1
   

Has the republican party been turned into the party of God?

 
 
Instigate
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 02:17 pm
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
but you still have just agreed with my statement. Republicans and the Bush crowd do invoke the name of God and associate themselves that way at every opportunity.

The Democrats NEVER describe themselves as Commie/Pinkos.


The broad, sweeping generalizations like the one underlined above are precisely what I am talking about. It just irritates me that people are trying to apply the goofiness of the Religious Right to Republicans in general. I dont want "Religious" and "Republican" to become synonymous, and I dont think they are, but that is what the title of this thread implies and it is that to which I object and deny.

You can look at the numerous conservatives on A2K and I think you'll be hard pressed to find anyone who voted for Bush because of their religious preference.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 02:25 pm
How is that a broad sweeping generalization. The Bush crowd in particular and by your own admission politicians in general are constantly connecting themselves to God.

I notice you ignored the fact that the Democrats NEVER associate themselves with pinkos or commies your exact words, not mine.

I'm not taking a side here. Just stating an irrefutable fact. I even gave an example to back up my statement like we learned in school to do with my faith based charity example.
0 Replies
 
Instigate
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 02:26 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Quote:
Nor do I belive that Bush actually consults God for advice on Foreign and Domestic policy.


This directly contradicts statements he and others have made in the past, yaknow.

Cycloptichorn


I suppose its possible that he is really that nutty, but I think it more feasible that he is pandering to the Religious Right. If Bush really does formulate his policy based upon messages from God, than I say that we're probably screwed; But I dont think he does.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 02:27 pm
Quote:
You can look at the numerous conservatives on A2K and I think you'll be hard pressed to find anyone who voted for Bush because of their religious preference.


I highly doubt the conservatives on A2K represent the average Bush voter, or the average Republican candidate.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 02:35 pm
This is one of the rare cases where I agree with McGentrix. In a democracy, a person is free to make up her mind for whatever reason. This is true of voters, and politicians and anyone else. You can not discount someones opinion because it stems from their religion.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 02:40 pm
As to the other question that is being tossed about,..

I am a Commie and a Pinko. I am not a Democrat.

I can't claim to represent the other Commies and Pinkos, and I don't know if their is a general rule as to our political affiliations, but we certainly aren't all Democrats.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 03:15 pm
Now I'm confused. Commie/Pinko IS a political party I thought, so how could anyone be a Comme/Oinki and a democrat at the same time?

Are we witnessing the birth of a new entity, the dual party human?

Fascinating.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 03:31 pm
Commie is short for "Communist". There is a Communist Party in the US, although it is possible to be a communist without being a member of the party.

Pinko is a somewhat derrogatory term for people who believe in liberty, justice and compassion.
0 Replies
 
candidone1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Apr, 2005 02:37 pm
I personally have no issues with Bush's newfound religiosity. From what I've heard, the new Jesus-George is better than the Frat Boy George of the past.
He seems fairly well represented as President, and accepted as a Christian President. Government of the people, for the people, by the people.

My problem is how a great deal of Americans are alienated by his devout Christianity, and similarily, all too aware of the inconsistencies he demonstrates in spiritual belief vs real life actions.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Apr, 2005 02:44 pm
Quote:
PopeWatch: Bush nominates Jerry Falwell for Pope

1 Apr 2005 by Malcolm Drury

US President "Boy" George W. Bush has nominated the right-wing fundamentalist American preacher Jerry Falwell for the office of Pope, once the present incumbent passes over to the other side.

Mr Falwell and his fellow members of the US Christian right helped to deliver Mr Bush's presidential victory last year. He is well-known for being outspoken. For example, he once called Muhammad, the founder of Islam, a terrorist, and he blamed abortionists, feminists and gays for indirectly causing the attacks of September 11th, 2001, by incurring the wrath of the Supreme Being. More seriously, he has also suggested that Tinky Winky, the Teletubby, is a covert role model designed to promote the gay lifestyle.

Mr Bush announced the nomination this morning from his ranch at Crawford, where he has been watching Fox News coverage of what appear to be Pope John Paul II's final hours.

"Jerry's a great guy and a great American," said Mr Bush, "and I owe him one. He's just the type we want over there in Vaticania, and he'll make a great Pope. JP's a great guy too but he's gone soft. Jerry is just the one to shake things up and get them abortionaters and evolutionists and teletubbies and other sons of Satan where they belong - burnin' in hell."

Apparently buoyed by what he believes to be a mandate to consolidate American domination of the world given to him in the 2004 election, Mr Bush has recently been making nominations from among the most hawkish of America-first neo-conservatives for key positions of global influence. For example, he has nominated UN-hater John Bolton as US ambassador to the United Nations, and Paul Wolfowitz as the next head of the World Bank.

The papal nomination has taken the Holy See by surprise as it has not been customary for heads of state to interfere in the process of selecting a new Pope. A Vatican spokesman, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that it would appear unlikely that the president's nomination could lead to anything as Mr Falwell is not actually a Roman Catholic. However, in the interests of maintaining good US-Vatican relations, he promised that full consideration would be given to including Mr Falwell's name in the list of possible candidates.

A spokesman for Tinky Winky said the nomination did give some cause for concern but declined to comment further.
Source


:wink:
0 Replies
 
goodfielder
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Apr, 2005 11:37 pm
Religion shoudn't have a place in politics because each has their own method of reasoning.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Apr, 2005 02:12 pm
goodfielder wrote:
Religion shoudn't have a place in politics because each has their own method of reasoning.


agreed.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/30/2024 at 09:24:59