Friday, September 17, 2010

Politics Of Evil

Oh, my head is about to explode. My friend sent me a few articles that demonstrate the problem of "Christians" in the political arena.
First is feminist Schafly: "Jesus isn't on the ballot"

So...what then? Vote for the evil? This is the same type of argumentation people use when they don't want to be held accountable for doctrine and behavior: "no one's perfect". Really? Jesus isn't on the ballot? I can't vote for Him? No one's perfect? Shoot! I'm devisated.

Pragmatism why we're in such a mess, especially in CA. Professing Christians voted for Schwarzeneggar TWICE (thank you "Christians" and "Conservatives")and he made our state far worse than it was. Socially liberal, he wasn't even a fiscal conservative (I know that will likely be the case with Meg Whitman, the RINO). Such an animal doesn't exist. Who ever thought Jesus is or SHOULD be on the ballot? Only those who reject His lordship put Him on the ballot of their heart, voting Him in and out at will, depending on the issue.

In another article about Schafly:

"Preaching to the CPAC choir in her allotted seven minutes on the "Saving Freedom from the Enemies of our Values" panel, Schlafly warned about the futility of a Tea Party third party. Too expensive, too inefficient, and, in the end, pointless because every single one of those 435 House members and 100 Senators will end up aligning with the Republicans or Democrats. Although she's thrilled that the GOP now has "the most conservative platform ever," she insists she doesn't want to "expel" anyone from its not-so-big tent."

CPAC is not conservative, its LIBERAL. It was sponsored this year by GOPROUD, the sodomite GOP group that claims to be "conservative". How sodomy can be akin to conservative is beyond my comprehension...unless one starts to REDEFINE terms.

This is what I mean. GOP = RINOS. She's one of them. Maybe she slipped a cog when she turned 55-60 (a theory of my friend that continues to be proven true --we see it in Evangelicalism too--the older people get, the more liberal they become...with a tiny few exceptions). The Tea Party is the revolt of the liberal GOP, but she doesn't get that. Politics as usual. Who said there has to be ONLY RINOS and DEMS? Where is that written? Funny how its the leadership of the GOP that cries about it---because they've had a liberal chokehold on the GOP for years. They see a political loss and can't handle the threat. They recoil at the demand of accountability, which is the Tea Parties (not an actual party...the very movement is not a singular party) are demanding.Its people like her that made me see that there was no one in the GOP standing for the principles it used to hold to and which I still do.

She goes on: "Although she's thrilled that the GOP now has "the most conservative platform ever," she insists she doesn't want to "expel" anyone from its not-so-big tent."

Ok, she's lost her senses. This is the MOST LIBERAL this party has been! CPAC is exhibit #1. Ann Coulter is exhibit #2. McCain is exhibit #3. Schwarzeneggaar is exhibit #4. #5 is Mitt Romney. (None of these is in order except #1). See what I mean? I could go on. If she means just the platform, then why did the liberals sponsor the CPAC? And let's say the platform is "conservative". Ok, well, is anyone in the GOP living up to said platform? NOPE.


Schafly's feminist mindset in guise of "tradition" is revealed in this interview:

"So, I asked Mrs. Schlafly -- you don't really think she's ever called Ms. Schlafly? -- when might this country elect a woman president?"I don't see it happening because I don't see one coming up the line in either party," she said. Democrat Hillary Clinton lost to Barack Obama because "people don't want to elect a feminist because they are not likeable. You have to be likeable to be elected." She paused a moment before musing that "the best route is probably being a governer," never mind that at this moment, "the pickings among [women] governors are very slim."

Elsewhere she indicates that time is what makes one not a feminist:

Quote:

To Schlafly, this is a simple question of practicality. "You can't have it all at the same time. There are not that many hours in the day," she asserts. "Now, with our lengthened lifespan, a woman can have it all; I think I've had it all," she says, "but you don't have it at the same time. A baby is extremely demanding -- even more demanding than a husband."

"A lot of the newspapers ... have published articles about how some of the most highly educated women -- women who graduated from the elite colleges and then got graduate degrees like MBAs or JDs -- have put their career ahead of husband and family," Schlafly notes. "In many of these cases, in the woman's scale of values, the husband is ranking third," she says.
The real issue is not women having careers, Schlafly says, but women making their careers their highest priority, above family. When that type of situation takes place, she observes, it is not likely that a husband will stick around.

End quote.

Time doesn't make one not a feminist. Its in the mindset. God says women are not to rule over men (Gen. 3, and below). Just having some years inbetween doesn't relieve one of the view that women CAN have it all (do men EVERY say that?) nor is it accurate. Because for a Christian, we're to be about our Father's business, not being poster girls for Loreal. A 60 year old woman working full time is cutting short her ministry to her own husband, kids, grandkids and church. Please, do not tell me women can have it all....someone will always suffer. Besides, that view of time just means that her desire to have something more fulfilling than mere family, etc., reveals it is seeded in her desire, as it was in Eve's.

And here's the more appalling article:

Quote:

Scarborough, himself a former Southern Baptist minister, told the audience his story of recognizing the need for pastors to snap out of political complacency and get involved in the cultural war for the soul of the nation.

Shortly thereafter, Scarborough explained at "Taking America Back," he began to free his congregation from excessive church responsibilities to take up civic duties. Members of his church were elected to the school board and city council and began to reassert Christian values in the public arena.

"We just got the people in the churches to stand up and do what they ought to be doing," Scarborough said.

End quote.

Is that why those of us who don't vote for any evil are bullied by those folks?

Here's another issue: its these very people who have doctrinal problems with the Lordship of Christ. Had "Christians" never sat there and questioned Scripture, but believed it and obeyed it, we wouldn't be in such a pathetic mess!

Morever, its too late. This country is under God's judgment and we're seeing it starting in the churches and work its way outward.

WOW. Deny the command to be ministrying in the church, but get tangled up in the affairs of the world. Switch a committment (whatever was left) from the church to the political scene??? Its because people see church as optional and doctrine as optional that people put their hope in politics!

Jeremiah 17:5, “Thus says the Lord, ‘Cursed is the man who trusts in mankind and makes flesh his strength and whose heart turns away from the Lord.’”

Isa 3:12 My people--infants are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, your guides mislead you and they have swallowed up the course of your paths.

Psa 20:7 Some trust in chariots and some in horses, but we trust in the name of the LORD our God.

Isa 31:1 Woe to those who go down to Egypt for help and rely on horses, who trust in chariots because they are many and in horsemen because they are very strong, but do not look to the Holy One of Israel or consult the LORD! 2 And yet he is wise and brings disaster; he does not call back his words, but will arise against the house of the evildoers and against the helpers of those who work iniquity.

“You know what party politics are. We are all trying to [usher] in another set of maggots to eat the cheese; that is about all it amounts to; first turn out one lot, and then turn in another. It comes to little more than that. Even in the pursuit of really good matters of policy, do you know any Christian man who goes into politics who is the better for it? If I find such a man, I will have him stuffed if I can, for I have never seen such a specimen yet. I will not say, do not attend to politics; but I do say, do not let them spot you.”
- Charles Spurgeon

No comments: