Bluegrassrivals

I invite all who are Democrats and claim to be "good Christians" to explain to me and the others just how you reconcile your political alliance with your religious beliefs.

Democrats support same sex marriage although such conduct is clearly condemned in the scriptures. Democrats support abortion which, with advances in medical knowledge, has been conclusively proven to be the violent termination of a human life. Obviously condemned in the scriptures.

So, pew-filling Democrats, fill us in on how you justify your "beliefs". You appear to be hypocrites.

A great question...

90% of the time the response is, "Republicans don't care about the poor!"

Here is all one needs to see.

(If a mod could put this in the right viewing format on here for me it would be appreciated.)

[YOUTUBE="Vid"]aG6qgSfaARE[/YOUTUBE]

WideRight05 Wrote:A great question...

90% of the time the response is, "Republicans don't care about the poor!"

Here is all one needs to see.

(If a mod could put this in the right viewing format on here for me it would be appreciated.)

I feel certain that, if a legitimate study could be done, we would learn that Democrat's talk a lot about the poor but that Republicans actually assist the poor. Words feed no one but tend to impress the media.

Honest Question to "Christian" Democrats

Is there such a thing???? Or is this similar to the Loch Ness Monster and Bigfoot.....

Stardust Wrote:Honest Question to "Christian" Democrats

Is there such a thing???? Or is this similar to the Loch Ness Monster and Bigfoot.....

Excellent comparison. I would be more likely to bet on the Loch Ness Monster or Bigfoot.

And, the "American Dream" was a great man. This country needs him as well as Dick the Bruiser and John Wayne.

I'm a Christian democrat, but I'm probably more of a political independent than anything else.

I'm fiscally conservative and socially moderate, but to be honest, if I want to have any kind of say in my local government I have to be a democrat.

Perry County is a democrat stronghold and the real election to decide who your leaders will be is in the democratic primary.

My question to you is: Do I have to support abortion to be a democrat? Do I have to protest gay marriage to be a Christian? Or are those questions not simple-minded enough to get an answer?

zaga_fan Wrote:I'm a Christian democrat, but I'm probably more of a political independent than anything else.

I'm fiscally conservative and socially moderate, but to be honest, if I want to have any kind of say in my local government I have to be a democrat.

Perry County is a democrat stronghold and the real election to decide who your leaders will be is in the democratic primary.

My question to you is: Do I have to support abortion to be a democrat? Do I have to protest gay marriage to be a Christian? Or are those questions not simple-minded enough to get an answer?

This is flopping at a ridiculously fast rate. Of the last 100000 people who have registered to vote in this state, over 90% have been Republican. The parties have completely flopped. IMHO, I do not believe that there would be a single democrat win any election if not for the belief of some in this state that the "good ole" southern democratic party still exist. It however does not. Your blue dog democrats and dixiecrats have absolutely no say in the democratic party, nor does there beliefs.



As for your answer, the beliefs of the democratic party have been blinded by the extremist who currently run it. IMHO, yes you have to be for abortion, gay marriage, and climate change if your a democrat because I do not know of one single senate democrat or house dem who does not support those beliefs. With Republicans, theres a very wide variety of differing opinions as it should be. Some believe in marriage equality, abortion, etc and your not classified as something that can only be one thing.
I have seen nothing from the democrat party and there leaders that leads me to believe there members have a choice on the issue. At least your presidential candidates do not believe you do. If you don't believe in those things, they want no part of you and if you speak up, you will be exiled forever.



I hope people like you take the democratic party back over but its never going to happen. It is too far gone. For these old democrats that have been dems in there familes since the 50s and 60s, my advice is to start a new party and get away from the Pelosis, Reids, Clintons, etc. Id rather be homeless than shake there hands.

I agree with you, for the most part, Gut.

There is a stark difference in the Democrats in office here in Perry County and the Democrats in office up in Washington.

It's short-sighted for anyone to question how I can be a Christian and a democrat.

The problem with supporting local Democrats is that some of them grow up to be national Democrats. Unfortunately, the same kind of irresponsible, immoral political behavior has taken over the leadership positions of the national GOP.

The biggest difference between the parties is that the few fiscal conservatives and ethical politicians who exist in Washington are Republicans and most of them are members of the House of Representatives.

Nearly all Democrats and most Republicans in Washington have accepted that this country is headed for an economic meltdown and are just lining their pockets and clinging to power as long as they are able to collect and spend other people's money. The few elected politicians who are sounding the alarm and fulfilling campaign promises are worth supporting.

zaga_fan Wrote:I'm a Christian democrat, but I'm probably more of a political independent than anything else.

I'm fiscally conservative and socially moderate, but to be honest, if I want to have any kind of say in my local government I have to be a democrat.

Perry County is a democrat stronghold and the real election to decide who your leaders will be is in the democratic primary.

My question to you is: Do I have to support abortion to be a democrat? Do I have to protest gay marriage to be a Christian? Or are those questions not simple-minded enough to get an answer?

The truth is that, without the support of the Democratic Party, abortion would not be legal in this country. The Scriptures are clear that Christians cannot support abortion. Anyone who is a Democrat, directly or indirectly supports abortion which, according to present scientific evidence, is clearly the termination of an innocent human life.

The same logic applies to same sex marriages.

The Holy Scriptures give us absolutes that cannot be "amended" by "modern thinkers" and the advancement of amoral behavior.

The questions are not simple-minded. However, the answers are both simple and beyond question.

That is a short-sighted response in general.

Anyone who pays taxes indirectly supports abortion since Planned Parenthood is government funded. Whether you want to admit it or not.

Not a single vote that I've ever cast has forwarded the abortion or same-sex marriage agendas.

That won't change this Tuesday when I go to the voting booth and vote based on who I think represents me socially and economically, regardless of their party.

zaga_fan Wrote:That is a short-sighted response in general.

Anyone who pays taxes indirectly supports abortion since Planned Parenthood is government funded. Whether you want to admit it or not.

Not a single vote that I've ever cast has forwarded the abortion or same-sex marriage agendas.

That won't change this Tuesday when I go to the voting booth and vote based on who I think represents me socially and economically, regardless of their party.

Every vote that you cast for a Democrat supports their party's abortion and gay marriage agendas. Voting for Democrats is also supporting irresponsible fiscal policies that does not represent you economically unless your goal in life is to saddle your children and grandchildren with a debt that can never be repaid. To be fair, most votes for Republicans support the same political agenda, but at this time, the party is still the lesser of two evils.

Explain to me how my support of Les Burgett for Perry County Sheriff (who goes to Church with my family and stamps "In God We Trust" emblems on the deputy's vehicles) furthers the liberal agenda.

It's a real stretch IMO.

I choose to be a democrat because I invest in my local government. If I was a Republican I wouldn't be afforded that opportunity. If I was in Leslie County, I would probably be Republican.

zaga_fan Wrote:Explain to me how my support of Les Burgett for Perry County Sheriff (who goes to Church with my family and stamps "In God We Trust" emblems on the deputy's vehicles) furthers the liberal agenda.

It's a real stretch IMO.

I choose to be a democrat because I invest in my local government. If I was a Republican I wouldn't be afforded that opportunity. If I was in Leslie County, I would probably be Republican.

If you were to list all of Sheriff Burgett's beliefs, would they fall in line more with the democratic parties members or Republicans members?

This is my main point. Its almost as though some people just don't want to waste the time switching parties even though they are not in line with those beliefs. If he were to list all of his beliefs, I imagine they would fall in line with 90% of the Republican beliefs and a small % for the dems. I also guarantee his entire family has been democratic since the beginning of voting in this country but do not concede to liberal agendas.

Its not the party itself, its the radicals who run it on a national level.

zaga_fan Wrote:That is a short-sighted response in general.

Anyone who pays taxes indirectly supports abortion since Planned Parenthood is government funded. Whether you want to admit it or not.

Not a single vote that I've ever cast has forwarded the abortion or same-sex marriage agendas.

That won't change this Tuesday when I go to the voting booth and vote based on who I think represents me socially and economically, regardless of their party.

If it weren't for the unwavering support of Democrats, Planned Parenthood would receive no tax dollars so your argument doesn't hold water on that issue.

If you voted for any Democrats in statewide or national elections, you supported, at least indirectly, abortion and same sex marriage. That is because you voted for people who, by their own admission, will act to further both of these abominations. As an example, Conway, as attorney general, wouldn't even represent the citizens of the Commonwealth by appealing the ruling of the federal judge in Louisville supporting homosexual marriages. And, by the way, Conway also supports the mislabeled freedom of choice which is another way of saying he supports murdering innocent babies. So, if you vote for Conway, you are, by your vote, supporting same sex marriage and abortion.

zaga_fan Wrote:Explain to me how my support of Les Burgett for Perry County Sheriff (who goes to Church with my family and stamps "In God We Trust" emblems on the deputy's vehicles) furthers the liberal agenda.

It's a real stretch IMO.

I choose to be a democrat because I invest in my local government. If I was a Republican I wouldn't be afforded that opportunity. If I was in Leslie County, I would probably be Republican.

I used to feel the same way that you do about local politics. I finally decided that the Democrat Party is the biggest threat to our way of life in the world, including our national and economic security, and for me, supporting the party in any way outweighs the benefits of supporting local Democratic candidates who may be good, honest public servants. (The Republican Party may be the second biggest threat to our economic and physical security.)

In all honesty, I would probably still support a local Democratic candidate who could convince me that he or she had no higher political aspirations. In general, I choose candidates solely based on party affiliation. There are exceptions - I would abstain or vote for a third-party candidate if the names of Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, or - the list is long, ever appeared on my ballot.

I have no plans to make Fairfax County, Virginia my last home, so I have little interest in local politics, which is a good thing because Fairfax County is about 60 percent Democrat - not quite Floyd County numbers, but very few Republicans get elected here.

Hoot Gibson Wrote:The problem with supporting local Democrats is that some of them grow up to be national Democrats. Unfortunately, the same kind of irresponsible, immoral political behavior has taken over the leadership positions of the national GOP.

The biggest difference between the parties is that the few fiscal conservatives and ethical politicians who exist in Washington are Republicans and most of them are members of the House of Representatives.

Nearly all Democrats and most Republicans in Washington have accepted that this country is headed for an economic meltdown and are just lining their pockets and clinging to power as long as they are able to collect and spend other people's money. The few elected politicians who are sounding the alarm and fulfilling campaign promises are worth supporting.

Correct, and it can happen a lot quicker than one might think. The career of Alison Lundergan Grimes comes to mind. There is the example of someone who owing to her father's involvement in local politics, became involved as a mere child at the local level. She went on to become Secretary of State in Kentucky, and one could argue that she has already come fairly close to becoming a US Senator.

She will act and vote like she has been taught, and as she is no doubt guided by her father and political associates. That's where she will get her most meaningful atta-girls, and you can bet that mean's a lot.

I must say I really appreciate this line of discussion because it is so pertinent in our time. Truth is truth. There is not political truth separated from spiritual truth by a wall as was dreamed up in the mind of an ACLU lawyer named Leo Piffer. Nothing true ever contradicts other truth. Scientific truth, economic truth, sociological truth, all truth coexists together in harmony. Therefore if it is wrong to kill people, (and as far as I know it still is in the eyes of the court), then it is wrong to kill little people too. Especially defenseless babies still in their mother's womb.

It is the same old argument as is depicted in Scripture, where Satan through guileful yet skillful complexities far superior to the quintessential abilities of your local flim flaming car salesman, afforded Eve occasion to err. It is the art of changing a simple and straightforward concept to make it mean something completely different than was it's originator's intention. I mean, one can rationalize abortion on demand with volumes of data and arguments, but it is still wrong. In exactly the same manner, those who espouse Evolutionism over Creationism, justify their stance with ever more elaborate and voluminous speculation. Justifications for those who prefer to believe in Evolution are all the stuff of retro engineered surmises which are not based in science. Although science is mixed into the omelet to give it more spice and flare, and I can tell you that said complexities represent a mountain of contrived data in comparison to the rather modest amount of data available when I was in college. Global Warming is the exact same deal, by the time these guys get through building the cover story, a convention hall full of debaters would not stand a chance in rebuff. You know what they say, if you can't win them over with the facts, overwhelm them with the bull.

Abortion on demand is murder, and not working to support one's family is wrong, as is the homosexual lifestyle. Democrats have sworn to advance all three with all their strength, as Hillary is out doing as we speak. Those three issues are enshrined as planks in the Dem's party platform, and are openly campaigned for by joined-at-the-hip Democrats.
Acts 5:29 (KJV)
29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.


As Hoot has pointed out, unfortunately to some extent the Republicans do it too. At least the war is still being actively fought within the Republican party, and that's why as yet I have not yet completely abandoned hope or the political process.

Truth Wrote:If it weren't for the unwavering support of Democrats, Planned Parenthood would receive no tax dollars so your argument doesn't hold water on that issue.

If you voted for any Democrats in statewide or national elections, you supported, at least indirectly, abortion and same sex marriage. That is because you voted for people who, by their own admission, will act to further both of these abominations. As an example, Conway, as attorney general, wouldn't even represent the citizens of the Commonwealth by appealing the ruling of the federal judge in Louisville supporting homosexual marriages. And, by the way, Conway also supports the mislabeled freedom of choice which is another way of saying he supports murdering innocent babies. So, if you vote for Conway, you are, by your vote, supporting same sex marriage and abortion.

To my way of thinking Governor Beshear has been a disgrace. I doubt that most on here have any idea just how tightly the Kentucky financial outlook is intertwined with the success or failure of ObamaCare. I hope I'm wrong but, as goes ObamaCare, so will go Kentucky's financial fortunes. Governor Beshear is so all-in to fall in line with the Obama agenda that he has been proactive on a few matters. Take for example the persecution of Kim Davis for her refusal to issue marriage licenses to gays. There is no authority by law in Kentucky under which she has the authority to so do. Democratic lock steppers such as our Governor, have none the less gone to dramatic lengths to reach out past established law, with proactive legal actions which anticipate the legalization of such measures by our legislature. Thusly ceding away even more state sovereignty to the feds without so much as a wince.

I and most of my friends and family will not be voting for Jack Conway. Who I believe would be just like Beshear without the embarrassing and glaring hillbilly twang.

^
What happens when the federal money that fund Kynect runs out?
Ill tell you what. The next governor gets blamed for obamacare no working in this state. Mass bankruptcy, and no money to fund it.
That's the reason it need appealed. There is no way this state can sustain Kynect on its own.

RunItUpTheGut Wrote:^
What happens when the federal money that fund Kynect runs out?
Ill tell you what. The next governor gets blamed for obamacare no working in this state. Mass bankruptcy, and no money to fund it.
That's the reason it need appealed. There is no way this state can sustain Kynect on its own.

The whole mess just looks like another liberal Ponzi scheme to me. If it is ludacris to believe money grows on trees, how much more to believe it comes from thin air? That is the sad delusion of the liberal, who to a man believes in Keynesian Economics. We are in the fall of the year which, provides an excellent analogy for KE. Ever see a swirling wind kick up millions of leaves in a cloud so huge and compact that you felt compelled to put your hand up in front of your face for protection? At that moment one can appreciate the abundance of leaves. However, soon most of them are gone and by Spring that bounty of fallen leaves has faded from memory, completely gone.

Such is the temporary euphoria induced by the clouds of government money flooding the scene. It seems to be everywhere for a while, but at some point it will be just as gone as the afore mentioned leaves. Meanwhile the reality of the ObamaCare pipe dream is coming home to roost even now as co-ops are closing across the land.

"Two more Obamacare co-ops fail: Tennessee and Kentucky both announce closures"

EXCERPT---
"According to The Lexington Herald-Leader, Kentucky Health Cooperative has about 51,000 members in all 120 Kentucky counties – about 75 percent of those insured on Kynect – all of whom will have to find new insurance in 2016.

The co-op lost $50 million last year, partly because over 20,000 more people had purchased the insurance than originally estimated. Glenn Jennings, Kentucky Health Cooperative’s interim CEO, told the Herald-Leader that further financial woes came because many of their new members had not previously had health insurance, leading to “a lot of people with pent up medical needs.” Then, said Jennings, “when they suddenly had health insurance…they began using their benefits.”
http://hotair.com/archives/2015/10/15/tw...-closures/

And let's understand something, when the article says people "purchased" the insurance, that is ObamaSpeak for people who are receiving government subsidies.

AFTR, my health care expenses have very nearly doubled since the passage of ObamaCare and the darn thing isn't even fully implemented yet.

TheRealThing Wrote:To my way of thinking Governor Beshear has been a disgrace. I doubt that most on here have any idea just how tightly the Kentucky financial outlook is intertwined with the success or failure of ObamaCare. I hope I'm wrong but, as goes ObamaCare, so will go Kentucky's financial fortunes. Governor Beshear is so all-in to fall in line with the Obama agenda that he has been proactive on a few matters. Take for example the persecution of Kim Davis for her refusal to issue marriage licenses to gays. There is no authority by law in Kentucky under which she has the authority to so do. Democratic lock steppers such as our Governor, have none the less gone to dramatic lengths to reach out past established law, with proactive legal actions which anticipate the legalization of such measures by our legislature. Thusly ceding away even more state sovereignty to the feds without so much as a wince.

I and most of my friends and family will not be voting for Jack Conway. Who I believe would be just like Beshear without the embarrassing and glaring hillbilly twang.

Conway and Grimes have a lot in common. Both have done little of note in life and both have lived off the names and money of their daddies. Poor little Beshear has done even less- if possible.

Truth Wrote:Conway and Grimes have a lot in common. Both have done little of note in life and both have lived off the names and money of their daddies. Poor little Beshear has done even less- if possible.

What has happened to all the viable candidates? Seriously, the Dems should be hiding their heads in the sand. At the state level here in Kentucky the best they can muster is another tired rerun featuring Jack Conway, and at the national level we get another nauseating dose of Hillary Clinton. I couldn't care less what her fans say about her level of experience, she's do-less. O'Reilly asked a number of Dem-supporting talking heads to list her achievements as Secretary of State, and not one of them could offer one thing of interest.

She tried and failed to get government run health care started while Bill was in office. Then she literally got handed a senatorship for the state of New York. Which by definition is an ironclad lock for whatever empty vessel that happens to run. Her voting record is not exactly profound as it was in lock step with Chuck Schumer's. I still have yet to find anything of substance to mention as resume fodder.

Truth Wrote:I invite all who are Democrats and claim to be "good Christians" to explain to me and the others just how you reconcile your political alliance with your religious beliefs.

Democrats support same sex marriage although such conduct is clearly condemned in the scriptures. Democrats support abortion which, with advances in medical knowledge, has been conclusively proven to be the violent termination of a human life. Obviously condemned in the scriptures.

So, pew-filling Democrats, fill us in on how you justify your "beliefs". You appear to be hypocrites.

First off I am a sinner. I need Jesus. No matter what I do I will still come up short with God.

Second, I believe that the United States Government should not judge me off of a religious belief such as with holding a tax break that all other citizens get because of a religious belief.

Third, I believe that for an example people should have health care, all people.

Fourth, I believe that I should help the less fortunate.

Fifth, I believe that I should honor my father and mother, help them with their social security.

Sixth, I believe that I should not bear false witness and make sure that the Commonwealth keeps its pension programs for school teachers and state workers.

Seventh, I believe that I own nothing, everything comes from the Lord. I am just a steward of that which He has given me.

Eighth, I believe that I am to be a good steward of the planet

Ninth, I believe that all humans need God

Tenth, I still need Jesus.

Have a good day!

^ Jesus also said to give to Caesar what is Caesar's. The good book teaches us to work for what is ours and help those in need - so that is reasonable to say that those who choose NOT to work, are not considered those in need and should not be given to the rewards of those who follow Gods direction! The people of Israel were told that this was their land, and to defend it to death - thus those who intrude into our land that has not been given permission should be extracted. Being a good steward of the planet is to take those gifts of knowledge and use them for the betterment of our lives so that we may glorify God - thus partaking in ANY thought that man can cause any ill affects on this World that has been PRE-destined is a rediculous thought from those who believe God is the builder and the owner!

Stardust you make a great point!
Here is where I am torn with this logic. First the good side, nothing belongs to me...I came in with nothing... I am leaving with nothing. I do agree everything should be for giving praise of God. However, having a mega church or house does nothing but promote self... I personally think it has a lot to do with greed and controlling another. I do like the example of the first church you know sell everything so no one has need, I also like the warning about folks that try to deceive the spirit.

However, if I go with your example for us working hard to get what we deserve... (start playing the sith music) I must say that is a great argument for a union. They are simply created to do one thing get as much for that union member as they possibly can.

So I will say that as well..

11... I support the idea that a man should work hard and get everything he can... therefore I support unions!

zaga_fan Wrote:That is a short-sighted response in general.

Anyone who pays taxes indirectly supports abortion since Planned Parenthood is government funded. Whether you want to admit it or not.

Not a single vote that I've ever cast has forwarded the abortion or same-sex marriage agendas.

That won't change this Tuesday when I go to the voting booth and vote based on who I think represents me socially and economically, regardless of their party.

I do not know how old you are but just for your information... right now you have a conservative court 5-4. In fact the deciding vote was the judge that was appointed by Reagan! Again, don't know how old you are but if you voted for him there you go on same sex marriage.

As far as Roe V. Wade, the person who wrote the majority opinion was appointed by Nixon. Really doubt that you are that old but there you go on abortion.

Please look at it and research it and come back and let's talk more about it.

TheRealThing Wrote:What has happened to all the viable candidates? Seriously, the Dems should be hiding their heads in the sand. At the state level here in Kentucky the best they can muster is another tired rerun featuring Jack Conway, and at the national level we get another nauseating dose of Hillary Clinton. I couldn't care less what her fans say about her level of experience, she's do-less. O'Reilly asked a number of Dem-supporting talking heads to list her achievements as Secretary of State, and not one of them could offer one thing of interest.

She tried and failed to get government run health care started while Bill was in office. Then she literally got handed a senatorship for the state of New York. Which by definition is an ironclad lock for whatever empty vessel that happens to run. Her voting record is not exactly profound as it was in lock step with Chuck Schumer's. I still have yet to find anything of substance to mention as resume fodder.

Same can be side of Kentucky GOP??? Two U.S senators not from our state and now a governor... come on state rights people you should be all over this...

tvtimeout Wrote:Here is where I am torn with this logic. First the good side, nothing belongs to me...I came in with nothing... I am leaving with nothing. I do agree everything should be for giving praise of God. However, having a mega church or house does nothing but promote self... I personally think it has a lot to do with greed and controlling another. I do like the example of the first church you know sell everything so no one has need, I also like the warning about folks that try to deceive the spirit.

tvtimeout Wrote:Same can be side of Kentucky GOP??? Two U.S senators not from our state and now a governor... come on state rights people you should be all over this...

So, you're a union supporting though somewhat confused man where it comes to self sufficiency as that concept applies to Biblical principles? The Bible is more than clear, God says as is His unequivocal manner the following;
1 Timothy 5:8 (KJV)
8 "But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel."

And that means even if the man of the house has to go forth to find yard work and cleaning out other folks gutters BTW. As I have mentioned to you in times past, Christians are supposed to tithe their income in order to provide for the Church and it's work, that is God's plan to fund His work. Dusty hit it right on the head in saying that able bodied men who choose not to work, fall outside the guidelines to receive help in feeding their families. Not to mention expecting Uncle Sam to do it all.

In our day though, the government has the backs of the slothful among us. The program's name was changed from welfare to public assistance some time ago. Anybody who does not work, is eligible to receive said assistance so I am at somewhat of a loss to understand your concern. Can these poor folks not make it to their local government agencies to sign up for assistance or what?

Frankly and I say this in all due respect, it is very likely that those who have learned to game the system so well, have also learned that if they do actually get down on their luck, having wasted their government subsidies on everything from beer to cigarettes and worse, they can always turn to local Churches to get help in the form of food stuffs and utility payment assistance. A real man would see to the needs of his family before he ever considered wasting the first dime. His house is his own responsibility, not the responsible people who get up 6 or 8 hours earlier than he does in order to go out and face the world every day to actually earn a living wage.

And secondly, are you in any way suggesting that Republicans are pulling up the rear with regard to those who inhabit their ranks? By that I mean surely you're not saying Hillary is a credible candidate of origins known for integrity are you?

TheRealThing Wrote:So, you're a union supporting though somewhat confused man where it comes to self sufficiency as that concept applies to Biblical principles? The Bible is more than clear, God says as is His unequivocal manner the following;
1 Timothy 5:8 (KJV)
8 "But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel."

And that means even if the man of the house has to go forth to find yard work and cleaning out other folks gutters BTW. As I have mentioned to you in times past, Christians are supposed to tithe their income in order to provide for the Church and it's work, that is God's plan to fund His work. Dusty hit it right on the head in saying that able bodied men who choose not to work, fall outside the guidelines to receive help in feeding their families. Not to mention expecting Uncle Sam to do it all.

In our day though, the government has the backs of the slothful among us. The program's name was changed from welfare to public assistance some time ago. Anybody who does not work, is eligible to receive said assistance so I am at somewhat of a loss to understand your concern. Can these poor folks not make it to their local government agencies to sign up for assistance or what?

Frankly and I say this in all due respect, it is very likely that those who have learned to game the system so well, have also learned that if they do actually get down on their luck, having wasted their government subsidies on everything from beer to cigarettes and worse, they can always turn to local Churches to get help in the form of food stuffs and utility payment assistance. A real man would see to the needs of his family before he ever considered wasting the first dime. His house is his own responsibility, not the responsible people who get up 6 or 8 hours earlier than he does in order to go out and face the world every day to actually earn a living wage.

And secondly, are you in any way suggesting that Republicans are pulling up the rear with regard to those who inhabit their ranks? By that I mean surely you're not saying Hillary is a credible candidate of origins known for integrity are you?

"Judge not lest he be Judged"


Yes Hillary falls into that camp, but she did not move here... moved to New York.

I just pointed out to my good friends of state right folks three positions that are wanted the most are held by people outside our state... no one has a problem with that?

tvtimeout Wrote:"Judge not lest he be Judged"


Yes Hillary falls into that camp, but she did not move here... moved to New York.

I just pointed out to my good friends of state right folks three positions that are wanted the most are held by people outside our state... no one has a problem with that?

You're quoting Matthew Chapter 7 verse 1, and you got it pretty close.
Matthew 7:1 (KJV)
1 "Judge not, that ye be not judged." This verse in no way suggests that we are not to judge and condemn sin. Otherwise, if we dare not judge sin, how could we ever hope to avoid sin in our own lives? If one accurately points out Scriptural truths, say for example calling out able bodied men who choose to lay around the house rather than to seek out employment, while at the same time expecting to get their check/checks every month, that is not judging the person. That my friend is judging an action, and not only do we have that right, we as Christians have the obligation to expose such activity for what it is, sin. Certainly we should not be forced by law to fund their slothful ways, as those ways are immoral as 1 Tim 5:8 very clearly sets forth. Men are to be men, as was the case with Job when the Lord spoke with him as follows; Job 38:3 (KJV)
3 "Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me." In other words, get up, get dressed, and be a man.

You alluded, that the Kentucky GOP had offered up non-viable candidates, because you think they are not Kentuckians. Bevin can trace linage in Kentucky, he didn't just move here.
EXCERPT---
"Bevin is a wealthy businessman from Louisville, best known for running the Bevin Brothers Manufacturing Company, a bell manufacturing company that has been in his family for generations. In 2014, he ran in the Republican primary against incumbent-Senator Mitch McConnell."
http://www.businessinsider.com/upset-bus...ky-2015-11

FTR, Mitch McConnell was deemed by most to be the lesser of two evils. Perhaps the Dems can come up with a better candidate than a Hollywood vixen with a skeleton crammed closet, or a complete novice the next time around? I'm no McConnell fan, I can assure you. All of that being said, Jack Conway is a liberal and is openly of the Obama mindset. Therefore, the people of Kentucky rejected him and rightly so. So obviously, most did not "have a problem with that."

Anyway, thank you for being honest enough or objective enough more likely, to acknowledge that Hillary is a political opportunist if there ever was one. As fate would have it at the time, the Senate seat for New York happened to be open and, as I have mentioned, Deep blue New Yorkers would elect a bum off the streets, as long as he was a Democrat. That is why Hillary Clinton was elected the Senator from NY, and the string pulling behind the scenes by her die hard fans got her in there as Obama's Secretary of State, with an eye on her heir apparancy to the Oval Office. But you did hit squarely on the real problem, failings in today's government machinations are directly related to the character flaws of those involved. Therefore, better candidates are prerequisite if we expect to return to any faint semblance to our former glory.