Does "Debauchery" define Liberal politics?

AlAyeti · Post by **AlAyeti** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 9:14 am

Why are people that self-identify as "Christian," supporting Liberal politics?

Liberals have ignored or broken laws to corrupt children, redefine marriage and family and stand in opposition to parental rights.

In the last week Liberals continued to promote laws in a California state-wide vote, that children can engage in sex and have abortions without any rights of the parents being important to the issues that involve their own children.

Abortion is a means to unfettered sexual intercourse as well as eliminating any consequences that arise from sexual promiscuity. Supporting the loss of chastity and and virtue is inherent in Liberal politics and indeed its ideology. Why do Christians still support Liberals?

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that schools can teach children sexuality and parents have no rights to what is being taught to their children in schools.

Debauchery is to corrupt anothers virtue or chastity.

Why would Christians want to be part of an political movement that targets children in schools?

Clearly this word "debauched" defines the sexual licentiousness and unfettered promiscuity that is the "core values" in the Liberal political movement across America today.

Are not Christians "called" to purity and virtue?

Why do Christians that have read the words of Christ Jesus, "especially on corrupting children," continue to support Liberal politics?

micatala · Post by **micatala** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 9:59 am

Sigh.

This post is so full of false statements, fallacious assumptions, semantic ambiguity, unsubstantiated assertions, over-generalization, and biased framing of questions I don't even know where to start.

In my view, the title of the thread could be considered flame bait.

In my personal opinion, I'm not sure this poll and post are worth responding to.

McCulloch · Post by **McCulloch** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 10:33 am

I'm with Micatala on this one.

Frankly, I don't quite understand the poll. Normally, a poll allows those being polled to choose between two or more mutually exclusive options. For this one those being polled are being asked to choose between two not mutually exclusive questions. What does it mean if you select, "Can a Christian oppose Christ and be a Christian?" as opposed to "Why would a Christian follow anti-Christian ways?" ?

Looking at the first question, "Can a Christian oppose Christ and be a Christian?", it appears to be rhetorical. The answer is self-evident. The real question should be more along the lines of what are Christ's legitimate teachings regarding a number of modern issues.

The second question is equally pointless. Rather than deal with the difficulties inherent in determining the right course of action, the poser seems to assume that there is a clear Christian way and those alleged Christians who do not follow that prescribed path are anti-Christian. It appears as if there has been no effort to understand why some Christians choose different aspects of Christianity to emphasize and may come to a different conclusion than the literalist conformity of the questioner's brand of Christianity.

questioner4 · Post by **questioner4** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 11:28 am

Gee, what a loaded poll!

questioner4 · Post by **questioner4** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 11:28 am

Gee, what a loaded poll!

juliod · Post by **juliod** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 5:06 pm

I selected "Why would a Christian follow anti-Christian ways?".

But I would have prefered an option with the word "licentuousness" in it.

DanZ

The Persnickety Platypus · Thu Nov 10, 2005 5:16 pm

Why do Christians that have read the words of Christ Jesus, "especially on corrupting children," continue to support Liberal politics?

Because the alternative is conservatism.

ENIGMA · Post by **ENIGMA** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 6:41 pm

You know, at first I was rather annoyed with the only having questions for poll responses part of this thread, but I've come to realize the large amount of enjoyment that can be derived from such a format.

So, here's how this works:

I've taken your OP, and respondeded to all five questions in the post itself with questions. Only one of the responses is intended to be a meaningful one. Feel free to guess about which one out of the five is given a meaningful response.

Why are people that self-identify as "Christian," supporting Liberal politics?

Are you sure?

Why do Christians still support Liberals?

Who took the cookie from the cookie jar?

Why would Christians want to be part of an political movement that targets children in schools?

Why do snipers attach long-range scopes to their rifles?

Are not Christians "called" to purity and virtue?

What would the Flying Spaghetti Monster do?

Why do Christians that have read the words of Christ Jesus, "especially on corrupting children," continue to support Liberal politics?

Why do people think reading is important?

AlAyeti · Post by **AlAyeti** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 10:49 pm

I apologize for the mistake I made in the poll questions format.

///

Liberal Christians use the Bible correctly on war, but then refuse to use the fundametals of the faith to see the horror and abominations they support.

Pure hypocrisy.

Jesus was clear on what marriage "is." He did not leave room for the "interpretation of " . . . and cleaves unto his life partner, the two becoming one flesh." Anti-Christians can implement further insanity into their world if they choose to do so, but Christians cannot join them according to the Bible.

Secualristst can do what they want to to destroy their own world but Christians are warned about joining these kinds of people in their abominations.

Anyone that thinks that slaughtering the peoples that were comitting abominations in the lands that were conquered by the Israeiltes is somehow "wrong," surely cannot look at an ultrasound of a human baby and agree that chopping it to pieces for the convenience of its mother and father to continue a life of debauchery is justifiable?

Again, anti-Christians may somehow license this but the followers of Christ Jesus should not cast their votes to further whoredeom.

But Liberals do just that. California is the most recent and perfect example.

juliod · Post by **juliod** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 11:36 pm

surely cannot look at an ultrasound of a human baby and agree that chopping it to pieces for the convenience of its mother and father to continue a life of debauchery is justifiable?

If Jesus thought abortion was wrong it would say so in the bible.

In the bible, causing a miscarriage is only punished if the husband chooses to set a fine. So if a husband chooses his wife to have an abortion there is no punishment. How could this possibly be written in the bible if abortion were wrong?

Instead, since abortion is a safe and effective means of birth control, couldn't it be part of a responsible program of christian family planning?

BTW, your continued tendancy to talk in stilted terms ("debauchery") is a sign that the real problem lies within your personal sexuality. The two issues you get most angry about, abortion and homosexuality, are both sexual issues. In each case we can see your resistance to what you seem to percieve as a sexual freedom of others than you cannot share. I suggest that you could be happier if you reexamine you views on these issues.

DanZ