Sunday, November 02, 2008

Why economy seems more important than abortion.

I TOOK THIS PHOTO ON THE WAY TO CHURCH ON FRIDAY..... WHEN THE FALL COMES AND THE LEAVES FALL, YOU ARE ABLE TO SEE THE TRUTH BEHIND THE TREES....


I quoted a passage from one of David Wells' books:


  • "It is one of the defining marks of Our Time that God is now weightless. I do not mean by this that he is ethereal but rather that he has become unimportant. He rests upon the world so inconsequentially as not to be noticeable. He has lost his saliency for human life. Those who assure the pollsters of their belief in God's existence may nonetheless consider him less interesting than television, his commands less authoritative than their appetites for affluence and influence, his judgment no more awe-inspiring than the evening news, and his truth less compelling than the advertisers' sweet fog of flattery and lies. That is weightlessness. It is a condition we have assigned him after having nudged him out to the periphery of our secularized life....Weightlessness tells us nothing about God but everything about ourselves, about our condition, about our psychological disposition to exclude God from our reality."

(God In The Wasteland [Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1995], pp. 88, 90)


"'Let the record show that John McCain and Barack Obama are polar opposites on partial-birth abortion, parental notification of abortion, marriage protection on the ballot, homosexual indoctrination of schoolchildren, gay adoptions, gun-owner rights, activist judges, and raising taxes,' said Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families. 'No one should base their vote on personality or mere feelings. Our carefully-researched report card shows you exactly where Obama and McCain stand on issues of importance to voters, their families, and our nation's future.'" (Campaign For Children And Families)


One of the reasons why issues like abortion, homosexuality, marriage, and judges are so weightless to so many voters is the weightlessness of God in their lives. The same party that tells us "It's the economy, stupid!" objects that its opponents are too concerned with money, that they're selfish, greedy, and too concerned about the upper class. There is a party in America that's more greedy than the other, but it isn't the Republicans.

"Michelle Obama, wife of Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama, told the Democratic National Committee’s Gay and Lesbian Caucus that her husband wants to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and reverse the rule on homosexuals in the military. In her speech, she also compared homosexual advocacy groups with the civil rights movement, referring to events 'from Selma to Stonewall' as a progression of justice. Cybercast News Service reports that Michelle Obama began her speech by praising the 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision Lawrence v. Texas, which struck down anti-sodomy laws. Because of the decision, she said, 'same-sex couples would never again be persecuted through the use of criminal law.'...Michelle Obama said her husband supports 'a world where federal laws don't discriminate against same-sex relationships' and he advocates equal treatment for 'any relationship recognized under state law.' 'That is why he has said the federal government should not stand in the way of states that want to decide for themselves how best to pursue equality for gay and lesbian couples -- whether that means a domestic partnership, a civil union or a civil marriage,' Obama said to the DNC’s Gay and Lesbian Caucus. A position paper on the Barack Obama campaign’s website says the candidate wants to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman and also states that a homosexual marriage in one state does not have to be recognized in another state. The repeal of the federal law could mean that the more than 40 states that have statutory or constitutional bans on same-sex marriage would be required to recognize a homosexual marriage license from another state as a legally binding contract.
The Obama campaign’s position paper also states Obama’s desire to enact legislation that would ensure the '1,100-plus federal legal rights and benefits currently provided on the basis of marital status are extended to same-sex couples in civil unions and other legally recognized union.' Lynn Wardle, a law professor at Brigham Young University, told Cybercast News Service it is likely this statement references the federal definition provision that, if so modified, would extend Social Security and other government benefits to same-sex couples. This, Wardle said, could effectively nationalize same-sex marriages....Sen. Obama’s opponent, presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain, voted for the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996. He joined Obama in opposing a federal constitutional amendment to define marriage as between a man and a woman, saying he believed states should decide on the matter. McCain supported a 2006 state constitutional amendment defining marriage as a heterosexual institution in his home state
of Arizona, but the amendment failed in the November election." (Catholic News Agency)

Featured Post

Did Jesus Die For All Men

Did Christ Die for all Men or Only His elect?   The following is a written response to a brother with the following question about l...