Obama declares support for gay "marriage."

Obama declares support for gay marriage
By Rick Klein
ABC News
9 May 2012

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-announces-his-support-for-same-sex-marriage.html

President Obama today announced that he now supports same-sex marriage, reversing his longstanding opposition amid growing pressure from the Democratic base and even his own vice president.

In an interview with ABC News’ Robin Roberts, the president described his thought process as an “evolution” that led him to this place, based on conversations with his own staff members, openly gay and lesbian service members, and conversations with his wife and own daughters.

"I have to tell you that over the course of several years as I have talked to friends and family and neighbors when I think about members of my own staff who are in incredibly committed monogamous relationships, same-sex relationships, who are raising kids together, when I think about those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that Don't Ask Don't Tell is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage, at a certain point I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married,” Obama told Roberts, in an interview to appear on ABC’s “Good Morning America” Thursday. Excerpts of the interview will air tonight on ABC’s “World News with Diane Sawyer.”

The president stressed that this is a personal position, and that he still supports the concept of states deciding the issue on their own. But he said he’s confident that more Americans will grow comfortable with gays and lesbians getting married, citing his own daughters’ comfort with the concept.

“It’s interesting, some of this is also generational,” the president continued. “You know when I go to college campuses, sometimes I talk to college Republicans who think that I have terrible policies on the economy, on foreign policy, but are very clear that when it comes to same sex equality or, you know, believe in equality. They are much more comfortable with it. You know, Malia and Sasha, they have friends whose parents are same-sex couples. There have been times where Michelle and I have been sitting around the dinner table and we’re talking about their friends and their parents and Malia and Sasha, it wouldn’t dawn on them that somehow their friends’ parents would be treated differently. It doesn’t make sense to them and frankly, that’s the kind of thing that prompts a change in perspective.”

Roberts asked the president if First Lady Michelle Obama was involved in this decision. Obama said she was, and he talked specifically about his own faith in responding.
“This is something that, you know, we’ve talked about over the years and she, you know, she feels the same way, she feels the same way that I do. And that is that, in the end the values that I care most deeply about and she cares most deeply about is how we treat other people and, you know, I, you know, we are both practicing Christians and obviously this position may be considered to put us at odds with the views of others but, you know, when we think about our faith, the thing at root that we think about is, not only Christ sacrificing himself on our behalf, but it’s also the Golden Rule, you know, treat others the way you would want to be treated. And I think that’s what we try to impart to our kids and that’s what motivates me as president and I figure the most consistent I can be in being true to those precepts, the better I’ll be as a as a dad and a husband and hopefully the better I’ll be as president.”

Previously, Obama has moved in the direction of supporting same-sex marriage but has consistently stopped short of outright backing it. Instead, he’s voiced support for civil unions for gay and lesbian couples that provide the rights and benefits enjoyed by married couples, though not defined as “marriage.” At the same time, the president has opposed efforts to ban gay marriage at the state level, saying that he did not favor attempts to strip rights away from gay and lesbian couples.

The president’s position became a flashpoint this week, when Vice President Joe Biden pronounced himself “absolutely comfortable” with allowing same-sex couples to wed.

Obama aides insisted there was no daylight between the positions held by the president and his vice president when it comes to legal rights, but as other prominent Democrats also weighed in in favor of gay marriage, the disconnect became difficult for the White House to explain away.

The announcement completes a turnabout for the president, who has opposed gay marriage throughout his career in national politics. In 1996, as a state Senate candidate, he indicated support for gay marriage in a questionnaire, but Obama aides later disavowed it and said it did not reflect the candidate’s position.

In 2004, as a candidate for the US Senate, he cited his own religion in framing his views: “I'm a Christian. I do believe that tradition and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman.”

He maintained that position through his 2008 presidential campaign, and through his term as president, until today.

As president in 2010, Obama told ABC’s Jake Tapper that his feelings about gay marriage were “constantly evolving. I struggle with this.” A year later, the president told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, “I’m still working on it.”

“I probably won't make news right now, George,” Obama said in October 2011. “But I think that there's no doubt that as I see friends, families, children of gay couples who are thriving, you know, that has an impact on how I think about these issues.”

Obama’s decision has political connotations for the fall.

The issue divides elements of the Democratic base, with liberals and gay-rights groups eager to see the president go farther, but with gay marriage far less popular among African-American voters.

Just yesterday, in North Carolina, voters overwhelmingly approved a constitutional ban on gay marriage. President Obama carried North Carolina in 2008, and its status as a 2012 battleground was guaranteed by Democrats’ decision to hold their convention in Charlotte this summer.

Obama’s likely Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, opposes gay marriage, and fought his state’s highest court when Massachusetts became the first state to legalize gay marriage in 2004, when Romney was governor. Romney said on the campaign trail Monday that he continues to oppose gay marriage.

“My view is that marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman,” Romney said. “That’s the position I’ve had for some time, and I don’t intend to make any adjustments at this point. … Or ever, by the way.”

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-announces-his-support-for-same-sex-marriage.html

This is a clever political strategy by the President. It will bait social conservatives and politically minded Christians into attacks against same-sex marriages. Already the blogs, radio programs, facebook news feeds, etc are lighting up. Two things will be accomplished by this: One, the President's liberal base will be energized by the outrage expressed from the social conservatives. Two, as the inevitable incendiary language from the right is voiced, the President will take the high ground and alienate the electorate from the perceived 'extreme' right.

And all of this will be provided to the President free of charge by his reactionary opponents.

It's no real surprise that the President supports 'gay marriage'. If the conservatives are smart they'll save this issue for another day.

This is what happens when people replace God with government. Out of control spending and sin. He sold his soul today.

Hi hulsey,

This is a clever political strategy by the President. It will bait social conservatives and politically minded Christians into attacks against same-sex marriages. Already the blogs, radio programs, facebook news feeds, etc are lighting up. Two things will be accomplished by this: One, the President's liberal base will be energized by the outrage expressed from the social conservatives. Two, as the inevitable incendiary language from the right is voiced, the President will take the high ground and alienate the electorate from the perceived 'extreme' right.

And all of this will be provided to the President free of charge by his reactionary opponents.

It's no real surprise that the President supports 'gay marriage'. If the conservatives are smart they'll save this issue for another day.

I suspect that the president might try to maneuver this as a "equal rights" issue -- without saying how it would impact individuals, churches, small businesses or even the Constitutional concept of both "free speech" and "free exercise" of religious faith. In California, legislators are trying to ban the "conversion" of homosexuals.

http://tinyurl.com/californiaconversions

Now, the end will come no matter what. It will grow even more immoral than it is right now. However, that doesn't mean that believers must remain silent in such matters. John Baptist was imprisoned because he spoke out about how "unlawful" it was for the king to take up his brother's wife.

Still, you are probably right. There will be someone who will say something hateful or less-than-edifying and it will be published in the media as if it were reflective of ALL people -- including Christians -- who believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. There will be homosexual activists vilifying Christians and Christianity while simultaneously calling for "tolerance." Unfortunately, their idea of "tolerance" is to simply accept their lifestyle as "normal" and that any idea that opposes homosexuality is "on the wrong side of history."

I guess I have a good question I wonder about, when God begins to pour out his wrath on the US, will Christians suffer also.
I know he has already begin to, just look at the economy, although my business is doing great "thank you Lord! you wonder will there be another 911 or maybe two or three at the same time.

My reaction to this story posted here is the same as my reaction to it when it was posted on FoxNews and other national media: How is this news????

Anyone who is the LEAST surprised by this has had their head in the SAND. Anyone who did not know FROM DAY ONE that Obama was pro-homosexual everything must be seriously deluded or worse. From the beginning he established the National GLBT Day. So why are people printing this as if it is news????

I suspected this would come one day. One of the darkest days in American History. Christian, stand up for the truth and be not afraid to speak out.

Govenor Romney announced today on Fox news that he is fine with gay adoption.

What he said was, "I happen to believe that the best setting for raising a child is where this is the opportunity to a mom and a dad to be in the home. There are many circumstances where that is not possible. Through death. Divorce. I know that gay couples are able to adopt children. That is fine. But my preference is we encourage the marriage of a man and a woman and we continue to define marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman.”

Furthermore, he reiterated something that he has stated several times in the past...that states should be able to make up their laws about "gay adoption" and restrict or outlaw them as the state sees fit.

So, it would be just as incorrect to imply that he is somehow embracing the idea of gay adoption as it would be to imply that he embraces the idea of gay marriage. At least in word, Romney opposes both...particularly on a federal level. And, of course, there is a big contrast between what he said and what the President said.

However, the point of the article is to demonstrate how society has fallen to the point of creating their own set or morals and justice and rejecting the truth about what is right and wrong. It is the "redefining" of this that is disturbing...and an indication of the times (Isaiah 5:20).

If you go to the 4 minute mark, or better still, watch the whole interview, I think you will see that there would be no period where Chris put it and he says that gay adoption is fine.

I'm not sure what you mean. He said what I quoted above (although I got the quote from an Associated Press article that included the audio). I think that he is making it pretty clear that he doesn't support homosexual "marriage" and that he was saying that he believes that it is more important to have a mother and a father in the home. He also stated that he thinks that the people of the states should have the ability to make laws about it.

Regardless, my advice is to flee Babylon, for things are moving along swiftly, press into the heart of God, stay close to His heart for this gay marriage is simply one more issue on the road to Jesus' return.

I agree. At the same time, I think that it is important to note that those of us who are walking with God wholeheartedly have already "fled" Babylon.

The best way to "flee" Babylon is not to point out issues with a secular government or apparent flaws in a candidate. It is to point others to run to the Lord while journeying to Him ourselves. Amen?

Hi Brother Jim,

And others have bought into the lie that america is a christian nation.

Thankfully, I don't know any believers who feel this -- even if I have no doubt that it was founded upon many Christian principles (or at least what they assumed were "Christian" principles).

This afternoon, I was in a store that had a politically Liberal talk radio station on. Even the pundits on that local Liberal station admitted as much -- that America was deeply influenced by "Judeo-Christian principles."

However, no one is arguing that salvation is found in government, politics or even Christian influence on such things. Still, believers who live in this temporary country can still share their voice on issues that affect us, our families and neighbors.

Even though we live in a secular government, we often involve ourselves in those "government" issues. In fact, recently, I assisted a man who needed a passport and visa. We had to go down to the local Post Office (a government office) and then to a government immigration office.

If we were told no, I might have acted like the "persistent widow" who went over and over again to an "unjust judge" (or ruler) until we found a remedy. I didn't feel that it was wrong to assist this man any more than it would be to vote in elections, propositions or amendments (such as what people think marriage should consist of).

I said this previously: Although some of us may feel that we were saved from "right wing" Christianity, some people in this world would have no problem lumping you together with those people based upon your views. Even if you keep your faith to yourself -- "separate church from state" -- and never share your opinions or voice in matters of righteousness or unrighteousness (which they hope is true), many will still place you in the same group based solely upon your Biblical views. If you reject abortion or homosexuality as anything less than "normal" or worth "celebrating," you will be dismissed as a "right wing radical."

Still, I would like to inject that those of us here are not like those fickle believers who might place their faith in government...or man in general. Our faith is in Christ alone. We have already fled from Babylon and are looking only to Christ as the source of our being. We do have earthly duties (such as those mentioned in I Corinthians 7 and duties to provide for our families) and the sharing of our voice about issues that affect our families, the church and neighbors can be appropriate even when we maintain our heavenly citizenship.

A believer can share his/her voice to government in matters that are deemed important, in issues of right and wrong or in a desire for the furtherance of the Gospel. The persistent widow did it. Paul the Apostle did it. Esther did it. John the Baptist did it. Even David Wilkerson did it. It wasn't joining "right wing Christianity" but maintaining our faith without hiding it under the bushel of physical separation.

I hope this makes sense. We are simply being the children of light and sharing an opinion about matters when asked. No one should mistake this or suggest that it is the equivalent of placing faith in man (or government of men). No one should mistake it for living in Babylon either. It is shining the Light of Christ to a dark world by sharing a voice.

I read an interesting article from Melody Green (the widow of Keith Green) who co-founded Americans Against Abortion. She saw a deplorable practice (abortion) and stood up to it. She met government leaders -- including President Reagan. She was a guest when President Reagan issued the Emancipation Proclamation for the Preborn Child. She wrote an article about her participation:

http://tinyurl.com/melodygreen001

There is a great song by Keith Green about this. Now, I know that this is not necessarily about voting or other methods of government involvement. Sometimes, pushing a child out of the path of a speeding truck can preserve the life long enough for the Lord to reveal Himself to them. In a way, a baby can be saved by being "persistent" with a government of consent.

A BILLION STARVING PEOPLE
by Keith Green

I find it hard to turn away
a billion starving people,
But what can one do, I've heard you say
-- "You can't save someone's life."

I want to save a life today,
I want to get someone close with my Father.
Bring them the bread of life today
I want to help them get stronger
help them last longer
And give them a chance to see Jesus.

I find it hard to just ignore
the murdered unborn children,
Yes times have changed, but still God warns,
you shall not take a life.

I want to save a life today,
I want to keep one alive for my Father,
-- Who will avenge the blood
Of weak and helpless ones someday
whose lives are spilled out like water,
Like lambs in the slaughter
and each one is handmade by Jesus.

I find it hard to turn away
a billion starving people,
a billion starving people.

http://tinyurl.com/billionstarvingpeople

Hi bearmaster,

You should not accuse believers of "sin" simply because they think that a Mormon might be a better choice than the other primary choice.

And, of course, you should not question the "intellect" of individuals with whom you simply disagree.

There are some of us who pray about all of these things and simply have a different opinion than the one you have.

We have "fled" Babylon. We have entered the straight gate and are on the narrow and difficult road that leads to life. Your opinions on this matter are not sufficient to make such a pronouncement regarding the intellect, sinfulness or eternal condition of those with whom you disagree.

Again, no one is urging anyone to vote for Governor Romney or settle upon the status quo. This article was simply taken from the news. There are some of us who might vote according to issues (like the definition of "marriage" that was voted upon this week in North Carolina). Some might even feel compelled to choose one unsaved man over another for a secular job in the government.

However, it is unwise to consider this to be an indictment on the souls of believers or to voice it so sternly here. We should be more careful with our words before pronouncing such things upon individuals that we have known -- in limited word only -- for just over a month.

I appreciate the fact that you feel so strongly about it. I even appreciate the fact that you can share such thoughts and opinions. Yet, it just isn't right to point the finger at those believers who might not share your opinions.

May the Lord guide us all in this.

I'm attaching one article for encouragement to my brethren who believe that our place as God's people are not in politics and affairs of the corrupted wordily systems, democratic, republican, communist, or whatever system.

-----
Why I do not support Ron Paul for President
Special Edition

There are a wonderful variety of opinions in the Agrarian movement, and this is how it ought to be. Of course, just because there are multitudes of opinions does not mean that all (or any) of them are correct and have merit.

Agrarianism is not all Christian (it never was and neither will be before the Lord returns - Thomas Jefferson was not a Christian), and even among professing Christian agrarians there will be a wide expanse of ideas and positions. There were Yankee agrarians on the wrong side of the war of Northern Industrial Aggression, and I suppose there were a few Christians on the wrong side of that conflict as well. Such is the way things are, and I suppose if everyone agreed with me... well, it would be a better world but it might not be as interesting. That isn't to say that we're all right, because we are not... I am, but that shouldn't blunt the impact of what I am saying, which is that there are quite a few men who I like and respect and admire who are really phenomenally wrong on this particular subject.

By way of full disclosure, I must say that at one time I was an avid Reagan Republican and activist. My wife and I worked in politics as volunteers, I had dinner and conversation with Pat Buchanan in '92, I served as a County Precinct election judge in the '96 election - appointed by the Republican County Clerk. After that I was deeply involved in the Patriot movement (a ridiculously misnamed movement if ever there was one) and spoke all around the country at Patriot and Militia meetings, Preparedness Expos, etc. I have received standing ovations from large crowds for fiery patriotic speeches, and my flesh loved every minute of it. The problem is that I was fabulously wrong then, and I am mature enough now to admit it. I do not apologize for my zeal or for my love of freedom. I do, however, apologize for my blindness and errors that likely caused (and may still cause, since many of my writings are still out there) others to stumble.

When I was a young man, I was involved in many unsavory and un-Christian behaviors. Older folks would warn me, but I wouldn't listen. They just didn't understand... of course. That is the way of immaturity. When you have bought a false premise, and when you build your structure from the bottom up on a shaky foundation, then you will always think you are right because a cursory inspection shows the structure to be sound. Unhappily, when pressure is applied, the structure will collapse. When I was a firebrand in the Patriot circus there was one guy who would always burn me up. He was many men, but he was one guy. That guy was the guy who refused to be moved by my rhetoric, or to be inspired by my zeal. That guy would shake his head and walk away - muttering that one day I would probably "get it", and hopefully not too late. That guy had lived through the wars, fought the battles, and learned enough to know better. It is too simplistic and unfair to call the guy "cynical", "negative", "jaded", or "a pessimist".. being right about a situation doesn't make you cynical or a pessimist. It makes you a pragmatist, and truth ought not to be belittled just because it is unpopular and sometimes sad. That guy would email me and point out the fallacies in my logic, and the weakness in my foundation. He would always point out some blatant, obvious truths (the ones I didn't want to face because it would mean the death of my delusions and an end to the fantasy world I had believed since I was a child) and he would seriously burn me up. I would rant and rave against cynical "do-nothings" who always chide and snear, but never fight. I felt superior to that guy, because at least I was "doing something". Yeah. I was fooling myself, lying to my audience, and ignorantly supporting the system that was intent on killing my hopes of a better way of life. I was Otis, the town drunk from Mayberry, who always had a key to his own cell, and could let himself in and out whenever he pleased. I convinced myself that, so long as I could rant and rave, then I was free - and I never paused to focus on the velvet bars and chains in my heart and thinking, which were the love of the world, the lust of the flesh, and the pride of life that kept me from obeying God regardless of what men do or who they elect. I forgot that I am a pilgrim and a wanderer, an ambassador for an absentee King, and a gazingstock and hateful thorn in the side of a nation and world that hates God.

In my hatred of Socialism and Communism, I became a fascist - a statist just the same.
In my hatred of Statism and Authoritarianism, I became a worshipper of the Goddess Libertas - an idolater just the same.
In my hatred of idolatry, theft, graft, murder, and greed, I became a supporter of a system where these sins are intrinsic and even necessary.
In my sheer hatred, I hated everything but the country, society, social structures, morals, culture, and religious system that hates God.

I am guilty, but I was conned...

I was conned into forgetting history, first - that my people have always been strangers, separate from the greed and avarice of the bloodthirsty nations around them. They have always been persecuted for their separatism and their unique and solitary devotion to God above earthly and worldly politics. I was conned into being ignorant of my own history as well. I was never taught, and I was too lazy to learn the history of God's people and heritage. When Rome became corrupted and evil beyond belief in the early centuries of the past millennium, my people didn't hang around and vote for the lesser of two (or three) evils. They fled to the valleys of the Alps and became the Valley people (the Vadois or the Waldenses). When they were invaded by the Romish armies of conquest, they didn't sit around and vote their way to happiness. They fled, or they fought, or they died saying NO to Rome. When many of them fled Europe for the Americas, they didn't start political action committees, or voting blocks. They worked the land as agrarians and worshiped God according to their consciences until they were restricted from doing so by the "Protestants" of New England. Then they went south. The true Baptists spread out across the south and became the bedrock of Southern Agrarianism. I was conned into being ignorant and lazy and into not caring about God's heritage. I was conned into forgetting that, because of the peculiar successes of southern agrarianism, the south was invaded, my people were killed, the political institutions were placed in the hands of military governors and the people were disenfranchised and FORCED to vote for one or more of their invaders, or not vote at all. The people who did these deeds are the ones who now require that I joyfully support their system of empire and conquest, which continues even today. They have not stopped killing and they have not stopped "democratizing" and they have not stopped pillaging, raping, looting, stealing, or colonizing - all in the name of freedom. I forgot that God taught his people how to live in foreign bondage and occupation, and at no time did that mean that they were to be assimilated completely into the worldly culture and society around them.

Now, I hate election years as much as I hate the wordly "holiday season" and for the same reasons. Because the same people, nice as they may be - but ignorant of the truth and of God's opinion on the subject, dance and flit around forcing their foreign practices and cultures on everyone else around them. Four years ago (and four years before that, and four years before that... and so on) I was inundated with emails and messages from do-gooding "christians" who were adamant that I pray... PRAY, PRAY, PRAY!!!! that God would not judge this country, and that He would give us a good, Christian leader. Hmm.... yeah right. The people are ignorant of God's pattern of justice, adjudication, and punishment. I received another one of these emails the other day from a good Christian man, who still somehow believes that there is still time to intercede on behalf of Judas Ameriot and his system of Baal. It's time for Isaiah 58, they say... Pray, Pray, Pray... Where in all of the Bible are we encouraged to pray for the support, succor, and success of the wicked or of a wicked system? Does not the Bible say, "Do not I hate them, O LORD, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee? I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies"? Is there any question that the Amerikan system hates God? While we are encouraged to pray for our enemies (Matt. 5:44), we are taught by Christ Himself what that prayer is supposed to entail (Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do). God does not overthrow wicked systems and nations by the electoral system, He overthrows them by 1st - giving them over to a wicked mind to do that which is inconvenient and wicked in His sight, then 2nd - by causing them to crumble from within due to sloth, greed, lust, and blatant sin, and 3rd - by bringing the enemy in like a storm to overthrow them and to destroy them. That is the history of God and nations.

But, but, but... 2 Chronicles! God promises to heal our land if we repent! Uh...

If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land. (2Ch 7:14)

How many ways can modernists be wrong? Let me count the ways...

1. If my people... not secular, greedy, imperial powers, but MY PEOPLE. In the Old Testament this referred to physical Israel, the nation who He chose out of the world. This was TYPE, fulfilled by the anti-type in the NT, not "Amerika", but the children and people of Jesus Christ, God of very God, the Son of God, the Messiah and head of the elect body.

2. which are called by my name... Called by His name... CHRISTians, not those called by the name of Amerigo Vespucci, which "Amerika" is. (An aside... Vespucci was a Roman Catholic son of the notary of the Money Changer's Guild of Venice - imagine that!). The people which are called by His name are the true Body and Bride of Jesus Christ, everywhere in the world, they are not Amerikans.

3. shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; not "continue in them", or "vote to prolong them", or "vote to defend them", but TURN FROM THEM, cease from them in humility and prayer. A vote in Amerika today is a vote to sustain the status quo, and the vote only is for the DEGREE of the status quo. One candidate is 100% for the status quo, and another is 75% for the status quo... The anti-establishment candidate is only 55% for the status quo.

4. then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin... until then I do not hear or forgive. Until then, the nation (professing Christianity) will continue in apostasy and heresy, and will continue in their love of the world, and will continue to be given over to the heathen, and be tramped underfoot. I WILL NOT HEAR THEM, says God.

5. and will heal their land. Not "Amerika", but the Church of Jesus Christ, the Body of Christ. Those who repent and abandon idolatry, wickedness, and every evil and crooked way - these are the nation of God, and the land of the truly free.

And he spake unto the congregation, saying, Depart, I pray you, from the tents of these wicked men, and touch nothing of theirs, lest ye be consumed in all their sins. (Num. 16:26)

The Part that hurts...

This is the part that hurts, so gird up your loins. Think of this as me evaluating the old me, back when I was a red-blooded Amerikan and hip to install righteousness in her institutions. If the dart hits you too, then so be it - but, like I said, it will hurt...

The reason that people want to "fix" Amerika, is not because they want a righteous nation, or because they want righteous government and institutions. If they truly wanted that, then they would obey the scripture which commands that they flee iniquity, "come out from among her and be ye separate", and they put their hands not in with the wicked. People want Amerika fixed because it means a continuance of the status quo, and of the wicked ways, and of comfort and relative prosperity, and of 401k's, Monday Night Football, home mortgages, vacations, Google and YouTube. People want Amerika fixed because they love their dainty lives, and they cannot separate from worldliness or hate it. They like comfortable couches and 300 channels and on-demand video and the Paris Hilton/Wal-Mart culture of get it now, but get it.

Now, I have just become "that guy" and I shake my head at people who ought to know better. My love of this world has faded and has grown dim as God has revealed more and more of Himself to me. I do not seek peace and comfort in this world, because I do not plan to be long in it, and this is not my country. All political bluster, patriotic polemics, and flag-waving idolatry aside - I do not train my children to be participants in the great Amerikan experiment, or cogs in the great Amerikan machine. I train them to be lovers of God, and worshipers of Him, and to see duty in a far greater and deeper way than merely the pulling of a lever or the punching out of a "chad". Our God can cause us (Christians - not Amerikans) to persevere and succeed while we are hidden in the wilderness and in the palm of His hand. The storms that gather around us can pass over us while we are hidden in Him. Our God can sell us into slavery for our sins, He can punish us for our iniquities, or He can cause the waters from the mouth of His enemies which pursue us and our lives to be swallowed up by the earth. In any case, He is righteous and good and right. He does not need Ron Paul and neither do I. Though I have a carnal heart which is inclined towards the rhetoric of freedom and the machinations of political Liberty, it is just the carnal heart and not the mind of Christ that inclines me so. Amerika has a building that identifies its heart and symbolizes its mind; that building is the Capitol Building in Washington D.C. Atop that building is an idol made with hands, a statue of the Goddess Libertas (Persephone), called Lady Liberty to Amerikan idolaters. Her feet stand on her sacred ground, and I for one have nothing to do with her. She is the "goddess" of the underworld, and has her roots in paganism. From her went forth the decrees that crushed freedom and liberty in the Agrarian south, and from her went forth the laws that subjugated and destroyed the Agrarian cause. The passage of time does not make right of wrong, nor does it cleanse the blood of God's people, philosophy, and worldview from the land. I cannot support what God hates, and I cannot believe that fixing Amerika will satiate a just and righteous God. Ron Paul may be a "good man" (if there were such a thing), but He loves the wrong country, and His idolatry is no different from that of those who built the molten calf to worship.

Our greatest and most inalienable right is not the right to profit, land, travel, "freedom", or the right to keep the fruit of our labors. Our greatest and most inalienable right is the right to say no, and to not participate in the follies of the world. If God allows (and only if He allows) they can kill me and take my land. They can imprison me and chain me to a wall. They can waterboard me, or torture me to death. They can take my children and train them in their schools. They can rape the land for corn for the masses, or they can scrape it and put up a mall. They can burn it and make it a perpetual hissing , or they can sell it off to a people more inclined to bow to their will. What they cannot do is make me agree to it and participate in it. They cannot and they will not.

I've become the old guy in the corner - "that guy" who shakes my head at those who say the same things I once said, and fight for the things for which I once fought. I can't make anyone listen, but I can still say "no". They call Dr. Ron Paul "Dr. NO" since he votes no on almost everything. Good for him. He and his supporters, of all people, should understand why I will say no to him. My conscience doesn't allow any other position. If Ron Paul is the man they claim he is - then he will applaud that.

"No"... think about it.

Your servant in Christ Jesus,

Michael Bunker

---

What I wonder is how many Christians will sin by voting a Mormon into the Presidency. There was a previous thread that stated how evil this system was. The satanic orgions of this system were pointed out. Yet posters in this forum keep telling us we are not voting for a pastor but a president, the best man for the job.

Honestly I wonder about the intellect here. There are some of you who will rise up to give a brilliant defence of your theological system. Yet in the sane breath justify voting for a man who comes out of a satanic cultic system. Go figure.

I agree with this 100%. How can anyone who calls themself a Christian vote for a Mormon to lead them? I am not questioning your Christianity, but only your common sense.

Think about it folks, your endorsing a CULT HEAD/LEADER to lead our nation. If that doesn't make you step back and say "WAIT", I don't know what will.

The Lord is in control. He will do as He wishes.

Approved...In the last election, Christians everywhere were flattered by the current President. They were mesmerized, their salvation had come, so they thought. Obama entered in like any other politician, through flatteries. Obama will most likely get in again. He'll have the Gays, he'll have the youth, he'll have the African Americans.

Well you don't know your African Americans very well, they are probably the only race that has no approval at all for gays, at least the ones I personally know.

Brother bearmaster,

I don't know which Christians that you associate with, but I don't know anyone who is waiting for a "king." I also don't know any Christians who believe that any man -- Romney, Obama or anyone for that matter -- is going to "save" anyone else. The people that you are speaking to here (and "warning") are believers who know and love Jesus Christ.

Also, please reconsider repeating terms like "Hiyooh Silver" when you try to make a point -- especially when you announced what you deem to be "sin" in others or question their "intellect." I know that you feel strongly about this...which is probably why you say the things that you do. However, there is a right way and wrong way to share your concerns.

Making light of something that you previously and immediately thereafter equated as being so seriously important might not be the best way. We all have opinions about this matter. It would be better to refrain from casting rhetorical stones at others with whom we simply disagree.

I do love you, brother. I just think that this can be discussed without being captious with our words.