don1 (anonymous) says...

Jesus Is Not a Politician.
Jesus does not support the RNC or DNC. The ancient Romans were also religious. Even satanists are religious. Religion is a hobby. It is something you DO in your life. In contrast, following Jesus Christ is a 'way of life'. Everything else is a side bar.

Pro Choice means 'pro having the option to pull a baby from the mothers womb and kill him'.
What does the bible say about that?

"When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman's husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine.
But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe."

This makes it clear that killing the unborn baby is murder. "Life for Life" is the penalty.

Jesus Christ did not relieve us from the penalty for murder. He said, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.
This is the great and first commandment.
And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets."

At another place Jesus said not one jot of the law and prophets shall pass away until all things are fulfilled. Killing the unborn was murder back then, and it is murder today.

Now the difference between Religion and following Jesus Christ is that religion adds to, and removes the word of God to suit the person in the pew.

So, is Jesus Christ a Republican? No
Is Jesus Christ a Democrat? No
Is Jesus Christ Pro Life? Indeed. Abundantly so.

Where does Obama stand on this type of murder?

Don

October 11, 2008 at 11:52 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

em1 (anonymous) says...

"That is why it was wrong to support the invasion of Iraq. The Democrats know we will be perceived as a warlike country in the international community. That will be our undoing."

Please don't forget that over 70% of congress voted for this war too, including many of our "Christain" democrats. Jesus also told the rich man who came to him that for him to get into heaven he would need to sell all he had and give it to the poor. Just like Joe Biden gave 0.2% of his income ($380 a year) to charity over the last 10 years, but calls for massive tax increases to fund social programs he himself obviously isn't giving to. The Obama - Biden tax plan calls for the highest tax rate to be right around 40%, but at least we'll be funding all these great "Christian" social programs. In the spirit of every liberal here I say, "don't push your beliefs on me."

I agree Jesus was no republican, but don't tell me I should be a democrat either.

October 11, 2008 at 8:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

don1 (anonymous) says...

I suppose it needs to be emphasized, and so I will do that...

"The 'damage' you refer to is damage to the *mother,* not the fetus..."

If the verse meant to say 'damage to the woman', then God would not have needed to make it be a pregnant woman. In fact, it needn't have been a woman in the example at all. But it was. And not just ANY woman...a pregnant woman. Why? Reading comprehension comes into play here.
"so that her children come out, but there is no harm,"
The baby is the focus. Not a fetus mind you... but a baby.

I will never forget Obama's words concerning babies and abortion. He was speaking about his daughters and said, "I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby,"

In stark contrast the bible speaks of children in this light.
Psa 127:3 Behold, children are a heritage from the LORD, the fruit of the womb a reward.
Job 31:15 Did not he who made me in the womb make him? And did not one fashion us in the womb?
Jer 1:5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations."

When someone says I should look past abortion to other issues, I remember those verses. I remember the children. I am realizing more as time goes by that to be a Christian is to realize that there are NO politicians on earth that will ever do the right thing. Why? Because the people do not want it. Abortion is a perfect example. The bible says it will be that way. Prophecy gets fulfilled all the time.
In the old testament days they didn't do so called 'partial birth abortions'. They did post birth abortions. When the baby was born it would get placed on the flaming alter of Molech, Baal, (enter local name of Deity here) and be incinerated. Now days we think its more humane to pull the baby from the mothers womb and then drop it in the incinerator at the clinic.
There is nothing new under the sun.

I know that many of the women are traumatized. I know many live a life of guilt because of an abortion. And of course, Jesus Christ can heal the pain, and provide forgiveness, if a person turns to Him and asks.

October 11, 2008 at 8:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

peanutbutter1 (anonymous) says...

Only the same five people comment on here and they all have the same opinions... boring.

October 13, 2008 at 2:08 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

linguo_the_grammar_robot (anonymous) says...

xtians are idiots. The bible is a boring book of lies. There was never a jesus.

October 13, 2008 at 9:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

connerm (anonymous) says...

Actually there probably was a man named Jesus living during that period of time though I am pretty doubtful about some of the miracles he apparently performed. There are records of him in accounts other than the Bible.

October 13, 2008 at 10:17 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

linguo_the_grammar_robot (anonymous) says...

"Not to mention when you completely ignore all historical evidence that Jesus existed"

Apart from the myths in the bible there is no evidence of a jesus. Please list some historical evidence.

"And you've obviously never read the Bible. It is incredibly exciting, and is Truth"

It is not 'truth'; it's fables and myths and some biased historical reporting. Oh yes, there's nothing quite as exciting as reading page after page of x begat y. Yawn.

October 13, 2008 at 11:47 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Mike (anonymous) says...

"Charity is the main focus of the Democratic Party. I can think of no larger demonstration of Christ-like love than to make sure that all people, regardless of social status, have access to good healthcare."

Even at the cost of economic stability? Being charitable and socially conscious toward the less fortunate is a very noble endeavor, but Democrats endanger the entire flock by trying to pick up a few wanderers.

They're the primary culprits behind our current economic crisis because of poorly conceived social-engineering programs. Look up the Community Reinvestment Act - a program designed to ensure low income families would be given a home loan. While the intention is commendable, it's been a horrible idea. Banks don't give out loans to everyone because some people are unlikely to pay them back. Now we're facing the consequences of the CRA mandate to give out enough of those loans.

And which party over the last eight years was most active in blocking any reform to this policy or imposing more oversight of Freedie/Fannie? Democrats with idiots like Barney Frank is who.

So when you say charity, do you mean crippling economic policy blunders?

October 13, 2008 at 12:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

fghtdir (anonymous) says...

actually, I belive that the word charaity in the bible is the ancient Greek word Agape which means unconditional love or self-sacrificing love. What are social programs? They are trying to help and have charity for the people of the country. A Christian should have no problem paying a little more in taxes to make sure that all mankind has access to health care. That is the self sacrificing part. Christ did say that one of the two greatest commandments was to have love (agapao) our neighbors as we do ourselves. I, for one have not problem paying higher taxes of it helps those who need help.

Also, being pro-choice does not mean you are pro-abortion. Just like being anti-abortion does not mean you are pro-life. There are a lot of anit-choice rebublicans that support the death penalty and supported the Iraq war. That is not very pro-life. Let's call things what they are. Rebublicans are really anti-abortion, but so are some dems. The dem's issue is the right to choose. I agree with the article. Christ would have been anti-abortion, I have no doubt. But, according to the scriptures, He would have been pro-choice.

October 13, 2008 at 1:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

em1 (anonymous) says...

For the record there are quite a few democrats who are "pro-life" or "anti-abortion" or "anti-choice" or whatever you want to call it, and this ins't some obscure fact. People don't always fit so easily into your political mold.

As far as Jesus being pro choice, I don't know where people come up with this. The following is an excerpt from Pope John Paul II (arguably one of the most tolerant Popes in modern time). "direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, always constitutes a grave moral disorder, since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. This doctrine is based upon the natural law and upon the written word of God, is transmitted by the Church’s tradition and taught by the ordinary and universal magisterium. No circumstance, no purpose, no law whatsoever can ever make licit an act which is intrinsically illicit, since it is contrary to the law of God which is written in every human heart, knowable by reason itself, and proclaimed by the Church" (Evangelium Vitae 62). Pro choice indeed.

If you think its just the Catholics who say stuff like this, think again. Just about every church body out there has very similar statements on the record, and all have volumes of scripture to back their positions. Given that the church as a whole is so opposed to legalized abortion on demand, when you say, "according to the scriptures, He would have been pro-choice" I think its only fair to ask, "what scriptures?"

October 13, 2008 at 2:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

linguo_the_grammar_robot (anonymous) says...

csommervilee
Yes, you've mentioned ancient scholars who mention jesus but they where either xtians themselves or talking to xtians....all well after the life of the supposed savior. The Romans kept very good records and there is no record of a jesus being crucified or any mention of his having existed at all. So how about some real evidence, afterall, I can find plenty of ancient books that mention dragons and such. Do I have to believe in them because some old dead guy says they existed? In fact, there are a large number of cultures across the globe which have stories of dragon like creatures. This is more 'evidence' than you have for jesus.

October 13, 2008 at 3:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

fghtdir (anonymous) says...

em1, I completely agree that there are anti-abortion democrats. I am one of them. I dislike the practice and wish that it did not exist. However I do not think that the state has the right to infringe on personal choice. I am thankful for right to choose. This is what I was speaking of.

One of the greatest abilities God gave us is the ability to choose. Any deity who can create with the wave of His hands could also cause His people do love Him and obey Him. However he gave us "free agency", the ability to choose to love and follow His commands and laws.

I agree, that according to scriptures and doctrines baesed on those scriptures, God hates the practice of abortion as a means of birth control. The cavalier approach to human life, I am sure, saddens Him greatly. However, Humans still have the right to choose. God wants us to choose the right, but he does not force us. That is why making the right choice is so rewarding, because it was ours to make.

October 13, 2008 at 3:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

don1 (anonymous) says...

fghtdr
I do not need a politician to help me , help the poor. The poor are right here in my town. Give to Caesar what is Caesars, but give to the poor, what God leads you to do. You see, the difference between Govt welfare and charity is this;
The Govt gives the politician the glory
I give to the poor and ...give the glory to God.

As for the pro choice stuff... you presented semantics. Scripture shows clearly where God stands on killing babies.

October 13, 2008 at 3:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

don1 (anonymous) says...

I suppose reviewing the two commandments by Christ would suffice. How about the 10 commandments. Thou shalt not kill.
Not
Thou shalt not kill, but its your choice.
By your reasoning there should be no law against stealing or murder or....

Why do we allow some kinds of murder? Shouldnt we be pro choice on all murder instead of just the murder of the defensless? I mean, we do have free will.
Do you see how twisted it is? There is no choice. Its all murder

October 13, 2008 at 3:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

ouma (anonymous) says...

I am one of those who could be "labeled" as very Republican. I take issue with the implications that we do not act out of charity and that we claim Christ to be one of us! I flatly deny that I, as a Republican, believe that you cannot be both a Democrat (or a liberal!) and a Christian! That is quite a generalization to make!! My choice of political party has nothing to do with my belief in Christ. True, my faith does have an impact on the way that I vote on certain issues, but it DOES NOT determine my party!!!! As for the issue of charity. Yes, everyone should have access to medical care. Can you guarantee that my "little" extra taxes will ALL go to make that possible? I think not! I do not agree with all these "entitlement" programs, in part because they do not encourage people to attempt to better themselves. Why do we have to give handouts? Why not help them to find ways to achieve success while we are "giving" to them? Why should I have to fund their lives from here on out? To my mind, charity is not JUST giving and giving and giving. Sometimes that is the worst thing you can do for a person. Charity goes far beyond that!! It is about helping those in need to find ways to better themselves. That is one big difference between the conservative and the liberal viewpoints.

October 13, 2008 at 9:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

fghtdir (anonymous) says...

Ouma - I agree with what you said about faith impacting how you vote, not necessairly the party. What I take issue with is the "Religious Right" attacking the Dems implying that they are Godless. They claim to have family and religious values and imply that the Dems do not. That is what I think is the over-riding message of the original letter. That too often the Religious Right claim God as their own. Itis like they are the first to pick teams in gym class. They call God and then point out that God is on their side and not the others.

October 13, 2008 at 9:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

fghtdir (anonymous) says...

On the point of charity, I agree that there are people that will take advantage of a social system. There is no way around that. It will happen. There will always be lazy, self-serving people that think they can get a free ride. However, we cannot allow the few that abuse the system outweigh the many that are helped by it. I agree that the programs should not be merely handouts. They should be presented as a way to better the people. But the social programs need to go well beyond just welfare and similar programs. Work programs, similar to the WPA - A National Theatre Program. The USA is the only industrialized state without a national theatre. The government should allow the people to have access to healthcare and arts. It is expensive – yes. But we spend (as a country) a lot of money on programs that are worse than failing. The War on Drugs costs more money than it is worth. The War in Iraq bleeds this country of its resources (money and lives). Subsidies and tax breaks for large companies who don’t really need them. By fixing and dumping these failed programs we can more afford the programs that will make our country more vibrant. It will require sacrifice from all of us, but that is what makes life so great. Knowing that our sacrifices can help others live a better life.

October 13, 2008 at 9:43 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

ouma (anonymous) says...

I guess the thing that really bothers me about giving more money in taxes to any of these programs is that I have no faith that any of my money will be spent wisely!! I don't care who is in the White House or in the Congress, I think that there pet programs will take precedent over what the money really needs to be spent on!!! Take, for example, the recently passed "bail-out". There was so much "pork" added to that bill that it was absolutely ridiculous!! Right now, I can better use that money through my own donations to specific associations than to give it to a bunch of Congressmen (and women) that will say it is for one thing and then use it for another! That doesn't mean that I am not charitable!

October 13, 2008 at 9:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

fghtdir (anonymous) says...

Agreed -Congress (both parties) are way out of control. A two week "junket" in the caribbean is hardly proper use of funds. Parties aside the main problem with government is that they have all the power. The people fear what the gov't can do. The gov't forgets that it is employed by us. Thomas Jefferson wisley said, "When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny.” The gov't should fear us... they don't. They don't really even work for us anymore. They work for lobbyest and special interests.

Back to charity. It would be wonderful if it were not necessary for the gov't to step in. The problem is that not enough people give out of the goodness of their hearts. So there is not enough to help the people that need it. I know that a lot of people give charitable in churches, mosques and synagogues, but it, unfortunantly, is not enough. We are losing freedoms in this country for the sake of security (which costs us millions of dollars). I would gladly give up some security for more liberty. While Saddam was in power (and I agree that he was an evil man) the nations was very secure, but had no liberties. While we are not close to that here, we are on that road. The patriot act was a joke, that took liberties away from the people in the name of security.

I agree that there is too much pork barrel and "add on" clauses in congress. But unfortuantly that is what it takes to get bills to pass sometimes. I am in complete agreeance that major change and reform needs to happen in Washington. As much as I like Obama, I wonder how sucessful one man, even the president, can be at cleaning up Washington. Perhaps what this country needs is a little, old fashion revolt of the people. Wealthy people need to be reminded that if it were not for the middle class, they would have no wealth. The working class is what drives everything. The working class should have a say, not just praised and talked about in stump speaches. perhaps a little revolution would put this country back on the track that the founders had in mind. They meant us to act as one nation. That is why it went from being "the United states are" to "the United States is." I think that people forget, especially during election time that we are all one people. One nation, indivisible. With liberty and Justice for ALL!!!

October 14, 2008 at 11:47 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

em1 (anonymous) says...

"actually, I belive that the word charaity in the bible is the ancient Greek word Agape which means unconditional love or self-sacrificing love. What are social programs? They are trying to help and have charity for the people of the country. A Christian should have no problem paying a little more in taxes to make sure that all mankind has access to health care"

A true Christian should be willing to give to social programs and charaties and help others on their own, not forced into it. Biden gave $380 of his income to charity...yet demands that others be forced to give. That is entirely hypocritical. If he really cared he'd give money on his own. (ANgelina JoLie gives 30% of her income to charity, showing how much she really cares). How can you force something on others that you aren't passionate enough to support on your own? Also, why can we force social responsibility on the population as "Christians" (and therefore our religious views) but we can't force abortion on others because we can't force our beliefs on others?

October 14, 2008 at 1:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

em1 (anonymous) says...

social responsibility meaning doing the right thing for the good (ie social programs).

October 14, 2008 at 1:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Rayosun (anonymous) says...

See tons of material on this question at
http://www.JesusNoRepublican.Org/ which shows why Jesus would abhor
today's Republican Party, &
http://www.LiberalsLikeChrist.Org/ which shows why Liberal Democrats are
more like Christ than are Conservative Republicans

Rev. Ray Dubuque, creator of both sites.

October 24, 2008 at 10:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

don1 (anonymous) says...

True.
To try to align Jesus Christ with a political party is just plain ignorant.

The real issue here was whether Jesus would approve the idea of abortion. That is ludicrous. Jesus Christ is for eternal life. Killing any person is called murder. A person can play all the games they want with words but none of that will matter if you believe the bible. None of that will matter for those who DO believe the bible.
The fact is, we are here on this earth for an average of 72 - 77 years. Then comes eternity one way or another. Follow the words of Jesus Christ, or dont. You will be rewarded according to your choice.

October 28, 2008 at 9:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )