Obama says he wants to put billions of $$$ in futuristic energy, but his ideas are still in the laboratories and may be decades off.
Common sense says to drill where you know there is fuel now and keep experimenting for new fuels. It just boggles my mind at how the Dems want to keep us at $5 a gal for gas. It is clear that they are totally against trying to get more oil. Seems to me this is a losing idea for them.
]]>Maybe everyone will be too afraid to venture a response on this topic.
Maybe the mods won’t allow it.
Let the discussion begin.
]]>What do you think? Would Jesus be in favor of defending someone or some nation because a tyrant butchering and murdering people? Would Jesus be against removing a tyrant and his system of government who was an enemy of Israel? Remember, Sadam bombed Israel every chance he got.
Can we really look at the Bible and say that God is against war? What about the innocent women and children? Unfortunately, innocent people die in the cost of freedom. We lost innocent people when we fought the Revolutionary War and the Civil War. I do not understand why, but God often required that Israel take no survivors. No women, no children, not even any livestock were allowed to be spared.
The sad thing is that there are some truly evil people in this world, and as a result of their actions, innocent people lose their lives. These evil people persuade others to follow them. Their loyalty often remains even after the death of the evil leader. These evil followers cause the death of many innocent people even after the evil leader is dead. So do you simply remove the evil leader? If we do that and leave, then the evil followers simply pick another leader and continue their terror in the country. No we must continue to fight the evil followers or insurgents even if more innocent lives are lost. It is the cost of freedom. Well, why are we still there? Why don’t we just leave those people to fight against the remaining evil followers? That’s simple, because it would be suicide to just leave the people fight against the evil remaining terrorists.
I have more ideas, but what do you think so far?
]]>Abortion- Obama is an avid supporter of abortion under any circumstances and no matter how far along in the pregnancy the mother is. Basically, if it has not been born yet, go ahead and kill it. Its not human or its not alive. He and other liberals justify this position by saying life does not begin until birth. So at 8 months, if the mother decides she does not want the baby on a whim, well abort it. Another argument is, it can not live outside of the mother’s womd, so technically it is not fully developed. Well, I was born six weeks early ( at 7 1/2 months) and my lungs were not fully developed. I am no less human and was no less alive than any baby carried to full term. Did my life not count until my due date? As Christians, we believe that life begins at conception. Scripture even tell us this ("Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.") in Jeremiah. If we as Christians believe this, then there is only one way to look at abortion and that is murder. To support a candidate who so vigorously supports abortion is to become an accomplice to murder.
Gay Rights- Obama, according to his wife Michelle, seeks to overturn or repeal The Defense of Marriage Act. Furthermore, he has gone as far as to try to twist the Sermon on the Mount to back up his support for civil unions. Can we say “BLASPHEMY” any louder? As a Christian, we believe marriage to be an institution ordained by God and to be exclusively between one man and one woman. Supporting a candidate that supports gay rights so heavily is to throw your support behind the gay and lesbian movement yourself.
Now, are you really a Christian if you do not strive to reflect Christ in everything, including who you choose to vote for? Can you go to an alter, pray for forgiveness and accept the gift of grace and then turn around two years later, decide you know better for your life than God does, reject His word and live by the flesh and still call yourself a Christian? Here is another question. Can a Christian decide to reflect Christ in every aspect of their life except in their voting, throwing their support behind a candidate that is very much anti-Christian in his views and voting record. I do not want this to turn into a theological debate, however I do want to know how anyone who calls themselves a Christian can support anti-Christian views.
Just a quick side note: I do not believe there is anything you can do to “earn” salvation. The price was to great for any of us to bare, so Jesus paid that price on the cross. God has given us the freedom or free will to accept or reject that salvation. Therefor, I do not believe that you can “lose” your salvation but you do have the free will to reject it, even after that conversion experience, (stories of King David and even the story of Judas comes to mind). God does not force you to follow Him. When we accept that gift of grace, our lives change. Are we perfect, no! Our flesh will still make mistakes. But the One who lives inside of us is perfect. If we start reflecting Him in our lives, then we will be less likely to make a calculated decision (vote) to support anything that He would reject. A vote is a decision. It is something you think about (or should think about) before making. You should not be able to look back at a vote and say “Oops, I made a mistake.” “I just wasn’t thinking.” To many of us do. We better compare the two candidates we have to choose from and see who we are more in line with on morality issues way before we start worrying about the “political” aspects of the campaign. We need to get informed on issues as much as possible so we can make the best decisions we can based on the information. After all, the political aspects are now infringing into the very foundations of our morality. It is no longer just an issue of politics.
]]>Hendrix, has promoted positive music since the late 80’s and recently became a value voter organizer for this year’s Presidential election. Hendrix stated, “This has been a historic Presidential campaign and I have enjoyed getting to spend time with and know this years candidates for President of the United States. I have been excited to share my beliefs and hear their idea for our country,” said Hendrix.
Hendrix was elected a district delegate earlier this year by party organizers and encouraged to run for national delegate on the state level. During the caucus on Saturday,organizers and Democratic party leaders stated the Presidential candidates had all endorsed Hendrix and was hopeful of his win and securing a seat on the national delegation for 2008. Hendrix won the seat with a large number of the votes and will represent North Carolina in this year’s Presidential election process.
Hendrix has been active in the Hilary Clinton campaign and says that he was asked to run for the seat by President Bill Clinton. Hendrix stated, “I have strong conservative beliefs that I intend to hold on to in my own political ambitions.”
For more information visit http://www.rickhendrix.com
]]>
The literal definition according to Dictionary.com is:
a government program guaranteeing certain benefits to a segment of the population; the right to benefits offered by a government, esp. as compensation
The definition for entitlement is as follows:
1. the act of entitling.
2. the state of being entitled.
3. the right to guaranteed benefits under a government program, as Social Security or unemployment compensation.
So the question is, what programs are entitlement programs and which ones aren’t?
Are the military, interstate system, Veteran’s programs, FDA, and Bill of Rights (I find that last suggestion laughable myself) these types of programs?
Or are food stamps, welfare and goverment housing more likely candidates?
]]>The Democrats have hindered drilling for new oil for years and years and now want us to pay $5.00 a gallon to conserve gasoline?
I think that McCain’s chances just skyrocketed.
]]>