John Kerry's Voting Record
9/6/04
In an effort to build an informed electorate, we have collected some statistics on John Kerry's voting record in the Senate. The data cover the period from Jan. 16, 2003, to July 22, 2004, with the data obtained from Congressmerge.com, and reflects actual voting data as recorded in the Congressional Record.
| Number of Issues Voted on by Senate (1/16/03-7/22/04): | 621 votes |
| Number of Times John Kerry Voted: | 182 votes |
| Number of Times John Kerry DID NOT VOTE: | 439 votes |
| Percent of Time John Kerry DID NOT VOTE: | OVER 70% |
Link to Partial Record of John Kerry's Voting in the U.S. Senate (1/16/03-7/22/04):
Voting History for John Kerry
Here are some interesting links that deal with John Kerry's voting record. Yes, they are conservative links, but then what would you expect from a Christian website?
Why are we posting this on a Christian website?
9/6/04
We will return to our regular format after the election. Until that time, we feel that it is time to try to wake up the Church to a move in the U.S. that is towards extremely radical liberalism, and away from God.
We believe that this is important to Christians, who have been asleep during the last few elections. John Kerry is rated as the MOST LIBERAL senator in the U.S. Senate, even more liberal than Ted Kennedy. Kerry's record in the senate has been a long history of voting pro-abortion, weak national defense, and against the long standing definition of Marriage and Family.
John Kerry has said that he believes that life begins at conception, and yet sees no problem in killing the unborn. In some cases, the Church is refusing to offer Communion to John Kerry. There is a good reason for that.
One of the world's most famous democrats, former mayor of New York Ed Koch, has stated that he will vote for George Bush, stating that although he disagrees with Bush on a number of issues, the issue of national security outweighs these other issues. Join the millions of democrats across the nation that will vote for George Bush for President, and just say no to the liberal Kerry/Edwards ticket, considered to be the most liberal ticket in the history of America.
We are not attacking John Kerry's patriotism. We are attacking his judgment, and ability to lead a nation in troubled times.
Where are the Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq?
Suppose you were running a drug lab in a house, and you were given a year's notice that the police were coming to inspect the house. A year is a long time to clean things up. By analogy, the only thing we can say about the weapons of mass destruction, is that we did not find them, and that Saddam had a very long time to move them or hide them, and he knew we were coming. We did however find one weapon of mass destruction, and that weapon was Saddam Hussein, who gassed his own people, and tortured and murdered them by the thousands. George Bush did not lie to or deceive the electorate, although Michael Moore certainly did with his movie.
What about the Economy?
9/6/04
We have had a rough time since 9/11. The muslim terrorists attacked not only our buildings, but the heart of our economy. This terrorist attack occurred after the "dot com" economic bubble burst, which was a purely artificial economic event. It is a known fact that the recession began at the end of the Clinton era, and carried over into the Bush administration. This back-to-back combination of terrorist attack on our economy and recession caused some hardship across America. The economic crimes that were committed at Worldcom, Enron, and other corporations were committed during the economic bubble of the Clinton administration, and were prosecuted during the Bush administration. The jobs that were lost as a result of the recession and war are now starting to come back, and America is on a road to recovery. Voting tax and spend liberals back into office will not help the economic recovery, and of course, voting liberals into office that are weak on defense will not help keep America strong.
Should Christians Vote?
9/6/04
Yes, Absolutely! While our primary role as Christians is to save the lost, it is also important to speak out against a world that has gone astray. America has already moved far to the left, to a point where extreme liberalism is no longer viewed as shocking and immoral. John Kerry and his trial lawyer vice presidential candidate John Edwards would move America even further to the extreme left, and further into moral decay.
Millions of Christians did not vote in the last presidential election. Even fewer made informed decisions on Senators, Congressman, and local elections. Many of you are one-issue voters, and either do not vote, or vote for a person with no real chance of winning. Many of you are married, and yet you certainly do not agree with your wife/husband on every issue. Do you really think it is reasonable to withhold a vote from a person that does not agree with you 100 percent??? You should vote for a viable candidate that agrees with you on a majority of issues. This is the most important election of your life. What are you going to do about it?
Who Should We Vote For?
9/19/04
My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge (Hosea 4:6)
It is important that you make an informed vote for President, Senator, and Congressman, in addition to informed votes on local elections. This is not an easy task, but the future of your country depends on YOUR ability to make informed decisions. The gay marriage vote listed above is just one of many issues that impact the Christian community. As a general rule, a liberal vote on gay marriage is a good indicator of liberal extremist views on other issues. Below we have provided a link to a PDF document for the "Christian Coalition 2003 Scorecard". The document is a bit hard to read, and you will need to zoom in to actually read the document. A high "CCA Score" means that the Senator or Congressman agrees with the Christian Coalition on a majority of issues that are of interest to Christians. To turn America around, you will need to support candidates at the level of President, Congress, Senators, and local levels that support YOUR VALUES.
Christian Coalition Scorecard for Senators and Congressmen
What Else Can Be Done?
9/19/04
The single most important thing that can be done is to get Christians to VOTE. The Church is the single largest potential voting block in America. And while that is true, it is also true that MOST CHRISTIANS DO NOT VOTE!!! According to the Pew Research Center, almost half of evangelical Christians did not register to vote in 2000. Of those who did register, less than half actually went to the polls to vote in 2000. That means that approximately 25% of Christians that were eligible to vote actually voted in the last presidential election! This, of course, is one of the main reasons that our government is in moral decay... total apathy. If you are a Christian, then you need to encourage other Christians to REGISTER IN TIME TO VOTE, and then vote for Godly candidates. If you are a pastor, then it is important to speak out on issues of the day. The all too common lukewarm sermon that is preached from the pulpit will not lead to changed lives, and will not lead to a change in the morals of a nation. In most cases, if you are a tax exempt organization, then you cannot endorse a candidate, although you can certainly make it clear from the pulpit that there are certain issues that are important to the Church. The following links are good summaries on the types of activities that are legal for Churches and Pastors in tax exempt organizations:
Legal Dos and Dont's for Pastors and Churches
In most cases, you should try to register to vote offline, since the internet registration may cause problems. There does appear to be an online voter registration form at the link below, although we have not tested it. The online form allows you to fill out a form, and then download the form and hand mail it to an official registration site in your state. This is a bit risky, since it assumes that everything will go perfectly in the mail-in registration process. For this reason, we recommend that you register in person in your voting district. In many cases, the deadline to vote is October 2, 2004, so REGISTER NOW, PREFERABLY IN PERSON IN YOUR DISTRICT, TO ENSURE THAT YOUR REGISTRATION IS PERFORMED CORRECTLY!!!
Register to Vote
In the following link, there is a good collection of issues and summaries of candidates. We encourage you to browse the links, and become an informed voter:
Vote YOUR Values
Just Say No to CBS News
Dan Rather-gate Continues
9/19/04
Dan Rather, a long-time proponent of the extreme liberal left (aka "progressives") is starting to drift back to reality in his trust of the falsified documents attacking President Bush. This makes Dan Rather and CBS news one of the last groups on earth to believe that an apparent Microsoft Word document was genuinely newsworthy (created before MS Word existed). The competition is getting stiff on who can deliver the most biased liberal news, with heavyweight contenders like CBS, the New York Times, the LA Times, CNN, and Chris Matthews (Hardball on MSNBC) battling it out to see who can best deliver slanted news while pretending to have genuine news content. Recent reports are showing that CBS has dropped in the Nielsen TV ratings to dead last in all major markets for TV news. In the largest market, New York, CBS news is even trailing reruns of the "Simpsons", with viewers finding more satisfying comic relief and believability from a TV cartoon than Dan Rather. In a Rather-not report from Dan on 9/15/04, he stated that "If the documents are not what we were led to believe, I'd like to break that story". Way to go Dan, and please keep us informed on more late-breaking news fabricated in the CBS newsroom. Given the resistence by CBS to admit the truth, there are only two questions that remain on the document forgery (along the lines of the first Watergate questions):
- What did Dan Rather and CBS know about the forgery, and when did they know it?
- What did John Kerry and/or the Democratic party organizers know about the forgery, and when did they know it?
In an apparent attempt to further muddy the waters of dirty-trick politics by CBS, Rather interviewed an 86 year old secretary for the national guard about her opinions of the documents. Rather failed to mention that the secretary was a Bush opponent, and that she had previously told the Dallas Morning News that the President was "selected, not elected" - the oft quoted party line from the liberal left... Perhaps it is time for CBS viewers to just change the channel. While CBS is by far the most liberal of the major TV networks, there is a clear tendency for the other major networks to lean to the left. A Pew Research Center study found that the ratio of liberal to conservative journalists was an astounding five to one. This is all the more surprising given that the majority of Americans are conservative. Apparently, the liberal media has not been successful in pushing its extreme liberal agenda. While all of the major networks lean to the left, it is clear that CBS is testing the limits of slanted media reporting... and depending on the answers to the above questions, perhaps testing the limits of the laws.
We would like to thank Prestek Design Services for contributing the above image and new CBS motto "We Distort, You Decide".
|
Bernard Goldberg was himself a CBS liberal, and finally saw the light about liberal media bias and distorted news. The issue is more than just Dan Rather, a well known actor peddling distorted liberal news... CBS has been pushing a liberal agenda throughout the CBS organization. Click on the link below to order his excellent book from Amazon.com.
Bias : A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News
From the Publisher:
IN HIS NEARLY thirty years at CBS News, Emmy Award- winner Bernard Goldberg earned a reputation as one of the preeminent reporters in the television news business. When he looked at his own industry, however, he saw that the media far too often ignored their primary mission: objective, disinterested reporting. Again and again he saw that they slanted the news to the left. For years Goldberg appealed to reporters, producers, and network executives for more balanced reporting, but no one listened. The liberal bias continued. Now, in Bias, he blows the whistle on the news business, showing exactly how the media slant their coverage while insisting that they're just reporting the facts
|
|
Read Bernard Goldberg latest book on liberal bias in the media: Arrogance:
Arrogance: Rescuing America From the Media Elite
From the Publisher:
The #1 New York Times bestselling author of Bias exposes the culture of narrow-minded elitism in the media--and reveals what must be done to change it.In December of 2001, Emmy Award-winning journalist Bernard Goldberg charged the mainstream media with slanting the news and created a firestorm with his controversial bestseller Bias. Now Goldberg goes beyond identifying the media's partiality and explains how the slanting of the news is all but inevitable in the current climate--and why the media's stars continue to deny the industry's condition. In this fascinating report, Goldberg lays out his rallying cry, unafraid to name names, and prescribes the difficult remedies that must take place if genuinely balanced news is to survive.
|
War
9/30/04
There is no good war. There has never been a good war, and there will never be a good war. There is nothing good about war. And yet, there are times when we have no good alternatives, so we go to war. War has always been controversial among Christians, since God is love (1 John 4:8), and in Him there is no darkness (1 John 1:5). In the Old Testament, we read that God would frequently send his chosen people Israel into wars, and this God of the Old Testament is the same God as the God of the New Testament. The darkness was not in God, but in the world, and God expects His people to deal with darkness. And so it was in World War II, where we had a monster, Adolph Hitler, that was murdering Jews by the millions. For those of you that are old enough to remember, or wise enough to study history, you know that appeasement and weakness were tried with Hitler, and it did not work. The mass murder continued under appeasement, and the only thing that stopped this madman was force, force by a people that understood that evil must be opposed at every turn. The only thing that the lack of opposition to evil can bring to the world is enslavement, and death, and more evil. This is why Israel had wars in the Old Testament, and this is why we have wars in the "modern" world of today, because there is evil and darkness in the world. As Christians, you should know this, although many of you have been asleep.
Saddam was a type of Hitler, a truly murderous maniac that had to be stopped. To not stop this madman from gassing and torturing and enslaving his people would have been an abomination. It took a leader to stop this madman, and leaders make hard decisions. This war has not been perfect. No war in the history of the world has been perfect, and of course, no war could ever be perfect.
So far, all John Kerry has done is whine about the fact that this war has not been perfect. He has been nothing more than a cheap shot artist, second guessing the war, and vaguely hinting how he would have done things better. John Kerry is not a leader. He has never authored a major bill in the U.S. Senate, although he has opposed every single major issue in national defense that has come to vote on the Senate floor (when he bothered to show up to vote). He never takes a strong stand on anything that lasts for more than a few days, and appears to have no firm beliefs on any major issue of interest to Christians. As mentioned in the above paragraphs, he has stated that he believes that life begins at conception, but believes it is ok to kill the fetus, even though he believes it is a full human being. He refuses to vote on gay marriage, since that might offend somebody, preferring as usual to stay lukewarm on all issues of interest to anybody. When asked in a recent interview if he preferred the Beatles or the Rolling Stones, he didn't answer, undoubtedly concerned that even this trivial opinion might offend some voters. We don't really know what Kerry would have done as president with respect to Saddam Hussein, but his history of weakness in national security decisions should serve as a warning to America about the decisions (or indecisions) he could make in the future if confronted with new threats. If we are to believe John Kerry (who voted for the war, but voted against supplying our troops with the necessary armour), his latest position (this week) on the war in Iraq is that we should not have gone to war with Saddam, and we should not have stopped the murderous rampage of a maniac. This is the type of "leader" that would have in all likelihood left Hitler in power, since he would have left the modern day Hitler-type in power. This is an abomination. Yes, this is not a leadership decision, and John Kerry is NOT a leader, although he has led a valiant fight to weaken the United States through his Senate votes, and appears to be leading the nation down a path to further moral decay and appeasement.
These are dangerous times for America, and we need a leader in office that has a history of leading. We need a leader that can make tough decisions without flip-flopping and wallowing in indecision. Removing Saddam Hussein was a tough decision by a true leader. The future in Iraq, and in the world, is not going to be an easy one, but we know that weakness and appeasement by a government led by a person with a history of indecision can only make matters worse. Weakness and appeasement did not work with Hitler, it did not work with Saddam, and it will not work with future maniacs.
Flip-Flop Leadership
9/30/04
A double minded man is unstable in all his ways. (James 1:8)
5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
6 But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.
7 For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord.
8 A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.
James 1:5-8
|
An unfortunate fact in modern day politics is that far too many supposed "leaders" are driven by polls, and far too few are led by the Lord. Decisions based on Godly principles leave little room for wavering. God's Word is quite clear in moral issues, and leave no room for the type of "flip-flop" decision making we have recently witnessed. There is quite simply no room to be on both sides of issues in God's court, and with very few exceptions, we know with absolute certainty where God stands on the major issues of the day. In James 1:8 we read that A double minded man is unstable in all his ways, which Christians should take to heart in making their decision on how to vote. The one thing we need in a leadership position is stability. That doesn't mean that a leader may never change his position, since information on which a decision is based may change. However, a pattern of constant radical shifts in position is more than a warning sign of future instability, it is a clear signal of a dangerous leader - a leader with no internal moral compass, driven by polls and a lust for power.
Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil... (Exodus 23:2)
God has a way of painting each and every one of us into a corner with our own words, and He leaves one and only one escape route - the saving grace of Jesus Christ. We have all been painted into a corner at one time or another, and had the unpleasant experience of trying to find a way out of the mess we have created. As we mature in Christ, our moral compass keeps us from getting cornered with our own words. As we grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord, we find that the important decisions are easy to make, and we find no need for radical changes in direction. The reason, of course, is that the best leaders are led by the Lord, and HE always knows the right direction.
|
Choosing a First Lady, or a Loose Cannon???
9/30/04
Although not addressed in the U.S. Constitution, the position of first lady has grown significantly since the birth of our nation. No longer the mere hostess of dinners at the White House, the first lady is now herself a shaper of events and policy. While the first lady has always had first access to the ear of the president, she is now expected to speak out on issues of the day, and head up her own programs. We are not saying that this expectation is the way things should be, but simply saying that this is the way things are. For this reason, we need to also look at the first lady when making decisions on who is leading our country.
In the early days of battle at sea, a loose cannon referred to a cannon that had broken its recoil ropes and rolled around the deck at random, doing damage to its own ship or shipmates. In modern times it is used to refer to a person that is truly out of control, or unstable. We have all had encounters with people that blow up with little or no provocation, firing shots at who knows what, and doing damage to their own cause. In choosing a leader to guide our ship of state, we need to be assured that there will not be loose cannons rolling around the deck, ready to offend foreign leaders at the slightest provocation. The job of first lady is now that of a statesman, and she is expected to deal with people in a dignified manner. We have all witnessed this loose cannon behaviour in Teresa Heinz-Kerry with her attacks on the media and those who disagree with her, and her denial of statements she has made on record, with cameras rolling. How can somebody deny a statement that they made minutes earlier on camera? The popular media has made a concerted effort to downplay Ms. Heinz-Kerry's long history as a loose cannon, in an apparent attempt to minimize her damage to their latest favorite liberal candidate John Kerry. Since the media is avoiding the issue, let's talk a little bit more about Teresa Heinz-Kerry.
John Kerry has a history of marrying wealthy women, women whose wealth far exceeds his own sizable fortune. His latest catch, Teresa Heinz-Kerry, is a billionaire, with a fortune that she herself married into, the famous Heinz ketchup fortune. The Heinz-Kerry fortune dwarfs that of President Bush. This would make Teresa, the billionaire from Mozambique, and her hubby John Kerry, the wealthiest people to ever occupy the White House. The strange twist in this election is that John Kerry and his billionaire wife are advertising themselves as the "friends of the common man".
As summarized in an article (Playing Ketchup) from the prestigious magazine National Review, the Teresa Heinz-Kerry fortune is now being used to finance some of the most liberal causes on earth. In addition to using her billions to fund far left wing causes, Teresa is now using her billions to put her hubby in the White House, while at the same time refusing to release her own financial records. Another question that you should be asking yourself, is "Where is Teresa?". Mrs. Laura Bush is certainly out there in public view, speaking about her efforts to improve public education, and she has made significant advances in this area - but where is Ms. Heinz-Kerry? Ever since her disastrous speech at the democratic convention, where she told a reporter to "shove it", she has been almost invisible. It appears that she has been carefully hidden from public view, since every time she speaks she inflicts damage to the careful veneer of respectability pasted over this campaign by the democrats. As Christians, you should be concerned about the Presidency falling into the hands of an extreme liberal, with a wife in control of her own billion dollar budget to both buy a presidency, and push an agenda that is in clear opposition to your own Christian morals. So where is Teresa - and what, or who, is she buying today? And when will this loose cannon go off next? America needs rational, stable minded leaders and representatives in the White House, both in the Presidency, and in the roll of First Lady. And you need to think about this when you go to the polls in this next election.
|
GOD is not democrat or replublican,
Although HE is a bit conservative on the issues...
10/6/04
God is not a democrat or a republican, although he is a bit conservative on the issues... For God's people, when we are on the wrong side of issues with God, we know in our hearts that we are on the wrong side. When we go against God's will, we know it. He sees us when we believe in Him, and He sees us when we rebel against Him... and He knows exactly how you cast your last vote, regardless of the private elections laws. When we vote for a person or issue in an election (any election), we are forced to actually make a decision and commit to it. For some people this is a challenge during an election (supply your own flipflop joke), since commitment means you are actually taking partial responsibility for the outcome of your decision, or vote.
Voting is easy, free, and helps determine your future in a direct way.
So is Salvation
If you do not commit to taking a position on issues (e.g., don't vote), then you are also responsible, since you did nothing to support (or even try to understand) the issues related to God's will in an election. God has never called His people to be lazy in the defense of their rights and freedoms. To not vote or express your opinion is to ignore a gift from God, since He has blessed our nation with the gift of a government that allows people to have a vote and a voice in the government. He has especially blessed this nation with the freedoms for individuals to speak out on issues in society and its government. For the Christian the voting obligation is twofold: The first step is to make yourself informed on the special issues of the day that relate to God's Word, the Bible, and our Government based on the US Constitution and other key documents. The second step is to prayerfully vote on issues and people that reflect your values, or that reflect the values you want in a future society for your children.
So this brings us to the latest hot topic, "Is GOD a democrat or a republican?", which is again back in the news again. In the USA, this topic runs in a four year cycle based on the elections. This is perhaps part of the problem in the USA - God is on a four year cycle in peoples thoughts and prayers. Every four years some people in the Church wake up to issues that surround them like war, gay marriage, abortion, cloning, etc., and then go back to sleep in their daily lives, leaving the job of bringing the world back to righteousness as a task for the elected officials. By any reasonable definition, these people are in a lukewarm part of the Church, somewhere out there in the vast sea of lukewarm Churches.
Lukewarm faith will not change America, and it will not change the world. While God is not a democrat or republican, He does appear to have some very strong opinions on a variety of issues, and He is not timid about putting His opinions in writing (the Bible). One of these issues addressed this week in the US House of Representatives was gay marriage. Recall a few weeks ago that the US Senate tried and failed in a similar measure. In the Senate, the vote went down party lines, with the Republicans voting to (in effect) bring a standard Male-Female Marriage amendment to a vote, and the Democrats voting against it. There were a few crossover votes (very few, see above Senate roll call), with a few liberal conservatives like Senate Republican John McCain voting against the traditional marriage amendment, and a few conservative liberals like Democrat Robert Byrd of West Virginia voting in favor of traditional marriage. Overall, the vote was along party lines. In fact, without trying to be irreverent, let's go to the stats on one of the hot button issues with God's people, gay marriage.
(Leviticus 18:22 KJV, NASB, NIV)
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
(Leviticus 18:22 KJV)
'You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.
(Leviticus 18:22 NASB)
'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.
(Leviticus 18:22 NIV)
(1 Corinthians 6:9 KJV, NASB, NIV)
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
(1 Corinthians 6:9 KJV)
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,
(1 Corinthians 6:9 NASB)
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders
(1 Corinthians 6:9 NIV)
(Romans 1:24-27 KJV, NASB, NIV)
24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
(Romans 1:24-27 KJV)
24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them.
25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,
27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
(Romans 1:24-27 NASB)
24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.
25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen.
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.
27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
(Romans 1:24-27 NIV)
(1 Timothy 1:9-10 KJV, NASB, NIV)
9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
(1 Timothy 1:9-10 KJV)
9 realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers
10 and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching,
(1 Timothy 1:9-10 NASB)
9 We also know that law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious; for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers,
10 for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers--and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine
(1 Timothy 1:9-10 NIV)
To give a "fair and balanced" view of scripture, I have listed the three most published versions of the Bible: KJV, NASB, and NIV. In any reasonable reading of scripture it is perfectly clear where God stands on homosexuality. As Christians, our great commission is to go out and save the lost, and bring them into repentence and a new life in Jesus Christ. While that definitely means we need to witness to all of God's children, it does not mean that we need to encourage bad behaviour by some of His children, and say that sin is not sin.
Of course we all sin, each and every one of us, but we should not revel in our sin and rebellion to God. It is clear where God stands on homosexuality, and it is also clear that sinners should not show pride in their sinful lifestyle. For Christians, it should also be clear that homosexual marriage should NOT be turned into a government sanctioned/funded/recommended/preferred lifestyle. It is clear that the Church should promote a Godly life inside the Church, but it is also important in a society blessed with the right to vote, for the Church to vote for a society in which it can best survive and grow. And that is your duty: to find, promote, vote for, and fund laws and politicians that support your beliefs and morals, like the traditional definition of marriage between a man and a woman.
5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.
6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:
7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
(1 John 1:5-8)
As we see in 1 John 5-8, God wants us to turn away from sin, all sin, and turn towards righteous living. When we read the end of the passage, "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." (1 John 8) we understand that God is telling us in His Word that He knows our thoughts, and (to put it lightly) He does not delight in the way His people rejoice in sin. In 1 John 1:8 we read that God knows when we lie about our sins, and He sees the way some live their lies, and continue to be deceived in their belief that sin is not sin. Imagine God saying to you that "the truth is not in you", and then pray on this, selah...
This redefinition of sin as not sin is the way of the dead Church, and should not be the way of the saints. It is up to you to protect the society that many of you will one day deliver to your children. One of these societal issues that you will be handing down to your children is the definition of marriage. Marriage has been defined in the Bible since Adam and Eve, and so far, after all these generations, the man-woman marriage is still the basis of our society. The institution of marriage and family is too important to let the Government try its latest experiment in family design, gay marriage.
OK, with that long preamble being said, let's have a look at the traditional marriage vote in the U.S. House of Representatives, and then do some math. The link below is to the same page that is included inside the frame below. Feel free to link to the page below, or use the source code on your own page, with or without credit. Before moving on, we encourage you to look up the views of your own Congressman on gay marriage. The frame below is a long list of hundreds of Congressmen, so use the down arrow to first find your state, and then find how your current Representative voted. Some browsers (Netscape) may have problems with embedded frames, so just click on the link below if the frame is not visible.
U.S. House Roll Call on Traditional Marriage
Scroll down to find your congressman's vote on Gay Marriage. Frame below may be broken in Netscape.
|
(Editors Note: For the technically curious, the embedded frame below was converted from "IFRAME" format to a style sheet on 8/19/05. The IFRAME format had major problems with numerous browsers and operating systems. To view the original page posted during the election, click here: Original commentary with buggy IFRAME . Remember this is a learning experience for your webmaster too... Job)
|
Christians Should VOTE in this Election
Marriage Protection Amendment
How did YOUR Congressman Vote on Gay Marriage?
Who will get YOUR vote for Congressman... and President?
We have had several requests for information on the upcoming election in the United States. We believe that it is important to have an informed electorate. In support of that belief, we are posting the roll call votes in Congress for some of the issues of interest to Christians. One of these issues is the Marriage Protection Amendment, which would define Marriage as between one Man and one Woman. The Senate bill which was voted upon in the Senate on 7/14/04, and the House bill described on this page are essentially identical, with very minor differences in wording.
A link to the bill is listed below, followed by the voting record in the U.S. House of Representatives:
Marriage Protection Amendment
U.S. House of Representatives Official Roll Call Vote on Marriage between one man and one woman:
Roll Call Vote
Summary Text of Amendment:
Marriage in the United States shall consist solely of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman.
|
Color Codes |
| | Voted for Marriage Protection Amendment, defining Marriage as between one man and one woman. Generally viewed as a vote against gay marriage. Believes marriage should be a federal issue, as opposed to a state issue. |
| | Voted against Marriage Protection Amendment, defining Marriage as between one man and one woman. Generally viewed as a vote for gay marriage, or believes individual states should allow gay marriage. |
| ??? | Not Voting, or has no opinion on gay marriage. |
|
| Alabama |
|---|
| Robert Aderholt (Republican), Yea |
| Spencer Bachus (Republican), Yea |
| Jo Bonner (Republican), Yea |
| Robert Cramer, Jr. (Democrat), Yea |
| Artur Davis (Democrat), Yea |
| Terry Everett (Republican), Yea |
| Michael Rogers (Republican), Yea |
|
| Alaska |
|---|
| Don Young (Republican-AL), Yea |
|
| Arizona |
|---|
| Jeff Flake (Republican), Yea |
| Trent Franks (Republican), Yea |
| Raul Grijalva (Democrat), Nay |
| J.D. Hayworth (Republican), Yea |
| Jim Kolbe (Republican), Nay |
| Ed Pastor (Democrat), Nay |
| Rick Renzi (Republican), Yea |
| John Shadegg (Republican), Yea |
|
| Arkansas |
|---|
| Marion Berry (Democrat), Yea |
| John Boozman (Republican), Yea |
| Mike Ross (Democrat), Yea |
| Vic Snyder (Democrat), Nay |
|
| California |
|---|
| Joe Baca (Democrat), Nay |
| Xavier Becerra (Democrat), Nay |
| Howard Berman (Democrat), Nay |
| Mary Bono (Republican), Nay |
| Ken Calvert (Republican), Yea |
| Lois Capps (Democrat), Nay |
| Dennis Cardoza (Democrat), Nay |
| Christopher Cox (Republican), Nay |
| Randy Cunningham (Republican), Yea |
| Susan Davis (Democrat), Nay |
| Calvin Dooley (Democrat), Nay |
| John Doolittle (Republican), Yea |
| David Dreier (Republican), Nay |
| Anna Eshoo (Democrat), Nay |
| Sam Farr (Democrat), Nay |
| Bob Filner (Democrat), Nay |
| Elton Gallegly (Republican), Yea |
| Jane Harman (Democrat), Not Voting |
| Wally Herger (Republican), Yea |
| Michael Honda (Democrat), Nay |
| Duncan Hunter (Republican), Not Voting |
| Darrell Issa (Republican), Yea |
| Tom Lantos (Democrat), Nay |
| Barbara Lee (Democrat), Nay |
| Jerry Lewis (Republican), Yea |
| Zoe Lofgren (Democrat), Nay |
| Robert Matsui (Democrat), Nay |
| Howard McKeon (Republican), Yea |
| Juanita Millender-McDonald (Democrat), Nay |
| George Miller (Democrat), Nay |
| Gary Miller (Republican), Yea |
| Grace Napolitano (Democrat), Nay |
| Devin Nunes (Republican), Yea |
| Doug Ose (Republican), Nay |
| Nancy Pelosi (Democrat), Nay |
| Richard Pombo (Republican), Yea |
| George Radanovich (Republican), Yea |
| Dana Rohrabacher (Republican), Yea |
| Lucille Roybal-Allard (Democrat), Nay |
| Ed Royce (Republican), Yea |
| Loretta Sanchez (Democrat), Nay |
| Linda Sanchez (Democrat), Nay |
| Adam Schiff (Democrat), Nay |
| Brad Sherman (Democrat), Nay |
| Hilda Solis (Democrat), Nay |
| Fortney Stark (Democrat), Nay |
| Ellen Tauscher (Democrat), Nay |
| William Thomas (Republican), Yea |
| Mike Thompson (Democrat), Nay |
| Maxine Waters (Democrat), Nay |
| Diane Watson (Democrat), Nay |
| Henry Waxman (Democrat), Nay |
| Lynn Woolsey (Democrat), Nay |
|
| Colorado |
|---|
| Bob Beauprez (Republican), Yea |
| Diana DeGette (Democrat), Nay |
| Joel Hefley (Republican), Yea |
| Scott McInnis (Republican), Nay |
| Marilyn Musgrave (Republican), Yea |
| Thomas Tancredo (Republican), Yea |
| Mark Udall (Democrat), Nay |
|
| Connecticut |
|---|
| Rosa DeLauro (Democrat), Nay |
| Nancy Johnson (Republican), Nay |
| John Larson (Democrat), Nay |
| Christopher Shays (Republican), Nay |
| Robert Simmons (Republican), Nay |
|
| Delaware |
|---|
| Michael Castle (Republican-AL), Nay |
|
| Florida |
|---|
| Michael Bilirakis (Republican), Yea |
| F. Allen Boyd, Jr. (Democrat), Yea |
| Corrine Brown (Democrat), Not Voting |
| Ginny Brown-Waite (Republican), Yea |
| Ander Crenshaw (Republican), Yea |
| Jim Davis (Democrat), Nay |
| Peter Deutsch (Democrat), Nay |
| Lincoln Diaz-Balart (Republican), Not Voting |
| Mario Diaz-Balart (Republican), Not Voting |
| Tom Feeney (Republican), Yea |
| Mark Foley (Republican), Nay |
| Katherine Harris (Republican), Yea |
| Alcee Hastings (Democrat), Not Voting |
| Ric Keller (Republican), Yea |
| Kendrick Meek (Democrat), Not Voting |
| John Mica (Republican), Yea |
| Jeff Miller (Republican), Yea |
| Adam Putnam (Republican), Yea |
| Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (Republican), Not Voting |
| E. Clay Shaw, Jr. (Republican), Yea |
| Cliff Stearns (Republican), Yea |
| Dave Weldon (Republican), Yea |
| Robert Wexler (Democrat), Nay |
| C.W. Bill Young (Republican), Yea |
|
| Georgia |
|---|
| Sanford Bishop, Jr. (Democrat), Yea |
| Max Burns (Republican), Yea |
| Michael Collins (Republican), Yea |
| Nathan Deal (Republican), Yea |
| Phil Gingrey (Republican), Yea |
| Johnny Isakson (Republican), Yea |
| Jack Kingston (Republican), Yea |
| John Lewis (Democrat), Nay |
| John Linder (Republican), Yea |
| Denise Majette (Democrat), Nay |
| Jim Marshall (Democrat), Yea |
| Charles Norwood (Republican), Yea |
| David Scott (Democrat), Yea |
|
| Hawaii |
|---|
| Neil Abercrombie (Democrat), Nay |
| Ed Case (Democrat), Nay |
|
| Idaho |
|---|
| C.L. Otter (Republican), Yea |
| Mike Simpson (Republican), Yea |
|
| Illinois |
|---|
| Judy Biggert (Republican), Nay |
| Jerry Costello (Democrat), Yea |
| Philip Crane (Republican), Yea |
| Danny Davis (Democrat), Not Voting |
| Rahm Emanuel (Democrat), Nay |
| Lane Evans (Democrat), Nay |
| Luis Gutierrez (Democrat), Nay |
| J. Dennis Hastert (Republican), Yea |
| Henry Hyde (Republican), Yea |
| Jesse Jackson, Jr. (Democrat), Nay |
| Timothy Johnson (Republican), Yea |
| Mark Kirk (Republican), Nay |
| Ray LaHood (Republican), Yea |
| William Lipinski (Democrat), Nay |
| Donald Manzullo (Republican), Yea |
| Bobby Rush (Democrat), Nay |
| Janice Schakowsky (Democrat), Nay |
| John Shimkus (Republican), Yea |
| Jerry Weller (Republican), Yea |
|
| Indiana |
|---|
| Dan Burton (Republican), Yea |
| Steve Buyer (Republican), Yea |
| Julia Carson (Democrat), Nay |
| Chris Chocola (Republican), Yea |
| Baron Hill (Democrat), Nay |
| John Hostettler (Republican), Nay |
| Mike Pence (Republican), Yea |
| Mark Souder (Republican), Yea |
| Peter Visclosky (Democrat), Nay |
|
| Iowa |
|---|
| Leonard Boswell (Democrat), Nay |
| Steve King (Republican), Yea |
| Tom Latham (Republican), Yea |
| Jim Leach (Republican), Nay |
| Jim Nussle (Republican), Yea |
|
| Kansas |
|---|
| Dennis Moore (Democrat), Nay |
| Jerry Moran (Republican), Yea |
| Jim Ryun (Republican), Yea |
| Todd Tiahrt (Republican), Yea |
|
| Kentucky |
|---|
| Ben Chandler (Democrat), Yea |
| Ron Lewis (Republican), Yea |
| Ken Lucas (Democrat), Yea |
| Anne Northup (Republican), Yea |
| Harold Rogers (Republican), Yea |
| Edward Whitfield (Republican), Yea |
|
| Louisiana |
|---|
| Rodney Alexander (Republican), Yea |
| Richard Baker (Republican), Yea |
| William Jefferson (Democrat), Yea |
| Chris John (Democrat), Yea |
| Jim McCrery (Republican), Yea |
| W.J. Tauzin (Republican), Not Voting |
| David Vitter (Republican), Yea |
|
| Maine |
|---|
| Thomas Allen (Democrat), Nay |
| Michael Michaud (Democrat), Nay |
|
| Maryland |
|---|
| Roscoe Bartlett (Republican), Yea |
| Benjamin Cardin (Democrat), Nay |
| Elijah Cummings (Democrat), Nay |
| Wayne Gilchrest (Republican), Nay |
| Steny Hoyer (Democrat), Nay |
| C.A. Ruppersberger (Democrat), Nay |
| Chris Van Hollen, Jr. (Democrat), Nay |
| Albert Wynn (Democrat), Nay |
|
| Massachusetts |
|---|
| Michael Capuano (Democrat), Nay |
| William Delahunt (Democrat), Nay |
| Barney Frank (Democrat), Nay |
| Stephen Lynch (Democrat), Nay |
| Edward Markey (Democrat), Nay |
| James McGovern (Democrat), Nay |
| Marty Meehan (Democrat), Nay |
| Richard Neal (Democrat), Nay |
| John Olver (Democrat), Nay |
| John Tierney (Democrat), Nay |
|
| Michigan |
|---|
| Dave Camp (Republican), Yea |
| John Conyers, Jr. (Democrat), Nay |
| John Dingell (Democrat), Nay |
| Vernon Ehlers (Republican), Yea |
| Peter Hoekstra (Republican), Yea |
| Dale Kildee (Democrat), Nay |
| Carolyn Kilpatrick (Democrat), Nay |
| Joseph Knollenberg (Republican), Nay |
| Sander Levin (Democrat), Nay |
| Thaddeus McCotter (Republican), Yea |
| Candice Miller (Republican), Yea |
| Michael Rogers (Republican), Yea |
| Nick Smith (Republican), Yea |
| Bart Stupak (Democrat), Nay |
| Fred Upton (Republican), Yea |
|
| Minnesota |
|---|
| Gil Gutknecht (Republican), Yea |
| Mark Kennedy (Republican), Yea |
| John Kline (Republican), Yea |
| Betty McCollum (Democrat), Nay |
| James Oberstar (Democrat), Not Voting |
| Collin Peterson (Democrat), Yea |
| Jim Ramstad (Republican), Yea |
| Martin Olav Sabo (Democrat), Nay |
|
| Mississippi |
|---|
| Charles Pickering, Jr. (Republican), Yea |
| Gene Taylor (Democrat), Yea |
| Bennie Thompson (Democrat), Yea |
| Roger Wicker (Republican), Yea |
|
| Missouri |
|---|
| Todd Akin (Republican), Yea |
| Roy Blunt (Republican), Yea |
| Wm. Lacy Clay (Democrat), Nay |
| Jo Ann Emerson (Republican), Yea |
| Richard Gephardt (Democrat), Nay |
| Sam Graves (Republican), Yea |
| Kenny Hulshof (Republican), Yea |
| Karen McCarthy (Democrat), Nay |
| Ike Skelton (Democrat), Yea |
|
| Montana |
|---|
| Dennis Rehberg (Republican-AL), Yea |
|
| Nebraska |
|---|
| Tom Osborne (Republican), Yea |
| Lee Terry (Republican), Yea |
|
| Nevada |
|---|
| Shelley Berkley (Democrat), Nay |
| James Gibbons (Republican), Nay |
| Jon Porter (Republican), Yea |
|
| New Hampshire |
|---|
| Charles Bass (Republican), Nay |
| Jeb Bradley (Republican), Yea |
|
| New Jersey |
|---|
| Robert Andrews (Democrat), Nay |
| Michael Ferguson (Republican), Yea |
| Rodney Frelinghuysen (Republican), Nay |
| Scott Garrett (Republican), Yea |
| Rush Holt (Democrat), Nay |
| Frank LoBiondo (Republican), Yea |
| Robert Menendez (Democrat), Not Voting |
| Frank Pallone, Jr. (Democrat), Nay |
| Bill Pascrell, Jr. (Democrat), Nay |
| Donald Payne (Democrat), Nay |
| Steven Rothman (Democrat), Nay |
| Jim Saxton (Republican), Yea |
| Christopher Smith (Republican), Yea |
|
| New Mexico |
|---|
| Steve Pearce (Republican), Yea |
| Tom Udall (Democrat), Nay |
| Heather Wilson (Republican), Yea |
|
| New York |
|---|
| Gary Ackerman (Democrat), Nay |
| Tim Bishop (Democrat), Nay |
| Sherwood Boehlert (Republican), Not Voting |
| Joseph Crowley (Democrat), Nay |
| Eliot Engel (Democrat), Nay |
| Vito Fossella (Republican), Yea |
| Maurice Hinchey (Democrat), Nay |
| Amory Houghton, Jr. (Republican), Nay |
| Steve Israel (Democrat), Nay |
| Sue Kelly (Republican), Yea |
| Peter King (Republican), Yea |
| Nita Lowey (Democrat), Nay |
| Carolyn Maloney (Democrat), Nay |
| Carolyn McCarthy (Democrat), Nay |
| John McHugh (Republican), Yea |
| Michael McNulty (Democrat), Nay |
| Gregory Meeks (Democrat), Not Voting |
| Jerrold Nadler (Democrat), Nay |
| Major Owens (Democrat), Nay |
| Jack Quinn (Republican), Yea |
| Charles Rangel (Democrat), Not Voting |
| Thomas Reynolds (Republican), Yea |
| Jose Serrano (Democrat), Nay |
| Louise McIntosh Slaughter (Democrat), Nay |
| John Sweeney (Republican), Nay |
| Edolphus Towns (Democrat), Nay |
| Nydia Velazquez (Democrat), Nay |
| James Walsh (Republican), Yea |
| Anthony Weiner (Democrat), Nay |
|
| North Carolina |
|---|
| Cass Ballenger (Republican), Yea |
| Richard Burr (Republican), Yea |
| G.K. Butterfield (Democrat), Nay |
| Howard Coble (Republican), Yea |
| Bob Etheridge (Democrat), Yea |
| Robin Hayes (Republican), Yea |
| Walter Jones, Jr. (Republican), Yea |
| Mike McIntyre (Democrat), Yea |
| Brad Miller (Democrat), Nay |
| Sue Myrick (Republican), Yea |
| David Price (Democrat), Nay |
| Charles Taylor (Republican), Yea |
| Melvin Watt (Democrat), Nay |
|
| North Dakota |
|---|
| Earl Pomeroy (Democrat-AL), Nay |
|
| Ohio |
|---|
| John Boehner (Republican), Yea |
| Sherrod Brown (Democrat), Nay |
| Steve Chabot (Republican), Yea |
| Paul Gillmor (Republican), Yea |
| David Hobson (Republican), Nay |
| Marcy Kaptur (Democrat), Nay |
| Dennis Kucinich (Democrat), Nay |
| Steven LaTourette (Republican), Yea |
| Bob Ney (Republican), Yea |
| Michael Oxley (Republican), Yea |
| Rob Portman (Republican), Yea |
| Deborah Pryce (Republican), Nay |
| Ralph Regula (Republican), Yea |
| Tim Ryan (Democrat), Nay |
| Ted Strickland (Democrat), Nay |
| Patrick Tiberi (Republican), Yea |
| Stephanie Tubbs Jones (Democrat), Nay |
| Michael Turner (Republican), Yea |
|
| Oklahoma |
|---|
| Brad Carson (Democrat), Yea |
| Tom Cole (Republican), Yea |
| Ernest Istook, Jr. (Republican), Yea |
| Frank Lucas (Republican), Yea |
| John Sullivan (Republican), Yea |
|
| Oregon |
|---|
| Earl Blumenauer (Democrat), Nay |
| Peter DeFazio (Democrat), Nay |
| Darlene Hooley (Democrat), Nay |
| Greg Walden (Republican), Yea |
| David Wu (Democrat), Nay |
|
| Pennsylvania |
|---|
| Robert Brady (Democrat), Nay |
| Mike Doyle (Democrat), Nay |
| Philip English (Republican), Yea |
| Chaka Fattah (Democrat), Nay |
| Jim Gerlach (Republican), Nay |
| Jim Greenwood (Republican), Nay |
| Melissa Hart (Republican), Yea |
| Joseph Hoeffel, III (Democrat), Nay |
| Tim Holden (Democrat), Yea |
| Paul Kanjorski (Democrat), Nay |
| Timothy Murphy (Republican), Yea |
| John Murtha (Democrat), Not Voting |
| John Peterson (Republican), Yea |
| Joseph Pitts (Republican), Yea |
| Todd Platts (Republican), Yea |
| Don Sherwood (Republican), Yea |
| Bill Shuster (Republican), Yea |
| Pat Toomey (Republican), Yea |
| Curt Weldon (Republican), Yea |
|
| Rhode Island |
|---|
| Patrick Kennedy (Democrat), Nay |
| James Langevin (Democrat), Nay |
|
| South Carolina |
|---|
| J. Gresham Barrett (Republican), Yea |
| Henry Brown, Jr. (Republican), Yea |
| James Clyburn (Democrat), Nay |
| Jim DeMint (Republican), Yea |
| John Spratt, Jr. (Democrat), Yea |
| Joe Wilson (Republican), Yea |
|
| South Dakota |
|---|
| Stephanie Herseth (Democrat-AL), Yea |
|
| Tennessee |
|---|
| Marsha Blackburn (Republican), Yea |
| Jim Cooper (Democrat), Yea |
| Lincoln Davis (Democrat), Yea |
| John Duncan, Jr. (Republican), Yea |
| Harold Ford, Jr. (Democrat), Yea |
| Bart Gordon (Democrat), Yea |
| William Jenkins (Republican), Yea |
| John Tanner (Democrat), Yea |
| Zach Wamp (Republican), Yea |
|
| Texas |
|---|
| Joe Barton (Republican), Yea |
| Chris Bell (Democrat), Nay |
| Henry Bonilla (Republican), Yea |
| Kevin Brady (Republican), Yea |
| Michael Burgess (Republican), Yea |
| John Carter (Republican), Yea |
| John Culberson (Republican), Yea |
| Tom DeLay (Republican), Yea |
| Lloyd Doggett (Democrat), Nay |
| Chet Edwards (Democrat), Yea |
| Martin Frost (Democrat), Nay |
| Charles Gonzalez (Democrat), Nay |
| Kay Granger (Republican), Yea |
| Gene Green (Democrat), Nay |
| Ralph Hall (Republican), Yea |
| Jeb Hensarling (Republican), Yea |
| Ruben Hinojosa (Democrat), Nay |
| Sheila Jackson Lee (Democrat), Nay |
| Sam Johnson (Republican), Yea |
| Eddie Bernice Johnson (Democrat), Nay |
| Nicholas Lampson (Democrat), Yea |
| Randy Neugebauer (Republican), Yea |
| Solomon Ortiz (Democrat), Yea |
| Ron Paul (Republican), Nay |
| Silvestre Reyes (Democrat), Not Voting |
| Ciro Rodriguez (Democrat), Nay |
| Max Sandlin, Jr. (Democrat), Yea |
| Pete Sessions (Republican), Yea |
| Lamar Smith (Republican), Yea |
| Charles Stenholm (Democrat), Yea |
| William Thornberry (Republican), Yea |
| Jim Turner (Democrat), Nay |
|
| Utah |
|---|
| Rob Bishop (Republican), Yea |
| Chris Cannon (Republican), Not Voting |
| Jim Matheson (Democrat), Yea |
|
| Vermont |
|---|
| Bernard Sanders (Independent-AL), Nay |
|
| Virginia |
|---|
| Rick Boucher (Democrat), Yea |
| Eric Cantor (Republican), Yea |
| Thomas Davis, III (Republican), Yea |
| Jo Ann Davis (Republican), Yea |
| Randy Forbes (Republican), Yea |
| Virgil Goode, Jr. (Republican), Yea |
| Bob Goodlatte (Republican), Yea |
| James Moran (Democrat), Nay |
| Edward Schrock (Republican), Yea |
| Bobby Scott (Democrat), Nay |
| Frank Wolf (Republican), Yea |
|
| Washington |
|---|
| Brian Baird (Democrat), Nay |
| Norman Dicks (Democrat), Nay |
| Jennifer Dunn (Republican), Not Voting |
| Doc Hastings (Republican), Yea |
| Jay Inslee (Democrat), Nay |
| Rick Larsen (Democrat), Nay |
| Jim McDermott (Democrat), Nay |
| George Nethercutt, Jr. (Republican), Not Voting |
| Adam Smith (Democrat), Nay |
|
| West Virginia |
|---|
| Shelley Moore Capito (Republican), Yea |
| Alan Mollohan (Democrat), Nay |
| Nick Rahall, II (Democrat), Yea |
|
| Wisconsin |
|---|
| Tammy Baldwin (Democrat), Nay |
| Mark Green (Republican), Yea |
| Ron Kind (Democrat), Nay |
| Jerry Kleczka (Democrat), Nay |
| David Obey (Democrat), Nay |
| Thomas Petri (Republican), Yea |
| Paul Ryan (Republican), Yea |
| F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr. (Republican), Yea |
|
| Wyoming |
|---|
| Barbara Cubin (Republican-AL), Yea |
|
Return to Christ.com
We encourage you to link to this page, or copy the source code to your own web page, with or without credit.
|
Since the topic of this article is "GOD is not a democrat, or a replublican, Although He is a bit conservative on the issues...", then let's talk about the issues. In this particular amendment we have the issue of gay marriage, in which God appears to have a very strong opinion, and that opinion divides the two main political parties in this election, Democrat and Republican. It is clear from the above major translations of the Bible that God has some strong opinions about the "gay" part of "gay marriage". But let's look at the stats on this God-based political issue:
Summary of Man/Woman Marriage Amendment by Party
| |
Yeas |
Nays |
Not Voting |
| Republicans |
191 (84.1% of Republicans) |
27 (11.9% of Republicans) |
9 (4.0% of Republicans) |
| Democrats |
36 (17.5% of Democrats) |
158 (77.1% of Democrats) |
11 (5.4% of Democrats) |
| Independents |
0 (0% of Independents) |
1 (100% of Independents) |
0 (0% of Independents) |
| Totals |
227 |
186 |
20 |
When we look at the vote breakdown, we see that 84.1% of the Republicans in the US House of Representatives voted for God's definition of marriage. By comparison, only 17.5% of the Democrats supported the amendment to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman. On the "Nay" side of the vote, we see that 11.9% of the House Republicans voted against the traditional marriage amendment, compared to 77.1% of House Democrats that voted against the traditional marriage amendment. These Republican/Democrat statistics are highly significant, and highlight the difference between the two parties on this one issue. We could do a similar statistical breakdown of any one of a large number of hot button issues for Christians and come to a similar conclusion.
While we are doing numbers, I should probably acknowledge that most of our readership is (or was) from faithful website visitors that are themselves strong members of the Democratic party. I hope we don't lose too many viewers out there by taking a firm stand in supporting President Bush for reelection, but after considerable prayer I have come to the conclusion that we need President Bush right now, and for the next four years. We also need to support President Bush by giving him a Congress he can work with. You can help do this, and also help reduce the gridlock in the House and Senate, by voting for Republican Senators and Congressman that support the traditional marriage protection amendment. Government is about teamwork, and George Bush needs a few more members on his team to unplug the gridlock. Now back to the numbers: the numbers part of this would tend to say that our website could lose over 50% of our audience by taking a firm stand on something (insert pun as needed). The interesting thing is that traffic is way up. Numbers, go figure... in any case, that means a few more opportunities for people to read something about Christ Jesus on our website, and get a new life.
Only God knows what new issues are coming up, but I am sure that the moral decisions will be challenging on things like Marriage, "Dog Stamps" and Cloning (I am confident that somebody out there believes it is the Government's obligation to pay for the pooch). Another ongoing issue is late term or partial birth abortion, where a perfectly healthy child can have its head crushed while in the birth canal, moments before birth. One of the best comparisons between parties is based on Tax policy... ahhh, taxes, and jobs, now that is a good comparison between Democrats and Republicans - but let's save taxes and jobs for next week. Clearly there are some major issues out there that divide Republicans and Democrats.
This should grab the attention of voters that include God in their life. While it is very clear that God is not a democrat or republican, it is also very clear that on this particular God-based and society-based issue, gay marriage, the Republican Congressmen and Congresswomen vote overwhelmingly for God's definition of marriage, and 77.1% of the Democrats vote in opposition to God's definition of marriage. While this certainly does not mean that God is a republican, it certainly does mean that Republican politicians typically vote for and support issues related to the God of the Bible, and that Democrats, statistically, appear to exhibit a voting pattern that is in many cases in conflict with God's Word.
As we said in the beginning of this article, God is NOT a republican or democrat, but He is conservative, and the "stats" seem to be showing that the Republicans do a much better job in supporting many of the God-based issues. You all know quite well that we could have used other Christian issues and derived similar results. No, God is not a republican, and God is not leaning to the right, but if voting records mean anything (works), it does appear that the Republicans are leaning closer to God on a number of key issues, and that is what is important... of course that's just what the stats say...
The point to notice here, is that while God is not a Democrat or a Republican, when we look at many of the hot button Christian issues, we do find that the Republicans overwhelmingly support these issues, and the Democrats overwhelmingly oppose these same issues. No, God is not a Democrat or a Republican, but in the United States, you can make your Government more like the kind of Government that God would want to bless. The way that happens in the US, is by you voting for President, Senators, and Congressmen that support your beliefs and values.
In this marriage issue it appears that the Republican candidates have done a much better job in voting for God's view of marriage, although as usual, God has provided some notable exceptions (crossover votes) that stood by the natural definition of marriage. The message to take away from this lengthy article, is that you should vote for a candidate that supports your Christian values regardless of party, and don't be swayed by the prospect that you might have to change parties. In general, we cannot break God's people down into statistics, since each individual Congressman, Senator, and Presidential candidate has a free will to choose right or wrong. If you truly want God to help this nation, then you should vote for a candidate that supports God's purposes in government... but it is worth noting that 84.1% of Republicans compared to 17.5% of Democrats support the Godly definition of Marriage, with similar results in other areas of interest to Christians... but then you do the math. God is not a Democrat or Republican, but He certainly does want us to prayerfully vote on issues according to His will, and support through our vote those people in government that are themselves voting according to His will.
The question should not be whether God is a democrat or a republican. The real question should be whether democrats or republicans support God with their words and deeds. The statistics, although just statistics, certainly are revealing. You need to pray about this before you go into the voting booth and select Senators, Congressmen, and a President.
Judgment
10/21/04
Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him. (Luke 17:3 KJV)
Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment. (John 7:24 KJV)
Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? (1 Corinthians 6:3 KJV)
Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. (Matthew 7:1-2 KJV)
The U.S. Presidential debates are over, and its time to make decisions. If you are part of the Church, then your decisions should be made in prayer, and for some of you, in prayer and fasting. There are many issues that concern the Church, like terrorism, and the war on terrorism, and abortion, gay marriage, poverty, wealth, health, etc... so there is certainly no shortage of issues in this election. To not vote is to discard a gift God has given the citizens in this nation's government... and you should never discard a gift from God.
Voting also requires that we exercise good judgment. Judgment is a loaded word with the Church, and has led many Christians to become lukewarm out of fear of being the dreaded "J word", Judgmental. God's consistent teaching throughout the Bible is that while He is the Final Judge in all matters, He also expects His people to exercise prayerful righteous judgments and decisions in the course of their lives. When we vote we are not being judgmental, although we should make a righteous, prayerful, and informed judgment when we do vote.
In the 2004 election the voters will be asked to make judgments and decisions about war and terrorism, and the costs of both. Your decisions in voting are also decisions on how you would like to proceed as a society, and how you would like to protect your society. Our "voting generation" has been blessed with a form of government (a Constitutional Republic) that guarantees individuals both an individual voice through the right to free speech, and a voice through their elected government officials. By electing government officials, like Senators, Congressmen/Congresswomen, President, Governor, and others that represent your views, you are having a say in how this society is led. If you want a society that is not openly antagonistic to God (like our current society), then you need to elect government officials that are themselves not antagonistic to God. If you want to have a more "God-friendly" society, then you need to vote for people that are supporting God-friendly causes.
The Bible says that we are called to form judgments in this life, as clearly stated in 1 Corinthians 6:3. We are reminded in John 7:24 that these judgments are to be based on sound Godly principles. People frequently read Matthew 7, and come to the erroneous conclusion that the Bible says "thou shalt not judge". This is not a Biblical teaching, and is not the teaching of Matthew 7, which is teaching about hypocritical judgment. In our present-day context, we are expected to make judgments about voting. In this election, we are expected to make decisions on our leaders based on Godly principles and righteousness. For Christians, these decisions apply to our choices for Senators, Congressmen, and President, in addition to decisions on local elections. This is by no means an easy task. To make the righteous judgment spoken of in John 7:24, we are expected to make ourselves informed on the issues, and in America, we are expected to exercise our duty to make an informed vote.
Since we are called to make judgments in this election, let's talk about judgment, imagery, and superficiality. Unfortunately, looks play an important role in American politics, which makes it difficult to exercise John 7:24 (judge righteous judgment), since everything we see on TV is imagery. When we vote we should not vote according to appearance, and booming echo in a voice, but for ideas that are sound and Godly. In this election we have seen a great deal of imagery and rumors of imagery, ranging from Botox injections to smooth out wrinkles, to the use of a well practiced booming voice. Many of us saw (on TV) John Kerry with a deep bronze tan suddenly appear one day. All imagery as part of the careers that all politicians use to appeal to peoples shallow side. In this election Mr. Kerry assumes, in many cases correctly, that the electorate has a memory span of minutes, and cannot remember that he has taken positions on all sides of every issue. It is easy to convince people that you are their friend when all you do is tell them what they want to hear. This is the "tickling of the ears" spoken of in the Bible applied in a political context. In the Bible we are warned of a Church that will become popular by telling the people what they want to hear as opposed to the truth. For some in the Church, the truth is a bitter pill to swallow, so they flock to a leader that tickles their ears with nice sounding words that have no truth behind them. This also happens in politics, where people flock to a "leader" that tickles their ears with false promises, rather than follow a leader that tells them the hard truth.
The Bible tells us that a time will come when even the elect will be at risk for being deceived. While we do not believe that John Kerry is the "great deceiver" (or even a good deceiver), we do believe that there are many that will be deceived by his booming voice and eloquence, golden tan out of a bottle, Botox, and ability to dodge all issues. This should serve as an early warning to some of you. If you are that easily deceived by John Kerry, then you are a prime candidate for even greater deceptions down the road. When you think about the debates and speeches, we pray that you try to avoid judgment based on appearance and golden tan and booming voice (John 7:24), and try to listen to ideas. In this election we have one candidate Mr. Kerry that is an empty shell, with a polished voice, false promises, and tired ideas designed to fool an electorate. We have another candidate that is really not a very gifted speaker, President George Bush, but with a history of good ideas and strong leadership. The Bible tells us that one of the greatest leaders of all time, Moses, was not a good speaker. He led the nation Israel with ideas and words from God, and not with eloquent speech, or a golden tan. When the time comes for you to go into the voting booth, vote for a leader with content in his words as ideas, as opposed to John Kerry's words without ideas. When you develop a history of changing positions, like John Kerry has, then the words that he uses lose their meaning. Vote for a leader that can make the tough decisions, George Bush, based on leadership rather than appearance.
In this election we have made it clear that most of the newer God-based issues like gay marriage, abortion, and cloning, the Democrats vote in opposition to God's position stated in the Bible, and the Republicans (for the most part) support the positions that are more Biblical. The two parties have evolved over the years with both parties moving to the left side of the political house. The Republicans have become much more liberal over the years, to the point that some Republicans are like old time Democrats. And while Republicans have become more like Democrats over the years, the Democrats are taking liberalism to new and unexplored levels of degradation in a society. As part of moving to the left, the Republicans have been active in supporting and improving programs in health, poverty, education, and other areas that were long considered to be issues belonging to the Democratic party. It is for this reason that "old time Democrats" should feel no remorse for changing parties and voting for a Republican. It is not that you have left the Democratic party, it is that the Democratic Party has left you for a more attractive voter in the outer ozone. By standing for every strange cause on earth, the Democratic party, once a great party, has reached a point that they have lost the middle of America. Although the Democratic party has left many of you former Democrats by moving too far to the left, there is still a place that supports most of your beliefs. Since the move by the Democrats to the far left, the Republicans have now occupied that all important middle ground in politics. This means that you "long-time Democrats" should feel no remorse in switching parties at this point in history. Welcome aboard.
The second biggest issue this election (after war) is the economy. Republicans have always built strong economies and strong national defenses. While it is clear that for the most part the Republican candidates present a stronger national defense position, there is some question in this election on who would do a better job with the economy. It is important to remember that this economy did not take place in a vacuum, but at a delicate point in history. This economy had gone through a false economic bubble that finally burst during the Clinton era, with Enron and other casualties, and then went into an economic recession which started at the end of the Clinton era. Following this recession, we were attacked on 9/11/01 in an attack that struck at our sense of safety and confidence.
The attacks of 9/11 were attacks on our economy, but shook our confidence to its core. The result of 9/11 was not just the destruction of 3 buildings, 4 planes, and thousands of lives. The result of 9/11 was a society that began to show fear where there was no fear, and showed pain in a grieving people that changed their lives, and changed their economy. The impact on the economy was broad, and in a few places deep, like the travel industry which was devastated with ripple effects throughout the economy. It was natural for people to slow down their spending in uncertain times, which itself had a major impact on the economy. This was the situation that created today's economy, which is actually starting to show good signs of recovery. While the Democrats complain in their ads that we have lost jobs, they fail to mention the context of this economy. Given the overall mess in both economics and national security that was handed down to this administration from the Clinton administration, I believe that the President has done a good job in keeping America on track and secure after the 9/11 attacks. He has made moves to heal the economy, and the healing is underway. This is very good news, and is another reason to reelect President Bush for a second term. He has strengthened America, and is working hard to strengthen the morals of our government and our economy.
As mentioned above, the Republicans have long been thought of as strong business proponents. This is important, since many of you would like to find jobs, or find better paying jobs. America runs on business. We manufacture things, buy things, and sell things, which collectively builds an economic society. Most of us in this society are in fact employed by businesses. Some big businesses employ over a hundred thousand workers, and there are thousands of small businesses that employ a few people each. Business and free enterprise are how America was built, and are signposts on the main road to economic growth for the nation. When our forefathers enabled a free people to build to the limits of their imagination, restricted only by the most basic set of moral laws, they created a society in which healthy economies thrive. This healthy business environment is what led America to greatness in the past, and economic success and growth will mean good jobs for the workers in the future.
The economics of war are hard to manage, since the benefit is that your own nation is not destroyed by an enemy that is trying to destroy you. The cost is whatever it takes to keep from being destroyed or taken over, tortured, and murdered by another group. So doing a cost/benefit analysis is a bit difficult since the cost/benefit = (anything it takes)/(not destroyed) is a bit vague. However, we do have to allocate a budget for national defense and make projections for later years. When a large scale event happens like 9/11/01, we (quite obviously) have a cost overrun in the budget. This happened in this war, as it has with all wars. We will pay it back in the same way we have paid back our other wars like WWII - we pay back over time in a growing economy. The big debt that was incurred during the Iraq war will have to be paid back, which we will. But the world is a better place without Saddam Hussein, and that must be reflected in the world economy. When you have a murderous creature like Hitler or Hussein at work in the world, then the economy of the world gets a bit tilted, and you shift your priorities to short term emergency tasks (eliminating Hitler, Hussein...) and acknowledge that you will have to pay for it later. Not a pretty solution, but it is the solution for the economics of war that has worked since the beginning of man.
15 Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk.
16 And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men.
17 Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?
18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?
19 Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny.
20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?
21 They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.
(Matthew 22:15-22)
Wartime economics is probably not the most exciting topic, and certainly not one you would expect to find on a Christian website. It is important however to point out that war has a cost, and that cost has to be figured into a budget and paid out over time. This issue, national security, is just one of those many "Government Services" that draws on our tax base. Taxes have never been popular. In the verse quoted above (Matthew 22:15-22) we see that Christ was being asked about taxes. The tax issue has been widely discussed this election, so lets try to get a Christian perspective on taxes. We all appreciate the need for government services like fire, police, national security, health, welfare, etc, and we realize that these can only come through taxes or volunteer effort. So far, the volunteer effort is small in the fire services, and non existent in police, national security, and other large projects, so the overwhelming majority of our government resources come through taxes.
The tax base is used to provide the essential services for the society, but it is a balancing act. If you over tax the society, it gets stagnant as seen in many of the highly taxed nations around the world. A high tax rate is generally considered undesirable for business, and hampers employment. Businesses thrive in low cost environments, where the benefits of teaming and large scale production offset the burden of taxes. When we come together in a corporate environment, we build teams that work off of each person's strength. This teaming is what makes a well run business more productive than the sum of its parts (the employees that make the business). When people come together in a well planned effort the result is always greater than the sum of the parts, so it is a natural result for businesses to grow. Overall, the corporate and small business model is effective at keeping people employed in a free society. Other societies without freedoms have been tried, like Russia, but these economies have failed to provide the standard of living that we have generated through free enterprise and the business model. So you folks need to pray for both your leaders in government, and your leaders in business. For many of you, it would probably help to get down on your knees right now, and ask the Lord for His forgiveness, and then say a prayer for your boss, and your company. When employers do well, employees do well, so pray for your employers. Most of you need to remember that it is a business that will give you your next job or promotion, and you need to pray and work hard to make that business successful, without jealousy or envy.
Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 19:23 KJV)
For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? (Matthew 16:26 KJV)
We all understand why lower taxes are good for business. As a historical matter, the Republicans have always favored lower taxes, and Democrats have favored higher taxes. Some of you, however, are upset with tax breaks for all of the wrong reasons. Some of you want to penalize people for being successful, and then rejoice at their downfall. This is jealousy and envy speaking in you, and not Christ. I believe that even in the current situation (war, debt, jobs), that George Bush's plan for economic recovery will benefit far more people, including poor people, than John Kerry's plan. I say this based on taxes. Kerry would ultimately have to raise taxes on everybody (although perhaps indirectly), because that is what tax and spend liberals do to create bigger government. And that is precisely what chokes off business. And business is where you are most likely going to get your next job, or raise. The economy is just one more reason, but an important reason, for supporting George Bush for President. George Bush and the Republican leadership understand business, and jobs.
A few last thoughts about the war:
For most Christians, the hardest issue in this election is the Iraq war. God has had his people fighting wars against evil since the beginning, not because war is good, but because we must resist evil at every turn or it grows like a cancer. Occasionally evil appears to grow out of control, as in World War II, although God's people finally won a major victory against the nightmare of Adolf Hitler. In World War II, as with all wars, God's people were able to win at a cost, a cost measured in thousands of lives and broken families. Liberty and freedom have always come at a cost, and we will need to continue defending liberty and freedom until the next coming of our Lord. In World War II it would have been an abomination to NOT stop the madness of Hitler. In this case it was clear that while God did not start WWII, He certainly did make sure that His people had a say in how it ended. In WWII, it was clear that God had His people bring judgment against Hitler and his regime, and remove him from power by force. In WWII, it was the calling of a Godly people to resist evil that finally halted Hitler's madness.
In today's war on terror and the war in Iraq we have another war where God has called on His people to stop a madman, Saddam Hussein, and it took George Bush to stop him. Throughout the Clinton administration Saddam Hussein resisted multiple attempts by the U.N. for inspections, and played games with the U.N. inspectors as a cat plays with a mouse before a kill. As the terrorists stepped into a more dangerous world of their own creation on Sept. 11, 2001, and stepped up their level of terror and madness, George Bush stepped forward in becoming a world leader in the war against terror and murderous insanity. During the Clinton administration the World Trade Center had been bombed, but it was treated as a legal matter (go figure, Clinton and Gore were lawyers, just like John Kerry and John Edwards). In contrast, George Bush stepped forward at the right point in history to lead the fight against terror, using the only weapon that terror understands - force. President Bush saw that it was time for Saddam to go, and the U.S. with allies from England, Italy, Poland, and many other nations stepped forward to stop the insanity, mass murder, torture, and rape that was part of the routine "government" of Saddam Hussein. I believe God wanted the "government" of Saddam Hussein to go, and God used the Iraq war to remove him from power.
Based on President Bush's leadership throughout this difficult period of 9/11 and the war on terror, I believe that the President should be reelected this November. National Security is now considered the single most important topic for voters, and George Bush's actions have spoken much louder than John Kerry's empty promises designed to tickle your ears. In this election you are now called upon to make a righteous judgment on who would be the best person to lead our nation in troubled times.
In summary, it is clear to this prayerful Christian that George Bush is best suited to be the next president. Christians need to carefully pray and seriously consider voting for George Bush in this election, regardless of your party affiliation. The reasons are many, but here is a quick summary:
George Bush has what American needs in a President:
- Understands national security
- Active and Decisive (no flip-flops)
- Understands Business and Jobs
- Understands Taxes and Economics
- Understands life (abortion, cloning...)
- Is a Bornagain Christian and loves God
- Promotes Marriage between one Man and one Woman
- Promotes education, healthcare, and other quality of life issues
- Is a natural Leader
- Promotes Legal Reform
- Has a wonderful First Lady that is not a loose cannon
- Has a VP Dick Cheney can serve as President in emergency (John Edwards cannot). The Liberal Democrats have done a total smear campaign on Dick Cheney during his time as Vice President. Dick Cheney would make a wonderful and decisive president, whereas even John Kerry was questioning John Edwards ability to lead the nation - before he chose him for his VP candidate slot.
- ... Many other Positive Attributes
George Bush is strong in all of the above areas, while these same key areas are areas of weakness for John Kerry and his new one-senate-term trial-lawyer VP John Edwards. This is just part of the reasoning and prayer that have gone into the decision to support George Bush for the 2004 election.
Taking an editorial stand is a difficult decision, since you know you are going to offend half of your audience. We have a special audience, so I appreciate your patience. When you believe that something is right in a clear moral decision, then it is your duty to see to it that the right action or decision is made. This is the way I felt about George Bush for President. As the editor here at this Christian webstation, I have never endorsed a candidate until this election, but I thought it was important enough to make a (lengthy) statement. I believe that this election has more potential for helping or hurting America than any election in my lifetime. We will return to our regular programming after the election and a few wrapup articles, but for now pray for our nation to grow closer to God, and pray for and vote for George Bush. It is also important to pray for and vote for the members of the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives. The president needs a Congress that he can work with. Some of the Senators, like Democrat Senator Daschle of South Dakota, have been obstructing progress in the Senate, and should be removed. He also voted against the Man/Woman Marriage Amendment in the Senate. So while you are in the voting booth this November voting for President George Bush, be sure to vote for House and Senate members that can work with President Bush and unplug the gridlock. In many cases this will mean you are voting for a Republican for the first time. Welcome.
This will probably be my last comment on this matter before the election... unless something pops up that demands comment. Try to find a few friends or even strangers and convince them to vote for George Bush and the Republicans this election. All Christians would agree that our country has gone into moral decay in the last few years. You can help that by bringing God's people back into elected office (President, Congressmen/Congresswomen, Senators, Local Offices). And you can help even more (infinitely more) by bringing the light of Christ to somebody new today. So while you are convincing others to vote for God's representatives in government, be sure to pray and talk with nonbelievers and try to lead them to salvation through Jesus Christ. God has given you a free will and the choice to do right or wrong. God has also given you a way out, so if YOU, the person reading this needs a new life just take some quiet time and pray, and ask the Lord Jesus Christ for a new life. Ask Him to straighten out the mess you have created in your life, to come into your life and make you a new creation. He can do that. He created you the first time, so He can recreate you in a new birth right now if you just ask Him.
Yours in Christ,
Job
This election, vote for security, vote for family, vote for life, and vote for a strong America. Vote for George Bush.
Since we are NOT a tax exempt organization, we are free to express our opinion. We are not trying to be a popular website, and we know that some will be offended by Christians having an opinion in politics. We are just trying to help change a nation, and bring its laws and law makers back into line with God's laws. You can help make that change. Vote for candidates whose morals reflect your morals.
|
|