It seems that a statement made by Governor Palin has the liberal pundits a bit “worried” about her ability to uphold the division of church and state. While their concern is more likely translated into utter delight, they might want to reconsider the premature salivation. In the amateur video that is currently circulating the Internet and quite likely to become one of many in the Palin Hatin’ Greatest Hits collection, the Vice Presidential candidate is speaking to a crowd in (gasp) her own church. At this particular juncture, she made a statement about the Iraq war and its function as “God’s task.” Well, before we start casting the biblical stones, we should re-examine some of the church and state separation sins committed by the opposing team.
In a speech delivered to an audience of students at Hocking College, a secular venue, Obama decided to refer to Jesus Christ’s Sermon on the Mount to justify his support of civil unions for same-sex couples. Not only is this a form of blatant bible-thumping propaganda, but the reference itself is contradictory to a basic Christian ideology. The Senator might as well have quoted the Koran as proof that women’s lib is God’s will.
In yet another attempt to let the light of God shine upon the Democrats, Nancy Pelosi created new Catholic doctrine as she was interviewed by Tom Brokaw on “Meet the Press.” She talked about herself as an “ardent Catholic” and inaccurately referenced Saint Augustine in order to support her position that life in the womb does not begin until three months gestation. The amateur theologian was immediately corrected and discredited by the United States Council of Bishops, among others of whose beliefs she so readily insulted.
While the Democrats have found ways to weave Christianity into their rhetoric as a means to appeal to conservatives on the proverbial fence, they could leave their own constituents wondering…where is the love? Unfortunately for the Democrats, their frivolous exploitation of Christianity is a transparent political strategy that looks like manipulation to those who hold steadfast to those Christian values. Barrack and Nancy should stop trying to re-define Christianity and focus on the staunchly secular beliefs upheld by their own party, hence leaving the bibles and crucifixes to those who will truly cling to them!
Loading ...
10 users commented in " God is for Democrats "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a Trackback4300 plus men & women dying in Iraq and were sent there by the same bible thumpin cross clinging Republican President Bush. Was he showing the values the right holds? Does the bible tell you to kill everyone else who does not have the same beliefs as you, oh and has all the oil. Americans are still to this day being killed, as well as, innocent Iraqi people and you think someone actually believes that the Republican Party are the Christians in our society? Sad, sad, sad…. Palin was ignorant and wrong to say it was God’s task, unless she thinks Bush is god.
Ah wasn’t it the Christian Right that helped George Bush get into office?
I thought the Republicans had shown they are the Party of “family values” code for Christians.
This post is simply an anomily.
hmmm, I wonder if Palin thinks that the economic crisis is “god’s will”. The problem with people like Palin and those that represent the “christian right” is that those individuals feel that they speak for god and that when it suits them it is gods will and when it goes against their beliefs it is against god. The problem with those views are these issues are regarding human acts based on choice. God wants you to choose your path, not others path based on what you think. Yes, you can attest to his love, but not use his name to push your views. God is not a Republican or a Democrat and does not care about your agenda of war, the dollar and so called “family values”.
God wants you to choose your path? Sounds like somebody’s been drinking the Pelosi Kool-Aid. Yes, he wants you to choose your path, but incase you haven’t heard, Christianity is based on the idea that free will has its rewards and consequences. If you don’t believe in Christian principles, then you should find a religion that you do believe in. If you believe in keeping church and state separate, then do it.
You”thinking for yourself” are exactly the type of so called christians I was refering to-you think you have a golden ticket to heaven and a monopoly on the term christian.
If the principles of seperation of church and state did not exist, the US would become a country like those in the middle east fighting over religious views. Christianity takes on varies forms, the most common are Eastern Orthodox, Protestant churches, and Roman Catholic, although there are over a 1000 form of christianity.
Christianity is about personal relationships: with God as our father, with Jesus, with our family and friends, and even with enemies. Relationships are based on communication.
The studing of christianity is done by an individual or group will take a passage from the Bible, look at its meaning in the original context, and then see how it might apply to them, thus CHOOSING YOUR OWN PATH!
Christian ethics are founded on love. However there have been a number of debates about the best way to do this. One of the best-known disagreements in this Century is over “situation ethics”. A number of people argued that Christians should not become tied up in rules. Instead, they should act in any given situation as love would dictate.-thus CHOOSING YOUR OWN PATH!
Jesus teaching are based on love. The best example of that is “Love is patient; love is kind; love is not envious or boastful or arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth. It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.” from one of paul’s letters.
I am not sure what point your are trying to make by saying’Christianity is based on the idea that free will has its rewards and consequences’- other that to make the same point I made of regarding human acts based on choice. The bottom line is the the term christianity is not exclusive to the Republican party line. The principles of this country are based on freedom, specifically freedom of religious beliefs-thus making the seperation of church and state essential to a civilized nation. you seem to think seperation of church and state refers to comments on a blog, it does not it is based on the fact that government and religious institutions are to be keep seperate and independent of each other: Government actions are done singularly and based of the freedom religion.
Of course Christianity is not exclusive to the Republican Party…however, it is the Democratic Party that makes the fuss over the separation of church and state. So, why do the democrats feel a need to use Christianity as a tool during an election year? If you don’t want God in government, then keep him out of your politics. It’s really not that complicated.
Oh, and “Truth,” you might want to use spell check.
If you think you are insulting someone by suggesting spell check, your simple minded thinking is exposed. Your petty comments are exactly why you do not get to the root of understanding. People that are democratic in their views are christians also and have a right to acknowledge god and beliefs as much as a republican. You are kidding right, you are not really that ignorant are you?
Again, seperation of church and state applies to government and freedom of religious beliefs, not to conversation or speech! The context of the comments are regarding the principles that you just do not seem to understand,seperation of church and state applies to government and freedom of religious beliefs, not to conversation. That means laws that govern the combined population of the US are not based on a selection of religious followers. You should take a world religion course so that you can enlighten yourself regarding the fact that many have christian and religious beliefs and are equal to the expression of those in conversation and behavior. Again, because I know you still do not get it and it is that complicated for you…seperation of church and state is regarding government laws being seperated from a basis of religious belief.
A Democrat can be a christian and fight for the right of others whom have different religious beliefs to be represented and protected in and by the laws of our country.
So, when Obama noted the “Sermon on the Mount” as a reference point for his idea that Civil Unions should be allowable under the LAW…was he suggesting that Christian principles can affect his position of power? Was he implying that this part of the Bible could help him influence how he would lead our country? ABSOLUTELY! Here is your definition…and I quote: “government laws being seperated from a basis of religious belief.” (Yes, I used your misspelling in order to quote you as accurately as possible.) So, according to you, TRUTH, the senator most certainly violated the rules of separation. Personally, as a Republican Christian, I believe that the leaders of our great country should not have to suppress the beliefs and ideologies that come from the very religion that this country was founded upon—Christianity. It’s the lefties that have butchered the whole “separation” issue in the first place—and now they want to put it back together? Sure they do, but only during the election. Incidentally, I apologize for hurting you little liberal feelings by suggesting spell check. I was simply stating a fact. Your retort of calling me “simple minded” is akin to a 6 year-old calling his friend a stupid-head. Thanks for the entertainment.
Separation of Church & State is referring to Laws/government actions made not speeches or views expressed. Unfortunately, you are wrong on you interpretation of the law.
While one can see you are passionate about your view, you are arguing something that you do not understand thinking for yourself and are making yourself seem like the child. I am a Republican Christian so I understand what you are trying to say, but it is not relevant to the actual law.
McCain 08
Kristin (aka Truth),
To scrutinize whether or not speeches about future policy have anything to do with the law is moot, frankly. The point is obvious: Obama is using and twisting Christianity to promote an agenda when his own party is completely against the incorporation of religion into politics. Period.
Leave A Reply