I definitely don't base it JUST on morals
Posted By: OP on 2008-09-12
In Reply to: Another side of the coin..... - sm
I guess I should have been more elaborate on that. And you are completely right, most presidents change their tune after they get into the white house. I feel like we are almost gambling when we vote, who will change less?
Honestly, if we could take the candidates and even the VPs and just mush them into one candidate, I think we would be flying pretty high.
I think my biggest fear right now is that myself and a lot of people I know are one step from losing our homes and standing in the breadline. I Get upset that my husband and I both work extremely hard to keep what we have (which isn't much) but that we can't seem to get any assistance whatsoever. Yet someone can have seven kids and never work a day in her life and be taken care of. Do I think this will change? No. I feel like the middle class in the economy is a lot like "the middle child" in a family - often forgotten about, but expected to behave anyways.
On religion, check out my reply to Kaydie. I've written a short summary of a part of the book I mentioned to her in response to you saying that Jesus was a highly evolved human being (I used to believe the same thing)
Josh Mcdowell puts it like this: either Jesus was a liar, a lunatic, or Lord.
If he spent his life telling everyone that he was the Son of God and getting people to believe and follow him and he knew that he wasn't, then he was a liar. But the question poses, can someone that evil hearted (remember a lot of his disciples left there homes, family, jobs, etc to follow Him and were even killed defending His name) never do wrong? See I believe that there were enough people that hated Jesus that after he died if someone tried to talk about how great he was they would have been writing about ANYTHING wrong he did if they knew that he did. We would have heard about it.
Lunatic - If he did all this not knowing that he was being deceptive, and he really believed that he was the Son of God, then he had to be crazy. But this is crazy to the tenth power. Most lunatics who believe they are something else believe they are something tangible, such as a dog or a butterfly or another human. To believe that your the Son of God (remember, there was no Son of God in history before him, so it's not like it was a term thrown around or an unoriginal idea) is very unlikely. Not to mention how eloquent of a speaker Jesus was and how he was so easily able to explain things.
Lord - If Jesus was neither a liar or a lunatic, then he must be who he says he is - Lord, the Son of God. And since the Son of God cannot sin, he cannot lie, which means when he says "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, no one comes to the Father EXCEPT by me" then he must not be lying.
Josh Mcdowell explains this a lot better than I can (that's why he's a PhD and I'm an MT! :-D ) but in case you never get to check out his book, I just wanted to give a recap. It helped me make my decision that he is Lord, because for a long time I wanted to believe that he was just "a great man" or "a great teacher" but I feel now that it was so rude of me to say that of someone who personally died for me.
Just my ideas! Thanks for giving me yours! It's nice to be able to talk back and forth about this without anyone getting upset! :-D
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Like I said.......this man has no morals.....
@@
Then there would be no morals
Just a lot of contradicting dictators with their own ego agenda.
Your morals are not everyone's morals.
What is so hard to understand about that? You think that everyone should behave exactly the way you want them to behave, believe whatever you want them to believe, and act however you want them to act. The last time I checked, this was still a free country. Stop trying to impose your beliefs on others.
No morals is what's going
in our country. Drugs, same-sex "marriage," abortion, taking God out of every conversation. When drug use is commonplace, when people of the same sex demand "marriage" and affirmation, when you are allowed to dispose of your unborn children, when using God's name is illegal, what do you expect? To many people, children are dispensable at any age.
My morals are my business.
I am not interested in discussing my morals, especially with people who are trying to shove their morals and their religion down my throat. That's the whole point of my post. Keep your moral and religious beliefs to yourself!
Define morals.......
Your definition might not match mine.......That's why God gave us free will.
On that morals and values question...
May I point out one way that Emanuel is most definitely NOT left wing liberal. On the issue of Israel, he is more to the right than even Bush is. To be honest, the idea of his being Chief of Staff to Obama is concerning for me in THAT regard. However, that post is a very broad one and I do not pretend to know precisely what Obama's motivations may be for considering him. What I do know is that Emanuel is only one voice in many that Obama will be listening to. I have not heard that Emanuel has accepted the position but I know that he has expressed his passion for the legislative branch, has his eye on the Speaker's position and has personal considerations of being the father of small children. This is in the wait and see mode. I feel I do not have enough information on him yet and am trying not to focus on what I consider to be a strong negative about him.
In terms of your fear, I will gently suggest to you that you might try broadening your base of information sources beyond O'Reilly, if you haven't already done that. It is not surprising that Bill O's guests are calling Obama a puppet. I hear none of that anywhere else but Fox. As difficult as it may be, a good dose of balance AND extreme viewpoints may be helpful in this respect. I hold my nose quite often and listen to Rush Limbaugh (ugh), Bill O and Hannity, though I confess I have a pretty low tolerance to them. I also tune into Lou Dobbs, Anderson Cooper, Wolf Blitzer, Cafferty, Joe Scarborough (not terribly fond of him either), Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Amy Goodman, Juan Gonzalez, Naomi Klein and innumerable independent journalists. I find that approach very effective in soothing the fear factor and to be much more engaging.
You may be right to a certain extent about the morals and values. We are not living in the same world and our nations best interests will not be best served if we try to pretend we are. That is what the dynamics of change is all about. As a species, human beings have survived BECAUSE of their capacity to adapt to change. The internet and free trade act has transformed our country into a vital component of a global economic and cultural system. We must now take on the task of defining what role we want to assume within that context. The diversity of our nation's culture can remain a point of contention and division, or it can become a new source of our strength and pride. This choice is ours to make and I believe this election has been a mandate on where the younger generations stand on this issue. After all, they are the ones who have grown up in the midst of these population dynamics.
In this respect, it seems that our most basic and cherished values and beliefs do manage to endure as a nation, and what does not can always be elaborated in how we lives our personal lives. In the past, as a country we have managed to survive quite well during "liberal years." However, that is not what I believe is in store for us now. Whatever tectonic shifts we have undergone in the past (and we have had our share), never once have we been able to negotiate them against a backdrop of a house divided, as gourdpainter pointed out earlier. We unite, we rise to the occasion and we get past it.
I think part of our peek into the future will inevitably require us to place much more focus on new energies and phase out our dependence and relentless and, at times, fatal search for fossil fuel resources. I cannot think of a better way to diffuse the power that those "not so friendly nations" hold over us now. Jobs do not necessarily have to come from the oil patch and there are alternatives to trying to drill our way out of these problems as T. Bone Pickens so eloquently reminded us recently. Any new jobs creation will have that domino effect you describe.
Obama hardly is a one-issue candidate (tax) the way Bill O would have you believe. I will not spend my time trying to promote the president-elect, except to say you may find some comfort in at least reading his Blueprint for Change, whether you trust him to carry it out or not. He has put this is writing and no doubt the media and the electorate will be holding his feet to the fire with those words and promises. So it looks like we are back to wait and see again.
BTW, a good antidote to fear is hope and faith....and that does not necessarily mean Obama style hope. Being hopeful and drawing strength from faith is also a very personal choice one makes in life. It is not that hard to talk yourself into a more positive attitude. Just talk the talk and walk the walk and pretty soon, it becomes second nature.
yeah well America's morals have changed
interracial marriages used to be illegal. One day we ill look upon the ban against gay marriage to be as rediculous of a notion as not allowing blacks to go to school with whites. The times, they are a changin!
YES, I most certainly would if it meant sacrificing my morals, my soul, hurting.....sm
other people everywhere, and basically being a cut-throat sleeze. I would love if I could get rich honestly, with integrity. I would love to provide the best educations for my children, give to charities, pay off my two sisters' mortgages for them, etc., but it is NOT going to happen, so it is a moot point. A person can be "rich and prosperous" without a large bank account, I feel I am rich indeed for my blessings.
and I base mine on
available information .... don't just pull them out of my bellybutton.
Deeni, please don't base all on one
I'm a Christian, but I see a lot of Christians who just are paranoid about anything and everything under the sun. They become paralyzed with "end times," the antichrist, etc. They become so entranced by this stuff that they lose their joy in their faith. I'm not like this. I feel Obama is there because he's supposed to be there, and I'm just working, paying bills, and enjoying my life and family. We're not all the "fire and brimstone" kind. :) I actually feel sorry for those Christians that feel this way because they're not acknowledging who is really in charge and these things are happening because they're supposed to. "Let it go!" I say to them. lol I'm sure you will agree. :)
I want to know what facts you base this on.
Unless, you know her personally, that is.
U.S. air base closing which is a key to
This is not good. Just heard on the news that we need McCain, Romney, and Obama to talk to Russia about this special base closing. But of course, the senate and congress are too busy with this stimulus, stated the ex-FBI agent to fight terrorism.
Supposedly Russia prime minister stated he was FOR (not against) helping fight terrorists, but instead, Russia is actually working with Taliban. Basically, "Russia is bullying Obama." This needs to be worked out soon or terrorists are going to get stronger and attack when we are at our weakest, which I say is about now. We have already lost 150 vehicles for fighting because of base closing and do we seriously have 15,000 troops? Or are some of our young ones in high school and college going to be drafted soon.
MOSCOW — Kyrgyzstan's president said Tuesday his country is ending U.S. use of an air base key to military operations in Afghanistan_ a decision with potentially grave consequences for U.S. efforts to put down surging Taliban and al-Qaida violence.
A U.S. military official in Afghanistan called President Kurmanbek Bakiyev's statement "political positioning" and denied the U.S. presence at the Manas air base would end anytime soon.
The United States is preparing to deploy an additional 15,000 troops in Afghanistan and Manas is an important stopover for U.S. materiel and personnel.
Ending U.S. access would be a significant victory for Moscow in its efforts to squeeze the United States out of Central Asia, home to substantial oil and gas reserves and seen by Russia as part of its strategic sphere of influence.
Kyrgyz President Kurmanbek Bakiyev spoke on a visit to Moscow minutes after Russia announced it was providing the poor Central Asian nation with billions of dollars in aid.
Bakiyev said when the U.S. forces began using Manas after the September 2001 terrorist attacks, the expectation was that they would stay for two years at most.
"It should be said that during this time... we discussed not just once with our American partners the subject of economic compensation for the stationing (of US forces at the base)," he said on Russian state-run TV. "But unfortunately we have not found any understanding on the part of the United States.
"So literally just days ago, the Kyrgyz government made the decision on ending the term for the American base on the territory of Kyrgyzstan," he said.
Col. Greg Julian, the U.S. spokesman in Afghanistan, denied there was any change in U.S. use of the base and he noted that Gen. David Petraeus, commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, just recently traveled there.
"I think it's political positioning. Gen. Petraeus was just there and he talked with them. We have a standing contract and they're making millions off our presence there. There are no plans to shut down access to it anytime soon," he told The Associated Press.
As recently as Jan. 19, Petraeus said he had received Kyrgyz assurances that Russia was not pushing for the base to close.
In Washington, Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said: "I have seen nothing to suggest, other than press reports, that the Russians are attempting to undermine our use of that facility."
The United States set up Manas and a base in neighboring Uzbekistan after the September 2001 attacks to back operations in Afghanistan. Uzbekistan expelled U.S. troops from the base on its territory in 2005 in a dispute over human rights issues, leaving Manas as the only U.S. military facility in the immediate region.
Moscow, which fought a 10-year war in Afghanistan during the Soviet era, was initially supportive of U.S. efforts to keep Afghanistan from collapsing into new anarchy and stem the spread of militancy northward through ex-Soviet Central Asia.
But as Kremlin suspicions about U.S. foreign policy have grown, so has Russian wariness about the U.S. presence in Central Asia. Russia also uses a military air base in the ex-Soviet nation.
During his visit last month, Petraeus said that Manas would be key to plans to boost the U.S. troop presence in Afghanistan. He also said the United States currently pumps a total of $150 million into Kyrgyzstan's economy annually, including $63 million in rent for Manas.
About 1,200 U.S. troops are based at Manas.
Russia, however, agreed Tuesday to provide Kyrgyzstan with $2 billion in loans plus another $150 million in financial aid.
Kyrgyzstan is one of Central Asia's poorest countries and has been buffeted by political turmoil for years. Its economy has been strained to the limit this winter after neighboring Uzbekistan significantly raised prices for natural gas.
Most Kyrgyz have been supportive, or at least accepting, of the U.S. presence, though in 2007, widespread anger erupted after a U.S. serviceman at Manas shot and killed a Kyrgyz man during a security check. Kyrgyz investigators had asked the serviceman face criminal prosecution in their country.
Petraeus said during a trip to the region last month that the investigation will be reopened.
Central Asia is key to U.S. efforts to secure an alternative supply line to forces in Afghanistan. The main route, through the Khyber Pass in Pakistan's northwest, has occasionally been closed in recent months due to rising attacks by bandits and Islamist militants, including one on Tuesday that destroyed a bridge.
During his visit, which included a stop in Kyrgyzstan, Petraeus said Washington had struck deals with Russia and several Central Asian states to allow the transhipment of supplies heading to Afghanistan.
NATO spokesman Eric Povel said the alliance could not comment because use of the base was an issue for the U.S. and Kyrgyzstan.
"It's not a NATO base," he said.
your way off base and don't know what your talking about
In my relationship with my partner we don't do sm, bondage, strange fetishes, and we certainly don't abuse each other. We don't do 3-ways or wife/husband swapping. We also don't do polygamy and certainly no domestic violence.
We have a normal sexual relationship and show tender loving care to each other. We respect each other, give each other privacy and never force the other into anything. We love each other unconditionally and when we're together we feel the love each of us shows the other. I trust my life with my partner. We have a totally natural and normal relationship with each other.
There are many couples (heterosexual) who do sm, bondage, strange fetishes, 3-ways, wife-swapping and polygamy and most domestic violence is commited by a heterosexual couple.
So I would say if anything heterosexual couples are not normal.
LOL, oh give it up, you are so off base it isn't funny! sm
You mean gt/Libby/deedee/DixieDew??? LOL!!! 
Once again, gt, you are not thinking from a base of fairness.
But I didn't expect you to. And when another poster actually did, you responded with HOW COULD YOU. I expected that, as well. So much for philosophical conversation, exploring intent, and misspeaking. I notice you never mentioned Maher, which, again, is typical. I drew a cogent correlation and you dismissed it completely. Again, expected. Thank you, Gadfly, for the conversation.
Permanent military base. sm
This has nothing to do with anything. We have permanent military bases in many European countries. That does not mean we are involved in the politics in those countries. It means, and I have said this three times but I will try again, that when the Iraqi Democratic government is finally in place, they will decide what happens with prisoners of war. Right now, we are involved in that. In the future, we won't be. I am not sure how much clearer I can make it. Very much to the contrary of what the poster Democrat has posted above, this is not a partisan brouhaha that the media has somehow missed. They miss very little. It is something you are misunderstanding. There is plenty out there on the internet that explains it. That might be your first step, or, if you are determined to be upset about it, then there is little anyone can do. Now, having said that, I am off to other boards. Have a nice day.
Seems like SP's speech energized O's base too.
su
Please don't base your decision on who you vote...sm
for on this or any other board. Look at the issues and make your decisions based on them, not personalities or rhetoric.
If you base your perceptions of the entire
populace of our country from the postings on this forum, you need to get out more.
I'm sorry they said bad things about your candidate. It obviously hurt you deeply.
If they were born on a military base, they
are considered U.S. citizens. Military bases anywhere in the world are considered U.S. soil.
they were not born on a military base either
they have dual citizenship.
You base your impression of all liberals
He is a television personality. That would be like basing an impression of all conservatives on Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly. None of them are there to provide objective opinion, and in a lot of ways they are caricatures for infotainment.
I consider myself a liberal, but I would not base my impression of all conservatives on any one individual of that political persuasion.
I do think that Obama will listen to knowledgeable people no matter what their political affiliation is. No one person (or political party) has all the answers and it is going to take a cooperative effort to get us started on the road out of this mess. Good ideas are good ideas no matter what the source is.
P.S. I don't think much of Olbermann really. He doesn't even vote. He strikes me as a blowhard critic. It will be interesting to see how/if his program changes in the next few months. She is way more liberal, but I prefer Rachel Maddow's show. She seems much more genuine and personable.
The Commander in Chimp's base is hopeless...sm
I saw one post on Alternet earlier today which stated that if 911 were an inside job, that Bush probably had to sacrifice for the greater good.
Has anyone seen this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whhbPVrb5KM
CG, me, Hillary's angered base, feminists,
We'll all be pushing long and hard against having what's-her-name represent us and squash the Bimbos Unite! movement before it even takes off.
You are so off base. BE PATRIOTIC, s tand behind the NEW PRESIDENT OF THE USA !!!!
nm
|
