Comments on: Ron Paul to End Active Campaigning http://freedomthirst.com/2008/03/09/ron-paul-to-end-active-campaigning/ A Quest for True Freedom Thu, 09 Feb 2012 06:53:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: ThirstyJon http://freedomthirst.com/2008/03/09/ron-paul-to-end-active-campaigning/comment-page-1/#comment-2766 ThirstyJon Fri, 14 Mar 2008 09:06:26 +0000 http://freedomthirst.com/2008/03/09/ron-paul-to-end-active-campaigning/#comment-2766 Casper and Lyne, God Himself led a people out of slavery and formed a nation in ancient Israel. We have no other case in history where he has done this in such an authoritative manner. We would not be wise to discount the reasonings of the only civil government ever founded directly by Supernatural Intervention from God Himself. I do not propose such a shallow reading of the scriptures that would result in outlawing clothing made of multiple materials. However, we as humans are free to each read the Bible for ourselves and then come together to form our forms of Civil Government. Including the revolutionary Freedom Ideas from God Himself in His Law would be a good idea. Unfortunately, not everyone accepts the Story of History as told by God in the Holy Scriptures. It would be best for those of us who do accept them to seek understanding of the reasonings behind God's Laws, then apply those reasonings to our quest to form good law, and then present them to the world. We can also work to persuade the world of the benefits that have resulted from Christian Civilization. Most importantly of all we can work to invite and persuade the world to embrace Jesus and be filled with the Holy Spirit. A bunch of people filled with God can still disagree, but at least we would be pursuing the same goal - the Character of the Kingdom of God manifest right here on earth while we await Jesus' imminent return. ThirstyJon P.S. I reposted this comment at: <a href="http://freedomthirst.com/2008/03/14/the-bible-and-government/" title="Click Here to read the article at the new post" alt="Click Here to read the article at the new post" rel="nofollow">http://freedomthirst.com/2008/03/14/the-bible-and-government/</a> Casper and Lyne,

God Himself led a people out of slavery and formed a nation in ancient Israel. We have no other case in history where he has done this in such an authoritative manner. We would not be wise to discount the reasonings of the only civil government ever founded directly by Supernatural Intervention from God Himself.

I do not propose such a shallow reading of the scriptures that would result in outlawing clothing made of multiple materials. However, we as humans are free to each read the Bible for ourselves and then come together to form our forms of Civil Government. Including the revolutionary Freedom Ideas from God Himself in His Law would be a good idea.

Unfortunately, not everyone accepts the Story of History as told by God in the Holy Scriptures. It would be best for those of us who do accept them to seek understanding of the reasonings behind God’s Laws, then apply those reasonings to our quest to form good law, and then present them to the world.

We can also work to persuade the world of the benefits that have resulted from Christian Civilization.

Most importantly of all we can work to invite and persuade the world to embrace Jesus and be filled with the Holy Spirit. A bunch of people filled with God can still disagree, but at least we would be pursuing the same goal – the Character of the Kingdom of God manifest right here on earth while we await Jesus’ imminent return.

ThirstyJon

P.S. I reposted this comment at: http://freedomthirst.com/2008/03/14/the-bible-and-government/

]]> By: Casper http://freedomthirst.com/2008/03/09/ron-paul-to-end-active-campaigning/comment-page-1/#comment-2760 Casper Thu, 13 Mar 2008 21:05:29 +0000 http://freedomthirst.com/2008/03/09/ron-paul-to-end-active-campaigning/#comment-2760 So what you're saying is - if 2 men are married in court by a justice of the peace, and enjoy all the legal benefits of legal marriage same as any other couple, they are discriminating against you. Is that correct? How? They would counter that by refusing to allow the legal benefits of marriage to certain couples on the basis of gender (and there are several legal benefits) you are discriminating against them. Do we really wish to make our civil laws based on the Bible? If so, you should check your pants. If your pants legs are blue denim and the pockets are white cotton, we’ll just have to stone you. Says so right in the book of Leviticus,,, Think hard - be careful what you wish for. There's lots of stuff in that book... I'm a Liberal - and I have no desire to discriminate against you or anyone else, so please explain your idea of "Discrimination" to me. So what you’re saying is – if 2 men are married in court by a justice of the peace, and enjoy all the legal benefits of legal marriage same as any other couple, they are discriminating against you. Is that correct? How?

They would counter that by refusing to allow the legal benefits of marriage to certain couples on the basis of gender (and there are several legal benefits) you are discriminating against them.

Do we really wish to make our civil laws based on the Bible? If so, you should check your pants. If your pants legs are blue denim and the pockets are white cotton, we’ll just have to stone you. Says so right in the book of Leviticus,,,

Think hard – be careful what you wish for. There’s lots of stuff in that book…

I’m a Liberal – and I have no desire to discriminate against you or anyone else, so please explain your idea of “Discrimination” to me.

]]> By: Lyne G. http://freedomthirst.com/2008/03/09/ron-paul-to-end-active-campaigning/comment-page-1/#comment-2744 Lyne G. Wed, 12 Mar 2008 01:01:11 +0000 http://freedomthirst.com/2008/03/09/ron-paul-to-end-active-campaigning/#comment-2744 I do understand your point of view. It does concern me however that gay couples would believe themselves to be married when they parade it in front of an audience (like for instance a public display on TV). Also, by supporting constitutional amendments in that matter, we open the door to more discrimination on the part of the more liberals towards anyone who differs in opinion. Amendments would only increase the "insanity" on the part of some judges who will no doubt take advantage of their high position. Like I said before, change is good but not when it compromises biblical truths. I do understand your point of view. It does concern me however that gay couples would believe themselves to be married when they parade it in front of an audience (like for instance a public display on TV). Also, by supporting constitutional amendments in that matter, we open the door to more discrimination on the part of the more liberals towards anyone who differs in opinion. Amendments would only increase the “insanity” on the part of some judges who will no doubt take advantage of their high position.
Like I said before, change is good but not when it compromises biblical truths.

]]> By: ThirstyJon http://freedomthirst.com/2008/03/09/ron-paul-to-end-active-campaigning/comment-page-1/#comment-2727 ThirstyJon Tue, 11 Mar 2008 06:53:01 +0000 http://freedomthirst.com/2008/03/09/ron-paul-to-end-active-campaigning/#comment-2727 Hello Lyne! I suppose a better way of saying what I mean by "I'm not very concerned" is actually "I am not <em>primarily</em> concerned" with people thinking they are "married" when they are not. (The truth is, if the Supreme Court, the United Nations, and 100% of the world's population said that members of the same sex could marry one another they still would not be married before God). I am <em>not</em> saying that I approve of "gay marriage." My point is that I am far more concerned about being forced to recognize a "gay" marriage then I am with a "gay" couple believing themselves to be married. I don't know if that makes sense or not. I support a marriage amendment to the U.S. Constitution. However, I think that is second best. (More laws are usually "second best") It would have been better for individual States and Communities to behave as free people before God and implement such things by themselves. The only reason we need an Amendment is to stop the insanity of activist judges. :-) ThirtyJon Hello Lyne!

I suppose a better way of saying what I mean by “I’m not very concerned” is actually “I am not primarily concerned” with people thinking they are “married” when they are not. (The truth is, if the Supreme Court, the United Nations, and 100% of the world’s population said that members of the same sex could marry one another they still would not be married before God). I am not saying that I approve of “gay marriage.”

My point is that I am far more concerned about being forced to recognize a “gay” marriage then I am with a “gay” couple believing themselves to be married.

I don’t know if that makes sense or not.

I support a marriage amendment to the U.S. Constitution. However, I think that is second best. (More laws are usually “second best”) It would have been better for individual States and Communities to behave as free people before God and implement such things by themselves. The only reason we need an Amendment is to stop the insanity of activist judges. :-)

ThirtyJon

]]> By: Lyne G. http://freedomthirst.com/2008/03/09/ron-paul-to-end-active-campaigning/comment-page-1/#comment-2723 Lyne G. Tue, 11 Mar 2008 02:35:59 +0000 http://freedomthirst.com/2008/03/09/ron-paul-to-end-active-campaigning/#comment-2723 one more thing...I don't believe either that our forefathers meant by "change with times" that we'd have to compromise our values for the sake of a few... one more thing…I don’t believe either that our forefathers meant by “change with times” that we’d have to compromise our values for the sake of a few…

]]> By: Lyne G. http://freedomthirst.com/2008/03/09/ron-paul-to-end-active-campaigning/comment-page-1/#comment-2722 Lyne G. Tue, 11 Mar 2008 02:33:59 +0000 http://freedomthirst.com/2008/03/09/ron-paul-to-end-active-campaigning/#comment-2722 Welcome back!!! When you say: "I am not very concerned if they want to think that it is!" (i.e. that their mariage is valid), doesn't it bother you that gays and lesbians/abortion lobbyists are trying to impose their agenda on the majority of North-Americans who refuse to get down to that level of political correctness and accept that kind of behavior as a normal fact of life. By accepting it so, we are compromising as Christians on what the Bible says about that kind of behavior. Contrary to Sen. Obama, as he spoke to students at Hocking College last week, I do not for one bit think the Sermon on the Mount was meant as an endorsement for those particular lifestyles. We would not want another Sodom and Gomorrha, would we??? Welcome back!!!
When you say: “I am not very concerned if they want to think that it is!” (i.e. that their mariage is valid), doesn’t it bother you that gays and lesbians/abortion lobbyists are trying to impose their agenda on the majority of North-Americans who refuse to get down to that level of political correctness and accept that kind of behavior as a normal fact of life. By accepting it so, we are compromising as Christians on what the Bible says about that kind of behavior.
Contrary to Sen. Obama, as he spoke to students at Hocking College last week, I do not for one bit think the Sermon on the Mount was meant as an endorsement for those particular lifestyles. We would not want another Sodom and Gomorrha, would we???

]]> By: ThirstyJon http://freedomthirst.com/2008/03/09/ron-paul-to-end-active-campaigning/comment-page-1/#comment-2716 ThirstyJon Mon, 10 Mar 2008 20:54:22 +0000 http://freedomthirst.com/2008/03/09/ron-paul-to-end-active-campaigning/#comment-2716 Casper, I have just read a couple of the articles a the link you suggested. Fascinating stuff! It will take me a while to catch up, but the articles I happened to scan only confirmed to me that I have some things in common with Ron Paul. A friend asked me years ago why I was concerned with homosexuals getting married. I put a lot of thought into that question and began to realize that I am <em>not</em> actually concerned with that very much. I <em>am</em> concerned with people who <em>object</em> being forced to recognize such marriages! As far as I am concerned, someone can have a ceremony saying they are married to a door nob and then going around saying that they are. I don't believe that their marriage is valid, but I am not very concerned if they want to think that it is! However, if they want me as their employer to fix their sick door nob when it is broken... I would prefer that abortion and homosexual marriage and pornography and the like be handled by the States and local communities. The only reason I would support national laws or Constitutional Amendments about such things is because the Courts are sometimes "off the wall" and cannot be relied upon to make sensible decisions. There is no way around the fact that some believe the Constitution to be a "living document" that changes with the times. Of course the Founders of our Nation believed it should change with the times as well, and so set up an Amendment Process so that the people could make those changes! Ok. I am rambling in a comment. We'll see if I approve my own comment, it is too long. I need to get that forum going. :-) ThirstyJon Casper, I have just read a couple of the articles a the link you suggested. Fascinating stuff!

It will take me a while to catch up, but the articles I happened to scan only confirmed to me that I have some things in common with Ron Paul.

A friend asked me years ago why I was concerned with homosexuals getting married. I put a lot of thought into that question and began to realize that I am not actually concerned with that very much. I am concerned with people who object being forced to recognize such marriages!

As far as I am concerned, someone can have a ceremony saying they are married to a door nob and then going around saying that they are. I don’t believe that their marriage is valid, but I am not very concerned if they want to think that it is!

However, if they want me as their employer to fix their sick door nob when it is broken…

I would prefer that abortion and homosexual marriage and pornography and the like be handled by the States and local communities. The only reason I would support national laws or Constitutional Amendments about such things is because the Courts are sometimes “off the wall” and cannot be relied upon to make sensible decisions. There is no way around the fact that some believe the Constitution to be a “living document” that changes with the times. Of course the Founders of our Nation believed it should change with the times as well, and so set up an Amendment Process so that the people could make those changes!

Ok. I am rambling in a comment. We’ll see if I approve my own comment, it is too long. I need to get that forum going.

:-)

ThirstyJon

]]> By: Casper http://freedomthirst.com/2008/03/09/ron-paul-to-end-active-campaigning/comment-page-1/#comment-2713 Casper Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:58:08 +0000 http://freedomthirst.com/2008/03/09/ron-paul-to-end-active-campaigning/#comment-2713 Ron Paul has been publishing columns online for years on LewRockwell.com . He’s a fairly radical Libertarian. He believes that government should be just almost nonexistent. He also believes that government should not be in the business of regulating behavior short of preventing harm to one another. So if the “Church of Freddie Mercury” were to start marrying men to each other, he could care less. Doesn’t figure it’s any of the gov’s business. Read him here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul-arch.html Ron Paul has been publishing columns online for years on LewRockwell.com .

He’s a fairly radical Libertarian. He believes that government should be just almost nonexistent. He also believes that government should not be in the business of regulating behavior short of preventing harm to one another. So if the “Church of Freddie Mercury” were to start marrying men to each other, he could care less. Doesn’t figure it’s any of the gov’s business.

Read him here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul-arch.html

]]>