Nominee debate

Nominee debate (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

nejisty -> Nominee debate (8/17/2008 1:27:47 AM)
Did anyone else have a problem with a Presidential nominee debate going on in a Christian church hosted by a Pastor in front of a congregation?? Just curious. nejisty

RCdc -> RE: Nominee debate (8/17/2008 3:41:52 AM)
No? If they are invited to hold a debate that is up to the pastor. Why do you have issues with it? the.dark.

thishereboi -> RE: Nominee debate (8/17/2008 3:44:05 AM)
Nope, not even a little bit.

nejisty -> RE: Nominee debate (8/17/2008 3:58:39 AM)
the.dark It just seems to me the answers to some of the questions would be a given. What nominee, who by the way wants to be President, would want to say they are for abortion and same sex marriages in a church full of the congregation? Not sure if this plays into it or not but what about the seperation of church and Gov't. Just seemed like a set up for the answers some people wanted to hear. nejisty

RCdc -> RE: Nominee debate (8/17/2008 4:18:25 AM)
quote: What nominee, who by the way wants to be President, would want to say they are for abortion and same sex marriages in a church full of the congregation? A brave one? It's no different to any 'community' structure. I'm not in the states and as I understand it, fundemental christianity is a main course deal - but the nominees will answer and have answers that fit the criteria of any majority structure if it will aid their programme. Seperation of church and state is one of those impossible endeavours when a country lists itself as insert denomination here Any candidate is going to relate 'what the people want to hear'- it is up to people to assess their sincerity. I do find it painfully disturbing that fundemental christianity is so rife and has such control in a country that portrays itself as the 'leader of the free world'. Seperation of church and state is a wonderful idea which in principle can and could work - but right now cannot because the USA is still an infant learning to grow. Itwould be great to hear a candidate stand up and admit to the states infancy, rather than harp on about how democratic and progressive it 'is'. My one concern is that in 10-20 years the USA will end up in collapse and that is just heartbreaking for me because it is the people that will be suffering. the.dark.

nejisty -> RE: Nominee debate (8/17/2008 5:29:44 AM)
the.dark you stated "a brave one" we are talking politicians here. Do you really think what they are saying now is what they will be doing when they get elected?? Remember "Read my lips"? You are correct. The US is going to fall, look at history. The super powers collapsing in on themselves over and over again because the same mistakes were made. We can map history but not seem to learn from it. nejisty

Thadius -> RE: Nominee debate (8/17/2008 5:50:16 AM)
To answer your original question, I had no problems with where the forum was held. Would there have been a big difference if it was held in a bowling alley? To the other points you raised, can you please point me to the text in the Constituion where it says "seperation of chuch and state"? The move to make the US more secular is a huge mistake, in my opinion, as what has made this country great is the freedom of ALL religiions to practice what they wish. The diversity of religions practiced here is a strength not a weakness. I am all for the US not promoting or preventing the practice of whatever faith folks choose or choose not to practice. Just my opinions, Thadius

bipolarber -> RE: Nominee debate (8/17/2008 6:07:46 AM)
Freedom of, and freedom from religion, if the individual so desires. The only way to make sure that happens is to keep any one religion from having a controlling stake in the US government. The founders didn't want the US to be, or become, a theocracy. Considering what we see in theocracies around the world (We're fighting two of them as you may remember...) this is probably a good idea. Bush weakened the line between church and state with his "faith-based-initiatives" where he gave federal money to certain churches (the ones he believed in, we can safely assume) and told them to go take care of local social issues. (i.e. strongarm the poor and homeless into becoming part of their flock, or you they forget about finding shelter in the -20 degree winter.) Oh, sure, supposedly there was a rule or two about not using the cash as a recruiting tool... but thate hasn't been any oversight on the program since it's conception. The churches who have been recipients of our tax dollars could have been out buying assault weapons (a la David Koresh) as far as we know... or misappropriating it to build up their TV networks. Frankly, I hope whoever gets into the white house cuts this program off at the roots. It was a shitty idea to begin with, and will only get worse as time goes on. As to the "Q&A" last night: I imagine McCain did the best. (I haven't actually watched it) But considering he was willing to suck up to televangelist-moral majority types during his first run, he's probably better practiced at telling the deluded, irrational religious types what they want to hear.

Thadius -> RE: Nominee debate (8/17/2008 6:15:01 AM)
You have heard/read the Obama speeches and his position last night about increasing the role of faith based initiatives? I guess not.

Alumbrado -> RE: Nominee debate (8/17/2008 6:15:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: nejisty the.dark you stated "a brave one" we are talking politicians here. Do you really think what they are saying now is what they will be doing when they get elected?? Remember "Read my lips"? Which is why campaign speeches have nothing to to do with 'the government', and last night's appearances have nothing to do with violating any part of the Constitution.

bipolarber -> RE: Nominee debate (8/17/2008 6:19:21 AM)
Actually, I hear that it was part of his talk. And, it's depressing to think that he'd be in support of them. But, you can't expect a candidate to be 100% behind yourself on every issue, Thad. Besides, what difference does it make? McCain is in such parity with Bush, that it's going to be a third term by proxy. No matter who wins in Nov., this wrongheaded program will continue, and America will keep going down a very dangerous road.

Musicmystery -> RE: Nominee debate (8/17/2008 6:25:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: nejisty Did anyone else have a problem with a Presidential nominee debate going on in a Christian church hosted by a Pastor in front of a congregation?? Just curious. nejisty Yes. It was inappropriate. I disagree with my fridend Thadius about people trying to make the country more secular--quite the reverse is the case, and has been for a few decades. Diversity is, indeed, great---but this is Christian hegemony, not diversity, and it flies in the face of the principles that founded this country. Best, Tim

Thadius -> RE: Nominee debate (8/17/2008 6:26:03 AM)
This should be a fun question, and it is an easy one... What issues does Obama agree with you on?

Thadius -> RE: Nominee debate (8/17/2008 6:31:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: ORIGINAL: nejisty Did anyone else have a problem with a Presidential nominee debate going on in a Christian church hosted by a Pastor in front of a congregation?? Just curious. nejisty Yes. It was inappropriate. I disagree with my fridend Thadius about people trying to make the country more secular--quite the reverse is the case, and has been for a few decades. Diversity is, indeed, great---but this is Christian hegemony, not diversity, and it flies in the face of the principles that founded this country. Best, Tim Morning Tim, Do you realize where the biggest congregation met for church services during those founding days, and even after? One hint, it wasn't a church. I am not aware of any laws that prevent folks from practicing or not practicing a particular faith. I have noticed a huge ammount of lawsuits trying to remove any mention of religion, or expression of "faith" from numerous public places. The diversity of faiths practiced in this country speaks volumes, about the freedom provided to do so. I also havent' seen anybody (except the occassional kid or hubby) being dragged to particular church services. As always, Thadius

housesub4you -> RE: Nominee debate (8/17/2008 6:40:36 AM)
From what little I saw I would not call it a debate. They knew the questions before hand, as they do with every "debate" so from what I saw it was more of just more of the same. As for the location and the person asking the questions, I have no knowledge of why the person was chosen to ask the questions, seems to me you would want someone without a hidden adgenda, if that is possible. I mean he is a Preacher, so you know he is coming from one side and in a church???? So can we expect a debate in a bar, dungeon, not everyone in America supports the church, but that is the view the world gets when they see the debate. I think the location was chosen more to send a message to the world then to the American people. We are Christian and don't you forget it

Alumbrado -> RE: Nominee debate (8/17/2008 6:42:37 AM)
Everyone in the country falls into some religious demographic or another... if it is inappropriate to allow members of the larger faiths to listen to last night's campaigning, then it would be equally inappropriate to allow any candidate to speak to anyone, be they atheist, agnostic, Wodinist, Anabaptist, or 'None of the above'. Unless of course someone wants to make the argument that the Constitution says that religious freedom restrictions only apply to other's beliefs and not to their group.

bipolarber -> RE: Nominee debate (8/17/2008 6:44:32 AM)
1) getting the bulk of our troops out of Iraq in 16 to 20 months. 2) increased spending on alternative fuels. With programs to help decrease our need for fossil fuels 3) I'm in about 80% agreement with his 15 point health care proposal 4) no drilling in ANWAR, and little to none off the coasts without enviromental oversight. 5) a lower to middle class tax cut, while increasing taxes on those earing over a quarter of a million a year. (personal income tax, NOT taxes on corperations.) The platforms for both candidates are still pretty much in flux, but I can already tell I'd prefer Obama over McCain's four more years of the same shit as we've had for the last eight. Oh, and the increased transparency to government would be a nice change too.

bipolarber -> RE: Nominee debate (8/17/2008 6:49:15 AM)
Oh, yeah, and although he's not really said as much in his speeches, It's pretty well established that the Dems fully intend to strike down PATRIOT II, restore Habeas Corpus, shut down Gitmo, and the "redition to black prisons" programs. A full return to the US Constitution, BEFORE Bush and Cheany laid their slimy, pustule-erupted hands on it.

bipolarber -> RE: Nominee debate (8/17/2008 6:54:53 AM)
Then of course, there's the Supreme Court... with three to four of the justices waiting on a Demorcatic President to take office before they retire... there will be a major shift to the center once Obama makes his picks. Roe v. Wade, and women's rights to their own bodies will remain intact, as will civil rights for minorities. The "little guy" will continue to have free speech, and their right to take down the rich and powerful in a court of law... Who knows, we may even end up with a Constitutional ammendment affirming an American right to privacy... unlike the GOP, who only want to change the Constitution to take rights away from GLBT folk.

Level -> RE: Nominee debate (8/17/2008 6:57:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: nejisty Did anyone else have a problem with a Presidential nominee debate going on in a Christian church hosted by a Pastor in front of a congregation?? Just curious. nejisty I didn't.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.100586E-02