It’s Time to Formally Declare America A Christian Nation.

[Mashmont]

Boring self soothing platitudes of a religious goober whose mind has grown soft from faith.

Rape and incest are not logically consistent exception to my basis for opposing abortions. On that point, I do not disagree with you. But I’ll be damned if I’ll tell a woman who has been impregnated by her father or brother that she has no choice but to carry that male’s child. It is almost beyond comprehensibility that we could tell the woman that her rapist’s baby “must “ be carried by her. And what if her life is in danger or even her overall health? These are all horrible things to contemplate yet provide no ground for me (or the government In my name) to impose my view about the sanctity of human life on her.

the balance of your post is just another reiteration by you of your very trite views.

This is sort of Joe Biden's cop-out argument that 'While I personally oppose abortion, I won't impose my beliefs on others". However your beliefs are far better than Biden's in that you appear to oppose most abortions. But regarding pregnancy from rape or incest, as tragic as that circumstance is, there is no way to justify to the killing of that innocent child.

Now in terms of danger to the life of the mother, I believe if the baby dies as the result of the doctor's attempt to save the mother, that's permissible, but if direct action is taken to abortion the baby, that's wrong.

So in Mashmont's overall assessment, if there are four categories: 1) strong conservative, moral and fiscal; 2) some redeeming conservative features, but otherwise Marxist enabler; 3) passive Marxist enabler 4) nutso leftwing activist, I'd put you in #2. Winter is a #3.

 

[Mashmont]

Repeating a lie does not make it true.

A conservative is not necessarily a Christian, or even religious. A social conservative may be, but they are just the political version of Mrs. Kravitz.

I don't think a true conservative can further Marxist goals. But that's me. Perhaps we'll have to disagree on this.

 

[WinterBorn]

I don't think a true conservative can further Marxist goals. But that's me. Perhaps we'll have to disagree on this.

A true conservative that follows the US Constitution is not furthering Marxism.

 

[Mashmont]

A true conservative that follows the US Constitution is not furthering Marxism.

A true conservative that follows the US Constitution is not furthering Marxism.

You and I will be allies on most threads. Probably not on anything religious. Same with BackAgain.

 

[BackAgain]

This is sort of Joe Biden's cop-out argument that 'While I personally oppose abortion, I won't impose my beliefs on others". However your beliefs are far better than Biden's in that you appear to oppose most abortions. But regarding pregnancy from rape or incest, as tragic as that circumstance is, there is no way to justify to the killing of that innocent child.

Now in terms of danger to the life of the mother, I believe if the baby dies as the result of the doctor's attempt to save the mother, that's permissible, but if direct action is taken to abortion the baby, that's wrong.

So in Mashmont's overall assessment, if there are four categories: 1) strong conservative, moral and fiscal; 2) some redeeming conservative features, but otherwise Marxist enabler; 3) passive Marxist enabler 4) nutso leftwing activist, I'd put you in #2. Winter is a #3.

I understand your reliance on “one rule fits all.” But I find it unconscionable.

Your categorizations are pure stupidity. You are so shallow (based on your religious zealotry and bigotry) that you appear to be more of a dictatorial-type than a conservative.

 

[Mashmont]

I understand your reliance on “one rule fits all.” But I find it unconscionable.

Your categorizations are pure stupidity. You are so shallow (based on your religious zealotry and bigotry) that you appear to be more of a dictatorial-type than a conservative.

So much for my attempt to be conciliatory.

 

[BackAgain]

You and I will be allies on most threads. Probably not on anything religious. Same with BackAgain.

We may agree on certain topics. We are probably both opposed to a lot of the “thinking” associated with modern day American “liberals” and so-called “progressives.” That said, our respective bases to oppose such things may not be all that similar.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Please stop whining about the admonishment.

Simply asking for an answer to a few questions. Or just say you refuse to answer it. It’s not complicated.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

You can't separate politics from religion

NFBW wrote: Do you think there are any atheists in the US military? Are you ok with your Christian dollars paying his or her salary? Will you ban atheists from serving in the military to defend your Christian nation? What about Muslims? 22FEB07-POST#0989

 

[AsherN]

I can only answer that from a Catholic perspective, but I believe only religious weddings are valid. Not JP weddings. I'll look into that.

Except that the State does not recognize religious weddings. Only civil ones. That's why the license is granted by the state, it is a very NA thing that clergy can act as a secular agent of the State to sign the legal documents.

 

[Mashmont]

Except that the State does not recognize religious weddings. Only civil ones. That's why the license is granted by the state, it is a very NA thing that clergy can act as a secular agent of the State to sign the legal documents.

Ergo, I said "I am answering from a Catholic perspective". Not the state's.

 

[AsherN]

Ergo, I said "I am answering from a Catholic perspective". Not the state's.

but your marriages are not legal in the eyes of the law of the land. A religious wedding is nothing but a ceremony. The actual marriage is done before.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Was atheistic Marxist policy to stop the peaceful disarming of Iraq or was it a “Nation under God policy” to defend One Nation under GOD from the threat of WMD? 22FEB07-POST#852

NFBW wrote: Was the US Invasion of Iraq an atheist driven unnecessary war that George W. Bush started? 22FEB07-POST#0993

 

[Mashmont]

but your marriages are not legal in the eyes of the law of the land. A religious wedding is nothing but a ceremony. The actual marriage is done before.

If you go back and look, the context of the question was the morality of sex inside marriage. What kind of wedding? Church or state? It's not a legal question. It's a moral question.
Gotta follow the conversation before interjecting.

 

[Stann]

You people continue to post without reading. For the now tenth time, I said nothing about demanding conversion through force. That is a strawman lie. My plan is simply to allow only laws that do not violate Christian teaching, and to disallow the media complex from advocating an atheist agenda. But if we keep the way we're going and allow atheism to be the law of the land due to the banning of religion, then you'll see your 'forced conversion' Soviet style in due time.

Christian teachings very so greatly between all the different churches how could you get one consensus on what Christian teachings are. It's impossible. You'd get down to the bare minimums, thou shall not steal, thou shall not rape, and I'll shall not kill. And those are already covered by secular law.

 

[Mashmont]

but your marriages are not legal in the eyes of the law of the land. A religious wedding is nothing but a ceremony. The actual marriage is done before.

That's untrue.

 

[Mashmont]

Christian teachings very so greatly between all the different churches how could you get one consensus on what Christian teachings are. It's impossible. You'd get down to the bare minimums, thou shall not steal, thou shall not rape, and I'll shall not kill. And those are already covered by secular law.

All Christian denominations oppose abortion and sex outside marriage, for example None of things on my list of laws would violent any Christian denomination's teachings.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

You people continue to post without reading. For the now tenth time, I said nothing about demanding conversion through force.

NFBW wrote: What do you mean you’re not using force? Every woman who does not agree with your religious belief that life begins at conception will be forced to carry a pregnancy to full-term by Christian Nation Pregnancy Police. 22FEB07-POST#0998

 

[AsherN]

That's untrue.

All the legal civil paperwork is done before the ceremony. At that point, the couple is legally married. Whether the ceremony occurs is irrelevant.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

All Christian denominations oppose abortion and sex outside marriage, for example None of things on my list of laws would violent any Christian denomination's teachings

NFBW wrote: What country are you living in? Because it is not the United States of America or freedom of religion or from religion is guaranteed in our Constitution.


JANUARY 22, 2018

American religious groups vary widely in their views of abortion​

BY DAVID MASCI

More than four decades after Roe v. Wade legalized abortion nationwide, most Americans (57%) are supportive of legal abortion, according to a 2017 Pew Research Center survey. But a substantial minority (40%) says abortion should be illegal in all or most cases, and within some U.S. denominations and religious groups, this figure is much higher.
For instance, most Jehovah’s Witnesses (75%) and Mormons (70%) say abortion should be illegal in all or most cases, according to the 2014 Religious Landscape Study, a survey of more than 35,000 Americans in all 50 states. The same holds true for members of some evangelical churches, including the Pentecostal denominations Church of God (Cleveland, Tennessee) (77%) and Assemblies of God (71%), as well as America’s largest evangelical denomination, the Southern Baptist Convention (66%). Indeed, among all those who are part of the evangelical tradition, nearly twice as many say they oppose legal abortion as support it (63% to 33%).
By comparison, only 35% of those who are part of the mainline Protestant tradition say abortion should be illegal in all or most cases, with 60% in support of keeping abortion legal. Members of the Episcopal Church (79%) and the United Church of Christ (72%) are especially likely to support legal abortion, while most members of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) and the mainline Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (65%) also take this position.

American religious groups vary widely in their views of abortion

Many Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons and members of some evangelical churches say abortion should be illegal. But among other religious groups, many support legal abortion.

www.pewresearch.org

Unitarian Universalists (90%) and American Jews (83%) in the 2014 survey were much more supportive of legal abortion than the general population. And most people who have no religious affiliation – particularly atheists and agnostics (87% each) – also support abortion rights.
Among those who do identify with a religion, the majority view about abortion among members of a particular group often mirrors that group’s official policy on abortion. This is the case with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Mormon church) and the Southern Baptist Convention – both churches oppose abortion, as do most members of those churches. And the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), Unitarian Universalist Association, and Reform and Conservative Judaism, for example, all support abortion rights, in line with most of their adherents.
There are, however, cases where the views of a church’s members don’t align with its teachings on abortion. For instance, while the Roman Catholic Church is an outspoken critic of abortion, U.S. Catholics were divided on the issue in the 2014 survey, with 48% supportive of legal abortion and 47% opposed. 22FEB07-POST#