|
0 members (),
321
guests, and
22
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,219
Posts415,295
Members5,881
| |
Most Online3,380 Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,959
Moderator Member
|
OP
Moderator Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,959 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214 |
It's interesting that the Democrats are speaking of faith.
Senator Hillary Clinton spoke ambiguously as to how her faith and prayer helped her through the public shame involved in the tarnishing of President Bill Clinton's reputation.
I have a hard time imagining how faith would lead one to have married such a man, let alone stay with him. Does she mean that she was at peace with his infidelity or did she see (and sees) divorce as a greater sin than former President Clinton's lack of self-control?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 199
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 199 |
Did she talk about how she had a "clergy" (woman, IIRC) "guide" her to talk to the spirits of Gandhi, Eleanor Roosevelt, and others in the White House? BTW, she refused to speak to Jesus. No word on whether He reciprocated. ------ Western Orthodoxy Blog [westernorthodox.blogspot.com]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,658 Likes: 3
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,658 Likes: 3 |
Hilary Clinton did that? I thought that was Nancy Reagan's bit.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 641
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 641 |
That's right... Nancy did have the whole-gnarly-consult-the- astrologer-thing going on. She was probably distraught after the assassination attempt. I had forgotten all about that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,658 Likes: 3
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,658 Likes: 3 |
I've heard stories that both Nancy and Ron Reagan were very much into the occult and "consulting of spirits" with the aid of mediums, etc. It's probably an extension of the Hollywood mentality of the time. This article mentions the irony. "A Christian Looks At the Religious Right" The Reagan - Carter Irony
One of the baffling things to me and several Religious Right observers is the seemingly contradictory way in which Ronald Reagan is held in such high esteem and men like Jimmy Carter are scorned. The obvious Republican bias is one answer but still does not fulfill the explanation. Arguably, Dukakis and Clinton have received more than their fair share of assaults by the group. This still leaves the Carter issue unsettled.
At the three national Coalition rallies I attended, the anti-Clinton rhetoric was extreme. Clinton bashing or promises to unseat the administration drew jubilant exclamations of religious fervor from the crowd. Some of the booths sold demeaning buttons and posters of the President. One booth peddled a book by Jennifer Flowers which was supposed to contain, "Bill's candid comments about Hillary's sexual preferences;".
In contrast, Reagan posters offered a saintly aura of a genuine American hero in terms of family values. Oliver North stated from the platform that Reagan was the greatest president of our lifetime. It puzzles me how Reagan inherited such a legacy with the group. More than a patron saint, he is almost a national icon to the faithful following. I assume mountable statues sold for automobile dashes would be a hit.
In 1996, I visited a booth manned by a couple from Austin, Texas. The man was an active layman who had produced a video on dynamic Christian living. It was a spiritual growth instruction tape. His video was featured with another special item that dealt with the "Truth about Ronald Reagan". Both videos were promoted beside one another. It is a peculiar blend. Much akin to the way in which Billy Hargis adores the vice-laden Joe McCarthy.
The fact is Reagan never attended church nor gave much money to Christian causes. Nancy was pregnant when they married. For both, it was not the first marriage. Nancy was notorious for her occult visits and mediums who came to the White House. The Reagan children do not regard Ronald as "Father of the Century". He failed to recognize one of them at the son's own graduation, introducing himself to his own son. Reagan's ties with Hollywood witch hunts during McCarthism do not defer the followers who uphold his ethical values.
In contrast to Reagan's appeal, Jimmy Carter is the Religious Right's scapegoat for many social evils. Carter, who has taken his years since the White House to work for Habitat for Humanity and settle international disputes peacefully, did not sit back in his rocking chair and make a fabulous income on memoirs. Jimmy, who brought the concept of "born again" into the vocabulary of the national media, still teaches a Sunday School class and is active in church. Reagan claimed he did not attend church for fear of someone being hurt from him being in the congregation. Jerry Falwell must know that if he had a church full of members like Reagan he wouldn't be much of a national figure.
If Carter's name were ever brought up in these circles, it was only to ridicule. Reagan's following is almost like a cult following. His followers excuse his imperfections refusing to accept any discounting of his accomplishments. If Rev.Moon, Rush Limbaugh, and G. Gordan Liddy can have a welcomed reception at the Christian Coalition, why not Jimmy Carter?
Perhaps the Religious Right approach towards the two can best be explained by Old South Dixiecrat attitudes. It certainly portrays a puzzling liason between Christians and politics.
My Religious Right friends claim the issue is the abortion debate. This argument is not a consistent one. Carter's alleged pro-choice stances are not much different than favored Bob Dole's positions historically. Carter's position in the 70's on abortion was set in a different setting. Even Fundamentalist pastor, W.A. Criswell of Dallas, was documented as having a pro-choice position while he was president of the SBC. By the way, Criswell did have statues of himself sold from the church. Don't expect to see any of Jimmy Carter at a Religious Right rally.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,959
Moderator Member
|
OP
Moderator Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,959 |
It seems that o matter what, we Americans want to hear that our candidates espouse some sort of Christian faith...as unquestionable or misguided that faith may be at times...it suffices to know that they acknowledge having faith and belief in Almighty God openly.
I think this is a good thing.
In Europe, there is the other extreme--unfortunately, no one cares about such things.
Alice
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 641
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 641 |
That's a fair point, Alice.
Americans remain interested in faith and in the lack of faith of politicians and statesmen. I believe this is because our most basic concept of government is rooted in the idea that certain human rights are inalienable and are bestowed by God Himself. We may look and frequently act like secular humanists, but we're not, really - at least not at the heart and soul of our national identity. We certainly don't decide every issue correctly, but the fact that we have lively debate on right and wrong in our nation says that we're still people alive with hope.
Really, there can be no hope, freedom, justice, equality or peace in a world "without" God. There can be nothing but hollow emptiness.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214 |
There can still be hollow emptiness with talk of faith.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133 |
Yes, the democrats believe in a higher being. It is known as Multiculturalism or Secular Progressivism with their highest sacrament being Abortion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 250
Byzantine Secret Service Member
|
Byzantine Secret Service Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 250 |
Yes, the democrats believe in a higher being. It is known as Multiculturalism or Secular Progressivism with their highest sacrament being Abortion. You mean unlike those bastions of deep faith and conviction in �truth� like Guliani and that polytheist/mason Romney?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133 |
I think Romney is a man of faith.
Yes, He is misguided by Mormonism, but how can you blame someone who has grown up in that enivironment. My friend, if you grew up in a Mormon family are you 100% sure that you would by this time have converted to Catholicism and Orthodoxy. As someone who was Baptized fairly recently myself, I can tell you that it is not an easy step to make.
As far as His social values, he represents what I believe in 100%. Anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, anti-big government, anti-embryonic stem cell research, strong on Islamic terror, family oriented. Why wouldn't I support this brilliant man?
As far as Guliani goes, I think He is anti abortion in his heart, but He is unable to say so because if He does he will never be elected in a State like New York, and if He changes now that he is running for president He will be labeled a flip flopper.
But would I rather have Guiliani or Hillary?
I say 100% I would rather have Rudy.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,528
Grateful Member
|
Grateful Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,528 |
Earlier this week, the top three Democratic candidates (Hillary Clinton, Barrack Obama and John Edwards) gave their views on faith. There are several videos of this at You Tube. http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=presidential+forum+faith-- John
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133 |
We don't really need to hear the Democratic candidates talk about their faith to figure out what they stand for.
Appeasement of Islamic Jihadists Suppressing Christianity Abortion Gay Marriage High Taxes Big Government Racial Preference Surrender
Last edited by Subdeacon Borislav; 06/06/07 01:48 PM.
|
|
|
|
|