I'm sure I would not have missed hearing about Sarah Palin telling anyone who they were allowed to believe in or not. What exactly do you mean by pushing religious views? Are you saying that politicians shouldn't be allowed to believe in God?

I'm not sure how anyone could say God is for the war or any war for that matter. Speaking of which, religion has been the cause of many wars for over 2000 years.

Strawman argument.

Palin has made comments in the past that say that the government should be based on Christianity:

Pushing your religion by saying that the government should be based around it makes you a proponent of a theocracy - how is that any different than any of the Middle Eastern countries based on Islam and Sharia?

Good question and it does not make it any different. As stated above, religion has co-mingled in politics/law of the land since inception of laws of the land/politics.

Sure, but I have a problem when any party uses religion to promote an agenda.

Palin, her past church and pastors are all known "Dominionist" that christians should take over public office and create a christian only state and impose christian doctrine by law. She runs from it now, but too many video's of her speaking on it at church and meetings. She even stated in the last days people will flock to Alaska to escape the NWO and the church needed to be ready to take care of them...and of course offerings were taken up.

Simply, another Reformation...

All one need do is watch her interviews, enough to make you cringe that she even had a chance in the White House.

Really watch the last part of the interview when the radical preacher speaks then prays over Sarah...Listen to what he said, getting rid of all over religions through government, etc...scary stuff.

I'll all for the local church, people telling others about their beliefs, but also for people having the right to chose what they believe.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sixDDLSN46s

Certainly it has. Let's face it in about 400AD when christianity mixed with Rome, it became more political, eventually as powerful. That went on for hundreds of years, along with mass wars, torture, etc.. all in the name of God. Eventually man saw the evil of it and secular law became more powerful. However, residue from our past is still in politics today and many would love a christian theocracy running things. The problem is any time this has happened it was used to control people, not help them.

The GOP is basically for corporations, non funding of programs for the poor, etc, then they want God in government. I'm not sure what God these people serve, Christ commanded to take care of the poor, sick, widows, children, etc....they certainly don't want any of that through government, but have no problems pushing religious ideals through government.

The founding fathers didn't have much trouble with religion, why should we, it is the bases and the foundation of this country, if you have a godless country you have a lawless country, just like what is going on now and it is sickening, don't be fooled these people in DC don't care about you or me, all they care about is their power and how much they can take away from you. These are our God given rights, Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happyness, not us slaving away, to a out of control government, they are suppose to work for us, not us for them. If the Left had a little more God In their lives, we won't be in the mess we are in now. No moral compass, over the cliff you go, say hi, to Satin for me.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=171703

:)

With all of the huffing and puffing over her religion, I'm not worried about her imposing Christian law (so to speak). They said the same thing with JFK, that he would be a pawn of the pope:haha::doh:

But I heard Romney was after you personally:D:haha:... and if he gets elected....:cool:


Agreed. I would worry about her foreign policy. It would (imo) be the polar opposite of the bamsters, which I don't like either. I want someone in the middle on FP, no hawks, no doves.

So what?

Does any of it justify the sexism and bigotry that is continually displayed against this woman? Opposing her political beliefs is one thing but the things that have been said about her and especially her family have been unarguably reprehensible.

Is it unjust? Yep. Does it happen all the time? Yep.

Obama's citizenship is called into question by many; Palin's gender/religion are called into question. Kerry's service was called into question; photoshopped pics of him and Hanoi Jane, though debunked, served to brand his campaign ever after.

If you want ethics, look elsewhere. Once a person puts themselves in the public eye, especially for political office, expect the worst from their opponents. It's how we come to expect the game to be played, and it's all part of the "show" anymore. It sucks... it's dishonest, unethical, crude, and yes - reprehensible - what both sides will do to discredit the other. And it's business as usual until enough Americans decide that we're tired of being the ones to foot the bills and still get the smelly end of the stick.

Not much trouble, not sure what you mean, our codes of laws first created by them gave everyone to seek God as they pleased with no interference.

I actually find liberals much more moral than the right, but certainly no side has a a monopoly of morals in government.

I guess we could bring back the churches old tools to keep people in line, you know, burnings, beheadings, cagings, disemboweled. Actually, I think I know a few here that could use some prayer in the old fashion..:O:

You mean, sharia law?

That was one of the things that made me cringe about President Bush when he said that, in the context of foreign policy, that he does not do nuance.

:o

Foreign policy is nothing but nuance! :yep:

One in the same really, glad we got secular enough to do away with it here, course did take us awhile to get rid of slavery and give women rights, that wasn't really that long ago.

Don't get me wrong, I think faith is a good thing when it seeks to help and love others, not
control them or push man made codes of conduct on what morals mean.