Rudy for President!

[church mouse guy]

Andrew C. McCarthy, legal commentator and terrorism expert said about America's Mayor Rudy Giuliani:

"No fight, however, matters as much as the one for our survival. No one will fight that fight better or smarter or more zealously than Rudy Giuliani. That’s why we need him."

On the social issues, McCarthy said this about Rudy, "Some conservatives worry about Giuliani’s positions on certain social issues, especially abortion. But his positions have not signaled conventional liberalism. He has governed as a limited-government conservative — a species Republicans would do well to rediscover. More to the point, he doesn’t pine for the courts to impose that which the public rejects. To the contrary, he vows to appoint justices who will stick to the individual rights we already have rather than invent new ones as they go along. Who will adjudicate rather than legislate. Who will be our umpires, not our rulers. No president can do more than that to promote conservative outcomes. Conservatism is where the public is. We win a fair fight, a democratic fight, and he is committed to giving us that."

So I guess that we can say that unfortunately Rudy is sort of a live-and-let-live-on social issues in that he thinks government should stay out. I disagree but if we lose the war or withdrawal without victory, social issues will no longer matter as the economy collapses and all of our enemies from Iran to North Korea to Venezuela attack.

The link for McCarthy's remarks is:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjA5MzhhYTk5N2E2NzI3MTgwYWU4OTNkMWEyYWNhZWQ=

The official website of Rudy Giuliani for President in 2008 is:

http://www.joinrudy2008.com/

:type:

cmg

 

[Rufus_1611]

“I’m pro-choice. I’m pro-gay rights” - Rudy Giuliani
Source: CNN.com, “Inside Politics” Dec 2, 1999​

Extended all city benefits to same-sex couples​

National Republicans can lump it if they don't like his new domestic-partners bill, Mayor Giuliani said yesterday. "I really haven't thought about what the impact is on Republican politics or national politics or Democratic politics," Giuliani said. The bill he submitted to the City Council would extend the benefits city agencies must grant to gay and lesbian couples. "I'm proud of it," Giuliani said of the bill. "I think it puts New York City ahead of other places in the country."
Source: New York Daily News, reprinted in 3/25/05 NY Observer May 13, 1998 (http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Rudy_Giuliani_Civil_Rights.htm)​

 

[Terry_Herrington]

I disagree but if we lose the war or withdrawal without victory, social issues will no longer matter as the economy collapses and all of our enemies from Iran to North Korea to Venezuela attack

Yea, I imagine they are amassing their armies even now! :laugh:

Mouse, you really say some strange things. :laugh:

I think you actually believe that if a Democrat wins the White House in 2008 (which I hope happens) it will be the end of the United States.

What will be truly amazing is if we survive Bush's presidency!

 

[rbell]

And thank God he is pro-gay rights! And we all should be. You do realize we are the same species, correct?

As I've stated before, homosexuality is a documented natural occurance among the rest of the animal world.

It merely goes back to Biblical "literalists" cherry picking what they want out of the Bible to support what they feel is different and "dangerous" to society. I beg of you please abide by every sentence of the Bible and stone your children and murder anyone who murders another, etc!

This shows a profound lack of knowledge about the Biblical position on homosexuality.

It was also condemned in the New Testament, (and keep in mind that homosexuality was not that frowned upon in Hellenistic culture, thus further heightening the Biblical stance in the NT) so the Levitical red herrings simply won't work.

BTW, intra-species cannibalism is a "natural occurance" as well. Shall we engage in that?

And no, I don't believe in killing or beating up gay people, so save that diatribe.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

And thank God he is pro-gay rights! And we all should be. You do realize we are the same species, correct?

You make a good point, Rew. Gays are human beings, therefore gay rights are human rights. Christian rights are human rights. Buddhist rights are human rights. Black rights are human rights. White rights are human rights. Women's rights are human rights. Redneck bubbas who drive pickups with shotguns in the window rights are human rights. I do not believe in withholding rights from any subset of the human family. We are, all, endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Even though we have not always lived up to that lofty goal, including the founding fathers, the concept if very true.

 

[rbell]

MP, I would agree with basic rights of citizens...but there are those that wish to convey a "protected class" status (i.e., hate crime legislation). I think it's important for everyone to define their terms on this issue...especially in the political arena.

 

[rbell]

THere are folks on one extreme...that insist that all our founding fathers were evangelical Christians, and that we were made to be a theocracy. The other extreme are the uber-secularists, that insist there is no Judeo-Christian background to our way of governing and our laws.

Both extremes are wrong.

And following one red herring with another doesn't further your argument. I addressed some logical and Biblical responses to your assertions about homosexuality. Sorry if that offends you.

 

[rbell]

it's all good.

Man...a debate w/ a girlfriend AND a BB member...glutton for punishment! :laugh:

 

[church mouse guy]

Rudy will be elected because he can win the fight against international terror. The Democrats do not even discuss specific details of foreign affairs because they have no comprehensive worldview on military matters.

 

[Daisy]

*snip*
More to the point, he doesn’t pine for the courts to impose that which the public rejects. To the contrary, he vows to appoint justices who will stick to the individual rights we already have rather than invent new ones as they go along.
*snip*

That is contrary to the Ninth Amendment: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

 

[Pastor Larry]

And thank God he is pro-gay rights! And we all should be. You do realize we are the same species, correct?

God is not pro-Gay rights. He condemns homosexuality. It is not natural (as any basic level biology class will tell you ... forget about biology class ... any yo-yo can see that men are created differently than women, and the sexual function of homosexuality is unnatural). So it is not a "natural occurrence." It is sin against God.

It merely goes back to Biblical "literalists" cherry picking what they want out of the Bible to support what they feel is different and "dangerous" to society. I beg of you please abide by every sentence of the Bible and stone your children and murder anyone who murders another, etc!

That wouldn't be abiding by the Bible. That was the Law of Israel, which we are not under. On the other and, homosexuality is condemned as sin in the NT.

Genesis 9:5-6
"And Murder is forbidden. Animals that kill people must die, and any person who murders must be killed. Yes, you must execute anyone who murders another person, for to kill a person is to kill a living being made in God's image."

Why do Biblical literalists not abide by that?? And I'm sure some of them do and for them I merely hand them a straight jacket and point them towards a padded room.

Biblical literalists do abide by that. It is the command of God about how we honor the image of God in man.

The issue of treating people who act in homosexual ways with dignity and respect is a no brainer. We should absolutely treat them with dignity and respect. They however, are still living in sin against God. And to love them means to tell them that.

 

[Pastor Larry]

That is contrary to the Ninth Amendment: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Actually, the ninth amendment and Guiliani's comment (or comment about him) are addressing two different things. The 9th addresses rights we already have; teh comment addresses inventing new rights.

A key example is abortion. A woman has always had the right to make medicial decisions about her own body. The right to make a decision about someone else's body was invented in 1973. It had never been seen before.

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

You make a good point, Rew. Gays are human beings, therefore gay rights are human rights. Christian rights are human rights. Buddhist rights are human rights. Black rights are human rights. White rights are human rights. Women's rights are human rights. Redneck bubbas who drive pickups with shotguns in the window rights are human rights. I do not believe in withholding rights from any subset of the human family. We are, all, endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Even though we have not always lived up to that lofty goal, including the founding fathers, the concept if very true.

Really? Rapists are human, murderers are human, pedophiles are human, racists are human, automatic weapons owners are human, and these are the things that make these people happy.

When "human rights" trump the Word of God then we have begun to worship "human rights".

Just because somebody is inclined through lust to do something doesnt make it right. If we are going to recognize homosexuality as rights based on the fact that they are human the we have opened a pandoras box. And they already have the same rights as everyone else.

 

[saturneptune]

This is a perfect example of how far the republican party has rotted from the inside out. The best they can come up with is Gulianni, Romney and McCain. They are no better than Hillary or Obama. A pro abortionist is a pro abortionist. A weak and wishy washy stance against homosexuality is the same on both sides. This is the best we have to choose from? Come on people, lets find someone who has some backbone and elect them President. This time, lets elect someone with common sense and leadership.

 

[Martin]

I will support and vote for Gulianni when they start serving ice cream and snow cones in the lake of fire. If the Republican party actually nominates this clown I will pull out of the Republican Party because they will have totally sold out. I say "totally" because in '00 when they went with Bush over Keyes they sold out. However I was willing to go along with them then, but no more. They go Rudy, Martin goes bye.

 

[Martin]

And thank God he is pro-gay rights! And we all should be. You do realize we are the same species, correct?

As I've stated before, homosexuality is a documented natural occurance among the rest of the animal world.

It merely goes back to Biblical "literalists" cherry picking what they want out of the Bible to support what they feel is different and "dangerous" to society. I beg of you please abide by every sentence of the Bible and stone your children and murder anyone who murders another, etc!

The above statement is nothing shy of damnable heresy. Homosexuality is a sin and humans, unlike animals, have moral will and will be held accountable by God for their behaviors at the final judgment. Animals do not go to heaven or hell. So you can't look at their behaviors and attempt to use that to justify homosexuality, fornication, or any other behaviors. There is nothing "cherry picking" about saying that homosexuality is a sin. Both the Old and New Testaments are crystal clear that homosexuality is a sin. As for the silly "stoning" comment, well anyone with an elementary understanding of hermeneutics will know that those verses refer to Israel's civil law/government. We are not Israel, and we are certainly not under Israel's civil law. However the fact that God, in the Old Testament, said homosexuality is an abomination makes His view on the matter very clear. The New Testament goes further to make clear that those who practice homosexuality, among other sins, are lost and will not inherit the Kingdom of God (1Cor 6:9-10, Rev 21:8).

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

Of course when there is a limit to what you take form the Bible that would be cherry picking. When you take it all then you are taking the whole package including behavior like homosexuality as being sin.

 

[Martin]

There is just a limit to what I take from the Bible. I refuse to shun a person because of what is written in a text.

==Nobody is talking about "shunning" anyone. The fact that homosexuality is a sin cannot be debated anymore than the fact that fornication is a sin adultery is a sin, and lying is a sin. All of those behaviors, among others, are sinful and those who practice them are lost (1Cor 6:9-10, Gal 5:19-21, Rev 21:8,27, etc). If you don't like what the Bible says that is your problem. However not liking it, and denying it, will not change what it says.

I understand that some people can't admit that anything in the Bible is wrong

==What in the Bible is "wrong"? Please give at least one example.

But, I chose to make distinctions. I have many gay friends and one family member that are gay and all of them are good people.

==That is nothing but pure humanism. While many sinners are nice according to our standards, and this includes homosexuals even I know, they are not good according to God's standards. In fact all lost people, and homosexuals are lost (1Cor 6:9-10), are sinners under the wrath of God, they are children of the devil (Eph 2:1-3, Jn 8:44-45, Mk 10:18, etc).

You can deny that all you want however, at the end of the day, it will not change it's truthfulness.

Likewise, I feel that the same rights should be extended to them as any other people in our country.

==Homosexuals have the same rights as anyone else in this country. They are free to live their lives the way they wish.

 

[Petra-O IX]

Well Gulianni is just a little to wierd for my tatse.

I ain't votin fer him or whatever.

 

[saturneptune]

<member quote was edited out - LE>

Baloney, what a bunch of nonsense.