Main Reasons Conservatives Oppose McCain

Which candidate meets your high standards and deserves your vote?

 

1. Campaign finance reform. McCain tried to limit the role of money in politics with measures that, critics say, stomp on the constitutional right to free speech.

==I don't agree with that criticism of McCain or the reform. The current election cycle, mainly on the Democratic side, shows that we need to do something to control the spending and to limit outside influence of these elections.



2. Immigration. McCain has been a vocal supporter of a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, although he now says he understands the border between the United States and Mexico must be sealed first.


==McCain's position has shifted. Enough said.



3. Tax cuts. McCain twice voted against President Bush's tax cuts, saying in 2001 that they helped the wealthy at the expense of the middle class and in 2003 that there should be no tax relief until the cost of the Iraq war is known. But he now wants to extend the tax cuts.


==Spending cuts are needed more than tax cuts. If we maintain our current level of spending we should not cut taxes. That was true in 2001, 2003, and it is true today in 2008. Bush has done little to solve this problem.


4. Gay Marriage. McCain refuses to support a federal constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. He believes the matter should be left up to the states.


==I don't support a federal constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. I would not oppose it, but I don't support it. Why?

First, it is not a big problem. This issue is only active among the activists (on both sides).

Second, there is no such thing as "gay marriage" (see Genesis). Homosexuals, married or not, are on their way to hell (1Cor 6:9-10, Rev 21:8). These people need the church to reach out to them with the Gospel of Christ. Federal laws will do these people no good.

Third, an amendment would only stop the states not private individuals and "churches".

Fourth, there is no way such an amendment would pass now or in the future.

In conclusion, there are more important issues to be concerned with.


5. Stem cell research. McCain would relax restrictions on federal dollars for embryonic stem cell research, which critics consider tantamount to abortion.

==Bush did not exactly end embryonic stem cell research. So why someone who still supports Bush would oppose McCain on this point is beyond me. If you oppose embryonic stem cell research, as I do, then you disagree with both Bush and McCain on this (as I do).

6. Global warming. McCain is among the loudest voices in Congress for aggressive action against global warming and a frequent critic of the Bush administration on the issue.

==Global warming is a historical fact. Go back some 12,000 years and you will see what I am talking about. Glacier melt is nothing new. A friend of mine earned his PhD in Agriculture from Iowa State and he loves to talk about how glaciers once impacted the North American continent. So humans are not the "main" cause of global warming. However there is nothing wrong with promoting the ideas of clean air, water, saving the forests, and various animals.

So while I don't agree that humans are causing global warming I do believe that we need to change how we treat our planet.


7. ''Gang of 14'' member. McCain is one of seven Republicans who joined seven Democrats to avert a Senate showdown over whether filibusters could be used against Bush judicial nominees.

==O my gosh, a man who can work with others!! How terrible!! This is the same type of criticism the Pharisees aimed at Jesus when He reached out to sinners. Don't misunderstand, I am not comparing McCain with Jesus or anything like that. I am only saying that being willing to reach out to and work with different people is not always a bad thing. It can be a bad thing, but it is not always a bad thing and I don't believe in was a bad thing in McCain's case.


8. Kerry VP candidate. McCain was approached by the Democratic presidential nominee in 2004, Massachusetts senator John Kerry, about being his running mate. McCain talked with Kerry but rejected the offer.

==So what?


9. Works with Democrats. See all of the above.

==So what?



10. Belligerence. McCain can be acerbic toward his critics, such as when he labeled televangelists Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson ''agents of intolerance.'' He reconciled with Falwell in 2006.

==If Falwell forgave him, we have no right to hold it against him. After all it was Falwell, not us, who McCain insulted. I had, and continue to have, respect for Dr. Falwell. While I disagreed with him on some issues, Dr Falwell was a true man of God. His forgiving attitude towards McCain, his efforts to help unwed mothers and men struggling with alcoholism, his work in Christian education, and his faithful preaching of the Gospel should be an example to us all.


Conservative James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, said in a statement on the morning of the Super Tuesday primaries that he would not vote for McCain, citing among other things his ''legendary temper'' and that he ''often uses foul and obscene language.'' (Libby Quaid, AP)

==McCain has a temper. No doubt about it. However he can learn to control that.

James Dobson carries little to no weight with me. I put him in the same category as Jack Van Impe, Paul Crouch, Pat Robertson, and John Hagee. I strongly disagree with Dobson's psychobabble, his compromise of the Gospel in order to support Dr. Laura, and his political tactics. I also believe that James Dobson is an opportunist who takes advantage of various situations to further his own career and agenda.

I have a lot of respect for the views of John MacArthur on the role of political activism and the church. We should vote for conservatives but we should not look to politics/government to solve our problems. Since that is my view, I have no problem with John McCain.

 

RM, you surprise me. Reading an LGBT magazine like The Advocate? Hmmm... :laugh:

 

I just spit out my morning coffee!!!

Great question. Keep asking him! :thumbs:

Martin, I have a lot of respect for McCain (he's a hero and dersves to be treated like one) but I have to part company with him here. If cfr only limited actual cash contributions to candidates I wouldn't have a problem with it: but cfr also limits public advocacy as an indirect contribution. Besides the fact that cfr only served to create 527s instead of cleaning up politics, numerous groups as diverse as both the NRA and the ACLU feel their ability to weigh in on the issues has been shafted. For instance, consider SpeechNow.org and just one of the many precarious restrictions of McCain-Feingold:

(Very interesting article.) SpeechNow.org is trying to simply opine publicly and is being put through the rigors of proving they have a right to. That being said, it probably doesn't matter how McCain feels about cfr at this point as he has promised to elect strict constructionists that would presumably limit some of the legislation's more draconion aspects.

 

The problem being, if I understand it right, is that a state that outlaws same sex marriage will have to accept as legal those same sex marriages that are performed out of their state.

A Constitutional amendment is the only way I know of to stop it entirely.

 

Not really. He has only upped the importance of protecting the border.

 

A point worth noting is that Revmitchell continually makes this false observation about McCain, and has yet to give any evidence that he has any understanding of the term "socialist" or "communist." Quite the contrary: this seemingly implies that Revmitchell has no understanding of either term.

But feel free to enlighten us as to where and when Karl Marx discussed the manipulation of tax rates for the purpose of redistributing wealth. Good luck with that - you are going to need it.

According to my count, that makes at least three discussion threads where you have made this same foolish claim. You just don't know when to quit.....

Wow.

 

The way some conservatives use the terms "socialist" or "communist" in directing them toward liberals makes no more sense than the way some liberals use the term "fascist" when they direct it toward conservatives.

 

Works with Democrats? You're saying that we should never have a Congress that actually listens to and works with the other party. I reject that view.

 

Rev Mitchell, or whatever his real occupation is, has not written one substantial post.