n/t

Ronald Reagan may not have been able to pass any legislation regarding the life issue, but his presidency had a profound impact on the movement. For decades, we have been working to get the word out, get the information to the people. It is working, more and more people are seeing abortion for the evil it is. More and more people are understanding the enormous harm it has done to the soul of this nation and her people.

Sarah is exactly what we need right now for this time and for the future. Her influence on young women, the majority of abortion seekers, will curb abortion more than any legislation.

I thank God for Sarah. She is exactly what the Founding Fathers wanted for Washington. A citizen politician who isn’t looking to make a career out of politics. One who understands the real problems of this country and wants to work to resolve them, not spend a lifetime in Congress, creating more problems and then promising to fix them if only we would reelect him.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

there is a specific order for a reason… otherwise there would be no need to called it, grammatically, a series.

Regarding the derivation of rights from a Creator… who do you suppose that Creator is?

She’s not talking about Sharia law or Mosaic law. She’s talking about the unalienable right to life here.

maybe it’s time american stop being confused about the simple things our country afford.

being pro-choice is not a right and it isn’t a liberty because it inherently attacks the preceding unalienable right to life.

think, please, for the love of us all.

that people will make choices about a candidate based upon a single issue-in this case abortion. While it is true that there are some people who are “single issue” candidates, there are many more who are able to think about more than one thing while choosing a candidate.

do you think McCain/Palin has a chance to turn PA from blue to red?

“Palin is loved by the base on the right, despised by the base on the left and not very appealing to those in the middle.

Her approach is very different than Reagan.”

You’ve made a couple of points that I find puzzling. You say that Palin is appealing to only part of the Republican base, then you say she’s good for the base but too polarizing for the general electorate, and then that Reagan was a beloved figure.

No politician is completely adored by all wings of his/her party. Sen. McCain is a good example of that. Gov. Palin wouldn’t have been my choice for the VP spot because I prefer a candidate with a longer term as governor or more experience at the national level. However, she’s grown on me. She’s smart, a natural campaigner, and even the accent/shrill voice is starting to bug me less. With more time to see her in action some of that polarization may fade. Keep in mind the media rollout was done poorly and she was subjected to an unprecedented avalanche of hostile coverage.

Reagan was adored by many by the end of his presidency and by still more in hindsight, but he was loathed by many at the start of his term. The press portrayed him as an idiot ex-actor and reckless cowboy. The left fanned the flames that he’d get us into a war right away. Europeans called him all kind of names of which “warmonger” was the kindest – remember the British Labor Party was pushing unilateral disarmament to make nice with the Soviets at that time so deploying missiles to NATO countries was unpopular.

People needed time to see Reagan in action and realize he was a great man before they could appreciate what the conservative members of the base knew a long time earlier. Palin might experience a similar course of earning respect if she gets the chance. Reagan got the chance because Carter was an unmitigated disaster and people decided he had to be fired as long as the other choice was remotely acceptable. Hopefully, the electorate will conclude that Sen. Obama just isn’t a good choice this time around. Otherwise, we’ll have time to see how Gov. Palin develops as a potential candidate for national office.

Of Obama

& no Big elections Senate Governor

George Washington alone was up at 4:00 a.m. reading the bible…their fear
was repeating the errors of where they
came from.

Their guidline was the Bible and God’s
teachings. That is repeated many, many
times in historical documents.

Their structure was to save the people
from government dicatating what religion they would follow. Not that
Government would be isolated from God or
his influence.

Pa! No time now to give up the ship. We must stay engaged and enraged, no matter what all the talking heads say, and turn out, turn out, turn out!

What in the Hell is a liberal republican? Sounds like an oxymoron to me. There is a place for liberals…a place they seem to thrive…it is the Democrat party. What am I missing here?

“Claiming that we should write or enforce laws based on Christian theology is unAmerican.”

Or maybe not, depending on your meaning of “theology.”

Any truly religious person has to admit that some of his decision process is shaped by his religious beliefs, at least Christians must, but Christianity is so inherently tied up in the concepts of Right and Wrong as well as philosophical ideas of our relationship to God that to say otherwise would reveal a non-Christian trying to pass.

Yet most would reject the idea that any law should be enacted because “the Good Book demands it” or “because God tells me to,” but they would not object to a law that grows out of the belief that it’s the right thing to do–protect the weak and defenseless being an example. After all, there is nothing LOGICAL about a desire to protect the weak, in fact it’s quite illogical at a personal level. Only when one looks beyond the personal to the effect on the whole society does one appreciate how selflessness can be good in practical ways.

I’m no Biblical expert by any stretch of the imagination but my opinion is that most of the ethical/moral concepts taught in the Bible would stand the logical test of being effective promoters of the general welfare. Thus, a proscription against killing one another is generally a good thing, whether a Commandment tells us so or not.

But there are many of us who might say that we learned the difference between good and bad from both our parents and in Sunday school, and the learning process included both rote memorization at first followed by inductive and deductive reasoning as we matured. I would argue that this is ethical and moral training, not theology.

So, if your statement is aimed at laws that restrict the behavior of the public because the day is Sunday (or Saturday, or Friday) and therefore “holy,” I agree with you 100% (I think). But if you mean that we can’t restrict other activities because they are included in some list of sins found in the Bible, I say that it depends on the sin and not upon the fact that the Bible has already identified it.

I just went back and read some more of your comments further downstream. Of what I read, I find myself pretty much in agreement with you.

I also went back and listened to Sarah’s video above. She does sound like a new-age preacher when she talks, and that is probably off-putting to some people. But Bill Clinton sounded like a tent-meeting revivalist preacher if you listened to his sound and not his words. There’s nothing wrong with that; it’s just a sound.

At this point, I see no problem at all with her or her religious beliefs. She said, “There are the world’s standards of perfection… and then there are God’s, and these are the final measure.” To me, that conveyed the idea that while Trig might not be considered “perfect” by some human evaluation, she thinks that God might have a different standard. As long as she doesn’t claim to “know what God’s standard is” I see no problem with her belief at all. In fact, it reveals a mind open to the idea that it (she) can be wrong in her own opinions, and that contemplation (prayer to some) is appropriate before acting.

I’ve never heard Sarah claim that our laws should be based on “God’s law.” Stated that way, I would take issue with her (but I’d think she was probably using shorthand speech for her concepts of Right and Wrong, not literally taking the words of the Bible an putting them into law). I think you are making the same distinction.

is a long time in politics. I think her problems with independents comes from the media portraying her has not knowing enough to be president. But in four years, she’ll have had enough time to gain more knowledge and articulate her stances with more precision.

At the end of the day, she is unapologetic about her conservative values, and is a natural on the stump. She could potentially be a great nominee in four years. It’s too early to tell.