Full thread can be found here. If you have no account and it asks you to register, just enter as a guest.
From: The Mostly Respectful Brian P. (PENDELL1) 10:18 am
To: ALL
I'm starting this thread so people can tell who they're voting for, and why.
I don't intend this to be a matter for discussion or debate. I simply hope to foster greater understanding of different points of view. Who are you voting for, and why? If you're not voting, why? If you haven't decided, what factors make it difficult to decide?
Me first.
Who I'm voting for: Bush
When I made that decision: March of this year.
Why: Couple reasons.
1. Bush signed the partial-birth abortion ban which President Clinton vetoed twice. That alone tells me all I need to know about the differences between the two parties.
I consider abortion and it's related issues -- euthanasia, stem-cells, cloning -- to be the pre-eminent moral issue of the day, as segregation was the pre-eminent issue of the 60s. It is innocent blood being shed. I believe the death of millions every year overrides the other, legitimate concerns Democrats have, and until this problem is solved I don't believe God will give his countenance to any politician who supports this.
I believe that a lot of the strife we've had over the past two years can be traced to this. Kerry has taken many stands on many issues, but he has been unapologetic in his support for abortion without limit, no matter how much he "regrets" it. He has been ambiguous on Iraq, but he has been unambiguous in his support for the harvesting of human embryos for the sake of research. Despite his belief that life begins at "conception". Bush, on the other hand, has chosen the opposite approach. If they are different in no other way, they are different here. The choice, for me, is clear-cut and indisputable.
Further, I believe that much energy has been consumed in the spiritual world on this issue. Do you remember the 2000 election? I believe that was more than humans being unable to agree on an election result -- I think contending spirits were warring powerfully in the heavenlies, each having chosen a candidate to support and each trying to influence the election their way. I could feel it in the air when it happened.
After Bush's election, the drumbeat did not let up -- the Enemy stirred up hatred against him. Bush draws more aggravation and more stress than any President in recent memory, and I think the reason is that he is a pro-life President, and the Enemy cannot stand that. Consequently the immense hatred pouring out of Hollywood. The lies and deceit of the Michael Moores. The absolute deadlock on judicial appointments in the Senate. The slander campaign against him and Ashcroft. Why? Because, as real believers, they pose a threat to everything the Enemy stands for, merely by their existence.
Even today, what should be a walkover election is being contested powerfully. It is likely that this election, too, will be fought for months after the election. Why? Because, IMO, the Enemy is investing a lot of spiritual capital in taking Bush down. And those who -- willingly or unwillingly -- are deceived by him -- are caught up in that same paroxysm of unreasoning hatred that he himself feels. Because he wants abortion to continue, and God does not. Perhaps there is someone coming that he fears to come? And I believe there is another reason.
Does this mean that I believe all Democrats are evil? Not even close. I know many fine Democrats who love God with all their heart and soul and strength and mind, my own parents among them. But I believe their leaders have chosen the wrong side on THE issue that both God and the Enemy care about more than any other -- the paramount moral issue of our day. And until the Dems call their leaders to account on this issue, I do not believe they will be blessed.
But that's not the only reason:
2. Israel.
I noticed Clinton twisting the arms of several Israeli administrations to fit his "peace process", and I saw the terror that resulted. I see Bush giving them a free hand, and the result has been that -- while no one was looking -- Israel "won" the Intifada (Jewish World Review). Certainly terrorism is much less than it was.
I believe that if Bush is elected, this state of affairs will continue. And I believe with Charles Krauthammer (Jewish World Review) that if Kerry is elected, he will attempt to "rebuild our foreign alliances" by screwing Isreal.
I think this is another thing that both God and the Enemy have on their agendas -- one of the Enemy's pre-eminent goals since the beginning of creation is to kill Jews in carload lots. I'm not convinced that Isreal is fully in the right, but I certainly oppose the lies, deceit, and murder which characterize the tactics of their enemies. I think that Kerry's plan will -- inadvertently -- lead to much more terrorism, much more death in Isreal, but nothing anyone would recognize as "peace". So again, I choose Bush.
3. Iraq.
I'm not convinced Bush did the right thing in Iraq. It could be his biggest mistake. Then again, if it works out, it could be the greatest step forward for the Middle East in generations.
But right or wrong, we must finish the job. I don't believe Kerry will do that. He's got a very cogent discussion on his web site (JohnKerry.com), but his big solution seems to be to bring in France and Germany, which have already said they will not get involved no matter what he says or does (http://news.ft.com/).
If he really wants to "rebuild alliances", he has to do what France and Germany -- and his anti-war base, such as Michael Moore who believe that Saddam's leftover thugs are "freedom fighters" (spits) -- is to pull out, as quickly as possible. Declare victory and go home.
It may be that we will pull out of Iraq next year in any case -- we shall see. There's certainly a lot of speculation about that. And the sooner Iraqis are doing the job for themselves the happier everyone will be. But I still trust Bush to get the job done more than I do Kerry.
Why? Because Bush is stubborn. Consequently, I believe he'll finish what he starts. Kerry's nuances and sophistication lead me to believe he may not. Clinton's bug-out from Somalia and his handling of the rest of the world with kid gloves during his tenure does nothing to change my mind on this score. There's a time for a stubborn man, and there's a time for an open-minded man, and wartime is a time for stubborn men like Churchill and Patton.
--------------
You'll notice I haven't mentioned the economy in all this. That is because I do not believe the government has much power to effect the economy for good or for ill, and consequently it isn't even on my list of priorities. I've learned the hard way that little good ever came out of a government bureaucracy, and I certainly have no trust in the government being there for me when things go bad. The government programs have nothing to offer me, and I don't see how it can possibly help the economy, and while I care about poverty I think voluntary private action will do more than the government ever can or will.
Besides -- I believe what Jesus said about "seek first the kingdom and his righteousness and all these things will be added to you as well". If we get the moral issues right, the economy will take care of itself -- if we get them wrong, God will curse the work of our hands no matter how clever we are with the economy.
Respectfully, Brian P.
And my response, starting off by quoting a paragraph from Brian's post:
From: StumblingToBethlehem (Newbirth) 5:08 pm
To: The Mostly Respectful Brian P. (PENDELL1)
I consider abortion and it's related issues -- euthanasia, stem-cells, cloning -- to be the pre-eminent moral issue of the day, as segregation was the pre-eminent issue of the 60s. It is innocent blood being shed. I believe the death of millions every year overrides the other, legitimate concerns Democrats have, and until this problem is solved I don't believe God will give his countenance to any politican who supports this.
Totally agree. This is a BIG reason I am voting for Bush, because those lives override just about everything else. That, and the gay marriage issue.
Kerry would do a good job on healthcare (and as someone without insurance who needs expensive medicine, this could even benefit me directly). Kerry would do a good job on a lot of things. But he supports abortion, homosexual marriage, and frankly, I don't trust him when it comes to Iraq. He'll do okay, but I agree with Brian...we need to finish what we started, and Bush is the best man for this.
For anyone interested in praying for the election, here's some ideas. And no, this site endorces neither candidate. You can and should pray for the election without mentioning either candidate by name. Rather, as American Christians, we should pray for a godly candidate. Let God sort out who that is. :)
Election prayer: Election prayer from presidentialprayerteam.org.
No comments:
Post a Comment