I'm afraid you're right.

I am contemplating not voting at all. Since I am already spiritually and moral disenfranchised from the process, I don't see why I should participate. I'm going to have to pray about this and think about this though. But I don't think that I believe in representational democracy anymore. The people simply can't be trusted because they do not vote as rational, autonomous individuals but they only follow the leading of the sophists in politics and the media. Most people should not have the right to vote.

I think it is an empirical fact that unless the government is officially Christian, we will end up with the kind of society that we have. Unfortunately, a constitutional monarchy with Orthodoxy as the official state religion is not viable anymore. We must face the fact that we live in a post-Christian world and that genuine Christian values are marginalized.

Joe

Part of what may explain why so many Republicans support the veto is how it was written and because of how the Democrats are framing and simplifying the issue to suit their short-term political objectives.

Terry

This bill is peripheral to the consequences of America's societal Godlessness.

Terry

That may very well be true. However, it does not remove their guilt.

Democrats or Republicans or whatever. The bottom line is this country is a mess because politicians on both sides of the fence do not have any sense of morality neither does that the majority of citizens in this country. The main goal I think I see in society is I don't care about anyone else all I care about are my needs.

The idea of what is good for society went out the window many many years ago. I am with Joe, I am disenfranchised from this political system. It aint moral folks.

Converted Viking

"Does not remove their guilt."

Can we really understand the exact nature of their moral guilt without knowing their conscience, their motivations, and the context of their decision to vote against overriding a veto?

Is this issue as morally objective as if the congressmen in question were to publicly support abortion?

Terry

Hi,



Then you do not get it.

We either believe that the human dignity of any person is a God-given gift nobody has the right to take away, or not.

If we do believe that, we cannot torture anybody for any reason, not even national security.

If we do not believe that and we believe national security ranks above human dignity, then well, we need to pursue national securty at all costs.

The real question is what do we believe and whether or not such beliefs are consistent with the Christian faith.

I have my answer, but I am pretty sure it is not shared by everybody on this forum.


Shalom,
Memo

Come on. Anybody should be able to see that waterboarding is a despicable practice--a practice for which we prosecuted Japanese after World War II.

No. However, it is a despicable, indefensible practice as far as I'm concerned. Votes against the bill were shameful. President Bush's veto was shameful. Votes agains overriding the veto were shameful.

There have always been exceptions, but as a rule, this has always been the case with politicians.


This is the real problem. Politicians will usually do either a.) what they think will please their constituency, or b.) what they think they can get away with. With the so-called "Religious Right" so solidly behind Bush, he can do just about anything he pleases, so long as it isn't something that will turn them against him.

For their part, they have bought his explanation regarding the use of torture because he is the one that's offering it, and they regard him as such a great Christian president.

Let us pray that they'll wake up and realize the power they could have over him (as his constituency) if they would only lose the hero worship.

(Maybe they won't be so starry-eyed about McCain--assuming he wins in November ...)


Peace,
Deacon Richard

"Anybody should be able to see that waterboarding is a despicable practice"

I wouldn't defend the practice nor judge those who support its conditional use without seeing the classified procedures which control the administration of what we are calling water boarding.

The ban would affect such a small number of detainees that I must wonder about the larger political issues at play; those on one side seem to have a stronger desire to negatively affect the image, the reputation, and the authority of President Bush than to seek just treatment for the detainees.

Terry

Dwight,

I respectfully disagree. Do you remember the Cold War years? I bet there were A LOT more torturing back then than nowadays in the post 9/11 world.

Do you remember the World Wars I & II? I bet there were a lot of torturing happening to get information.

I can go on and on. This subject has NOTHING to do with 9/11. It's been around for a long time.

SPDundas
Deaf Byzantine

If anyone of you have conscience in not voting for candidates you feel to be immoral...then why not write yourselves in the ballot?

SPDundas
Deaf Byzantine

Ha, that's a good suggestion.

Terry