1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Christians Who Voted for Obama Should Not Lie About Their Support for Abortion

Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by OldRegular, Sep 14, 2009.

Top Posters
Page 2 of 4
  1. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    26,977
    Likes Received:
    2,536
    Faith:
    Baptist
    A strong Pro-life position must be at the TOP of the candidates requirements list for my vote.

    There are several other criteria following but if pro-life is not at the top with a voting record to match, that candidate does not get my vote.

    Also I won't vote for a Democrat under any condition because the Dem Party Platform officially supports the so-called pro-choice position.
    That goes for any party, If the pro-life/pro-choice issue is missing, neutral or nebulous, I won't vote for their candidate(s).

    If an independent does not indicate their position on abortion they have lost my potential vote.

    If that makes me unrighteous, so be it.

    HankD
     
    #21 HankD, Sep 15, 2009
  2. targus

    targus New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have heard the "I am not a single issue voter" many times and wonder what are the other issues individually or combined that are more important than the life of even one unborn child?
     
    #22 targus, Sep 15, 2009
  3. OldRegular

    OldRegular Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    64
    SN

    Your bias is clouding your judgment. There was not and is still not a Conservative Supreme Court. Even if there had been the Republicans did not have a filibuster proof majority in the Senate. They did get the Partial Abortion Ban passed, signed by President Bush, and upheld by the Court after Clinton vetoed it twice. That procedure was too much even for some democrat Senators. But to believe the Republicans could have gotten a bill through the Senate further restricting abortion is a pipe dream.
     
    #23 OldRegular, Sep 15, 2009
  4. OldRegular

    OldRegular Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    64
    That is the same crap I would expect from "whoever"; alias: alatide, Freedom, JustChristian, or BaptistBeliever.
     
    #24 OldRegular, Sep 15, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 15, 2009
  5. OldRegular

    OldRegular Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    64
    The Biography of a Bad Statistic
    May 25, 2005
    Updated: May 26, 2005
    Abortions rising under Bush? Not true. How that false claim came to be - and lives on.

    Summary

    Politicians from Hillary Clinton and John Kerry to Howard Dean have recently*contended that abortions have increased since George W. Bush took office in 2001.

    This claim is false. It's based on an an opinion piece*that used data from*only 16 states. A*study by*the*Alan Guttmacher Institute of 43 states found that abortions have actually decreased. Update, May 26: The author of the original claim now concedes that the Guttmacher study is "significantly better" than his own.

    http://www.factcheck.org/society/the_biography_of_a_bad_statistic.html


    Where are the fruits?
    Why Stassen’s claims that Bush’s policies increased abortion are baseless

    by Randall K. O’Bannon, Ph.D., Director of Education & Research and Laura Hussey, M.P.M., Special Research Assistant, National Right to Life Educational Trust Fund

    In an opinion piece spreading over local newspapers and the internet, Glen Harold Stassen, the Lewis B. Smedes Professor of Christian Ethics at Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California, claims that after years of decline, abortions have increased under the watch of pro-life President George W. Bush.

    Attributing the alleged abortion increase to an economic downturn, Stassen argues that the way to reduce abortions is to elect a president who will “do something about jobs and health insurance and support for prospective mothers” rather than one who merely offers pro-life “rhetoric.” His intended implication is that pro-lifers should vote for Kerry, the “pro-choice” candidate, to reduce the number of abortions.

    While this twist of sense and logic is breathtaking, Stassen has a bigger problem – neither his data nor his argument hold up under scrutiny.


    http://www.nrlc.org/rko/stassenpart2.html
     
    #25 OldRegular, Sep 15, 2009
  6. OldRegular

    OldRegular Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    64
    Proverbs 6:16-19

    16. These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
    17. A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
    18. An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
    19. A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

    It seems you are in disagreement with God!
     
    #26 OldRegular, Sep 15, 2009
  7. OldRegular

    OldRegular Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    64
    SN
    You have to make a serious effort to be wrong so many times on so many things. I have already pointed out that the Republicans did not have the votes in the Senate. You continue to throw the Constitution around. You should know something about the rules of the Senate.
     
    #27 OldRegular, Sep 15, 2009
  8. OldRegular

    OldRegular Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    64
    Where oh where are all the Obama supporters on this Forum; where oh where can they be?
     
    #28 OldRegular, Sep 15, 2009
  9. Johnv

    Johnv New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    You hit the nail on the head, on two counts. It's at the top of your list, which says you ahve a list. That's quite respectable. Also, you said that this is a requirement for your vote. Also respectable.

    What is not adviseable is when a person has only one item on their list. Doesn't matter if that one item is abortion, the death penalty, the economy, the war, or any other such item. What is further not adviseable is when a person requires other voters to adhere to their list.

    You haven't indicated to me that you're doing this, so I don't see a problem with your personal voting view.
    How am I in disagreement with God, simply because I find single-issue voting unadviseable?
     
    #29 Johnv, Sep 15, 2009
  10. OldRegular

    OldRegular Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    64
    No! Because you say: "Making a judgement upon a person who voted for a candidate based on a single issue is usually unrighteous." The single issue is the slaughter of the unborn. That is innocent blood!
     
    #30 OldRegular, Sep 15, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 15, 2009
  11. Johnv

    Johnv New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    You're even going further. You're saying that it's unrighteous for a person to not make a judgement upon a person who voted for a candidate based on a single issue.
     
    #31 Johnv, Sep 15, 2009
  12. targus

    targus New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    How exactly does one "require others to adhere to their list"?

    By arguing in favor of their own position?

    You seem to be requiring others to adhere to your list which is "don't be a single issue voter".
     
    #32 targus, Sep 15, 2009
  13. Johnv

    Johnv New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    BY saying "if you support a candidate who supports [insert issue here], then you're [insert judgement here]". But here, it gets even worse. We have people whoa re saying "if you don't admonish others for not being single issue, then you're [insert judgement here]".
    Well, you can't have it both ways. If you're admonishing me for my list, then you should likewise admonish others for their list.
     
    #33 Johnv, Sep 15, 2009
  14. tinytim

    tinytim <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    But it is not hard to understand this point...

    If you support a candidate who supports (insert issue).. then when you cast your vote, you also support (insert issue)

    Soo... it follows that if you support a candidate who supports abortion, you are supporting abortion when you vote for said candidate.

    That is very dangerous.

    It would be the same with Homosexual marriage.

    That is why we must be very careful when we cast our vote...

    What about a pro-lifer who supports homosexual marriage... They would NOT be supported by me. The single issue switches from abortion to Homosexual marriage in that case...

    But why is it that usually you see the ones that support abortion also support homosexual marriage, and promoting animal and creation rights as high as human rights?

    Usually if one part of the equation is perverted, it perverts the whole equation.
     
    #34 tinytim, Sep 15, 2009
  15. Johnv

    Johnv New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    There's no such thing as a perfect candidate. If the above were a litmus test, then all Christians who voted for nonabolitionist presidents should be met with the same disdain as those who voted for a candidate who did not support a ban on abortion.
     
    #35 Johnv, Sep 15, 2009
  16. targus

    targus New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, making judgements (right or wrong) about the voting of others as it relates to Christian beliefs isn't "requiring" anyone to do anything.

    Unless one party is some sort of cult leader and the others are his followers - and that certainly cannot be said of participation on this board.

    We don't even know who anyone really is - just ask JustChristian, Freedom or alatide. They can vouch for me.:smilewinkgrin:

    Not all lists are the same.

    AndI am not admonishing you - I am just trying to figure out what individual issue or combination of issues out weighs the life of even a single unborn child.
     
    #36 targus, Sep 15, 2009
  17. alatide

    alatide New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    974
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nothing was done during the George HW Bush or the Ronald Reagan administrations either. It was all hypocrisy and talk designed to get the Christian Right vote.
     
    #37 alatide, Sep 15, 2009
  18. billwald

    billwald New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    2
    Candidates seldom run on their party's platform. They do their best to ignore it.
     
    #38 billwald, Sep 15, 2009
  19. Johnv

    Johnv New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    But it is usually unrighteous.
     
    #39 Johnv, Sep 15, 2009
  20. tinytim

    tinytim <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0

    I agree, they should.
     
    #40 tinytim, Sep 15, 2009
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 2 of 4
Loading...