Jump to content
270soft Forum

1984 Election: Poll


This election follows the recovery of the 1981 recession. Foreign policy efforts by Reagan, Thatcher, Pope John Paul II and others have helped crumble the Soviets. Domestically, Reagan has become much more moderate to work with a Democratic Congress.   

22 members have voted

  1. 1. Which candidate do you support for president in 1984?

    • Ronald Reagan - CA - Republican (trickle-down economic theory, tax reform, increased defense spending, low taxes, appeal to Religious Right, reluctant support for most Social Programs, aggressive foreign policy, hard on crime, pro-business)
    • Walter Mondale - MN - Liberal Democrat (Improve and expand Social Programs, pro-labor, equal rights amendment, reduce nukes, focus on anti-poverty measures)
    • Jesse Jackson - IL - Liberal Democrat (appeal to Religious Left, cut defense budget, huge focus on Civil Rights and anti-poverty measures, somewhat populist, African-American, universal healthcare, equal rights amendment, endorses Palestinian state)
    • Gary Hart - CO - Moderate Democrat (balance budget, balance labor and business, cut tax, reform and improve social programs)
  2. 2. Despite Reagan's campaign against government spending, Reagan has greatly accelerated military spending in an attempt to force the Soviets to spend all they have left for defense in order to compete. As a member of Congress, what is your view on this?

    • Very Favorable - The strategy outweighs political ideology. Even if Reagan has hypocritically increased government spending more than any president, it will be worth it to see the Soviets defeated this decade.
    • Somewhat Favorable - I fault Reagan for being a hypocrite, but if the strategy works, then I'll forgive him.
    • Somewhat unfavorable - I will not forgive Reagan for being opposed to government spending, and then doing the opposite. However, I don't like Communism either. It's sort of a lose-win situation as I see it.
    • Unfavorable - Reagan is a hypocrite and the Communist threat is no longer viable. Most experts see them falling apart on their own. This is for show. Besides, if we were going to increase government spending, it should be used on domestic issues to improve people's lives.
    • I don't know; I don't care.
      0
  3. 3. As a member of Congress, what do you think of Ronald Reagan moderating by continually working with liberal Massachusetts Democratic Speaker of the House Tip O'Niell to get legislation passed?

    • Very Favorable - I approve of his handling of the Speaker and Congress. By doing so, he's probably influencing them as much as they are influencing him. His eagerness to work with them, forces Congress to work with him. Brilliant!
    • Favorable - I don't like campaign version of Reagan--too conservative--, but I must hand it to him. He has shown the American people that he will work for all Americans by working with Democrats, who represent most people at this time, based on the number of Representatives.
    • Somewhat unfavorable - The is greatly unfortunate, but when the House is dominated by Democrats, what choice does one have?
    • Unfavorable - Reagan has violated his Conservative creed by working with Liberals, especially regarding social programs and lenient immigration.
    • I don't know/I don't care.
      0


Recommended Posts

@Reagan04

You just said that Jesus abolished the laws of Leviticus but Matthew 5:17 says in regards to the laws (and I assume he means Leviticus, along with the Mosaic laws--indeed, the entire Pentateuch, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets." And a little further on, "I tell you the truth, until Heaven and Earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." 

I would also ask social conservative Christians, how do they rank one sin above another? How is the hierarchy arranged? 

It seems abortion and gay marriage are about at the top. Yet, I rarely see social conservatives up in arms over adultery or divorce? Their politicians have often at least been divorced. 

As far as Christ-like behavior, which I'm sure every social conservative consider when supporting candidates, what about Jesus advising (or is it commanding?) that his followers turn their cheek when struck, and not hit back. Or if someone wants to sue you to take your tunic, that you should give them your both your tunic and your cloak? He also says not to turn away from those who ask from you and want to borrow from you. How far should the Christ-like Christian go with these?

I'll go on. "Love your enemy." Do you love or hate ISIS? Do you love what you want to hate? Can one carry on war and kill what one loves? Would Jesus wage war, or would he turn the cheek and love? If the government needed to borrow money from Jesus to help build a program for destitute ex-criminals to get healthcare, would he turn the government down? 

Would you consider your defense of your version of Christianity to be an "act of righteousness"? If so, would it not be more in line with Jesus's teachings to do your acts of righteousness in secret? 

As a Christ-like social conservative, do you support Jesus's suggestion (or is it a commandment?) that  one should not store for themselves treasures on earth, and that one cannot serve both God and Money. 

And again, going back to "Do not judge, or you too will be judged." To me, someone like Cruz and Bachman are almost all judgment. Shouldn't that be left to God? Or they Christ-like in their judgment? 

Overall, most of Jesus's miracles involve him healing those who are mentally and physically sick. Would not the Christ-like Christian be more inclined to doing the same, in the biggest way possible, perhaps even through government, if that is the way to make it accessible to more people? It seems to me, that healing, feeding, non-violence, and opposition to worldly possessions are rather crucial to his creed. Should not the Christ-like Christian make honest and active attempts to follow him in this? 

I can keep going on, but I'll end with this. If the Christ-like social conservative Christian wishes religion to influence law. Should they not also wish to election the candidate that is most Christ-like?

So as Congressman, would you use your Christ-like Christianity in your attempts to oppose abortion and gay marriage (two things Jesus never mentions; although, he probably opposes them, unless you think he abolished any of the old testament laws). Would you also in your Christ-like Christianity equally oppose divorce and adultery, and the politicians who have committed these acts? Would you also encourage other, by doing the same, to help the poor, the former criminals, to give to those who borrow, to give to those who wish to sue you, and to avoid worldly possessions. Will you love your enemies, even though they may hate you? Will you preach and pray your righteousness in secret? Will you serve God instead of money, or will you serve both? Will you judge others? Again, will you love your enemy? 

Can one pick and choose what parts of the Bible to enact, and claim the moral high ground? Do we ignore the relatively progressive and liberal Jesus of the New Testament, when the sometimes contradictory actions and words of the more bellicose Old Testament seem easier to endorse? Should the Christ-like Christian be Christ-like in all things, or should it be cotton-picked to whichever elements make us feel better for for wanting war while being a Christ-like, for wanting wealth while being Christ-like, etc. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@vcczar, *Cracks knuckles and neck* Here we go!

1)Jesus said that all food was fit to eat and all clothes fit to wear, take what you will of it.

2)Yeah I would say that you know abortion is on top because it's murder, but gay "marriage" is kind of big because its something that is going on right now. But I really don't know, I think there is a loose set in the Bible but many sins are very similar in awfulness because of being ranked as venial or mortal.

3)I agree with you on this one, I would like my fellow Social Conservatives to take more action in this area. But remembered getting Annulled is very different and the acceptable to end a Marriage.

4)Yeah I can tell that you are targeting Drumpf on this one and when he tells his supporters to punch people in the face it is really bad and I don't support him.... at least.... not yet... and to answer your second question I would say that Jesus crusaded for truth and Justice, so if someone sues you for your tunic of course we should do the same.

5)I do love ISIS, I love all, and if Jesus was alive today he's probably sit them down and because he's literally GOD he's convince them to stop shooting at us good Christians, but he's not here and we fight for the 3 in 1 and The Father is till an important part of that.

6)This is kind of a strawman but of course you should defend your faith. I do this not to impress others, but to save you. (Yes I realize you'll try to turn that around as self-righteousness butCommandment #9 exists.)

7)Yes those who live by greed will find destruction.

8)How so? I think there is a fine but important line when loving the sinner and hating the sin. I think they walk it, you may not, it's up for interpretation really.

9)Again I think Jesus was establishing himself as son of GOD and showing GOD as benevolent, Jesus really didn't preach healthcare because it wasn't a thing. Again Commandment #8 exists.

10)Yes, but other things are also important. Because Christ not upending the law is a double edge sword, because we know that while not talked about Christ is of course oppoes to gayism and murder/abortion.

11)I would hope so, but my humanity as it has all before will get in the way. But yes I would strive to do all I could.

12)Of course not I do not think Christ is Liberal as Government Programs have been proven to hurt the poor, so Jesus actually probably very opposed to them.

11)

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Reagan04

Your answer to #5 contradicts your statement and attitude in your response to @Patine , especially in regards to the unarmed civilian.

Your #12 is factually incorrect. It hasn't been proven to hurt the poor. I know a lot of poor people who are crucially helped by government programs, especially when I lived in NYC, but also the many hear in Austin, TX. Soup kitchen, homeless shelters, transportation, health care. Jesus would practically be FDR and LBJ combined, but without the wars!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, vcczar said:

@Reagan04

Your answer to #5 contradicts your statement and attitude in your response to @Patine , especially in regards to the unarmed civilian.

Your #12 is factually incorrect. It hasn't been proven to hurt the poor. I know a lot of poor people who are crucially helped by government programs, especially when I lived in NYC, but also the many hear in Austin, TX. Soup kitchen, homeless shelters, transportation, health care. Jesus would practically be FDR and LBJ combined, but without the wars!

 

I don't think it does I said wars are a necessary evil because Jesus has not returned in response to you which I will give you is more dovish just a different way to say what I said to Patine.

And look at when the Great Society was implemented and corresponding poverty rates you'll be amazed, welfare cycles are real and only work, which welfare disincentivises, is the road out of poverty, we have spent about 45 trillion since 1965 on welfare and other poverty programs and the poverty rate has stagnated, compared tot he fall in poverty in the 50's and early 60's under the fiscally conservative administration of Kennedy and Eisenhower.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Reagan04

Going back to your loving ISIS statement. What is your definition of love here? How do you love your enemy? It's not just a word or a statement. It is both noun and verb. 

Also, I don't think you understand social programs. They're pretty much all created, receive funding, and are maintained based off evidence. Sure they're expensive, they may not be fiscally efficient, which they should be, but that's not the real point here. The point is to help people while they are unemployed, if they have crippling disabilities, if they are elderly and poor and cannot work, if they are mentally ill and cannot work, if they do not have a house. 

You do realize Eisenhower and JFK supported and defended the social programs don't you? That the fiscally conservative Eisenhower increased the tax rate to a historic high, partially to fund and continue them. That the fiscally conservative Kennedy was the one that came up with most of the ideas of LBJ's Great Society. 

I could see Jesus maybe wanting a reformed version of social programs, if he cares about fiscal conservatism or not, but I don't think budgets are his concern. I think actions and good deeds ("good works") are all he cares about. Jesus would most definitely be an FDR/LBJ on steroids, but also anti-war. Jesus would probably most resemble Bernie Sanders, another Jewish man. He's definitely more Christ-like than Ted Cruz, Michelle Bachman and the other prophet-politicians in most things. I'd go so far as to say Obama has aimed to be more Christ-like in word and deed than Ted Cruz. 

Perhaps the most American thing is that we all have our invented Jesus's. Mine is literally Christ-like, adhering closely to what he says in the New Testament. I go with Jesus when there is a contradiction between him and Paul or even God in the Old Testament. Jesus trumps the prophets. Jesus trumps the old law, if he contradicts it in the New Testament. I also think, that the highest level of Satanism is to declare one's self as a moral Christian and to not be Christ-like. To be a non-Christ-like Christian and claim moral superiority, is corrupted Christianity, a kind of Satanism. In this since, I find Ted Cruz and Michelle Bachman to be Satanic. And anyone that operates like them is as well, whether they know it or not. They're "Christianity" is almost exclusively Old Testament, when the New Testament is clearly the focus of Jesus. 

If I had to guess Jesus's political presidential platform. I would guess that he would be: 

Government Spending: Center? I don't know. I think he'd spend as much is necessary to help the poor and disadvantaged. If he wanted to save money, he'd probably reign in defense spending probably. 

Healthcare: Far-left (universal public healthcare)

Role of Government: Left (government is an activist force for good--especially with Jesus in charge)

Tax rates: Center

Social Security: Far-left (however, I think he'd allow private investments for people wishing that over public investments. Just so long as everyone can have checks coming in when they retire so they can eat, cloth themselves and pay rent.)

Energy: Center. I don't think he'd really focus on this. I could see him chastising both rich oil men and rich clean energy moguls. I think he'd handle this to make it the most efficient for consumers, and the world, and not consider the profits of those who run the companies. 

Immigration: Far-left. This option seems like the most Christ-like. I think he would just open the boarders so everyone has the opportunity to succeed, have better jobs, healthcare, etc. if they wanted it. He would find restrictions unChristian. He probably wouldn't even question people coming from Iran or Syria. He would show absolute love. 

Defense Spending: Far-left

Iran: Far-left

Military intervention: I'll put Far-left, but I think he would send aid for humanitarian reasons. 

Education: Center. I think he would be fairly open here. So long as the schools or home schools aren't teaching a corrupted-version of Christianity. 

Unions: Center. I think he's mostly wouldn't focus here. He would support the Unions so long as they prevented companies from making their workers destitute, injured from overwork, etc. But I don't see him hand in hand with Unions all the time. 

War on Terror: Far-left (Jesus would never approve of a war on Islam through weapons or violence, even if they use it back)

Corruption: Center (he'd think both parties are corrupt, and that all parties are corrupt, and that all ideologies are corrupt, and that only political Jesus is non-corrupt). 

Same-Sex Marriage: center-right or right, if Jesus follows the Old Testament. If he's silent on the matter in the New Testament, because he's abolished God's old opinion, then I would say would certainly not condemn it. I would expect him to be about the way Pope Francis is in regards to this. 

Environment: Center-left. This really isn't his focus, but he's going to favor environment over profit. 

Gun control: Left. I don't think he'd ban all guns, but he'd see them primarily as weapons of violence, even if in defense. 

Free trade: Center. I don't think this is his focus. None of the options look like good answers for him. 

Abortion: Right, possibly. However, we'd still have to define what human life is, and at what point human life begins. Is it at the moment of ejaculation? Is it when the sperm hits the egg? Is it when there's a brain or a heart, or a brain and a heart? Etc. This has to be known to know at one point it can even be considered a form of "murder" 

Overall, Jesus seems like a Bernie Sanders (more Bernie than Bernie) that doesn't like abortion and might not support gay marriage. 

Meanwhile Satan, Jesus's opponent, has an identical platform to Ted Cruz. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@vcczar

1) It is that eternal feeling of no wanting your fellow humans to go to HELL.

2)They trap unemployed in cycles and prevent job growth to actually help them.

3)Tell JFK that when he cut taxes, the reforms he enacted were conservative whether or not he actually believed in them or wanted liberal ones. And yes Eisenhower was my mistake. But he was certainly more moderate than LBJ.

4And I don't think you understand how Jesus works. Jesus can snap his fingers and everyone is infinitely wealth and  inflation doesn't exist and no one lusts for more. However that  is not the world we live in, and you completely ignored my comment n his foreign policy, your platform is just stark-raving 100% wrong. And so is your platform for Stans who is fFar-Left and all issues because he wishes to usher in deadly reforms that seem nice *cough cough* free money through government *cough Cough* and of course he supports all version of sin from abortion to gay "marriage", your Satan platform is just hyperbole and that's sad. If you read revelations you'll find that Stan or the Anti-Christ will come and seem to unite the world under a socialist peacenik hippie society world government, and then the 4 horsemans deadly gifts, crumble the society as Jesus rides in with th3 Archangels on white horses and brings all those who follow him in righteousness to Heaven! AMEN! sorry... got a little engaged with my crazy preacher mode... you guys have really helped me keep that in check since I joined the forum:P , but in all seriousness your hyperbolic statements hold no weight against the Bible. The Lord Of the World is a great read on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Reagan04

1. Love is more than that. Even Jesus would say so. 

2. No they don't. I was unemployed and I got a job. As did unemployed friends. You have no concept of how this works. It's almost embarrassing to read what you write. 

3. Again, you're having a hard time cogitating what I'm saying. JFK supported social programs, and he came up with much of the Great Society, enacted by LBJ. This isn't about cutting taxes. 

4. I'm reading the Bible as I've been posting this. Jesus would be highly far-left. To think otherwise is completely ignorant of Jesus's fundamental principles. It's all about helping the poor and disadvantaged. Period. 

You show a very poor understanding of the driving force of your own religion. You show an equal misunderstanding of history. You embrace the Cruz/Bachman Satanic-brand of Christianity that has almost nothing in common with the Jesus in the Bible. I can't convenience how one can read about Jesus, and then behave and endorse actions that do the opposite. Your foreign policy and social program views would put Jesus in tears. 

Obviously, people who suffer from delusions cannot be talked out of their delusions. And I think I've now seen read enough from you. So I'm putting you on ignore/block before I say something I regret. You, sir, are what is wrong with both America and Christianity. Good riddance and I hope you find Jesus. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Obviously, people who suffer from delusions cannot be talked out of their delusions. And I think I've now seen read enough from you. So I'm putting you on ignore/block before I say something I regret. You, sir, are what is wrong with both America and Christianity. Good riddance and I hope you find Jesus. 

 

I am sorry it had to come to this I will be here if yu decide to unblock me, I don't wish for it to be this way but if you will it, so it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎9‎/‎3‎/‎2016 at 0:35 AM, vcczar said:

@Reagan04

Going back to your loving ISIS statement. What is your definition of love here? How do you love your enemy? It's not just a word or a statement. It is both noun and verb. 

Also, I don't think you understand social programs. They're pretty much all created, receive funding, and are maintained based off evidence. Sure they're expensive, they may not be fiscally efficient, which they should be, but that's not the real point here. The point is to help people while they are unemployed, if they have crippling disabilities, if they are elderly and poor and cannot work, if they are mentally ill and cannot work, if they do not have a house. 

You do realize Eisenhower and JFK supported and defended the social programs don't you? That the fiscally conservative Eisenhower increased the tax rate to a historic high, partially to fund and continue them. That the fiscally conservative Kennedy was the one that came up with most of the ideas of LBJ's Great Society. 

I could see Jesus maybe wanting a reformed version of social programs, if he cares about fiscal conservatism or not, but I don't think budgets are his concern. I think actions and good deeds ("good works") are all he cares about. Jesus would most definitely be an FDR/LBJ on steroids, but also anti-war. Jesus would probably most resemble Bernie Sanders, another Jewish man. He's definitely more Christ-like than Ted Cruz, Michelle Bachman and the other prophet-politicians in most things. I'd go so far as to say Obama has aimed to be more Christ-like in word and deed than Ted Cruz. 

Perhaps the most American thing is that we all have our invented Jesus's. Mine is literally Christ-like, adhering closely to what he says in the New Testament. I go with Jesus when there is a contradiction between him and Paul or even God in the Old Testament. Jesus trumps the prophets. Jesus trumps the old law, if he contradicts it in the New Testament. I also think, that the highest level of Satanism is to declare one's self as a moral Christian and to not be Christ-like. To be a non-Christ-like Christian and claim moral superiority, is corrupted Christianity, a kind of Satanism. In this since, I find Ted Cruz and Michelle Bachman to be Satanic. And anyone that operates like them is as well, whether they know it or not. They're "Christianity" is almost exclusively Old Testament, when the New Testament is clearly the focus of Jesus. 

If I had to guess Jesus's political presidential platform. I would guess that he would be: 

Government Spending: Center? I don't know. I think he'd spend as much is necessary to help the poor and disadvantaged. If he wanted to save money, he'd probably reign in defense spending probably. 

Healthcare: Far-left (universal public healthcare)

Role of Government: Left (government is an activist force for good--especially with Jesus in charge)

Tax rates: Center

Social Security: Far-left (however, I think he'd allow private investments for people wishing that over public investments. Just so long as everyone can have checks coming in when they retire so they can eat, cloth themselves and pay rent.)

Energy: Center. I don't think he'd really focus on this. I could see him chastising both rich oil men and rich clean energy moguls. I think he'd handle this to make it the most efficient for consumers, and the world, and not consider the profits of those who run the companies. 

Immigration: Far-left. This option seems like the most Christ-like. I think he would just open the boarders so everyone has the opportunity to succeed, have better jobs, healthcare, etc. if they wanted it. He would find restrictions unChristian. He probably wouldn't even question people coming from Iran or Syria. He would show absolute love. 

Defense Spending: Far-left

Iran: Far-left

Military intervention: I'll put Far-left, but I think he would send aid for humanitarian reasons. 

Education: Center. I think he would be fairly open here. So long as the schools or home schools aren't teaching a corrupted-version of Christianity. 

Unions: Center. I think he's mostly wouldn't focus here. He would support the Unions so long as they prevented companies from making their workers destitute, injured from overwork, etc. But I don't see him hand in hand with Unions all the time. 

War on Terror: Far-left (Jesus would never approve of a war on Islam through weapons or violence, even if they use it back)

Corruption: Center (he'd think both parties are corrupt, and that all parties are corrupt, and that all ideologies are corrupt, and that only political Jesus is non-corrupt). 

Same-Sex Marriage: center-right or right, if Jesus follows the Old Testament. If he's silent on the matter in the New Testament, because he's abolished God's old opinion, then I would say would certainly not condemn it. I would expect him to be about the way Pope Francis is in regards to this. 

Environment: Center-left. This really isn't his focus, but he's going to favor environment over profit. 

Gun control: Left. I don't think he'd ban all guns, but he'd see them primarily as weapons of violence, even if in defense. 

Free trade: Center. I don't think this is his focus. None of the options look like good answers for him. 

Abortion: Right, possibly. However, we'd still have to define what human life is, and at what point human life begins. Is it at the moment of ejaculation? Is it when the sperm hits the egg? Is it when there's a brain or a heart, or a brain and a heart? Etc. This has to be known to know at one point it can even be considered a form of "murder" 

Overall, Jesus seems like a Bernie Sanders (more Bernie than Bernie) that doesn't like abortion and might not support gay marriage. 

Meanwhile Satan, Jesus's opponent, has an identical platform to Ted Cruz. 

 

On ‎9‎/‎3‎/‎2016 at 0:51 AM, Reagan04 said:

@vcczar

1) It is that eternal feeling of no wanting your fellow humans to go to HELL.

2)They trap unemployed in cycles and prevent job growth to actually help them.

3)Tell JFK that when he cut taxes, the reforms he enacted were conservative whether or not he actually believed in them or wanted liberal ones. And yes Eisenhower was my mistake. But he was certainly more moderate than LBJ.

4And I don't think you understand how Jesus works. Jesus can snap his fingers and everyone is infinitely wealth and  inflation doesn't exist and no one lusts for more. However that  is not the world we live in, and you completely ignored my comment n his foreign policy, your platform is just stark-raving 100% wrong. And so is your platform for Stans who is fFar-Left and all issues because he wishes to usher in deadly reforms that seem nice *cough cough* free money through government *cough Cough* and of course he supports all version of sin from abortion to gay "marriage", your Satan platform is just hyperbole and that's sad. If you read revelations you'll find that Stan or the Anti-Christ will come and seem to unite the world under a socialist peacenik hippie society world government, and then the 4 horsemans deadly gifts, crumble the society as Jesus rides in with th3 Archangels on white horses and brings all those who follow him in righteousness to Heaven! AMEN! sorry... got a little engaged with my crazy preacher mode... you guys have really helped me keep that in check since I joined the forum:P , but in all seriousness your hyperbolic statements hold no weight against the Bible. The Lord Of the World is a great read on this.

There is not basis for any claims on any of the issues of today.  He did not talk about the role of government in people's lives.  There is no basis for him being Bernie Sanders.  There is no basis for him being Ted Cruz.  I am tired of Christ being used by political purposes by both sides.  He was not into politics.  He was about a message.  There is no way to know what he would want in politics.  He is above politics.  All we know is that he talked about individuals helping the poor.  He didn't talk about the government.  We know that performed miracles but did not talk about healthcare.  He did not talk about anything dealing with taking away people's weapons.  Saying that Jesus would not be far left would not be ignorant of his teachings.  That accusation is ignorant in it of itself since we would not know his positions.   Also, you REALLY need to stop throwing the accusation that people are actually satanic.  This is strong accusation and should not be taken lightly.  There is no reason that that should be thrown around here like that.  That goes to both of you.  Being a Christian means having a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.  It has nothing to do with politics or political positions.  Liberals and Conservatives can be Christians.  If your opinion is that someone of the different ideology is a Satanist, then you have a right to your opinion, but do not go around fire accusations like that at people.  And, as long as someone is a true follower of Christ, you are wrong on that accusation in the first place.  I am tired of seeing this all over the place now-a-days in this forum.  It has gotten way too personal on the attacks and needs to STOP NOW.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jvikings1 said:

 

There is not basis for any claims on any of the issues of today.  He did not talk about the role of government in people's lives.  There is no basis for him being Bernie Sanders.  There is no basis for him being Ted Cruz.  I am tired of Christ being used by political purposes by both sides.  He was not into politics.  He was about a message.  There is no way to know what he would want in politics.  He is above politics.  All we know is that he talked about individuals helping the poor.  He didn't talk about the government.  We know that performed miracles but did not talk about healthcare.  He did not talk about anything dealing with taking away people's weapons.  Saying that Jesus would not be far left would not be ignorant of his teachings.  That accusation is ignorant in it of itself since we would not know his positions.   Also, you REALLY need to stop throwing the accusation that people are actually satanic.  This is strong accusation and should not be taken lightly.  There is no reason that that should be thrown around here like that.  That goes to both of you.  I am tired of seeing this all over the place now-a-days in this forum.  It has gotten way too personal on the attacks and needs to STOP NOW.

 

Thank you for that anchoring my friend! I was inexcusably exploiting OUR LORD and Savior Jesus Christ for my own purposes breaking Commandment #4

Link to post
Share on other sites

@jvikings1 and others,

I apologize for my tone. I should have sent this as a private message to the person in question, rather than as a post on here. I do not apologize, however, for my opinions regarding politics or Christianity. I  blocked/ignored the offending person after posting the message. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

After seeing this thread I'd like some water to wash my eyes. It can be holy water or secular water just as long as it's clean. Anyway...

1 Hart

2 Somewhat unfavourable. The Soviet economy would have collapsed before long anyway; probably later but certainly before 2000. An economy which has been stagnant for decades is doomed.

3 Favourable. If ever a time comes when the parties go ape on each other all the time then things will get ugly. Oh wait...

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, SiorafasNaCillini said:

After seeing this thread I'd like some water to wash my eyes. It can be holy water or secular water just as long as it's clean. Anyway...

SO true..

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...