provision to protect the health of the mother, and many of the bills that came before me didn’t have that.

Source. But I guess just like Cutlass, Obama himself was lying about what Obama believes in.

Please keep the abortion debate, if you must have it again, about the facts, not strawmen.

 

[Ailedhoo]

Yup, that would indeed be better than seeing Madonna naked at her age. You understand my OP exactly.

I do not care about Madonna's "plans." I only concerned that your most urgent policies for taking a vote is... worthy.


...and Obama is a Christain, despite your and Classic's attempt to claim otherwise. He follows the same God as other people known as Christains, yes? Your "No True Scotsman" arguments are... worthy.

 

[Arakhor]

Thats fine...people all over the world ignore fact and truth every day of the week, so thats nothing new.

It seems that the nasty pills are catching on around here.

 

[GhostWriter16]

There shows Paul's admirable "consistency" again. I guess state rights are only important when you don't want to enforce your views on a national level

Honestly, his view makes perfect sense in principle. You could easily argue that the states can do anything that doesn't violate people's rights, and thus under the ninth amendment there is a right to life (A tradition that is backed by the Declaration of Independence) and that thus these lives (They are "lives" at this point since we're talking about third trimester and there's no debate by then) should be protected at a Federal level.

And even if Ron Paul made the wrong call here, which he didn't, nobody is perfect anyway. I've disagreed with him before. But there's a huge difference between being consistent over 90% of the time like Ron Paul and being consitent about absolutely nothing like Romney and being consistent about half the time like Obama.

You guys are crazy, honestly, you jump at the slightest perceived inconsistency by Ron Paul and say "Oh, he's not consistent now" because he's not absolutely perfect, and yet you don't give HALF that standard to your own favorite politicians.

I have never claimed RP is perfect, far from it. But his policies would save this country, and we know he actually believes them. Which doesn't count for anything anymore, apparently
Oh, and by the way:

 

[Leoreth]

You guys are crazy, honestly, you jump at the slightest perceived inconsistency by Ron Paul and say "Oh, he's not consistent now" because he's not absolutely perfect, and yet you don't give HALF that standard to your own favorite politicians.

This wouldn't be so much of a problem if we wouldn't hear "Ron Paul is the only politician with PRINCIPLES!" all the time.

 

[Quackers]

In this thread it seems that anybody can be a Christian as long as you self-identify. I disagree I think there are a few fundamentals of christianity you have to accept to call yourself a Christian; anything different makes the label "christian" completely meaningless IMO.

 

[Leoreth]

... and Evangelicals decide what these fundamentals of Christianity are?

 

[Quackers]

No idea who will decide it.
If your moral compass is widely different from the essential precepts why call yourself a christian? Your not.

 

[Leoreth]

No, I'm not and I don't claim to be.

I just think it's a cheap way to discredit someone's beliefs by stating he's not a Christian just because he doesn't take the same conclusions from Christianity.

 

[Quackers]

Oh I know your not. I'm using a hypothetical third person
You can pretend that people of differing point of views are all Christian, even if they dispute the major theological foundations of the faith; but one day the true christians will be shifted from the rest when they meet St Peter.

 

[Leoreth]

True. So maybe God should decide and Christians should stop calling other people not Christian

 

[Quackers]

Well it proves that there is a proper definition of Christians which can exclude fake Christians

 

[Ailedhoo]

Oh I know your not. I'm using a hypothetical third person
You can pretend that people of differing point of views are all Christian Scotsmen, even if they dispute the major theological foundations of the faith; but one day the true christians scotsmen will be shifted from the rest when they meet St Peter.

The moment of no true Scotsmen? The label is noted to those who believe in the same God and get their belief system of it from the same book.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

In this thread it seems that anybody can be a Christian as long as you self-identify. I disagree I think there are a few fundamentals of christianity you have to accept to call yourself a Christian; anything different makes the label "christian" completely meaningless IMO.

You accept Jesus as your lord and saviour and have the intention to live according to his spiritual teachings. Both of these are personal choices a person makes, and they are difficult to verify.

I am curious what fundamentals are available to verify whether someone is a Christian.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

In this thread it seems that anybody can be a Christian as long as you self-identify. I disagree I think there are a few fundamentals of christianity you have to accept to call yourself a Christian; anything different makes the label "christian" completely meaningless IMO.

Self-identify?
As if that's the only thing he's done to make him a Christian? He's been baptised, chose the religion over his fathers (and his mom wasn't particularly religious and even remarried another Muslim IIRC) and went/does go to church regularly.

WTH does it take Quackers to convince you he's a Christian? He's got the fundamentals covered.

I really, really, really dislike the line of thinking that if a politician chooses to follow the constitution and tries to keep explicit religion out of his politics that this makes him non-Christian. By this logic, David Cameron and Margaret Thatcher were militant atheists.

I actually don't think you're being honest here, you're just trying to troll Obama fans. And it's working - I'm pissed at you right about now.
/rant

Actually, i'm going to agree with the guy who doesnt like me here. I have no reason to not take Obama at his word that he is indeed a Christian, albeit perhaps he doesnt always make choices that are seen as traditionally correct Christian ones.

Everyone sins and Jesus himself said no one but the Father is good. Kinda puts all of us in a single demograph where sin is concerned doesnt it?

I dislike you this much <> less.
Thank you for defending Obama's Christianess. I'm glad you don't think he's a closet Muslim/Atheist.

 

[MobBoss]

It seems that the nasty pills are catching on around here.

That's not being nasty, but just pointing out a simple human truth.

We've known for a long time about your particular error concerning your own faith, so tthats nothing new.

...and Obama is a Christain, despite your and Classic's attempt to claim otherwise. He follows the same God as other people known as Christains, yes? Your "No True Scotsman" arguments are... worthy.

Uhm, I wasnt claiming Obama wasnt a Christian...so your attention to detail is..... worthy.

I dislike you this much <> less.
Thank you for defending Obama's Christianess. I'm glad you don't think he's a closet Muslim/Atheist.

Well, I do agree there is indeed a difference in not being a Christian and not being a very good one.

 

[Arakhor]

I've certainly made two errors in faith - being brought up in a particular religion and then talking about it.

 

[Cutlass]

In this thread it seems that anybody can be a Christian as long as you self-identify. I disagree I think there are a few fundamentals of christianity you have to accept to call yourself a Christian; anything different makes the label "christian" completely meaningless IMO.

If you believe in god, believe Jesus is the son of god and was sent to earth to be our savior, that pretty much the whole of what it takes to be a Christian. Within that, of course, is millions of variables on what kind or how good of a Christian they might be.

As for who god and Jesus accept, that's really up to them and nothing any living person has to say on the subject matters one little bit.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I've certainly made two errors in faith - being brought up in a particular religion and then talking about it.

At least you're not guilty of the self-righteous streak all self-denominated 'good Christians' are guilty of