Right of Conscience Rule

The fact that you see it as "Apples and refrigerators" further makes my point. You can't see selective pro-life as being hypocritical to the stance of pro-life.

 

You tried to compare being prolife against the needy. My point stands.

 

do you know someone here who has refused to help a brother or sister in need?

Red herrings will not cover up your hypocrisy.

 

No it doesn't but as long as you see it that way then you prove my point.

 

Do you know some one here who killed an unborn child?

Your position is that by voting for a pro-choice candidate then I have supported killing unborn children.

Your voting for a candidate who would take away welfare and help to the needy means you have supported the refusal of help to your bothers and sisters in need.


Mt 25:42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

 

..........................................................................................................

 

I know several someones here who support the killing of unborn children.

[personal attack snipped]

As soon as you find someone here who actually supports, in any way whatsoever, not helping a brother or sister in need, let us know.

Until you do, you're just using a red herring to cover over your own hypocrisy.

 

Your position is that by voting for a pro-choice candidate then I have supported killing unborn children.

Your voting for a candidate who would take away welfare and help to the needy means you have supported the refusal of help to your bothers and sisters in need.


Mt 25:42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

As soon as you get past the concept of a one issue God, you will find out what Christianity is really about.

 

Since government help is against the biblical principle of good stewardship and there are other means to deliver assistance to the needy that places more of your donation in the hands of those in need then your attempt at logic falls apart.

 

Says you... Even a sinner or bad steward can be used by God to benefit his Will.

 

Nice twist.