Palin mixing religion with policy

fuck

know1 wrote:

So what affects the policies of a non-religious person? I think it's their personal belief system. So how is that much different?

you can still be religious, and not a sociopath.

BTW, Obama is a Christian so his Christian beliefs may affect his decisions in office.

yeah, but he's not a religious nut, like Palin is.

seriously.

think about it. she thinks the Iraq war is a "task from God." next, she'll be taking us to war with Iran on another "task from God." how does this not bother you people?

know1

_outlaw wrote:

you can still be religious, and not a sociopath.

yeah, but he's not a religious nut, like Palin is.

seriously.

think about it. she thinks the Iraq war is a "task from God." next, she'll be taking us to war with Iran on another "task from God." how does this not bother you people?

You're splitting hairs now. If someone believes in a Christian God, don't they usually believe that God has a hand in all that is taking place?

So either Obama is basically as nutty as Palin and just doesn't talk about it as much, or he's lying about his Chrisitian faith to get votes.

fuck

Thecure wrote:

could you not say the same thing abotu Obama picking Biden (who i like) Obama has been ruuning as teh person who was agianst the war in Iraq and he picked Biden who voted for teh war and also to contuine to fund the war. he picked Biden i believe becuase he felt that he needed a person who was strong on Forighn affairs as that was something that he needed to win the Presidency. McCain also understood that if he wanted to be president he needed to have the right on his side hence he picked Palin.

hey, I don't like Biden either, but he's CERTAINLY better than Palin. The two of them can fight it out to see who loves Israel more, but at the end of the day, Palin is just insane.

lets be realistic, no matter who mccain picked people here woudl not be happy and would be saying the same thing.

that's not being realistic, that's a baseless accusation.

we don't know how/if Palin would be a detriment to the country.

I've seen enough to know how much damage she can do.

teh people in Alaska seem to like her and it does look like sh ehas done soem good things there.

great, some eskimos are going to decide who should be second-in-command to the most important country in the world.

fuck

know1 wrote:

You're splitting hairs now. If someone believes in a Christian God, don't they usually believe that God has a hand in all that is taking place?

So either Obama is basically as nutty as Palin and just doesn't talk about it as much, or he's lying about his Chrisitian faith to get votes.

what the fuck are you talking about? someone can be Christian and know that a war is not a "task from God". do you even know a single thing about religion? why do you think there's a difference between an "Islamic terrorist's" way of thinking, and a "regular" Muslim's way of thinking? the difference between Obama and Palin is that Palin is the equivalent of a radical terrorist with that kind of thinking.

9/11 being a task from God = you are a fucking crazy terrorist.

Iraq war being a task from God = what's the problem here?

hypocrisy at it's finest.

meme

I do not like Palin one bit and would never vote for her, but I think it makes a significant difference that she spoke those words in a church, and not in a public forum.

NMyTree wrote:

It is Palin's policy to impose God into what essetially is a corporate/financial/envorinmental issue and matter.

She had absolutley no ground or right to infuse "hearts must be good with god" into that pipeline issue. God and religion has nothing to do with that pipeline.

Building a pipeline is an environmental, financial and corporate issue; which always turns political.

It is her looney, Christian extremist disposition that dictated she make such an absurd and revealing comment.

If you don't see that as mixing religion.....her god, into the issue, then there's nothing more to say.

You see it your way. I see it my way.

catch22

know1 wrote:

I'll admit, I was twisting what you said a bit and almost thought better of it before I posted. I'll also admit that I'm a bit of a "skimmer" when it comes to longer posts.

I'm guessing that the truth of the matter is that widespread, conspiratorial manipulation by either party probably happens far less than what is frequently and casually mentioned as fact - whether it's issues about homosexuality, minorities, etc.

I think we give these parties far more credit then they deserve when it comes to their power to persuade.

i must not be making myself very clear. i agree with you that i don't think either party has some grand conspiracy to manipulate votes on a regular basis. i'm saying that it's a tactic of desperation both parties resort to when they feel they can't win and it often works.

thus my example about john kerry. he was a weak candidate and the swift boat/defense thing wasn't working. kerry was still close. so in key states like ohio, they brought up the wedge issues... kerry is pro-gay and pro-abortion. i think this is why palin was selected... obama was killing mccain in popularity and the republicans were having no luck with independents. so they bring in palin... a fiery pro-life ultra-conservative. she has whipped the fringe into a frenzy. this election was all about international relations and the economy... until about a week ago. now it's about palin and her religious views. again, the cultural wedge issues in play. it's not a conspiracy, it's a desperation tactic.

mammasan

know1 wrote:

Ever heard of checks and balances and the constitution. If they do something to promote religion, then it will be negated.

If they use their belief system to influence their own decision making....well, who doesn't do that?

I have heard of checks and balances and the Constitution but I believe our government, for the most part, completely forgot what those where.

Thecure

_outlaw wrote:

hey, I don't like Biden either, but he's CERTAINLY better than Palin. The two of them can fight it out to see who loves Israel more, but at the end of the day, Palin is just insane.

that's not being realistic, that's a baseless accusation.

I've seen enough to know how much damage she can do.

great, some eskimos are going to decide who should be second-in-command to the most important country in the world.

first, who could Mccain have picked that would not start a shitstorm here? second what have you seen, that can't be apply to everyone else running? wow, the last comment is just too dumb to even comment on.

digster

Thecure wrote:

first, who could Mccain have picked that would not start a shitstorm here? second what have you seen, that can't be apply to everyone else running? wow, the last comment is just too dumb to even comment on.

Joe Lieberman, Tom Ridge, Bobby Jindal, Kay Bailey Hutchinson. I don't agree with their policies, but I would have respected those choices. But you're right in that none of them probably would have generated as much news as Palin has.

Cosmo

MrSmith wrote:

every one bases policy on some belief, religious or not. its up to the voter to not vote in a crazy asshole who think Jesus wants to nuke everyone. there have been plenty of presidents who base decisions on Christian principles (or all of them). some of them made good decisions, some bad.

and many athiests have made some pretty barbaric decisions, too (Stalin, Mao, Hitler).

...
Yes. Personally... I base my decisions on Right or Wrong.
And I'm not speaking Atheists, here... I'm speaking of a person in power who will make decisions... Hopefully... on what is Right and what is Wrong... not, based on his/her religious belief.
...
Oh... and by the way... Hitler was a devout Catholic who believed in Jesus. He often spoke of God and his hatred of the Jews... whom he accused of killing Jesus... not the Romans.

"As long as leadership from above was not lacking, the people fulfilled their duty and obligation overwhelmingly. Whether Protestant pastor or Catholic priest, both together and particularly at the first flare, there really existed in both camps but a single holy German Reich, for whose existence and future each man turned to his own heaven. "

- Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 3

"And the founder of Christianity made no secret indeed of his estimation of the Jewish people. When He found it necessary, He drove those enemies of the human race out of the Temple of God; because then, as always, they used religion as a means of advancing their commercial interests. But at that time Christ was nailed to the Cross for his attitude towards the Jews; whereas our modern Christians enter into party politics and when elections are being held they debase themselves to beg for Jewish votes. They even enter into political intrigues with the atheistic Jewish parties against the interests of their own Christian nation."

- Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 11

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. ...Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed his blood upon the Cross. ... "

- Adolf Hitler, speech on April 12, 1922

"The fact that the Curia is now making its peace with Fascism shows that the Vatican trusts the new political realities far more than did the former liberal democracy with which it could not come to terms. ...The fact that the Catholic Church has come to an agreement with Fascist Italy ...proves beyond doubt that the Fascist world of ideas is closer to Christianity than those of Jewish liberalism or even atheistic Marxism... "

- Adolf Hitler in an article in the Völkischer Beobachter, February 29, 1929, on the new Lateran Treaty between Mussolini's fascist government and the Vatican

...
But, yes.. PEOPLE do Evil things. Some base their decisions on Religion while others blame religion as the cause.
What I am saying is that when a person goes into the Seat of The Presidency (or Congress or The Supreme Court)... he/she must NOT steer our country towards one religion over the others... be it with legislation or public policy. The latter does NOT come under the scrutiny of our Checks and Balances. They can call on their belief system for guidence.. but, their belief system should NOT be the goal of their decision making.

fuck

Thecure wrote:

first, who could Mccain have picked that would not start a shitstorm here? second what have you seen, that can't be apply to everyone else running? wow, the last comment is just too dumb to even comment on.

It's not my job to say who McCain should have picked. your accusation was still baseless, though. as for your second comment, I'm pretty sure no one else running as said anything as remotely crazy as Palin did.

sweetpotato

oops, sorry, wrong post...

decides2dream

if one believes in a god, i don't know why one would even think such a being would mix him/her self up with american politics and policy. keep your god(s) out of my government thank you very much.