An Exalted Nation

This was sent out to my devotional list (3,000 + subscribers) this morning:

AN EXALTED NATION

Godliness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people. – Proverbs 14:34 (NLT)

As United States citizens go to the voting booth tomorrow, those who are Christians need to decide which candidate and party will best represent Christian values before they mark their ballot. While I think we would all acknowledge that neither major political party is decidedly Christian, which one comes closest to demonstrating the godliness that God Himself desires for a nation?

I, for one, have become a “one issue” voter. If one candidate is pro-abortion and the other is pro-life, I will vote for the pro-life candidate every single time. To me, this is the defining issue of our day and will eventually determine whether or not our nation will be exalted. To think that 45,000,000 babies have been slaughtered in their mother’s wombs since the Roe v. Wade decision of 1973 is an indictment on the lack of morality of this nation, and in fact, most of the world. While some base their vote on the economy, health care, and other issues, I will vote for a culture that values life.

The next President of the United States will most likely appoint between 2-4 Supreme Court Justices who have the ability to decide the fate of the precious unborn in our country. Who do you want to make those appointments? Should it be President Bush, who has consistently valued life and reversed the “right” to partial birth abortion, or John Kerry, who has voted for partial birth abortion six times? The answer is obvious. To think that anyone could be for jamming scissors into the neck of a baby whose entire body other than its head has already exited the mother’s womb is beyond comprehension. What type of morality and ethics could a person have that could be for such a procedure? While I’m sure some will think my terminology is too strong, it is accurate – John Kerry is an evil man who will not exalt the nation if he is elected. Anyone who chooses to vote for him is choosing to take the lives of innocent children. We can use all the politically correct language available to us so we don’t sound so harsh, but the fact is that anyone who is “pro-choice” is living in rebellion against God, their creator.

We all can exercise our freedom to vote for the candidate we desire on November 2. I will vote for life. I will vote for President Bush.

PRAYER THOUGHT: Father, we want this nation to be exalted, but it is hard to ask for Your blessing when we have legalized the killing of innocents. Lead us to vote for a culture of life.

 

I guess you have forgotten the 100,000 innocent Iraqis (you know - the non-combatants), the 100 or so prisoners executed under the Bush brother's, the 1100 soldiers who have died to justify Bush's lies.

Oh - I guess they don't count in your book.

This is the exact reason that although I think the bible is a nice history book, it is no more the word of god than the National Enquirer is the word of truth.

Abortion is a tough decision - and believe me, not a very easy thing to live with. The Cons and Christian right trivilize it for political gain and to justify their own evil ways.

I can only hope and pray that is there is a truly a god in heaven, that the truly self-rightous are turned away. That would warm my heart greatly.

The Redskins lost, GW is another one termer. Mark my word. The world will be a better place without this man in power. If GW wants to be your local preacher, great. I don't want this man leading a nation.

 

Mr Engineer,
Just for arguments sake, let's accept your proposition that 112,000 people were unnecessarily killed. Do you really want to compare that with 45,000,000 babies slaughtered in their mother's wombs? Do you really want to back a candidate that supports jamming a pair of scissors into the back of a babies neck once its body has already exited the womb?

BLD

 

Abortion is a hideous thing. No doubt. But I really don't see that a President, even with a compliant Congress, can have more than a fringe effect.

It is a fantasy that the Supreme Court could be sufficiently stacked as to reverse Roe v. Wade. Once a Justice is appointed, there's no longer any political control over that person. This Supreme Court has begun to swing left, in case you hadn't noticed, and not by 5-4 majorities.

Just the most recent example is Crawford v. Washington. Rather technical, but suffice it to say that certain criminal convictions involving drug conspiracies will be MUCH harder to attain than before. Vote? 7-2 and one of the two was the Chief Justice.

A constitutional amendment bannign abortion is a practical impossibility given the super majority of state legislatures necessary to enact one.

Bottom line: Don't vote on a single issue and especially not on abortion as a single issue if you want yuour vote to count.

 

Pigeonhole at your own risk, bub.

This is what I told my parish at mass yesterday (not an exact quote, but pretty close):

You know our Biblical teachings on hot-button issues like abortion and so forth. You know that no decision by a secular government one way or the other can change that. Which party you support, and which candidates you support, and which initiatives you support (there's an anti-gay-marriage state constitution amendment and one relating to casino gambling) are up to you. Paul says in Romans that the government powers are ordained of God. When you vote, you are a kind of mini-emperor. It is God-pleasing that you vote. It is not God-pleasing if you don't. What candidates' set of opinions seem best for the country, and what courses of legislative and constitutional action best express your Biblically-informed conscience, are up to you to determine. The Church's one and only business is the proclamation of Law and Gospel. Your one and only business as a voter is to govern as best you know how.

Nobody has asked me how I voted (they know I voted absentee), and apart from lawn signs nobody has told me how they're going to vote--and there are plenty of us with very strong political opinions.

And are we ultra-conservative religiously? Yup you betcha.

 

First - the 45,000,000 number is probably a gross overestimate.

Second - No - I don't support abortion as function of birth control any more than I support the use of our military as a function of diplomacy nor do I support the death penalty as a function of justice.

I consider myself lucky, I have never been in the position to have to decide on an abortion. And unless you are a female, neither have you. I would like to explore the alternatives, but sometimes, things are not as black and white as the right thinks. That is why I think it is important to have the choice. And the choice should be between a woman and her doctor, and if necessary, the woman's clergy. (although I don't believe in the church's rhetoric). I do know a few women who have had to make the decision, and it is not an easy one. GW and his gang of Whitehouse rightous trivialize the issue purely for there own person gain.

I have found the only real difference between the lefties and righties is what they want to control, and what rights they want enforced, and what type of welfare they want to hand out.

Rights
No gun control - period. No abortion rights. Government contracts to selected companies which amounts to corporate welfare. Executions.

Left
Gun control. Abortion rights. No death penalty. Welfare for individuals.

If death is death, and killing is killing. Then killing for a lie, or killing for vengence is no better than abortion. Justifying it with your own (not speaking directly to you BLD), mind, is just nonsensical.

 

What about the father? That baby is just as much the son or daughter of the father as it is the mother.

Translation: You know a few women who have had abortions.

Having a child is an easy decision. Raising one is not so easy (at least if you do it right).

The left is in favor of death for innocent babies, and life for murderers and rapists.

 

Abortion makes me sick. Literally. But so does State interference in the lives of young women, criminalizing what is already a nightmare situation.

 

I couldn't agree more. It is a horrible desperate situation. Making it illegal multiplies the terror of the situation.

 

It's stuff like this that helps keep me from wholeheartedly siding with either candidate.

I think that Bush is a very flawed President and that the US could do a lot better.

But I think that Kerry is a very flawed candidate and that he definitely isn't that man.

I find it kind of appalling that both parties are so good at reminding me why I should vote against them, but so incapable of giving me any positive reason to vote for them.

Kerry makes legitimate criticisms of the stampede to go to war in Iraq. (But isn't that an implicit criticism of his own party as well? If the decision was so flawed, then why didn't the Democrats make the case against it?)

But Kerry fails abjectly when it comes to making constructive suggestions now that the war has already happened. Form a new coalition? From whom, exactly? A coalition to do what? It's just empty rhetoric.

Electing the anti-war candidate, the activist, the man who is running first and foremost as a critic, would hand the world's terrorists a victory on a plate. We would join Spain in demonstrating that outrages bring concessions. Do wou want a Western power to back down? Then just kidnap some people and cut off their heads on television. The voters' revulsion will be directed at the party in power and you will win.

Unfortunately, just when I'm ready to climb into bed with Bush because of Kerry's rancid odor (the French need to bathe more often), there's something like this thead to remind me why I don't much like Bush and the Republican party either.

There's the whole Republican Christo-political complex, the linking together of our nation with a religion that I don't begin to believe in and with positions on social issues that I can't possibly share.

I support abortion. I support gay rights. I fully accept evolution. I favor federal funding for stem-cell research. I applaud religious diversity and I strongly support the separation of church and state.

I'm still leaning towards Bush. But I'm leaning for Bush in spite of the kind of cultural-right rhetoric increasingly definitive of the new rural Southern-dominated Republican party, rhetoric that's as alien to my own culture and world-view as that of the cigarette smoking Parisian cafe intellectuals and their trendy Democratic admirers.

I'm increasingly depressed no matter which way this bullshit turns out, and I think (literally) that I'm going to buy some beer tomorrow night and get myself drunk.

 

Actually I've made that decision with my wife each time we chose to have our four kids. I have every much as right as a male as the female.

What right(s) do you think the child has?

BLD

 

BillDayson:

Just a suggestion:

Before you decide to vote for President Bush, you might ask yourself whether his frequent God-talk isn't just as phony as everything else about him. He doesn't ACT like a man who wants to do right by people or has a humble opinion of himself. He never admits to making a mistake in the face of overwhelming evidence, in Iraq alone, if no where else. He shows zero concern for preserving the Earth that God has entrusted to our care for future generations. He shows NO genuine concern for the welfare of the poor beyond a couple of tear stained encounters. He cannot tolerate dissent even in his public appearances as PRESIDENT (as opposed to candidate) and uses the Secret Service to remove those who merely wear anti-administration T-shirts. (NPR) He disregards his oath before God to enforce the law when it comes to preserving endangered animals if they get in the way of profit. He is arrogant and blind, proud to a crippling extent.

As a convinced Christian, has he EVER made the slightest effort to repair the fiancial damage that his insider trading did at Harkin?

As a convinced Christian, has he ever expressed his regret that Iraqi children died of our bombs?

How does being a convinced Christian square with his clear preference for the society and approval of the wealthy? (He called them "my base" as you will recall.)

He is dangerous.

 

And I assume you support the extra funds and resources needed to care for unwanted children - welfare, food stamps, subsidized housing etc.? Or do the rights you are so adamant about protecting disappear once the baby is born?

 

It's the right to LIFE we're talking about here. As Americans we're guaranteed the right to life.

No one is guaranteed the right to financial support.

Abortion and welfare are two seperate issues. Using the logic you suggest, would it be OK to kill all welfare receipients?

 

Tom,
I always find it somewhat humorous that you libs won't deal with the real issue -- is abortion the taking of human life or is it not? Medical science is definitely on the pro-life side.

And just FYI, I do financially support women who choose life. Now, what are you going to do to help stop the wanton killing of America's youth?

 

Why don't conservatives deal with the fact that the Iraq War deals with the taking also of innocent human life? Soldiers aren't the only ones we kill, you know.

 

Now that is just about the biggest pile of crap I've ever read.

No, the left is not "in favor of death for innocent babies", but we are somewhat different from the right in that we don't distinguish innocence by nationality. For example, we believe that all the people of the world should be given a chance at life, and not held hostage by repressive policies of either our own government or the proxies/dictatorships that we so often support. Talk about innocent deaths? What about the thousands, if not millions, who are tortured and killed by repressive regimes (e.g., Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Pakistan, India) of those countries that are our FRIENDS?

No, the left is not in favor of "life for murderers and rapists". I consider myself quite far to the left, and I would personally love to put a bullet in the back of the head of everyone of those scum-sucking criminals I could lay hands on. However, we also believe in following judicial process, and in honoring the rulings of our state and federal courts regarding these matters. We also do not believe in "cruel and unusual punishment", and we honor the fact that this discussion is in transition (as it has been throughout our country's history - from witch-dunkings to hangings to electric chairs to lethal injection to life without parole).

That all being said, I've already voted (absentee) for Kerry. May God help him win, and turn around this erroneous regime and set of failed policies that have driven our country and the entire world towards the precipice of global meltdown....

By the way, here in Palm Beach County, those precious absentee ballots, under the tender care of Teresa Lapore (a lameduck Republican elections supervisor, who had a lot to do with why Gore lost the election the last time) are being stored "in a large green tent". In Florida. In a hurricane zone - with 100% humidity and torrential rainstorms every day. I'm sure they'll all be counted, aren't you??

 

Fake support for the troops..... ??

A recent poll (IIRC by Pew) was cited on MSNBC by Chris Matthews. The pollster's research showed that 94% of those in the U.S. Armed Forces intend to vote. Of those 94%, 80% will cast their vote for President George W. Bush. As for favorability ratings, Bush was viewed favorably by approx 80+% of soldiers, while Sissy SINator Kerry was viewed favorably by only 23%.

If you really care about the soldiers, and I doubt you truly do, give them what they want, what they know is best, and cast your vote for George W. Bush. The soldiers are the ones fighting and dying for us. If they want George W. Bush as their leader, he should be re-elected. Don't just pretend to support the troops, respect their wishes!

 

Re: Fake support for the troops..... ??

And here is another equally fetid pile of crap.

No, we aren't going to just vote lockstep with whatever the rank and file of whatever military we have wants. I think you'd find those numbers different if (a) a draft were in place, and the population of the armed forces were more representative of the country as a whole (as it was in the glory days of the past - WWII, etc., most of whom voted for ROOSEVELT) and (b) if soldiers weren't constantly "educated" (i.e., brainwashed) with whatever the government in power wants them to know, but nothing else.... such as a dialogue about, or critical analysis of US foreign policy.

The rest of us, you know? - those of us who live in a "free country"? We are going to vote with our hearts and minds for what is best for our nation and the world - and that choice is clearly John Kerry over the failed regime and leadership of George W. Bush.

 

They do deal with it. Listen to the radio show of Michael Savage, hero of the far right. In between his rants about why we should have martial law and establish concentration camps for Arabs, he explains why he rejoices in seeing pictures of dead Iraqi children.

I'm not kidding, and this is not hyperbole. This is literally what he says. And I suspect that many here are big fans of his.