Dems are on the surface, but they still support the military-industrial complex just as much as the republicans. So neither are very Jesus-like at all if they refuse to do anything about basing the economy on being on arms production, use, and sales.
Who’s the most like Jesus? Probably the Socialists and Communists of the world rather than either of our political parties. Jesus wouldn’t have supported capitalism, that’s for sure.
Out of the Republicans vs. Democrats, probably the Democrats as their issues (health care, welfare, etc.) are at least core values of Christianity, whereas republicans take an old testament minor issue like homosexuality and treat it as if it’s at all equal to greed and fellow man.
No. I think they would have demonized anyone who was popular. Demonization is one of the techniques involved in instituting a government with shades of fascism. John Dean in Conservatives without Conscious cited research done to show that Republicans were significantly more authoritarian in nature than Democrats. Dean was quite startled with the research. That is why he was concerned that the US became a proto-fascist state under Bush. Hardly Christian, or Human for that matter, at all.
The GOP likes to think that Dems are unGodly, but it is undeniable that Democratic principles are more closely aligned with true Christian values than the GOP. The GOP will trot out a disdain for the gays or abortion as their proof of Christianity, yet wholly reject helping the poor or those suffering from disease. WWJD is a nice mantra, but it would be an even nicer mantra if all would actually follow the tenet, instead of just giving lipservice to it.
And then there’s the sense of being pro-life but pro-death penalty, but that’s another argument entirely. And I personally believe that the notion of homosexuality being a sin is arguable at best – and if so, certainly not equal to those of greed, war, etc. I tend to not see the Republicans as very Christian at all.
Abortion, well..I’m pro-life. But I certainly wouldn’t vote for the republicans based on that, particularly when it’s in the Judicial branch’s hands now anyway.
Yeah dforce, I agree that it amazes me that people will align themselves as being pro-life, yet pro-death penalty. I don’t think Jesus would approve of capital punishment, and it’s hard for me to envision a “true” Christian advocating such a position. I remember just after 9/11 asking a devout believer about “turning the other cheek,” and then hearing a long, Old Testament inspired diatribe that bore little resemblance to Christ’s teachings.
I think there’s also the question of if the GOP even actually support their own “christian” stances. They may mention it every election cycle, but after 6 years of full republican control, Roe v Wade wasn’t overturned, the gay marriage ammendment wasn’t passed, etc.
personally i REALLY DONT WANT TO KNOW what religion my political leaders follow. i believe that should be between them and they’re families, NOT they’re voters. i firmly believe that religion in politics becomes a popularity contest, when its the political issues that should be debated.
The right has worked hard and spent millions to get rid of the notion of a separation of church and state. Pat Robertson and the Christian Coalition represents the extreme neoconsevative view. They sell war for Israel and deny humanrights to especially homosexuals and minorities. Without the evangelical Christian Right breeding into a cancerous suberbia across the nation. The Republicans probably wouldnt even be in power. Our President even says he talks and listens to God!!
That’s it. A mass murderer who as the governor of Texas murdered more prisoners than the fellow governors together is not a christian, neither a born again one. Welfdare and health care is an outflow of christian teachings, cut taxes for the rich is not. They’ll tell you they donate more, which is true, but is a question of ability and will. Health care and welfare is taxes. Hillary and Democrats even if they*re atheists are more into Jesus’s teachings than any Republican ever can be!
Thiscame to mind when they began to ask politician like Hillary “Do you think gay marraige is immorral? And instead of saying “It does not matter what I think is immorral- it only matters what I feel should be legal” They would go ahead and answer that question. Politicians are not and never should be our moral guide. That is a personal ting between a person and God, if he believes in God, or a person and himself. Political leader should only concern themselves with law.
I’m sorry, this makes no sense. GOP hates Hillary because she’s too far left for them, she’s the wife of Bill, who they could never defeat, and they think she’s a representative of feminism. DL Hughley is an ok comedian, but he has zero clue about politics.
The new testament while not as murderous is still ugly and Hillary Clinton does not support the writings of Paul and Timothy at all. The whole bible and all monotheistic religions are anti-woman. A woman in leadership can never be a “real” christian.
The Religious Reich is fond of quoting Alexis de Tocqueville and love to cite him on his alleged claim that the United States is a Christian nation. I read his DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA and made a curious discovery. Those quotations are nowhere in the book. In fact, Tocqueville defined himself as a liberal and was a absolutist in the seperation of church and state. He also said that he never met a single American who opposed this principle, not even a cleric.
LV–the bullies in charge right now are NOT republicans, and divisiveness is not a solution to our problems. however, since you asked, politicians are the furthest from christian ideals. i am sick of the moral pissing contest! it solves nothing.
ps. someone called me a “liberal” last night! hahaha!
Who called you a liberal and where can I send the flowers?😉
I agree that bringing professions of faith into politics is pretty silly, but, checking out candidates’ values and whether they follow them, whatever their source, isn’t as silly.
Thx 4 comment🙂
It all comes down to sincerity, doesn’t it?
I consider the neocons utterly corrupted. Self-interest is all that guides their policies.
But you know, Clinton is not a liberal. She’s part of a wing of the Democratic party that leaned to the right, hard.
I think Hillary may be too sensitive to special interests in the health care industry. Defying those interests *is* the solution.
I hate religion and I hate this video. It’s bullshit that there even needs to be a discussion about which political candidate is more Christian. Fuck god and fuck the church. God doesn’t exist and the church is a fraud racket. I don’t want lunatics who believe in magic invisible sky beings running my country. Wake the fuck up people.
I’m just sick of it that’s all and it’s about time we started speaking out instead of pretending that all this nonsense is perfectly cool. Whatever anyway… I don’t like hillary for a lot of various other reasons and don’t think she’s electable so… why not bash her on this to? I felt it was a good place to make a point.
Why should we respect this stuff anyway? Do you respect different views on political issues? Would you hesitate to tell someone the Iraq war was stupid nonsense? Why does religion get a pass? That’s why it’s the problem it still is today because to many think it’s to taboo to critize. It’s not race or something, you can change your religion. It’s a choice and a bad one.
I don’t believe that Hillary’s political positions are necessarily rooted in religion. They tend to be rooted in popular public opinion & sentiment.
As far as why Republicans hate Hillary; there are plenty of reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with religion.
What a dimwitted analysis. The question is not whether the poor should be helped, it’s whether it’s the role of the federal government to do so my taking resources from one person and giving them to another at the point of a gun. Jesus stood firmly that people should have free will.
Hillary bugs me because she seems so very fake. I don’t believe her pious, nor any male Bush. They are war mongers not peacemakers.
Obama speaks somewhat more frankly. This and his more apparent intelligence are what make him appealing, I believe. I don’t think it is because of any fresh ideas, just fresh attitude.
Bill Richardson is my choice, though, for President.
That is a tough question. I was just on a retreat where we asked the same types of questions. I think today’s political world tends for activists to be liberal. I do believe that Jesus was an ancient activist, so by that, he was a liberal. But I really do think that Jesus would have a hard time with today’s political world with its extravagance and straight up hatred. For more on the topic, check out the book God’s Politics. Great read.
your government never puts anything ahead of material wealth, not health care, not peoples lives, not the enviroment, nothing.
if there was a god, he would have smited your people (and lets face it, most of the rest of human kind except the odd budhist monk) long ago for being such greedy arrogant fucktards.
end of story.
theres your proof.
Begging the question, maybe?
The right wing foamers hate Clinton because she’s a Clinton and not a Bush. When she and VP Obama win in ’08 that will mean 28 years of the White House controlled by only two families. Pretty scary for anybody, but really scary for a right wingnut who thinks that The Bush League are [ahem] God’s gift to democracy.
God doesn’t pick political sides, but the Dems are a lot closer to God’s standards of mores and ethics than the Repubs are.
Bush has “saved” unborn babies??!! What kind of dark, psychotic can equate the actions of a lunatic responsible for the deaths of upwards of one million innocent people in Iraq, not counting the barbarism and murder he’s responible for in Guantanimo, Abu Ghraib, the black hole sites, and his policy of “rendering” people to countries where they’ll be tortured and murdered!
It’s amazing how easily swayed some people are by an amoral monster who cynically calls himself “christian”!
HNK222- I think you missed the point of my post. I wrote in response to hughster41, attempting to highlight the riduculous nature of his criticism regarding Hillary killing babies. I used “saved” as a contrast to his absurd use of kiled”. I think he is bringing in a rhetoric-charged red herring that has little to due with evaluting day-to-day morality or Christianity.
the only reason the National Organization for Women endorsed Hillary is that she has a vagina. It’s like supporting Condi because she’s black. both Clintons are in bed with the bushes, just like Kerry. to ArchNME: I understand your feelings about religion (I’ve been there), but the anger will not accomplish anything, and after being an atheist my whole life, I believe that all the religions have some piece of the puzzle. evolution disproves nothing, b/c time is subjective.
I think many Republicans hate Hillary because she was in the White House, but also because she is an extremely corrupt politician who is mostly concerned about power. I don’t see her as much of an alternative to the Cheney-Rummy-Bush-Condi gang. Barack might be an alternative. MAYBE. if he can avoid assassination by the military-industrial complex that runs the U.S.
Do you know what the word “liberal” means? Go to my YouTube profile and you will find the web address to dozens of dictionary definitions. Then tell me which quality u think people shouldnt vote for.
Is it belief in progress and reform?
Belief in civil liberties?
Belief in free markets?
Which quality disqualifies someone from getting your vote?
Thx 4 comment🙂
There was a time in US history when words like progressive, religious, socialist and liberal could be applied to the same person and movement. Religious people were once found on all colors of the political spectrum. The conservative, wealthy, ruling class wants to align their agenda with inane social, values issues so that economics is never brought to the fore. Hillary and any religious politician not on the right challenges that strategy.
I sincerely respect people of faith, but have deep suspicions about those who wear it on their sleeves. Although never specifically stated in the US Constitution, the traditional practice of Seperation of Church and State is crucial to the American system. I would insist that it is implied in the First Amendment. Please, discuss.
Right Wingers like to hate the Clintons because they beat them at their own political games, answered their bitchfests and smears quickly, and put an end to their Reagan style Dynasty (like it was something Republicans were entitled to). Hilary may not be mine or many people’s ideal candidate, but if she is the Democratic nominee, I am willing to give her the benefit of consideration.
No, we dislike Hillary because she’s a fraud and has proven nothing in her so-called political career. She continues to ride the coattails of being a liberal and and a woman with absolutely no real platform. I’m also concerned about religionists who believe everyone must believe as they do. They too, are fruads.
thank you for your time:liberalism,in the late 19th c.liberalism was adapted in britain to favor a LIMITED amount of state intervention in order to provide welfare services and social security though remaining an essentially individualist doctrine,in contrast to socialism. what went wrong? kbmitchell
I consider myself a progressive, but I don’t like Hillary. Like her husband, Hillary is an example of the big business disguised as populism. She’s wishy washy on the war. She’s in AIPAC’s pocket. She’s essentially a carpet bagger. Even GM is for national health care at this point. I don’t care why the right hates her, because I think defending Hillary is a waste of breath.
As for health care, most conservatives I have spoken to believe that the government can’t be trusted to take care of the nation’s health. Many believe the government is very wasteful with spending. Personally, I believe national health care would actually save our nation a great deal of money.