|
Note also that those rules about stoning your wife in the Bible? Those were from the Old Testament. The coming of Jesus in the New Testament threw all those out the window. Just saying.
No actually, they didn't Jesus lived by those rules, Jesus said that anyone who loved and followed him would want in their hearts to follow those rules, that when you accept the spirit the law is a part of you. He didn't throw out the law, he just put faith before the law.
|
For the record, I still support Herman Cain, and his fiscal policy. I'm just staunchly against the idea that Muslims are trying to subvert our culture and institute their own religious law, just like the gays, the catholics, and the blacks, and the jews, and every other religion and culture that isn't the mainstream at some point in the past.
Agree 100% actually. As far as my own experiences go, the vast majority of Muslims (and gays, Catholics, and everyone else) just wants to live their own life as they will.
They're too worried about getting the dog to the vet and the kids to Little League to worry about subjegating the country to Sharia. :)
And IMHO, they should be allowed to.
Just my 2 cp
EDIT TO THE ABOVE: true enough. He also was big on that whole "forgiveness" thing. Much better to do that to anyone than stone them.
Heck, even in the Florida Koran burning case, several of the local Imams came out and said "It's cool. That's our holy book and you're trying to prove a point about how violent our religion is, but this is America. You have a right to burn a book if you want. We disagree, but it's your right to make a statement." (NOTE: obviously not the true quote, but you get the idea).
gonna need some links for this one. This sounds too outrageous to be believed.
|
|
Yup one group represents all muslims, if you'll excuse me, my westboro baptist church membership has to be renewed because I'm christian. And actually, the guy from Westboro if his son is to be believed routinely beats and subjugates the women and children of his family well. And even if you discount them you have the church in FL that had the koran burning, and do i really need to find links of pastors calling for America as a christian nation to uphold christian law, like say on abortion, nope no christians trying to change the law to make it more like their bible.Heres one for Australia
LINKHyperbole fixes everything!
One day you'll realize not everything is black and white. While not all peoples in a certain group are representd by a small minority of that group, maybe, just effing maybe, that small majority of a group is the one who has a legal team, and has the money to finance it's legal battles, to make their rediculous ideas as legal as they can while following the very same laws that are supposed to protect us from that crap.
Look at all the horrible crap Scientologists have done to persecute people in Florida, because they could hide behind religious freedom.
Any religion with a militant agenda can do this.
But ya know, we shouldn't look into this or question it because someone might get offended or be branded a (enter faith here)-o-phobe.
Oh no, I'm well aware of scientology, and islam, I have a copy of the koran in my house, and I've spoken to muslims and scientologists. See you sayng that there is a small majority is wrong. Even the link you posted had a percentage of muslims. it said 30-40% that's not a small majority, that's a large minority. I'm not saying that we can't be aware of what relgious groups try to do, but there's a difference between, being vigilant and having religious paranoia. No not everything is black and white, I'm not claiming they are, but once again, a muslim group =/= muslims in general.
I still have issues with the ROBIN HOOD mentality of so many that it is OK to take money from those that EARNED it and give it to those that didn't. At what point is stealing from the rich enough?
Later,
Mazra
You're begging the question. You're also fundamentally misrepresenting the opposition.
But once more, can we not do this again?
We're on the same page them, I just don't attribute Cain's words to religious paranoia :)
|
|
** spoiler omitted **
EDIT TO THE ABOVE: true enough. He also was big on that whole "forgiveness" thing.
Apologies! Didn't even mean "your" as in YOUR. Was talking more "you" as reader YOU....
Many sorries about the confusion! No disrespect intended.
EDIT: removed the whatever. Didn't want to seem flippant at ALL. truly sorry Knight.
Senior Software Developer
|
Let's keep in mind that this thread is specifically about Herman Cain winning the Florida straw poll. If you want to talk at length about sharia or the muslim religion or whatever, make a new thread. Please.
Edit: I'm trying something new with the political threads. My new theory is, if they remain on-topic maybe they'll be less inflammatory.
|
|
** spoiler omitted **
EDIT TO THE ABOVE: true enough. He also was big on that whole "forgiveness" thing.Apologies! Didn't even mean "your" as in YOUR. Was talking more "you" as reader YOU....
Many sorries about the confusion! No disrespect intended.
EDIT: removed the whatever. Didn't want to seem flippant at ALL. truly sorry Knight.
We're cool, like i sai, knew you didn't mean anything by it, just was weird seeing someone say that as a result of what I said.
He's too lacking in too many things. The guy may be rich, but he doesn't know squat, and his economic ideas are just more of the same "stop crippling the job creators" nonsense.
A folksy, down-home, catch-phrasing lightweight. We've got enough of those.
|
|
I'm excited to see him getting attention. I'm so sick of professional politicians right now; I'd love to see what a non-politician would do in office.
This is why I prefer Romney over Perry too, despite my living in Texas and all. He's a professional politician, but at least he's also been other things in his adult career.
At this point, I plan to vote for Cain for the primary. Maybe I'd be throwing my vote away, but I'm going to gun for the candidate I like best, not the one the political pundits think "has a chance".
I'm excited to see him getting attention. I'm so sick of professional politicians right now; I'd love to see what a non-politician would do in office.
This is why I prefer Romney over Perry too, despite my living in Texas and all. He's a professional politician, but at least he's also been other things in his adult career.
At this point, I plan to vote for Cain for the primary. Maybe I'd be throwing my vote away, but I'm going to gun for the candidate I like best, not the one the political pundits think "has a chance".
hm. Still, viewing cain with some distrust, despite jds endorsement.
|
Let's keep in mind that this thread is specifically about Herman Cain winning the Florida straw poll. If you want to talk at length about sharia or the muslim religion or whatever, make a new thread. Please.
Edit: I'm trying something new with the political threads. My new theory is, if they remain on-topic maybe they'll be less inflammatory.
Gary, you really can't separate the two. Herman Cain's policy on economics, Muslims, etc. are fundamental to the why he won. I truly can't imagine a thread based on any candidate not stirring up discussions about that candidates specific points of view. Especially when those points of view deal with matters like religion or class warfare.
We do need to keep it civil though! And for that you are doing splendidly.
Later,
Mazra
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm excited to see him getting attention. I'm so sick of professional politicians right now; I'd love to see what a non-politician would do in office.
This is why I prefer Romney over Perry too, despite my living in Texas and all. He's a professional politician, but at least he's also been other things in his adult career.
At this point, I plan to vote for Cain for the primary. Maybe I'd be throwing my vote away, but I'm going to gun for the candidate I like best, not the one the political pundits think "has a chance".
I agree 100% with the sentiment here.
While Romney maybe "better" than Perry, it's a d-bag or crap sandwich choice, imho. No McCain lite, please.|
|
He's too lacking in too many things. The guy may be rich, but he doesn't know squat, and his economic ideas are just more of the same "stop crippling the job creators" nonsense.
A folksy, down-home, catch-phrasing lightweight. We've got enough of those.
Actually plain talking politicians are few and far between. Most of them give you a bunch of double speak. If you spent as many hours as I have listening to Herman Cain's talk show, you would know he is not a light weight. I would agree that his Foreign Policy experience is lacking. But that was a weakness for Bill Clinton at this stage of the game too, as well as many candidates that come from outside of the Federal government. President Obama was a relative novice in Foreign Affairs. But Obama has a capable Secretary of State because of her eight years in the White House and time in the Senate. Cain would need a strong Sec of State too, but that is obtainable. Fixing the economic mess is job one right now. And by far Cain is the most capable candidate for that; even if you may disagree with his methods.
Later,
Mazra
|
|
hm. Still, viewing cain with some distrust, despite jds endorsement.I'm excited to see him getting attention. I'm so sick of professional politicians right now; I'd love to see what a non-politician would do in office.
This is why I prefer Romney over Perry too, despite my living in Texas and all. He's a professional politician, but at least he's also been other things in his adult career.
At this point, I plan to vote for Cain for the primary. Maybe I'd be throwing my vote away, but I'm going to gun for the candidate I like best, not the one the political pundits think "has a chance".
I know we're quite different on the political spectrum. :) I would rather everyone give any candidate they're thinking of voting for a careful look. Not trusting too much would lead, I hope, to a better informed, more thoughtful electorate. In general I encourage this!
How bad is it that my wife and I watched the SNL debate skit and after the guy playing Cain did his whole "government should be like pizza" bit finishing with, "If I get elected I will Deliver." Both of us looked at each other and said, "That was funny, but it actually didn't sound half-bad too."
Fixing the economic mess is job one right now. And by far Cain is the most capable candidate for that; even if you may disagree with his methods.
Later,
Mazra
LOL
How bad is it that my wife and I watched the SNL debate skit and after the guy playing Cain did his whole "government should be like pizza" bit finishing with, "If I get elected I will Deliver." Both of us looked at each other and said, "That was funny, but it actually didn't sound half-bad too."
Cain himself has actually said he might use that for a campaign slogan, he liked it so much.
Anyone know his stance on evolution?
I'd say any candidate who doesn't believe evolution is true (and maybe even support the teaching of creationism) would be automatically eliminated in my opinion. They'd have a serious problem with accepting reality and I'd fear how they'd react to some situations in office.
So far it seems only Huntsman has shown to be "pro-evolution" - but the jury still seems to be out on Cain.
Although he does tow a strong conservative Christian line, so maybe one could make an educated guess. But maybe those who have followed him for a while can shed some light on the matter?
I'm sure as a Christian he believes God created the Earth.
|
|
Anyone know his stance on evolution?
I'd say any candidate who doesn't believe evolution is true (and maybe even support the teaching of creationism) would be automatically eliminated in my opinion. They'd have a serious problem with accepting reality and I'd fear how they'd react to some situations in office.
So far it seems only Huntsman has shown to be "pro-evolution" - but the jury still seems to be out on Cain.
Although he does tow a strong conservative Christian line, so maybe one could make an educated guess. But maybe those who have followed him for a while can shed some light on the matter?
To my knowledge, he hasn't come out and said his views on evolution.
Not a big fan of HuffPo, but good breakdown on the candidates' stances on evolution here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/24/2012-election-gop-candidates-evolu tion-_n_934045.html#s333339&title=Herman_Cain
As for an educated guess, he's an associate minister, so I'm guessing he leans towards creationism. Not a certainty though! My cousin is a Baptist Minister as well (like Cain) and he believes in evolution. Shrug.
And my issue is whether the candidates want creationism taught as a "science." Take Gingrich for instance; he wants evolution taught as a science and creationism would be taught as a religion/philosophy.
Bachmann's ideas of teaching creationism right next to evolution in science class? Yeah... not so much.
Great catch though! Strange that no one has seemed to ask Cain about his evolution stance...
I'm sure as a Christian he believes God created the Earth.
I'm sure he does. That, in theory, has nothing to do with evolution, though. :-)
Anyone know his stance on evolution?
I'd say any candidate who doesn't believe evolution is true (and maybe even support the teaching of creationism) would be automatically eliminated in my opinion. They'd have a serious problem with accepting reality and I'd fear how they'd react to some situations in office.
So far it seems only Huntsman has shown to be "pro-evolution" - but the jury still seems to be out on Cain.
Although he does tow a strong conservative Christian line, so maybe one could make an educated guess. But maybe those who have followed him for a while can shed some light on the matter?To my knowledge, he hasn't come out and said his views on evolution.
Not a big fan of HuffPo, but good breakdown on the candidates' stances on evolution here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/24/2012-election-gop-candidates-evolu tion-_n_934045.html#s333339&title=Herman_Cain
As for an educated guess, he's an associate minister, so I'm guessing he leans towards creationism. Not a certainty though! My cousin is a Baptist Minister as well (like Cain) and he believes in evolution. Shrug.
And my issue is whether the candidates want creationism taught as a "science." Take Gingrich for instance; he wants evolution taught as a science and creationism would be taught as a religion/philosophy.
Bachmann's ideas of teaching creationism right next to evolution in science class? Yeah... not so much.Great catch though! Strange that no one has seemed to ask Cain about his evolution stance...
Yeah, the HuffPo article was also one of the first I stumbled upon and, like you said, gives a good rundown of the various candidates' stance.
Was Cain in the debate where they were asked whether they believed in evolution?|
|
Yeah, the HuffPo article was also one of the first I stumbled upon and, like you said, gives a good rundown of the various candidates' stance.
Was Cain in the debate where they were asked whether they believed in evolution?
He's been in all 3 debates so far, but I don't remember him getting the evolution question yet. Just the back and forth on the subject between Huntsman and Perry.
And I don't think they've hit the candidates like they did back in 2008. "Who on stage doesn't believe in evolution? Raise your hands."
But my memory may be faulty. I blame old age. :)
|
|
considering my wife and most of my friends don't believe in evolution (all of whom are educated and intelligent), I can't hold not believing in evolution against anybody. However, there's a difference between not believing in evolution and teaching against it in science class.
By the by, I've given his this a lot of thought since yesterday, I have decided that I've listened to Herman Cain long enough to get a sense of the man. I think if islamaphobia was an issue it would have been aparent when he spoke many times, and I don't believe from what I've heard that it will even be an issue if he was elected. He admits discomfort, I'd rather he admit it than hide it. While he's not my first pick for the nomination, if he gets it, I'll still vote for him. Barring new revelations of course, say if he want to make abortion illegal or force science classes to teach creationism etc.
I don't have a problem with repealing Roe V Wade. It's not going to happen, so it's not going to be a deciding factor in my canidate of choice.
I know there is a seperation of believing God created the world, and not believeing in evolution. Evolution happens. Some people don't realize when they are asked that question, that they are talking about an observed scientific phenomenon, not "Do you believe we are decended from monkeys." It's often used as a trap question.
If he says ID needs to be taught as science, then that will give me a slight pause.
|
|
considering my wife and most of my friends don't believe in evolution (all of whom are educated and intelligent), I can't hold not believing in evolution against anybody. However, there's a difference between not believing in evolution and teaching against it in science class.
By the by, I've given his this a lot of thought since yesterday, I have decided that I've listened to Herman Cain long enough to get a sense of the man. I think if islamaphobia was an issue it would have been aparent when he spoke many times, and I don't believe from what I've heard that it will even be an issue if he was elected. He admits discomfort, I'd rather he admit it than hide it. While he's not my first pick for the nomination, if he gets it, I'll still vote for him. Barring new revelations of course, say if he want to make abortion illegal or force science classes to teach creationism etc.
He wants to make abortion illegal. Even for cases of rape or incest.
I don't think he's been questioned on evolution/creationism. He should be.
F@#$ing social conservative bulls%#@! Damnit I hate when there's someone I like who can't get past the fact that it's not their f#$@ing body.
How many pro-life presidents have we had since 1973? Was Roe v Wade repealed?
He may appoint pro-life judges, but it has to come up again, go through all the other courts first, before it will even be heard by SCOTUS to repeal it.
It's not going to happen.
There are several things that I really, really want to respond to, but I think doing so would derail the original purpose of the thread and I don't want to do that.
To get back to the OP, there's been another poll released by Fox News that shows Cain in a statistical dead heat with Romney and Perry, having jumped nearly 300% in terms of support compared to the poll last month. Apparently the debates did a great deal to increase Cain's standing in the eyes of the people who watched them. I can't say I disagree; any time he was given the opportunity to respond to a question, I thought he answered very well.
Rediculous. We've had a conservative majority on the court for years now, and it's still there. It's not some anime movie where once all the judges are conservative they can declare "We now have the power to over turn Roe v Wade!!!" and make it happen. Most conservatives appoint strict constitutionist judges before they worry about them being pro-life or pro-choice. Abortion legality is the law now, backed up by a SCOTUS decision. A strict constitutionalist has no reason to try to overturn it, unless something lese comes up to challenge it.
It's red herring that comes up every election time. With all the other crap going on right now, its just such a non-issue. Lets get people jobs and the economy under control, then worry about this, k?
For the record, I get just as frustrated with people that won't vote for a person simply because they are pro-choice (my parents fall into this category).
|
|
"Cain, along with Mitt Romney, has refused to sign a pledge circulated by the Susan B. Anthony List. Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Tim Pawlenty and Rick Santorum each signed, vowing to nominate judges and appoint executive branch officials who are opposed to abortion. The pledge also commits signers to push legislation to end all taxpayer funding of abortion and to sign a law to “protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain from abortion.”
Cain explained that he could not pledge to “advance” legislation as president because that’s the job of the Congress." (From Politico)
So yeah, he's firmly in the "life starts at conception" camp (as Jeff pointed out, even for rape or incest) but I have my doubts it would affect his serving as President. Shrug.
EDIT: He's never said (that I know of) "to include rape or incest", but he does say he is personally against ANY abortion from conception to delivery. Shrug again. I'm assuming that would include all cases, but I don't know for sure.
|
|
"Cain, along with Mitt Romney, has refused to sign a pledge circulated by the Susan B. Anthony List. Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Tim Pawlenty and Rick Santorum each signed, vowing to nominate judges and appoint executive branch officials who are opposed to abortion. The pledge also commits signers to push legislation to end all taxpayer funding of abortion and to sign a law to “protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain from abortion.”
Cain explained that he could not pledge to “advance” legislation as president because that’s the job of the Congress." (From Politico)
So yeah, he's firmly in the "life starts at conception" camp (as Jeff pointed out, even for rape or incest) but I have my doubts it would affect his serving as President. Shrug.
EDIT: He's never said (that I know of) "to include rape or incest", but he does say he is personally against ANY abortion from conception to delivery. Shrug again. I'm assuming that would include all cases, but I don't know for sure.
Thanks, it still bothers me, as I'm pro abortion (not as a personal choice, I wouldn't consider it for me and would advise against it to anyone I know, I just don't want it to not be a choice), but clearly if he wouldn't sign something like that when its basically a "score free points with your party", signature line that hell apparently even Ron Paul signed, I'm confident he wouldn't make it an issue when we have so much more on our plates to worry about.
Roe v Wade may not be repealed, or overturned more accurately. Still adding more judges opposed to abortion as Cain claims he would do increases the chances. Further restrictions on the legal and practical availability of abortion are guaranteed.
This. It certainly CAN happen. Witness the "investigation" of Planned Parenthood. The Christofascists would love to be all up in your private business, make no mistake.
Evolution would be a trap question if there wasn't an entire movement dedicated to answering no.
You can't get the born-again vote if you don't dance to their tune. You better love guns and hate gays, too.
Roe v Wade may not be repealed, or overturned more accurately. Still adding more judges opposed to abortion as Cain claims he would do increases the chances. Further restrictions on the legal and practical availability of abortion are guaranteed.
This. It certainly CAN happen. Witness the "investigation" of Planned Parenthood. The Christofascists would love to be all up in your private business, make no mistake.
Evolution would be a trap question if there wasn't an entire movement dedicated to answering no.You can't get the born-again vote if you don't dance to their tune. You better love guns and hate gays, too.
LOL
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but this thread seems to be attracting a lot of bashing of conservative ideals.
As a conservative evangelical Christian, I can say that while I do love guns, I do not "hate gays," nor do I think doing so is productive in doing what I feel is the right thing to do in relation to my faith and taking it to others. I do not want to be "all up in" someone's personal business without being certain that my viewpoint is desired. I do, generally, oppose abortion. I also question evolution being treated like it's an accepted scientific fact with little or no problems that may call the idea into question.
While undoubtedly my views weigh heavily in my selection of a candidate that I support, I don't think that posting responses on this thread that could be read as derogatory or disparaging remarks is necessarily conducive to the discussion that the OP intended to generate.
I find the RAWR funny, and the QQ delicious.
|
|
Wow. Thanks for the "conservative bashing" laughs.
As for guns, Cain already took flak because though he "strongly supports the 2nd Ammendment" he's willing to have states set their own regulations on C/C laws, background checks, etc.
And for homosexual marriage, he's stated he personally believes in "traditional marriage" but thinks it should be left up to state legislation to make laws about it.
Sure sounds like he "loves guns" and "hates gays" to me. lol
But nice try on the hate-mongering. Really. <eye roll>
Wow. Thanks for the "conservative bashing" laughs.
As for guns, Cain already took flak because though he "strongly supports the 2nd Ammendment" he's willing to have states set their own regulations on C/C laws, background checks, etc.
And for homosexual marriage, he's stated he personally believes in "traditional marriage" but thinks it should be left up to state legislation to make laws about it.
Sure sounds like he "loves guns" and "hates gays" to me. lol
But nice try on the hate-mongering. Really. <eye roll>
On a lot of issues he seems to be more into the idea of states rights than anything else, which to me is one of the big reasons I want to support him. I think the fed has overstepped its bounds in a lot of ways and assumed a lot of controls over issues that should have defaulted to the states.
|
|
The site I linked before said he said that in his 2004 run for the Georgia Senate.
You're right! Missed that. Thank you!
Found the interview from 2004 and he was actually bashing his opponent for being a 3-exception "pro-life" candidate:
1. Rape 2. Incest 3. Mom's life at stake.
Cain is for abortion in one and only one case:
1. Mom's life is at stake.
Thanks again for tipping me to that Jeff.
And for homosexual marriage, he's stated he personally believes in "traditional marriage" but thinks it should be left up to state legislation to make laws about it.
Sure sounds like he "loves guns" and "hates gays" to me. lol
But nice try on the hate-mongering. Really. <eye roll>
I believe candidate Obama said something pretty similar. Yup "hates gays" sounds about right. LOL
|
|
On a lot of issues he seems to be more into the idea of states rights than anything else, which to me is one of the big reasons I want to support him. I think the fed has overstepped its bounds in a lot of ways and assumed a lot of controls over issues that should have defaulted to the states.Wow. Thanks for the "conservative bashing" laughs.
As for guns, Cain already took flak because though he "strongly supports the 2nd Ammendment" he's willing to have states set their own regulations on C/C laws, background checks, etc.
And for homosexual marriage, he's stated he personally believes in "traditional marriage" but thinks it should be left up to state legislation to make laws about it.
Sure sounds like he "loves guns" and "hates gays" to me. lol
But nice try on the hate-mongering. Really. <eye roll>
Agreed, I'm all for him having personal beliefs I don't think are great (i.e. anti-abortion, gay marriage, etc, basically any social conservative issue) as long as he's a states rights advocate I don't have to worry about what he'll do on a federal level to push those issues.
Cain is too far right to appeal to independent voters in the general election. In my opinion that means that if cooler heads prevail, the GOP will nominate someone else. And while the far right does seem to be at the wheel right now, I believe they will fundamentally reject Cain based on his stubborn refusal to budge on the issue of being black.
Yup, I said it.
Agreed, I'm all for him having personal beliefs I don't think are great (i.e. anti-abortion, gay marriage, etc, basically any social conservative issue) as long as he's a states rights advocate I don't have to worry about what he'll do on a federal level to push those issues.
Are you saying there's no chance Cain would, if president, select judges who agree with him on these issues?