Some of you may be concerned that, by becoming a part of this effort, you would thereby concede the election to Hillary Clinton if Rudy Giulani or Mitt Romney were to receive the Republican nomination. That is not the case at all! You do not have to make any pledges for a specific candidate or against specific candidates. To join this effort is to pledge support to the effort and a desire for a Christian President. Joining is like you saying, "I do not want to vote for Rudy Giulani. I do not want to vote for Mitt Romney. And I want to act so that I am not eventually compelled to under the philosophy of picking the lesser of two evils."
In fact, you do not even have to disavow both (or either) Giulani and (or) Romney. You can join whatever blogrolls you want to! There are three: "Americans for a Christian President," "Christian Coalition AGAINST Rudy Giulani," and "Evangelicals NOT for Mitt Romney." Obviously, it is preferable that you go all out and dedicate yourself to this effort, but those who partially agree with this site's philosophy are welcomed to join alongside those who fully agree with it. Perhaps, at some point, you will realize the fullness of our perspective.
One last note: Although the focus of this blog seems to be the Republican front-runners, that is an illusion. We Want a Christian President... is also presently against Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and all of the other Democratic presidential candidates who behave or believe in non-Christian ways.
Alasan Bermain Judi Kasino Online
-
Perekonomian agen bola terpercaya dunia tidak berjalan dengan baik. Biaya
hidup semakin tinggi setiap harinya. Oleh karena itu, setiap individu[...]
6 years ago
2 comments:
An interesting sight that sounds good to the ears but everything must be examined with discernment. On the right side of the blog you list sites for Huckabee and Hunter. Now Huckabee is a former televangelist, and from the debates in his definitions of creation, and his position on a war that violates entirely the "just war" principles of Christianity, it is clear that he is both a Deist (Supreme Being) in confession, a false prophet and ear-tickler, and cannot be a true Christian that fears God, for unjust war, the killing of over 1 million Iraqis, who never attacked the U.S. or harbored terrorists, who did not possess WMD, is murder, unlawful invasion, and aiding and abetting deliberate lying from Bush and Cheney who are driving a neoconservative (Trotskyte) agenda toward world government (world federation of democracies, "new middle east") under the guise of "war on terrorism".
There are not true Christian candidates presently. I reject in particular, as you, Romney and Giuliani (a Roman Catholic fascist) in particular, but candidates on both sides. While I do not believe Ron Paul is a true Christian (as many others do) he would restore the legitimate government, i.e. the constitution as law, which is what Christians have a duty to obey (the ordinance of man), until Christian laws can be introduced. In particular, phony and fraudulent attempts to win Christian votes through Constitutional amendments on "marriage", "faith based intitiatives", even empty abortion promises (unjust war is an abortion of a greater magnitude, the "shedding of innocent blood" of the living is a high crime in God's eyes), are all tricks to be abhorred.
Restoration of the "just war" principle of Christianity, which forbids war largely with the exception of self defense only, is the greatest abortion crisis of America (unless one considers Iraqis or Afghans or Palestinians as less than human), for which God also threatens judgment, as the prophets warned Israel of in the past. Calling Ron Paul would be like calling in the police to restore justice and order per the Constitution, supreme law, and therefore is the best alternative against all the feigning Christian candidates (even as GWB was pushed as a Christian by the agnostic Karl Rove).
You make many very interesting statements. So let me address them one by one.
"...from the debates in his definitions of creation..."
I believe Mike Huckabee raised his hand when asked who "didn't believe in Evolution." He was the only one, I believe. He told Fox News' Bill O'Reilly that he believes Adam and Eve existed, and he believes that God created. He added that he "didn't know how God did it or how long it took," but that he does believe it.
Now, that may not exactly be Ken Ham-esque, but I don't see how that qualifies him as a Deist.
"...Huckabee is a former televangelist..."
Now, I'm no fan of televangelists, but I don't know much of anything about Huckabee as a former televangelist (perhaps you could point me to some article detailing it), and, even if he was, I hardly think that inandof itself disqualifies him as a Christian.
"...the killing of over 1 million Iraqis..."
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt of having some measure of credibility until you mentioned this "statistic." The most far-left, anti-war fanatics that I have heard list the number at around 600,000, and that number is considered ridiculously inaccurately high by most analysts.
"...is murder..."
Let's define murder: accidentally killing citizens in a war is not murder; killing enemy combatants trying to kill you is not murder.
"...unjust war is an abortion of a greater magnitude...the greatest abortion crisis of America (unless one considers Iraqis or Afghans or Palestinians as less than human)..."
You really lose me here. You say that the war is a "greater abortion" and the "greatest abortion crisis." "Unless," you add, "you consider Iraqis...less than human." No, it's only greater if you consider UNBORN BABIES less than human! More babies are killed here in America IN ONE YEAR than all the Iraqis that have been killed IN THE WHOLE WAR!!!
"In particular, phony and fraudulent attempts to win Christian votes through Constitutional amendments on "marriage", "faith based intitiatives", even empty abortion promises (unjust war is an abortion of a greater magnitude, the "shedding of innocent blood" of the living is a high crime in God's eyes), are all tricks to be abhorred."
I hope you are not inferring that marriage and abortion are "phony issues," because that would be an inferrence to be abhorred.
"There are not true Christian candidates presently."
You may very well be right. But I am not about to presume that all of the presidential candidates are not Christians. I can only go by their statements and actions.
UNJUST WAR:
My question is this: why must a war of self-defense be reactive--after thousands of innocents have died--rather than pre-emptive? Furthermore, I would hardly call deposing a brutal dictator and trying to give a people a shot at freedom and democracy an abhorrent thing to do--especially considering that Saddam Hussein violated treaty after treaty and practically led U.N. investigators around on leashes. Am I supposed to believe he had no weapons of mass destruction? I'm not sure one way or the other, but I'm not going to crucify the President on the cross of an accusation of an "unjust war" and "deliberate lying."
Moreover, we know Saddam Hussein was supporting terrorism, even if he was not directly involved with the 9/11 attacks. Plus, we know terrorists had some kind of connection with Iraq, or else, why were they so quick to come and help fight the Americans?
RON PAUL:
I like a lot of what Ron Paul has to say, but I certainly do not agree with his "pull-out now" philosophy. We made the mess in Iraq. Now we're going to tuck our tails beneath our legs, cut our losses, get out of dodge, and leave them to deal with a civil war, genocide, a shaky government, and Islamic fascist, extremist insurgents? How Christian is that? Not to mention the problems it would cause for the United States by giving the terrorists a massive victory.
Post a Comment