ECHURCH-USA Archives

The Electronic Church

ECHURCH-USA@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Kathy Du Bois <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
The Electronic Church <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 5 Jan 2008 15:47:48 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (178 lines)
I just am not impressed with that man.  He's a bit deceptive as well 
and his stand on the military is awful!  Kathy


At 03:35 PM 1/5/2008, you wrote:
>John,
>
>Ron Paul sounds good but he is quite ambiguous about a constitutional
>federal amendment to ban abortions.  He believes Row verse Wade is wrong, he
>says, but he also says he does not believe in a federal constitutional
>amendment to ban them.  So what's up with that backwards logic?  If they
>think we need a national federal marriage amendment, protection of the
>unborn should be just as necessary in today's world.  It makes me mad Fox
>news won't let Ron Paul in on the republican up and coming debates they are
>sponsoring, too.  Makes no sense even if such debates with so many
>candidates is ridiculous.
>
>Phil.
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "John Schwery" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2008 12:46 PM
>Subject: Re: Who Are Evangelicals?
>
>
> > I think Ron Paul looks good.
> >
> > earlier, Phil Scovell, wrote:
> >
> > >Kathy,
> > >
> > >He was complimentary, Rush was that is, concerning the voters but it just
> > >sounded to me that he was trying to say Christian voters were not as true
>of
> > >conservatives but voted more based upon their religious beliefs.  I watch
> > >Bill O'o'Riley often and he seems to imply the same.  It makes me believe
> > >these guys because Christians, when compared to other conservatives,
>can't
> > >see the forest for the trees.  Frankly, I'm partly libertarian in some of
>my
> > >political beliefs, believe it or not, so I bristle any time I think
>someone
> > >is saying I support someone just because I'm a Christian and he's a
> > >Christian, too.  For example, as much as Mormon theology freaks me out,
>if
> > >Romney turned out to be the repub nominee, if he truly is pro life now,
> > >although he wasn't before, that is one big time issue that would allow me
>to
> > >vote for him, although I would have other criteria in the mix before I
>made
> > >up my mind.  On the other hand, I'll never vote for Juliani, or however
>he
> > >spells his name, because he believes in letting people decide to kill
>their
> > >unborn children and although he carries a gun himself, he doesn't believe
> > >common citizens have a right to protect themselves in the same manner.
> > >That's just for starters.  He has a whole boat load of things that makes
>me
> > >wonder why he is even a republican in the first place.  I sort of laughed
> > >last night when they interview Pat Robertson on Fox news.  He said the
>Lord
> > >had indeed told him who was going to be the next president but he refused
>to
> > >say because he hoped he was wrong.  I have learned, concerning Rush, to
>read
> > >between the lines, to some degree, because he isn't exactly what he
>appears
> > >to be.  I find the same to be true with O'Riley.  Frankly, I wish all the
> > >primaries were over and we could see who is left standing so we could
>find
> > >out what the candidates really believe.  Is that possible?  Bush dropped
>the
> > >ball somewhere along the line in some respects but I'd still rather have
>him
> > >the than any of the current Dems.  I'd probably vote for Lieberman, on
>the
> > >other hand, if he were running but I don't know what his abortion
>position
> > >is but since he isn't running, I don't care what it is.  I don't care
>what
> > >party a person is, I will not vote for anyone who believes in killing the
> > >unborn.  Call me a one issue conservative if you like but 50 million
>murders
> > >cannot be morally justifiable for a country, Christian or not.  I'm a one
> > >issue Christian when it comes to salvation, so I guess I can be a one
>issue
> > >voter, too, if I have to be.
> > >
> > >Phil.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "Kathy Du Bois" <[log in to unmask]>
> > >To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > >Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2008 4:49 AM
> > >Subject: Re: Who Are Evangelicals?
> > >
> > >
> > > > Interesting Phil,
> > > > I happened to catch a lot of Rush on Friday as well, but I think I
> > > > came away with a different take.  Oh well.
> > > > Kathy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > At 05:28 PM 1/4/2008, you wrote:
> > > > >I think I figured it out by listening to Rush today.  Of course, Rush
>is
> > >mad
> > > > >at Huckabee in the first place but he is definitely hacked off he won
> > >Iowa.
> > > > >A definite political drop in the bucket, even if I was born there,
>but a
> > >win
> > > > >nonetheless.  Other than that, I have spent quite awhile today
>listening
> > >to
> > > > >Rush insist that Huckabee won only due to those who are not true
> > > > >conservative voters, that is, the evangelical Christians that pulled
> > > > >Huckabee through.  At first, this odd political analysis made me feel
> > >funny
> > > > >coming from someone that has been, quote, the conservative leader of
>the
> > > > >world for decades, unquote, but then I remembered how mad I was when
>Rush
> > > > >pushed NAFTA so much years ago.  Look what we now have for that?
>Jobs
> > >out
> > > > >sourced to all points of the globe, including our Enemies, and we now
> > >also
> > > > >are spending our tax dollars to support non American citizens in
>school,
> > > > >their health care, unpaid health care, driver's licenses, jobs, which
> > > > >Americans won't do we are told, and free refrigerators, washers,
>driers,
> > > > >subsidized housing, and at the same time, they don't even need to
>speak
> > > > >English or read it and some even want them to vote.  Even so come
>Lord
> > > > >Jesus.
> > > > >
> > > > >Phil.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >--
> > >No virus found in this incoming message.
> > >Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > >Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.13/1210 - Release Date:
> > >1/5/2008 11:46 AM
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >--
> > >No virus found in this incoming message.
> > >Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > >Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.13/1210 - Release Date:
> > >1/5/2008 11:46 AM
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this outgoing message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.13/1210 - Release Date: 1/5/2008
>11:46 AM
> >
> >

ATOM RSS1 RSS2