I do not believe the gov’t should take the place of the family/community in supporting the family/community. A quick hand, yes. Being on the dole as a way of life, no.

Safe sex vs abstinence IS what I meant, even though I said condoms. BTW, thanks for clarifying your purpose for the question.

The choice between chocolate and vanilla ice cream is an amoral one LOL. I understand the difference Andy. The thing is are we supposed to accept amoral when there is a clear choice?

I have to scoot dude. We’ll talk later.

Since you like to talk about love, I did a keyword search (God Love) and came up with 107 verses (271 hits), but only twice did a verse state God is love (1Jo 4:8 & 16). Of the 107, 85 talks about loving the brotherhood, love of God towards man, man loving God or labor of love. About 12 verses pertaining to ungodly love.

So we can see that love is indeed very important: 1Jo 4:10 Herein, is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

The remaining verses are unrelated to each other, ie beloved: 1Jo 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.”

So then, even tho you say love is the answer, how do we tell what is true and what is a lie? By looking at God’s way of doing things? By looking at the life of Jesus?

Ironic that the ‘abusive’ Roman empire, nor the quisling Herod administration had any issue or animosity towards Jesus. It was instead the false teachers within the faith that sought to crucify Jesus because he condemned their progressive ways. It is the false teachers & prophets that screech and carry on the politics of personal destruction while believers simply point out the truths and use scriptures to point out the hypocrisy. And in their zeal, these vipers leveraged the civil government into doing their dirty work.

Well before I get accused of being OT, let me bring it full circle to the topic at hand, Dean’s tirade against eviiiil, hard-hearted white Christian republicans. La Shawn, I guess that means you’re white, do your parents know?

Sort of like the race pimps, ACLU, etc in our day and age. Speaking of race pimps, did you know that according to his hometown paper, sKerry once got up, before flip-flopping, and gave a warning about the costs of a ““culture of dependency. . . . We must ask whether [social disintegration] is the result of a massive shift in the psychology of our nation that some argue grew out of the excesses of the 1960s, a shift from self-reliance to indulgence and dependence, from caring to self-indulgence, from public accountability to public abdication and chaos. The truth is that affirmative action has kept America thinking in racial terms“. (Google “Herky-Jerky Kerry“)

There’s that word again: TRUTH.

God=Truth, Satan=deceit. In the interest of maintaining some semblance of short & sweet, examine the following scriptures for TRUTH: Deu 32, 2Sam 7 & 22, Psa 25,41,42 & 31:5-6, Pro 30:5-6, Jer 7:28, Jer 10, Dan 2:47-49, Mar 12, Joh 3:20-21.

The notion that only the Godly should sit in judgment of the public is found in Exodus 18 (secondary issue that sometimes when on a mission from God, it’s better to leave the family at home). Now why on earth would some ‘christians’ insist that faith be separate from politics? All Christians should take offense at the notion that Christians in politics/justice are extremists and should just butt out.

Godly wrath/justice, good intentions notwithstanding vis a vis moral equivalence and refusing to heed His ways: 1Ch 13:9-10, Job 31, Hos 4 & Zep 3. From the historical evidence, our founding fathers certainly believed that our democracy was only fit for a Godly nation.

Also considering a few examples/teachings of Jesus regarding personal responsibility vs. social justice & do-/feel-goodism:

–Good Samaritan: if Jesus thot it was the government’s role to assist the down & out, then it we must be missing a few verses from the Bible about the good Samaritan sending up a 911 smoke signal so that the king’s men and horses could rush in and put the victim back together again.
—-LESSON: If heathens can show mercy/love & take it upon themselves to help a fellow man, let alone a stranger (ethnic foreigner), at personal risk and cost, what’s your excuse? You the individual discovered the need, you take care of it.
—-No mention about government stepping in for you to take care of the downtrodden.

–The Adulteress: Go and sin no more.
—-LESSON: Sin is the root of human affliction. The first step towards relief is repentance, not assistance.
—-No mention of Church or State putting together a support group to provide self-esteem therapy, hypnotism, financial aid to get back on her feet.

–The Debt Forgiver: A debtor whose marker was called, pled for mercy and was granted it. Receiving sanctuary from debtor’s prison, turned and tossed a fellow man in prison for a smaller debt. When his lord heard of the injustice, he angrily revoked the forgiveness and locked him up until the debt was repaid (inflicted suffering???).
—-LESSON: Be merciful to others because we have a greater debt to God. Also, Debtor’s Prison is a valid concept — gasp. That’s why believers ought to be in debt to no man.
—-No mention of reforming bankruptcy laws and/or doing away with stiff penalties for failing to pay debts.

–The Laborers: Some worked all day for a penny, others worked half a day and again some only worked an hour, yet all got the same pay (unfair???).
—-LESSON: Fair compensation is in the eye of the employer and the contract between him and the worker.
—-No mention of the government mandating what is fair pay.

–Rich Man following Jesus: When asked, Jesus told him to sell all his possessions and give it to the poor.
—-LESSON: If you’re going to take on the mission of helping the poor and sick, use your own resources (personal price???). Helping someone is a personal one-on-one mission.
—-No mention of giving the money/resources to the government so that they can take care of the poor.

(You recall I warned you to be careful about your answer? Ironic that you should quote Mat 25:31-46 to tell me about the goats & sheep. I was waiting to use the following on you. If you had read further up, like Mat 25:14-30…)
–The 1, 2 & 5 Talents: Rich man about to take a business trip (capitalist pig). Tasked his servants to take care of his money. The industrial & capitalist entrepreneurs were richly rewarded and the one who buried ‘in order’ to protect the cash was cursed (not loving???) for not even at least putting the money to work in a bank account where it could at least earn interest and was FOREVER banished.
—-LESSON: Be self-reliant and learn something about capital & economics.
—-No mention of socialism whereby everyone, rich and poor shares in the generated wealth.

(Strike Two, a little bit further up from the parable of the talents, like Mat 25:1-12)
–The 10 Virgins: 5 wise virgins came with an extra supply of oil and 5 foolish virgins had just what was in their lamp. When their lamps went out, they asked the wise five to share, which they wisely refused (no compassion???). When the 5 FOOLS finally showed up, they were turned away with “I don’t know you”.
—-LESSON: When you make a foolish mistake, don’t look to others to bail you out. Instead take positive steps remedy the situation and hope & pray that you resolve it before it’s too late permanently. IOW, we can’t save others from their folly.
—-No mention of oil/wealth redistribution.

As for the goats and sheep, if you take Mat 25:31-46 to mean that the government should feed the hungry, clothe the naked etc, it would seem obvious that you have taken that passage totally out of context. Strike THREE. OTOH, if you mean it is the Christian’s obligation to do so when presented with the opportunity, you hit a line drive. However, as a referee, based on the way you’ve been swinging your bat, I’m calling it a foul ball. In either case, I do believe I got your number, but please don’t hang up.

I could go on, but I think you get the point. If you ‘feel’ for the common man, go and personally do something about it. Don’t expect to compel others to help, otherwise that ‘effort of love’ becomes but a clanging cymbal.

Oh!!! BTW, I’m pretty sure that REPENT is the answer (105 verses) and is God’s only way of accepting us, ie Lord, what must I do to be saved? REPENT!

You know there’s another parable where Jesus talks about 100 sheep. Luk 15:7 I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance.

Rafael: Peace & Love unto you.

“I don’t support what I believe you would call indefinite gov’t handouts to folks. A temporary hand up, ye…

Good. Then you’ll agree that some people can be justified in saying that the gov’t has no business meddling PERIOD in community business without being called heartless or unchristian?

“I don’t believe that there is any such thing as “safe sex” outside of the marriage bed. Period. To even ask me the condoms vs. safe sex question is insulting, especially from someone that prefers an amoral situation (your words) to a moral one in ANY circumstance.”

Good, I wanted to hear you come out and say it cause it wasn’t evident in your comment to Mary that you were trying to lead her precept by precept, line by line to wean her from milk and make her understand doctrine.

To ask you condoms vs safe sex??? Surely you mean safe sex vs abstinence? It’s not at all insulting, it is critical to know where you stand, to know whether you are speaking to truth or just another false teacher. If a false teacher, then your reference to Isa 28, particularily verse 15, would apply. Or?

While we’re on the subject of condoms, I think everyone is interested in helping to reduce the rate of AIDS/HIV infections. But how do we do this when Worldly Wisdom = Safe Sex, God’s Wisdom = Sin No More?

Now how often have we heard that Pope John Paul and other fundamentalists are responsible for the growth in the rate of infection due to dogmatic moral values? Now let us rightly divide the truth. Did you know that on a country by country analysis, the rate of AIDS/HIV infection is inversely related to ‘religiosity’? No? I wonder why? It wouldn’t have anything to do with progressive ideology (MSM/DNC/UN/WHO) which is at odds with the truth would it?

Moral values & ABC is winning the war on STD:
http://remotefarm.techcentralstation.com/061005D.html

Circumcision reduces AIDS/HIV and other hygenic problems:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2000/valley_hiv.shtml

WHO pushes the myth that a majority of AIDS/HIV comes from heterosexual contact:
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com/2005_04_24_dissectleft_archive.html#11142964

Plus La Shawn has blogged often about ABC & sex.

As for amoral vs moral, I said; “It is the obligation of every Christian to turn back policies that are immoral whenever possible. For example, I am completely within my rights to insist that the Government should not take my tax dollars to subsidize immoral activities such as abortion or p*** christ. I would settle for an amoral situation where States, as a consensus of its population can legalize or criminalize abortion and I would have the choice of where to live acordingly.”

The term amoral is distinct from the terms moral and immoral, and simply refers to the state of lacking any moral characteristics. An amoral act is not morally good nor is it morally bad – it simply is. I grant you I could have been a little more clearer, but given my druthers, I’d rather have a ‘moral’ code, but would settle for an amoral legal stance as opposed to abiding a code of law that not only is simply immoral, but requires that I support it.

Why the scare quotes around moral? Because legislation is political and as such there has to be some compromise. For example, taking God out of the school is immoral; freedom to pray, or not, if a team wishes is amoral; mandating that teams must pray a certain way, while moralistic, nevertheless is government enforced and becomes de facto state-sanctioned church. Regardless of whatever world, it would be my obligation to persuade one to think/act morally. See the difference?

“I remember that whole “ketchup is a vegetable” flap. I remember people who were legitimately on assistance BEING CUT OFF…”

Again, some of believe the govt has no business giving handouts whatsoever. I also recall the government moving in to stop, impede communities from taking care of their own. Yeah I remember the catsup flap, you mean that was immoral? I’ll be hornswoogled. Ever read the nutrition labels for both? How about the nutrition labels for soda pop in school vending machines? Follow the money.

So you weren’t fond of Reagan and your choices were?

“Do you really need a scriptural basis for asserting that Jesus was selfless?”

No, but your telling me would help me determine whether you’re a liberation theologist or not.

“I like your quote from Proverbs. However, maybe you should look at it with you as the subject.” Thanks, that’s something we should all evaluate everyday. I think the difference is that God has many attributes of which LOVE is but one. Those who ignore TRUTH, LIGHT, JEALOUS, HATER OF SIN, etc do so at their peril.

“The sole purpose of my post was to let Mary know she wasn’t alone. Whether or not you agree with her, her words rang out with compassion and feeling.”

Compassion is a good thing. Compasion can be misguided. Compassion can also be self-injurious. Feeling God is not like feeling Lucas’ Force. Feeling can be sincerely wrong. Feeling = seemth. The trick is knowing when AND how to be compassionate. Would have been nice to have taken the time to rightly divide the truth about compassion with Mary.

“NONE of us have all of the answers”

That’s why we have a user’s manual called the Bible and customer service agent called the Holy Spirit to walk us thru it.

No more calling folks moonbats and idiots and other such hateful rubbish.”

You mean I should stick to hypocrites, white-washed sepulchers, full of dead man bones, vipers, children of Satan, fools, blind — IOW ONLY if Jesus said it then I can repeat it, when appropriate?

Loving sinners is telling them they’re lost and on the highway to hell. Respecting people means not mincing the truth nor wrapping it up in feel-good liberation platitudes.

I’ll leave you with this: Truth (Acts 17:11)

I am NOT here to argue. I have a pronounced OPINION of the views of a few million Americans, that is true. I am NOT a fan of a lot of what I see. I can speak out about that, as can you. I haven’t called anyone an an oppressor. I do, however, feel like many of those on the extreme right are seriously unconcerned about those that are not in their circle. If the brush splatters a little paint on you, good. There was a time it would have splattered some on me. Incidentally, this applies to the extreme left also.

“Reaganite” is an identifier. When did I use that term with loathing? You make an assumption you can’t back up, so let me clear it up for you. Supporters of Ronald Reagan called themselves Reaganites WITH PRIDE back in the 1980s. If Reaganite is a hateful term, I am honestly not aware of it. I spoke of those whose worship at the ALTAR OF REAGANISM, but not with loathing. I don’t loathe/hate/despise anyone. Saying I feel pity for them would be the accurate description, because they (just like their polar political opposites) have substituted a philosophy of selfishness over the wisdom of God as their guiding principle.

I am simply saying I’d like to see some civil discourse. You SEEM to be peeved. I can’t take any responsibility for that. I don’t like the extreme right’s agenda. Does that cover all conservatives? No, it doesn’t. I am wrong for saying that? No, I am not. I don’t like the agenda of the extreme left either. Does that cover all liberals? No, it doesn’t. Am I wrong for saying that? No, I am not. I (maybe foolishly to some) happen to believe there is common ground to be found. People of differing opinions can work together. People can and should love and respect each other. If you have a problem with that SCSI, that is for you to work out (or not).

Freedom of speech is a great thing. It just happens to come with a greater responsiblity. I am shocked and appalled at the nastiness that comes from both sides of the fence. It doesn’t have to be so. Maybe you think Howard Dean gets a free pass from me when he shoots off at the mouth: he doesn’t. Some remarks simply should be tempered and not in the name of political correctness. They should be tempered in the name of civility.

I am going to ask you a personal question: why are you (seemingly) offended that I chose to leave you with LOVE? What is the issue with that? Is LOVE wrong? Is it uncomfortable for you? )I am asking rhetorically.)

I put into practice what I believe SCSI. I try not to allow any anger to trickle into what I post, even when there have been issues that I responded to that nearly had my hair on fire. I know that LOVE is the answer; God’s way of doing things is the only way to do them. If you think that calling people out of their names and being churlish is a proper way to conduct business, then I suppose that is what you will do. I just disagree that it is necessary. Folks can have strong disagreement without killing each other physically or verbally.

Oh, and the word is “reverend”, not “reverand”. I never have and never will call myself reverend. That is a name reserved for God. I did get a chuckle out of the attempted sarcasm. (You were being sarcastic, right? ) Again I will leave you with one word/concept/thing: LOVE.

I don’t support what I believe you would call indefinite gov’t handouts to folks. A temporary hand up, yes. You know the proverb: Give a man a fish and he’ll eat for a day; teach him to fish and he’ll eat forever. Families and the community should be the ones providing the bulk of the help. And yes, community includes churches.

SCSI, I don’t know or care who leads in charitable giving. I am just glad people do give. Incidentally, you don’t know my worldview, dude. Just rest assured that it isn’t one that thinks a political philosophy is superior to the wisdom of El Shaddai.

Andy, I don’t believe that there is any such thing as “safe sex” outside of the marriage bed. Period. To even ask me the condoms vs. safe sex question is insulting, especially from someone that prefers an amoral situation (your words) to a moral one in ANY circumstance.

Moving on, I referenced Isaiah chapter 28 in my mini-rant against Reaganites. I remember that whole “ketchup is a vegetable” flap. I remember people who were legitimately on assistance BEING CUT OFF. One family I knew suffered greatly. I mean, a quad CAN’T work! I remember them cutting and running in Lebanon after 241 of my brothers-in-arms were slaughtered. I also remember Iran-Contra. I wasn’t as fond of Ronald Reagan as I am sure you were, so no further need to even discuss him.

Do you really need a scriptural basis for asserting that Jesus was selfless? You do know that He sinless, died for our sins. He voluntarily laid His life down. That is selfless (see John 10:17 & 18). Do you need scripture to tell you that He was and still is an advocate for the downtrodden? Check out the parable of the Sheep and the Goats (Matthew 25:31-46) to get His attitude on that issue. There are obviously others, but that is enough for me to get my point across.

I like your quote from Proverbs. However, maybe you should look at it with you as the subject. I say that because I hear all of the love and respect you have for the conservative agenda, but not a peep about the love of God and how…no need to go there.

The sole purpose of my post was to let Mary know she wasn’t alone. Whether or not you agree with her, her words rang out with compassion and feeling. NONE of us have all of the answers. I have said and I maintain that the extremists on BOTH sides of the political spectrum are WRONG. There are some good things about the conservative agenda and there are some good things about the liberal agenda. Man, if people were really willing to talk to each other rather than call each other names what would we have then? I’d encourage you to think about that and to think about it seriously. No more calling folks moonbats and idiots and other such hateful rubbish. Love people. Respect people. Then perhaps you will see the differences between you are not so insurmountable. So (hoping you won’t need this scripturally referenced also ), I’ll leave you with this Andy & SCSI: LOVE.

It’ll take Raf some time to back it up without it falling apart right off the bat. I won’t hold my breath, but I think it’s another hit and run.

I’m all too often struck by the fact that self-described intellectuals, progressive christians included, are in reality idiots. Why is that? Thomas Sowell explains:
“Someone once defined a social problem as a situation in which the real world differs from the theories of intellectuals. To the intelligentsia, it follows, as night the day, the real world is wrong and needs to change.“
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20050611-112056-3607r.htm

Pro 14:12 There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

The government’s giving of handouts to the poor has increased the destuction of the nuclear family, given rise to illegitimate babies, children having children and abortion. The preaching of safe sex has only lead to higher rates of infection of AIDSHIV. Pray tell, what has these doing good gotten us?

Which is the greater good? Giving condoms freely and preaching safe sex or preaching abstinence? Be caeful how you answer.