Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
Now the only question is, where does the Holy Spirit stand?


In that corner over there, laughing its ass off, at you and your reported collection of idiots. Had you and these wise fools any aquaintance with the Bible, you would all of you realize that jesus (independent of any affection on his part for the poor and needy lambs of his perpetually whining flock) is neither Democrat or Republican but a Monarchist sent to rule over the nations with a rod of iron for the final thousand years before the Last Judgment.

How would jesus vote? He wouldn't, but he might very well give you an eternal ass kicking for having the temerity to suggest that he should.

~~DivasRule~~
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
Sodom and Gommorah weren't smitten (smoten? smit? smat?) for homosexuality, they were destroyed for "pride, excess of food, while the poor and needy suffered outside her door" (Ezekial 16:49). The implication that they were destroyed for homosexual is taken from a GROSSLY out of context interpretation of the attempted gang rape of the angels who visited Lot (first, it was gang rape; even if it had been straight, it was still horribly perverse; secondly, it was lack of hospitality; strangers come to your city and you want to go at them?).

Otherwise, not a bad article. Personally, though, my belief is that Christ wouldn't have gotten caught up in the political brouhaha (as evidenced by the fact He really steered his accusers around that topic whenever they tried to trap Him on the political side).
Sins of a Solar Empire II
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
The priests in the article I linked to eventually came to that conclusion, Gideon. And also thanks for the info on Sodom and Gammorah. Also, I think we can agree that Pearlcaster can lighten up a bit ;)
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
Personally I think you're off base.

Somehow there is an assumption, actually a rash generalization, that Democrats are for helping the needy, etc. and republicans are not. The truth is, almost everyone, regardless of political affiliation, is for helping the needy. The difference is that democrats believe it's the government's job to do it and republicans believe it should not fall to the government but rather to people.

The question should be "Would Jesus elect to have the government help the needy or would he do it himself?"


I think we already know the answer to that one.