Comments on: On Politics: Go Shane Claiborne! (Why the Republican Party Does Not Have a Lock on the Young Christian Vote) http://www.donnypauling.com/blog/2008/06/29/on-politics-go-shane-claiborne-subtitle-why-the-republican-party-does-not-have-a-lock-on-the-young-christian-vote/ The Blog of Donny Pauling: former porn producer, changed by Grace and Love... Mon, 15 Mar 2010 20:50:25 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: DeeW http://www.donnypauling.com/blog/2008/06/29/on-politics-go-shane-claiborne-subtitle-why-the-republican-party-does-not-have-a-lock-on-the-young-christian-vote/comment-page-1/#comment-2458 DeeW Wed, 05 Nov 2008 04:04:17 +0000 http://donnysramblings.wordpress.com/?p=341#comment-2458 The Supreme Court has done nothing? The GOP has done nothing on abortion? You must have missed Laci and Conner's law, and the ban on partial birth abortions. The latter was signed by the President and was upheld by only a 5-4 vote of the Supreme Court (a ruling Obama denounced). Without Bush's appointees that would not have happened. Your comments on that indicate you don't follow the news very often as those were very significant events at best, or at worse, you are not telling the truth. In either case, you are wrong. The Supreme Court has done nothing? The GOP has done nothing on abortion? You must have missed Laci and Conner’s law, and the ban on partial birth abortions. The latter was signed by the President and was upheld by only a 5-4 vote of the Supreme Court (a ruling Obama denounced). Without Bush’s appointees that would not have happened. Your comments on that indicate you don’t follow the news very often as those were very significant events at best, or at worse, you are not telling the truth. In either case, you are wrong.

]]> By: Daniel http://www.donnypauling.com/blog/2008/06/29/on-politics-go-shane-claiborne-subtitle-why-the-republican-party-does-not-have-a-lock-on-the-young-christian-vote/comment-page-1/#comment-2457 Daniel Tue, 26 Aug 2008 08:47:58 +0000 http://donnysramblings.wordpress.com/?p=341#comment-2457 Dear Donny, I’m probably late to the party on this one and maybe no one will be reading it, but here goes anyway. Also, don’t know if anyone else has made these points so please forgive any redundancy. Ever since you’ve posted this blog, I’ve been wanting to respond to it but have had so much going on in my life in terms of making ends meet, salvaging my bank account, my credit, not losing my home (not due to the recent mortgage issue, just a drastic loss of income due to being laid off nearly 2 years ago), etc (which gives me a personal insight into some of the issues that are being tossed around by the Democratic hopefuls for President, that I think gives me a deeper sense of where this is all at) , especially given that the DNC is going on even as I write, that I only have a moment now to write and will try to be quick and to the point. 1. First I think it presumptuous for the Republican Party to assume that to have let the “drive by media” choose McCain, because they assumed that the battle would be between Hilary and he, that immediately Conservatives would rush to his side. However, at the same time, while Conservatives could make a statement through their actions against McCain, to prove a point…he needs them to win, I don’t think now or in this scenario is the time to make such a statement as a greater issue is at stake. While I don’t necessarily like McCain, I believe of the two, I would choose the better of the two evils. 2. I believe this notion put forth by Obama summed up in the word “Change”, reminds me of the Twilight Zone episode where a book by Martians who were about to invade Earth, that was titled “To Serve Man”, only for the Earthlings to realize at the last moment, that what this book was, is a cook book, and man was what was to be served. The word “change” with Obama and the whole DNC to me is a Trojan horse. Aside from the fact that Obama has indeed “changed” several times on issues, not because of substance, but for convenience and as his pastor of 20 years said (and a pastor of that tenure should know his congregant/parishioner), that what he is doing is for “political expediency”. This is in addition to my sense that the DNC is possibly giving us a snow job with rhetoric that sounds “Christian” in order to appeal to this population, though it completely opposes their liberal history of declaring, legislating and pushing an agenda of “separation of Church and State”. Likewise, if there is a smaller % of rich and a greater % of poor, rhetoric against the rich will most certainly appeal to the greater mass, thus, potentially sealing their victory in a national vote. In any event, anything that has the right tone, right “message”, right heartfelt appeal, to gain the greatest response…to borrow Voight’s revelatory accusation, Hitler did the same and so will any other, who takes on the right cue’s and themes, to the ultimate demise of reason and reality. 3. As per the war and whether or not it is for oil as a Michael Moorism conspiracy, the last I heard, our soldiers and military are paying $4/gallon in Iraq like everyone else. Or that except for a few rogue soldiers, we are not ransacking, raping and killing innocent Iraqis or being imperialistic in our approach to countries such as Iraq. I know for a fact that though the threat of nuclear potential was the driving idea behind going to Iraq, that hundreds of Iraqi’s were also “pounding on Washington’s door” to do something on behalf of the Iraqis who were innocently being killed by Hussein (check out this video) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X35rhitzKPQ&feature=related 4. Being a recent needy recipient of social services, and seeing the complete ludicrous policies that set it’s parameters and target “needy”, to hear Obama and others declare that the Bush Tax Cuts favor the rich, please by all means read this following article: http://www.letxa.com/articles/9 To summarize, if the rich pay most of the taxes collected by the IRS, even with all of their loopholes, it would stand to reason that the rich benefit the most from any tax cuts. To show how foolish the baby of the liberal “help the poor” structure of social services is, I paid for nearly 30 years into the system, but I cannot access some of their services, because until I finally succumb to bankruptcy, I’m not poor enough, even though I am now working at nearly minimum wage. If this system is the same one that is suppose to run the supposed healthcare put forth by either an Obama or a Hilary, so that “every” American has coverage, then they can surely keep it. The best they can do right now doesn’t even provide me adequate healthcare that they currently have available and it runs along the “poor” man’s services that really stinks…my wife who has need of more medical care than I can’t even get the services she needs, and those they are suggesting are too far away, compared to what we had when I had a good job and had a choice. Social Services like so much of the “help” the government offers as a result of liberal efforts, make me depend completely on them or else there is nothing. Instead of supplementing, I have to depend on them completely…it takes away my independence, even though I have paid into it for so long. If this system makes you feel like it’s better you do nothing, rather than work and end up with less, then it’s a system I’d prefer not have…there’s enough recipients sitting in front of a TV with their remotes who do nothing and feel that someone owes them something, that I don’t want to be a part of that – but based on what I have heard from Obama and Hilary (though she’s still could have something up her sleeve), this all sounds the same to me… no change here, just more of the same, just dressed up differently. In one of their first debates, in LA among the Hollywood elite, rich to say the least, Hilary sat up so cozy and confident to say, using Conservative rhetoric, about helping the poor and getting everyone healthcare, that “Jesus would want us to be good Samaritans” implying that as Democrats, as oppose to the “Christian” Republican’s, do more to help the poor. Then when it came to Obama’s turn, he looked at the audience, suggesting togetherness with the audience in terms of being wealthy, that he believed it was all of their moral responsibility to do more for the poor. Again a Conservative rhetoric that taunts at the Christian Republicans who are “rich” and could care less for the poor. Sure it is a moral responsibility of those who are well to do, to help those less fortunate. But if I were rich, I’d find creative, comprehensive and choice ways to help the poor…as I did when I earned more, and certainly do through my church and Christian organizations, as opposed to giving…or should I say, have taken from me, by the government to do what it deems important to help the poor, such as support Planned Parenthood’s undisclosed and secret intent on diminishing the poor population through abortion, especially the African American community. Besides this “Moral” exercise by the government, this is coming from the party that declares that you can’t legislate morality, when it comes to abstinence, etc…isn’t this a legislation of morality as Obama puts it, to have the government take more from the rich because they should be moved to help the poor. If all of the pork was removed from our taxes, I am sure a lot more could be done for the poor that is comprehensive, than what is going on now. People complained when tax payer monies were lessened that went to the Endowment for the Arts…boohoo, I’m for helping poor kids with their music development, and artistic abilities, but let the very industry that we are already supporting through our CD purchases, movies and theaters, etc. (a multibillion dollar industry at that) support such an effort…after all, it eventually benefits them as they self support the future representatives of that industry…why should my tax dollars do that? 5. Though Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh have had problems with Jeremiah Wright’s rhetoric a few months back when it was finally covered by the “drive by media”, I beg to differ on him slightly. The notion that America deserved the 9-11 attacks due to our failures, racism, etc as Wright points out, “it’s in the bible”. I would like to correct him by saying that often when Israel was attacked by foreign countries, it was sometimes because they were trying to take away from Israel what God had promised them, but so often, and probably more often, it wasn’t because of their idolatry and other sins, as much as it was because they had backslidden from God. In other words they sinned and fell into idolatry and became the harlot, because they had backslidden from God…America has done likewise. The 9-11 attacks brought us to our knees…at least for a moment…but we are a stiff-necked people. 6. Anyway, I am sure I had other thoughts swimming around in my head while contemplating this over the last few weeks, but I for now, I close with this thought: When I think of the issue of the poor, of which right now I am one of them, I have this to say…or should I say, Jesus had this to say: Mark 14:7: “For you always have the poor with you, and whenever you wish you can do good to them; but you will not always have Me.” Amplified Bible However, to reiterate this Trojan horse theory I have about Change and everything else the DNC is putting out there, I think of Judas who was upset with the prostitute who washed Jesus feet with her tears and expensive perfume, saying, think how we could have sold the perfume and helped the poor…this notion of Evangelicals flocking to the essential left because of the “issues”, they may not realize that they may be getting a snow job. Mind you, not that disgust with Republicans isn’t a valid issue, but I prefer the better of the two evils, if I had to vote on it. Dear Donny,
I’m probably late to the party on this one and maybe no one will be reading it, but here goes anyway. Also, don’t know if anyone else has made these points so please forgive any redundancy.
Ever since you’ve posted this blog, I’ve been wanting to respond to it but have had so much going on in my life in terms of making ends meet, salvaging my bank account, my credit, not losing my home (not due to the recent mortgage issue, just a drastic loss of income due to being laid off nearly 2 years ago), etc (which gives me a personal insight into some of the issues that are being tossed around by the Democratic hopefuls for President, that I think gives me a deeper sense of where this is all at) , especially given that the DNC is going on even as I write, that I only have a moment now to write and will try to be quick and to the point.
1. First I think it presumptuous for the Republican Party to assume that to have let the “drive by media” choose McCain, because they assumed that the battle would be between Hilary and he, that immediately Conservatives would rush to his side. However, at the same time, while Conservatives could make a statement through their actions against McCain, to prove a point…he needs them to win, I don’t think now or in this scenario is the time to make such a statement as a greater issue is at stake. While I don’t necessarily like McCain, I believe of the two, I would choose the better of the two evils.
2. I believe this notion put forth by Obama summed up in the word “Change”, reminds me of the Twilight Zone episode where a book by Martians who were about to invade Earth, that was titled “To Serve Man”, only for the Earthlings to realize at the last moment, that what this book was, is a cook book, and man was what was to be served. The word “change” with Obama and the whole DNC to me is a Trojan horse. Aside from the fact that Obama has indeed “changed” several times on issues, not because of substance, but for convenience and as his pastor of 20 years said (and a pastor of that tenure should know his congregant/parishioner), that what he is doing is for “political expediency”. This is in addition to my sense that the DNC is possibly giving us a snow job with rhetoric that sounds “Christian” in order to appeal to this population, though it completely opposes their liberal history of declaring, legislating and pushing an agenda of “separation of Church and State”. Likewise, if there is a smaller % of rich and a greater % of poor, rhetoric against the rich will most certainly appeal to the greater mass, thus, potentially sealing their victory in a national vote. In any event, anything that has the right tone, right “message”, right heartfelt appeal, to gain the greatest response…to borrow Voight’s revelatory accusation, Hitler did the same and so will any other, who takes on the right cue’s and themes, to the ultimate demise of reason and reality.
3. As per the war and whether or not it is for oil as a Michael Moorism conspiracy, the last I heard, our soldiers and military are paying $4/gallon in Iraq like everyone else. Or that except for a few rogue soldiers, we are not ransacking, raping and killing innocent Iraqis or being imperialistic in our approach to countries such as Iraq. I know for a fact that though the threat of nuclear potential was the driving idea behind going to Iraq, that hundreds of Iraqi’s were also “pounding on Washington’s door” to do something on behalf of the Iraqis who were innocently being killed by Hussein (check out this video) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X35rhitzKPQ&feature=related
4. Being a recent needy recipient of social services, and seeing the complete ludicrous policies that set it’s parameters and target “needy”, to hear Obama and others declare that the Bush Tax Cuts favor the rich, please by all means read this following article: http://www.letxa.com/articles/9 To summarize, if the rich pay most of the taxes collected by the IRS, even with all of their loopholes, it would stand to reason that the rich benefit the most from any tax cuts. To show how foolish the baby of the liberal “help the poor” structure of social services is, I paid for nearly 30 years into the system, but I cannot access some of their services, because until I finally succumb to bankruptcy, I’m not poor enough, even though I am now working at nearly minimum wage. If this system is the same one that is suppose to run the supposed healthcare put forth by either an Obama or a Hilary, so that “every” American has coverage, then they can surely keep it. The best they can do right now doesn’t even provide me adequate healthcare that they currently have available and it runs along the “poor” man’s services that really stinks…my wife who has need of more medical care than I can’t even get the services she needs, and those they are suggesting are too far away, compared to what we had when I had a good job and had a choice. Social Services like so much of the “help” the government offers as a result of liberal efforts, make me depend completely on them or else there is nothing. Instead of supplementing, I have to depend on them completely…it takes away my independence, even though I have paid into it for so long. If this system makes you feel like it’s better you do nothing, rather than work and end up with less, then it’s a system I’d prefer not have…there’s enough recipients sitting in front of a TV with their remotes who do nothing and feel that someone owes them something, that I don’t want to be a part of that – but based on what I have heard from Obama and Hilary (though she’s still could have something up her sleeve), this all sounds the same to me… no change here, just more of the same, just dressed up differently. In one of their first debates, in LA among the Hollywood elite, rich to say the least, Hilary sat up so cozy and confident to say, using Conservative rhetoric, about helping the poor and getting everyone healthcare, that “Jesus would want us to be good Samaritans” implying that as Democrats, as oppose to the “Christian” Republican’s, do more to help the poor. Then when it came to Obama’s turn, he looked at the audience, suggesting togetherness with the audience in terms of being wealthy, that he believed it was all of their moral responsibility to do more for the poor. Again a Conservative rhetoric that taunts at the Christian Republicans who are “rich” and could care less for the poor. Sure it is a moral responsibility of those who are well to do, to help those less fortunate. But if I were rich, I’d find creative, comprehensive and choice ways to help the poor…as I did when I earned more, and certainly do through my church and Christian organizations, as opposed to giving…or should I say, have taken from me, by the government to do what it deems important to help the poor, such as support Planned Parenthood’s undisclosed and secret intent on diminishing the poor population through abortion, especially the African American community. Besides this “Moral” exercise by the government, this is coming from the party that declares that you can’t legislate morality, when it comes to abstinence, etc…isn’t this a legislation of morality as Obama puts it, to have the government take more from the rich because they should be moved to help the poor. If all of the pork was removed from our taxes, I am sure a lot more could be done for the poor that is comprehensive, than what is going on now. People complained when tax payer monies were lessened that went to the Endowment for the Arts…boohoo, I’m for helping poor kids with their music development, and artistic abilities, but let the very industry that we are already supporting through our CD purchases, movies and theaters, etc. (a multibillion dollar industry at that) support such an effort…after all, it eventually benefits them as they self support the future representatives of that industry…why should my tax dollars do that?
5. Though Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh have had problems with Jeremiah Wright’s rhetoric a few months back when it was finally covered by the “drive by media”, I beg to differ on him slightly. The notion that America deserved the 9-11 attacks due to our failures, racism, etc as Wright points out, “it’s in the bible”. I would like to correct him by saying that often when Israel was attacked by foreign countries, it was sometimes because they were trying to take away from Israel what God had promised them, but so often, and probably more often, it wasn’t because of their idolatry and other sins, as much as it was because they had backslidden from God. In other words they sinned and fell into idolatry and became the harlot, because they had backslidden from God…America has done likewise. The 9-11 attacks brought us to our knees…at least for a moment…but we are a stiff-necked people.
6. Anyway, I am sure I had other thoughts swimming around in my head while contemplating this over the last few weeks, but I for now, I close with this thought: When I think of the issue of the poor, of which right now I am one of them, I have this to say…or should I say, Jesus had this to say: Mark 14:7:
“For you always have the poor with you, and whenever you wish you can do good to them; but you will not always have Me.” Amplified Bible However, to reiterate this Trojan horse theory I have about Change and everything else the DNC is putting out there, I think of Judas who was upset with the prostitute who washed Jesus feet with her tears and expensive perfume, saying, think how we could have sold the perfume and helped the poor…this notion of Evangelicals flocking to the essential left because of the “issues”, they may not realize that they may be getting a snow job. Mind you, not that disgust with Republicans isn’t a valid issue, but I prefer the better of the two evils, if I had to vote on it.

]]> By: Walter Ballin http://www.donnypauling.com/blog/2008/06/29/on-politics-go-shane-claiborne-subtitle-why-the-republican-party-does-not-have-a-lock-on-the-young-christian-vote/comment-page-1/#comment-2456 Walter Ballin Mon, 14 Jul 2008 05:46:10 +0000 http://donnysramblings.wordpress.com/?p=341#comment-2456 Lew, You are ignorant. Barack Obama has never stated that he supports abortion on demand. He says that abortion should be safe, legal, and rare. I know that he supports more funding for birth control. You are wrong that Obama wants to encourage people to be on welfare, when in fact he supports more job opportunities and putting people to work. The thing is that today's Republicans and people like you care more about people when they aren't born yet, but not about people once they are alive. You all oppose more money for education, spending for more affordable housing, better health care, and the list goes on and on. Oh, but you'll stand in front of a family planning clinic to intimidate people from obtaining services and treatment that they need and saving the "unborn!" And before you say that I support "abortion on demand," again I agree with Obama's position that I mentioned above. What I do support is promoting more birth control programs. I say that family life course must be taught in our schools, and these courses must be mandatory just like English, Math, and Science. Our youngsters must be taught BOTH about abstinence and the use of birth control. Parents should be teaching their children this but many don't. As for what your statement that Obama "supports homosexual marriage - Not biblical and not really a federal issue to begin with mind you," you are wrong on that too. Obama says that Gay marriage is a matter for the states to decide, but that he supports civil unions and giving Gay and Lesbian partners the same rights as heterosexuals. I say that you are a bigot! When you say that Gay marriage is not biblical, there are religious leaders who state that no where in the Bible does it say that Gay marriage is a sin. However, didn't Jesus say that "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone" and "Love thy neighbor as thyself?" I say enough of you judgmental bigots! Lew, You are ignorant. Barack Obama has never stated that he supports abortion on demand. He says that abortion should be safe, legal, and rare. I know that he supports more funding for birth control. You are wrong that Obama wants to encourage people to be on welfare, when in fact he supports more job opportunities and putting people to work. The thing is that today’s Republicans and people like you care more about people when they aren’t born yet, but not about people once they are alive. You all oppose more money for education, spending for more affordable housing, better health care, and the list goes on and on. Oh, but you’ll stand in front of a family planning clinic to intimidate people from obtaining services and treatment that they need and saving the “unborn!” And before you say that I support “abortion on demand,” again I agree with Obama’s position that I mentioned above. What I do support is promoting more birth control programs. I say that family life course must be taught in our schools, and these courses must be mandatory just like English, Math, and Science. Our youngsters must be taught BOTH about abstinence and the use of birth control. Parents should be teaching their children this but many don’t.

As for what your statement that Obama “supports homosexual marriage – Not biblical and not really a federal issue to begin with mind you,” you are wrong on that too. Obama says that Gay marriage is a matter for the states to decide, but that he supports civil unions and giving Gay and Lesbian partners the same rights as heterosexuals. I say that you are a bigot! When you say that Gay marriage is not biblical, there are religious leaders who state that no where in the Bible does it say that Gay marriage is a sin. However, didn’t Jesus say that “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone” and “Love thy neighbor as thyself?” I say enough of you judgmental bigots!

]]> By: lew http://www.donnypauling.com/blog/2008/06/29/on-politics-go-shane-claiborne-subtitle-why-the-republican-party-does-not-have-a-lock-on-the-young-christian-vote/comment-page-1/#comment-2455 lew Sat, 12 Jul 2008 16:05:38 +0000 http://donnysramblings.wordpress.com/?p=341#comment-2455 Before you go and label me a Republican... in 2 of the the last 4 elections I voted for neither of the two parties and this one I will vote for a 3rd party once again. Unless one of those two repents, I'll never vote for them again. I really hate to say this, but anyone who votes for the Democrats and Obama isn't awake quite honestly. If you think the Republican's haven't been honest with you, think about how DISHONEST the Democrats INCLUDING Barack Obama have been. - Obama was just endorsed by Planned Parenthood. With the INTENDED purpose and actual TAPE recordings of PURPOSEFUL extermination of blacks, they're SINGLARY responsible for the eradication of millions upon millions of blacks in this country. And over the world it's even higher. - Obama has changed his view on what he'd do in Iraq 2 times already. How can you believe him just on that? - Seems like he's received some funny loans for housing from a friend who's probably going to do some serious time in the slammer. - He doesn't know his pastor uses such inflamatory and racial remarks and he's gone to the church for 20+ years? - He supports abortion on demand - That's not very biblical - Supports homosexual marriage - Not biblical and not really a federal issue to begin with mind you. - Supports Federal schools. This ALONE should make a practicing Christian weary! Evolution based on known lies such as butterflies, Close enough spelling - Ah, Joanne doesn't need to really know how to spell. We've got computers for that!, History devoid of truth in many cases. - Welfare that encourages MORE people on welfare rolls instead of off of them. Do you REALLY think that supplying someone's ever physical need gets them off of the welfare rolls? - Truth? Abortion alone has lies on both sides long enough to go around the world a few times. - How about the Democrats who continue to not say we can afford all of the entittlement programs when the countries they like to note are actually pulling back on their programs? - Povety? - Democrats give handouts, not a hand up. Nobody gets off of welfare unless the entire welfare system is either abolished or totally revamped. Can't happen with Dems because that's a large part of their constituency. Povety is YOUR job. YOU are the church. YOU are supposed to feed, cloth and shelter people. Not the govt. Before you go and label me a Republican… in 2 of the the last 4 elections I voted for neither of the two parties and this one I will vote for a 3rd party once again. Unless one of those two repents, I’ll never vote for them again.

I really hate to say this, but anyone who votes for the Democrats and Obama isn’t awake quite honestly. If you think the Republican’s haven’t been honest with you, think about how DISHONEST the Democrats INCLUDING Barack Obama have been.

- Obama was just endorsed by Planned Parenthood. With the INTENDED purpose and actual TAPE recordings of PURPOSEFUL extermination of blacks, they’re SINGLARY responsible for the eradication of millions upon millions of blacks in this country. And over the world it’s even higher.

- Obama has changed his view on what he’d do in Iraq 2 times already. How can you believe him just on that?

- Seems like he’s received some funny loans for housing from a friend who’s probably going to do some serious time in the slammer.

- He doesn’t know his pastor uses such inflamatory and racial remarks and he’s gone to the church for 20+ years?

- He supports abortion on demand – That’s not very biblical

- Supports homosexual marriage – Not biblical and not really a federal issue to begin with mind you.

- Supports Federal schools. This ALONE should make a practicing Christian weary! Evolution based on known lies such as butterflies, Close enough spelling – Ah, Joanne doesn’t need to really know how to spell. We’ve got computers for that!, History devoid of truth in many cases.

- Welfare that encourages MORE people on welfare rolls instead of off of them. Do you REALLY think that supplying someone’s ever physical need gets them off of the welfare rolls?

- Truth? Abortion alone has lies on both sides long enough to go around the world a few times.

- How about the Democrats who continue to not say we can afford all of the entittlement programs when the countries they like to note are actually pulling back on their programs?

- Povety? – Democrats give handouts, not a hand up. Nobody gets off of welfare unless the entire welfare system is either abolished or totally revamped. Can’t happen with Dems because that’s a large part of their constituency.

Povety is YOUR job. YOU are the church. YOU are supposed to feed, cloth and shelter people. Not the govt.

]]> By: Alan http://www.donnypauling.com/blog/2008/06/29/on-politics-go-shane-claiborne-subtitle-why-the-republican-party-does-not-have-a-lock-on-the-young-christian-vote/comment-page-1/#comment-2454 Alan Fri, 11 Jul 2008 02:58:52 +0000 http://donnysramblings.wordpress.com/?p=341#comment-2454 I don't know if you have found LarkNews.com yet or not. Here is a link that makes a similar point. http://larknews.com/january_2003/secondary.php?header=header&page=baptist_republican Alan I don’t know if you have found LarkNews.com yet or not. Here is a link that makes a similar point.
http://larknews.com/january_2003/secondary.php?header=header&page=baptist_republican

Alan

]]> By: Alan http://www.donnypauling.com/blog/2008/06/29/on-politics-go-shane-claiborne-subtitle-why-the-republican-party-does-not-have-a-lock-on-the-young-christian-vote/comment-page-1/#comment-2453 Alan Fri, 11 Jul 2008 01:55:51 +0000 http://donnysramblings.wordpress.com/?p=341#comment-2453 Donny, Thanks for the post. I share many of your feelings. I believe our country is in a mess. It is time for a change. Alan Donny,

Thanks for the post. I share many of your feelings. I believe our country is in a mess. It is time for a change.

Alan

]]> By: Lindsay http://www.donnypauling.com/blog/2008/06/29/on-politics-go-shane-claiborne-subtitle-why-the-republican-party-does-not-have-a-lock-on-the-young-christian-vote/comment-page-1/#comment-2452 Lindsay Wed, 09 Jul 2008 21:29:26 +0000 http://donnysramblings.wordpress.com/?p=341#comment-2452 Dean - I can't thank you enough for your thoughts. You truly put to words exactly what I've been feeling/thinking these last few months. Donny - Thanks for starting this convo. I completely agree that hearts need to be changed. I'm in! I also want to mention something that is not entirely my original thought, but I heard it somewhere and wish more people thought about: I don't believe it's not fair to lable someone pro-choice or pro-life. I'm 100% pro-life, but I also consider myself pro-choice. How? - I'm free to "choose" to have sexual relations with someone, knowing full well I may get pregnant. - I'm free to "choose" to use protection if I "choose" to have sexual relations. - I'm free to "choose" go to a library and research contraception/adoption and get educated on these subjects. - I'm free to give God the "choice" on whether my unborn baby lives or dies. - I'm free to "choose" to give my unborn baby up for adoption. - I'm free to CHOOSE! There are a lot more "choices" involved w/ having a baby than just abortion. I'm pro-choice AND pro-life. Vote McCain!! Lindsay Dean – I can’t thank you enough for your thoughts. You truly put to words exactly what I’ve been feeling/thinking these last few months.

Donny – Thanks for starting this convo. I completely agree that hearts need to be changed. I’m in!

I also want to mention something that is not entirely my original thought, but I heard it somewhere and wish more people thought about:

I don’t believe it’s not fair to lable someone pro-choice or pro-life. I’m 100% pro-life, but I also consider myself pro-choice. How?
- I’m free to “choose” to have sexual relations with someone, knowing full well I may get pregnant.
- I’m free to “choose” to use protection if I “choose” to have sexual relations.
- I’m free to “choose” go to a library and research contraception/adoption and get educated on these subjects.
- I’m free to give God the “choice” on whether my unborn baby lives or dies.
- I’m free to “choose” to give my unborn baby up for adoption.
- I’m free to CHOOSE!
There are a lot more “choices” involved w/ having a baby than just abortion. I’m pro-choice AND pro-life.

Vote McCain!!

Lindsay

]]> By: Jason Harper http://www.donnypauling.com/blog/2008/06/29/on-politics-go-shane-claiborne-subtitle-why-the-republican-party-does-not-have-a-lock-on-the-young-christian-vote/comment-page-1/#comment-2451 Jason Harper Sun, 06 Jul 2008 02:16:41 +0000 http://donnysramblings.wordpress.com/?p=341#comment-2451 I start by saying I am completely Pro-Life. But there has to be more than a single issue that molds my vote. For years, like Donny, I have been registered GOP. Many believe that it is our Christian duty to vote "Conservative." I believe it is my obligation to vote with a compassionate mindset. Many from within the Morale Majority have made abortion their only issue, minus the recent peppering of Homosexuality and same sex marriage outrage. While focused on this issue (reactive formation) and railing against Abortionist, Pro Choicers, and those who have had an abortion, they missed the mark. I've yet to hear OR see those who rail the loudest adopt themselves. Show me one who has opened an adoption home in their own home. Has the issue been addressed. They scream for life to be preserved, but won't sacrifice their own privacy, their own world, or their own agenda to adopt. I am sure someone has. Send the link. But those who screamed the loudest, in my experience, haven't. Imagine, if just a few of the nearly 70 million evangelicals opted for adoption, foster homes would emptied In 1999, the latest year for which totals have been finalized, there were about 581,000 children in foster care in the United States. Twenty-two percent of these children -about 127,000 kids - were available for adoption. The difference in numbers is that 59% of kids in foster care are on a path to be reunited with their birth parents. Only 16% are available for adoption. "With 69.5 million American adults devoted to the Evangelical lifestyle, the current and still-growing societal and monetary clout of this cohort is impossible to ignore. In 2006, household income among Evangelicals represented 28% of the national total, or $2.1 trillion" Out of 69.5 million Americans, only 127,000 needs to open their home to see that a life here, a child, can be loved, accepted, and cared for. When making the list of the immoralities in our society, let's not forget the greatest of them all, "….to love not." It seems that many of the 'Moral Majority' hang their ideological issues hat on their favorite two moral issues. While complete campaigns have been built around these two areas, hundreds of other social atrocities go ignored. When was the last time a fundamentalist or self proclaimed moralist on the Right championed against poverty, the crisis of health care, or any other social justice. Rare if ever. Instead, most are myopic and missing in action in the public's cry for reform. Consider this... Unaddressed poverty is immoral. Greed is immoral. Basic needs being ignored; that is immoral. A child without access to a dentist or a doctor is immoral. Hunger and unaccessible clean water; these are a few of the modern day atrocities. But instead, many choose their one "immoral issue" and hang their vote there. To think that we will ever find a candidate that will represent all of our ideological pillars is a fantasy. Instead, take the candidates that are available and a do a side by side analysis. Take Isaiah 61 and put it on one side. Place Barack, John, Ralph and the rest on the other side. See which one most closely echoes the heartbeat of that prophet. PS: Vote Obama. Jason Harper www.jasonharper.cc I start by saying I am completely Pro-Life. But there has to be more than a single issue that molds my vote.

For years, like Donny, I have been registered GOP. Many believe that it is our Christian duty to vote “Conservative.” I believe it is my obligation to vote with a compassionate mindset.

Many from within the Morale Majority have made abortion their only issue, minus the recent peppering of Homosexuality and same sex marriage outrage.

While focused on this issue (reactive formation) and railing against Abortionist, Pro Choicers, and those who have had an abortion, they missed the mark. I’ve yet to hear OR see those who rail the loudest adopt themselves.

Show me one who has opened an adoption home in their own home. Has the issue been addressed. They scream for life to be preserved, but won’t sacrifice their own privacy, their own world, or their own agenda to adopt. I am sure someone has. Send the link.

But those who screamed the loudest, in my experience, haven’t.

Imagine, if just a few of the nearly 70 million evangelicals opted for adoption, foster homes would emptied In 1999, the latest year for which totals have been finalized, there were about 581,000 children in foster care in the United States. Twenty-two percent of these children -about 127,000 kids – were available for adoption. The difference in numbers is that 59% of kids in foster care are on a path to be reunited with their birth parents. Only 16% are available for adoption.

“With 69.5 million American adults devoted to the Evangelical lifestyle, the current and still-growing societal and monetary clout of this cohort is impossible to ignore. In 2006, household income among Evangelicals represented 28% of the national total, or $2.1 trillion”

Out of 69.5 million Americans, only 127,000 needs to open their home to see that a life here, a child, can be loved, accepted, and cared for.

When making the list of the immoralities in our society, let’s not forget the greatest of them all, “….to love not.”

It seems that many of the ‘Moral Majority’ hang their ideological issues hat on their favorite two moral issues. While complete campaigns have been built around these two areas, hundreds of other social atrocities go ignored.

When was the last time a fundamentalist or self proclaimed moralist on the Right championed against poverty, the crisis of health care, or any other social justice. Rare if ever.

Instead, most are myopic and missing in action in the public’s cry for reform.

Consider this…

Unaddressed poverty is immoral.
Greed is immoral.
Basic needs being ignored; that is immoral.
A child without access to a dentist or a doctor is immoral.
Hunger and unaccessible clean water; these are a few of the modern day atrocities.

But instead, many choose their one “immoral issue” and hang their vote there.

To think that we will ever find a candidate that will represent all of our ideological pillars is a fantasy. Instead, take the candidates that are available and a do a side by side analysis.

Take Isaiah 61 and put it on one side. Place Barack, John, Ralph and the rest on the other side. See which one most closely echoes the heartbeat of that prophet.

PS: Vote Obama.

Jason Harper
http://www.jasonharper.cc

]]> By: john(right or left) http://www.donnypauling.com/blog/2008/06/29/on-politics-go-shane-claiborne-subtitle-why-the-republican-party-does-not-have-a-lock-on-the-young-christian-vote/comment-page-1/#comment-2450 john(right or left) Sun, 06 Jul 2008 01:31:04 +0000 http://donnysramblings.wordpress.com/?p=341#comment-2450 Dean, very nice way at putting it. I think Donny is hitting it on the head about the heart change but we cannot think that anything good will come if we step out of the legislative process completely. You basically summed up my thoughts on that. Some people will not listen even if you show all the love in the world and educate them. Laws still need to be in place and the legislative process still rolls on. Thats just how it is. Even though God is in the business of Grace, His law is still in effect. Cool convo! Dean, very nice way at putting it. I think Donny is hitting it on the head about the heart change but we cannot think that anything good will come if we step out of the legislative process completely. You basically summed up my thoughts on that. Some people will not listen even if you show all the love in the world and educate them. Laws still need to be in place and the legislative process still rolls on. Thats just how it is. Even though God is in the business of Grace, His law is still in effect.

Cool convo!

]]> By: Thomas http://www.donnypauling.com/blog/2008/06/29/on-politics-go-shane-claiborne-subtitle-why-the-republican-party-does-not-have-a-lock-on-the-young-christian-vote/comment-page-1/#comment-2449 Thomas Sat, 05 Jul 2008 21:21:17 +0000 http://donnysramblings.wordpress.com/?p=341#comment-2449 Hi Donny, I've been following your blog for some time now and find it pretty stimulating on many issues. However, this time I could not disagree more fervently! I agree, we have all the reason in the world to be disappointed with Bush/Republicans. Other than some of their specific actions, there are two reasons for that: They have not delivered the Christian agenda, on anything. They have been in power for eight years. Both of these reasons are par for the course, however. Political operators will NEVER deliver the Christian agenda. In a democracy and in a country where even Christians are showing constant disregard for the absoluteness of God's standards as well as Truth, politicians of any shade will continue to run us over, unless we happen to build enough groundswell on any issues to make a difference. Even then, manipulators will try to defeat what should rightfully be done by the will of the people (see the outrageous misconduct of justice where ONE judge constituted enough of a vote to run over the express will of the people of California not to recognize an institution as grossly perverted as "gay" "marriage."). The government that we are called to pray for always has and always will be evil. The people who first received this command in Biblical times knew that better than we ever will. Second, Republicans have been (to various degrees) in power for eight years now. That makes it easy to throw stones. These last eight years have been exceptionally difficult, whether it's 9-11, the dot.com and housing busts, the "culture war" etc. Along with that, Christians are showing a growing willingness to abandon the call to righteousness and go along with the "politically correct" agenda. As another contributor already pointed out, look where that got Canada! The media, not very often a friend of the cause of Christ, has been eating it up. Bush is now being blamed for executing policies that, yes, he spear headed, but that were also (and continue to be to this day in voting records) supported by his opposition that so verbally denounces them now out of the other side of their mouths. Which brings me to my point: I am amazed, appalled, and aghast that the US population is now seriously considering to settle for a man who has (a) no apparent qualifications or track record, (b) offers nothing but rhetoric (Goebbels had that too!) on something as vague as "change"--for the good or better, who is to say, (c) offers a voting record that smacks of naiveté, radicalism, anti-Christian values while now pandering to Christians with gross Bible misinterpretations (not to mention constitutional ignorance), (d) makes broad claims that in this democracy (which by definition is contentious between different interests) we should all gather on the platform of the lowest common denominator, get along, and sell out the rest of the few Christian values that are still protected by law. Yet this same man will not hesitate to snipe, categorize and judge his political foes in an instant while whining when the counterattacks come and claiming to be a bridge builder between the factions. This same man has no problem with surrounding himself with racists kooks (that's right, many more than Jermiah Wright) in the name of religion, Christianity. Any white candidate with these unsavory companions could disavow his associations ten times as fervently than Obama's lukewarm reactions ever did, and would still be looking at a dead candidacy! The true character of this man is becoming more and more apparent as he constantly reverses himself to appease this or that faction. Now he tells us that he is committed to ending the war--anything more specific is up in the air. Guess what, Bush offers us no less reassurance than that! He's trying to lure in Christians while exhibiting gross ignorance of what we stand for. My point is: yes, there is much to criticize about Bush. But that justifies in no way to set up shop in the devil's camps where the only difference is that we will be blatantly marginalized and disregarded (yet pandered to with greater hypocrisy than Bush would ever be capable of). The only positive that I have ever heard mentioned is the supposed Democratic passion for social justice. So far, I can't help but think that the deep pockets that are outspending the supposed "rich" "establishment" interests of the Rebublicans (another broken Obama promise, of course) are a lot more interested in power than using their resources to help the poor who profit nothing from this campaign. But more importantly, all the government has ever provided are programs of entitlement, govenment reliance, and corrupt redistribution of wealth--always at the expense of the middle class. This is not a Biblical concept! There is no such thing as entitlement in God's plan. We are commanded to exercise charity not promote a bloated govenment in hopes that they will do the dirty job for us--precisely the Democratic agenda! I agree with one of the other responses: I am not praising McCain in any particular way. The best a vote for McCain can be is a vote against Barack Hussein Obama. But perhaps that's a good start. At least I can not think of anything better to do to oppose an anti-Christian radical in sheep's clothing. Hi Donny,

I’ve been following your blog for some time now and find it pretty stimulating on many issues. However, this time I could not disagree more fervently!

I agree, we have all the reason in the world to be disappointed with Bush/Republicans. Other than some of their specific actions, there are two reasons for that: They have not delivered the Christian agenda, on anything. They have been in power for eight years.

Both of these reasons are par for the course, however. Political operators will NEVER deliver the Christian agenda. In a democracy and in a country where even Christians are showing constant disregard for the absoluteness of God’s standards as well as Truth, politicians of any shade will continue to run us over, unless we happen to build enough groundswell on any issues to make a difference. Even then, manipulators will try to defeat what should rightfully be done by the will of the people (see the outrageous misconduct of justice where ONE judge constituted enough of a vote to run over the express will of the people of California not to recognize an institution as grossly perverted as “gay” “marriage.”). The government that we are called to pray for always has and always will be evil. The people who first received this command in Biblical times knew that better than we ever will.

Second, Republicans have been (to various degrees) in power for eight years now. That makes it easy to throw stones. These last eight years have been exceptionally difficult, whether it’s 9-11, the dot.com and housing busts, the “culture war” etc. Along with that, Christians are showing a growing willingness to abandon the call to righteousness and go along with the “politically correct” agenda. As another contributor already pointed out, look where that got Canada! The media, not very often a friend of the cause of Christ, has been eating it up. Bush is now being blamed for executing policies that, yes, he spear headed, but that were also (and continue to be to this day in voting records) supported by his opposition that so verbally denounces them now out of the other side of their mouths.

Which brings me to my point: I am amazed, appalled, and aghast that the US population is now seriously considering to settle for a man who has (a) no apparent qualifications or track record, (b) offers nothing but rhetoric (Goebbels had that too!) on something as vague as “change”–for the good or better, who is to say, (c) offers a voting record that smacks of naiveté, radicalism, anti-Christian values while now pandering to Christians with gross Bible misinterpretations (not to mention constitutional ignorance), (d) makes broad claims that in this democracy (which by definition is contentious between different interests) we should all gather on the platform of the lowest common denominator, get along, and sell out the rest of the few Christian values that are still protected by law. Yet this same man will not hesitate to snipe, categorize and judge his political foes in an instant while whining when the counterattacks come and claiming to be a bridge builder between the factions. This same man has no problem with surrounding himself with racists kooks (that’s right, many more than Jermiah Wright) in the name of religion, Christianity. Any white candidate with these unsavory companions could disavow his associations ten times as fervently than Obama’s lukewarm reactions ever did, and would still be looking at a dead candidacy!

The true character of this man is becoming more and more apparent as he constantly reverses himself to appease this or that faction. Now he tells us that he is committed to ending the war–anything more specific is up in the air. Guess what, Bush offers us no less reassurance than that! He’s trying to lure in Christians while exhibiting gross ignorance of what we stand for. My point is: yes, there is much to criticize about Bush. But that justifies in no way to set up shop in the devil’s camps where the only difference is that we will be blatantly marginalized and disregarded (yet pandered to with greater hypocrisy than Bush would ever be capable of).

The only positive that I have ever heard mentioned is the supposed Democratic passion for social justice. So far, I can’t help but think that the deep pockets that are outspending the supposed “rich” “establishment” interests of the Rebublicans (another broken Obama promise, of course) are a lot more interested in power than using their resources to help the poor who profit nothing from this campaign. But more importantly, all the government has ever provided are programs of entitlement, govenment reliance, and corrupt redistribution of wealth–always at the expense of the middle class. This is not a Biblical concept! There is no such thing as entitlement in God’s plan. We are commanded to exercise charity not promote a bloated govenment in hopes that they will do the dirty job for us–precisely the Democratic agenda!

I agree with one of the other responses: I am not praising McCain in any particular way. The best a vote for McCain can be is a vote against Barack Hussein Obama. But perhaps that’s a good start. At least I can not think of anything better to do to oppose an anti-Christian radical in sheep’s clothing.

]]>