Politics and Religion...???

Question

Ever since Bush took office, his envoking of his religious beliefs has been scutinized. The Left has declared this a breach in the seperation of church and state. They have persecuted him and other conservatives for their views and demanded these have no place in politics.

Then what is written about today in the New York Times......

FRONT PAGE - "For Clinton (Hilary), Faith intertwined with political life"

Where is the outrage? The paper elludes to outrage from the same people that have been outraged with Bush' religious life; however, it have never been blasted across the media as Bush's was.

Liberals, as always, have again shown that they are spinless hipocrates.

My questions to the libs are: How do you defend this? How can she still be a viable candidate? OR Is she lying through her teeth about her true religious convictions?

Crushinator01 - Hilary is invoking religion to gain votes. Why else would she say now? You are clueless if youthink the Hilary is not trying ot tap into the came religious votes Bush did.

For everyone who thinks that made comments regarding "Bush having spoken to God"; HELLO, that is what prayer is. The whole premise of prayer is taht you are talking to God.

Katydid13 - You arguement was flawed in two areas:
1) the media has become the voice of the "Left", this is impossible to deny. They have persecuted christians.
2) You can't in your intro deny the existence of a single "left" group and then group all religious people in the "right" group.

Sadly blinded by your own hYpocracies.

Mr Danger - "We want to be lied to", it must happen.

I bet you are screaming bloody murder about the WMD's. Hypocracy.

Bush has never forced his religion on any one. We still are free to worship where we want, we continue to purge religion from our schools like a model after eating a cheeseburger and the senate and house still perform as they did when he started.

Lame arguement.

AHHHH! Easy Game - if you read the question, I point out that Bush was accused of it first and never stated it is wrong, but , that instead the accusations are baseless.

Answer 1

Politics IS the new RELIGION. Ann Coulter was right. That is why they have been beating her up. Think about it. She has exposed the game plan and the deceivers hate her for it.
Public teachers are the Clerics... you really need to read the book. It is filled with sarcasm, but the theory smells very sound. The new Religion of the body politic is a socialistic agenda without God, only the self made gods that skim off the top for personal gain.

Answer 2

Leave Hillary alone she's just doing what she' got to do ..Politicians lie because we the people demand that they do. We want some politician to lie to our faces and tell us some idiot thing like gay marriage is the greatest threat to this nation since 12/07/41
Obviously any politician that honestly believes that is not qualified to hold any office ,But that's what we want to hear so that's what they tell us. The name of the game is about winning not about being smart or right-see Al Gore & Adlai Stevenson
The tragic thing that has happened in America is that the majority is apathetic so the elections are being determined by the myopic crazies on the fringes.
The myopic crazies of our age seem to think that a belief in God is a job requirement -we know it's not.
So anybody that wants to get elected President need to pay them a visit and kiss their proverbial rings and so they do.
Edit
You're right I was mad because I knew that the WMD's didn't exist and it was the Gulf of Tonkin all over again.
The reason I knew that WMD's didn't exist is that a history of the world tells me that if an enemy with superior forces and weapons invades a nation's capital city and that nation has WMD's at their disposal that nation will use them. If they did have them then WTF were they waiting for ?The fact that they weren't used meant that they didn't have them.

Answer 3

Up until Jimmy Carter..Presidents used to walk to Sunday Services from the White House..it was a tradition

at the "take back America" conference last year prior to the mid term elections..soros's people told the participants
to express a religious manner..that they were losing the battle because faith was being allowed to be the Repubs domain

they also said that bloggers were to post from a soldier's
perspective and complain of leadership..well what have we
seen since last spring?...guys that come on here ask the same questions..that afford them the chance to say.."war is hell..pull out..Bush sux"..

then we get obama..changing religions..and a religious hillary clinton..when the whole 8 yrs..they went to Baptist Church once for a photo-op (other than black churches along the campaign trail) with a Bible under bill's arm..with jessie jackson and his Mistress after he came clean about lieing about lewinsky..

all designed to make a phony cheap gesture referencing a warped desire for redemption ..

they think we are all stupid..

Answer 4

lovable consumer call ;) In a christian/judeo context i assume you will make the case that it has exchange right into a pretend god (politics and the federal government or a minimum of a few of human beings that characterize it.) Even in that context, it would be a function of prioritizing your ideals, needs, desires, desires and aspiration to confirm the place politics falls and to what degree this is the middle of your international as against different conflicting hobbies. to date as th separation is going, it somewhat is a chick and egg argument. And too a super degree it somewhat is mute. there's a choose for a centralized government for infrastructure and risk-free practices. maximum different subject concerns alongside with wellbeing care are states rights subject concerns. The question that truly splits the version between a nicely-recognized republican (much less - government - is greater) and a prepare democrat (greater - government is greater helpful) is how lots centralized goevernment is suited. In immediately's international, i individually do no longer see many indicators of a nicely-recognized republican or a nicely-recognized democrat. it somewhat is tricky to tell who's who at cases. it somewhat is a good greater desirable reason at the back of the deficit spinning our of administration. there is not any counter stability to the present temper of spend all of it now on the two facet of the aisle. this could be an particularly exciting communication with a team of friends over dinner and many wine however!

Answer 5

Hillary Clinton is a ruling class candidate who has deep roots in the Republican party. She is a lifelong, devout Methodist, and was especially active in church groups as a teenager. She was a Goldwater (Republican) supporter while in high school, and was President of the Young Republicans at Wellesley College.

Bill Clinton came into office promising national health care and instead gave us imperialist war in Yugoslavia, the bombing of Iraq, an increased police state, consolidation of the media, destruction of welfare and NAFTA. G.W. Bush is merely the consolidation of the Clinton era. Hillary would be the consolidation of the Bush era -- which is why she is being so well funded by many of the same entities who funded Bush.

"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross." -- Sinclair Lewis

Answer 6

First of all there is no such thing as "the left." There are people who's political beliefs are to the left of the President, but there is no one voice.

No one who represents the majority of liberals has ever said that a person's faith is not or should not be tied into what they do in their political life. Of course they do.

People have demanded that Bush not enforce his particular religious beliefs on the rest of the country. People have demanded that his particular view of religion not over rule science.

Ronald Reagan often talked about his faith. Of all the things that the left criticized him for having faith wasn't one of them.

Bill Clinton also talked about his faith. Of modern Presidents he was one of the few to regularly participate in a religious congregation while he was President. He regularly worshiped at Foundry United Methodist with his family.

It's not Bush's faith I object to, it's his attitude and that of much of the rest of the religious right that his is the only way to have faith. It's not.

For a full discussion of these issues see God is Not a Republican. Or a Democrat. at http://www.sojo.net/action/alerts/sojourners_petition.pdf

Answer 7

I agree with a statement GW made in a tv interview when he said. " YES I believe in GOD. I have my reliegious views but I also represent the nation as a whole.I try to live my religion but must not put my faith above the good of all" That to me somes it upEven the Reliegious right got upset with him over his but I am PROUD of his stand.As a business man I did not drink or smoke but some of my employees did.I could not force my beliefs on them about drinking or smoking . The jusat lived their lives & I lived mine. That is why religion in politics is a nothing issue. I dont know what faith the Clintons are. They say something differant in every church.

Answer 8

Once again you say something and assume it's true when it not, does fox news give lessons on how to do that? The great percentage of democrats are religious themselves. They dislike Bush for many, many many reasons. The reason his faith come up is because many people voted for him just because of his faith, which is a horrible reason to vote for someone (Hitler was a Christian) and its also a key component in Bush's delusion that he is infallible. He believes God guided him into this war and that the main reason he won't even consider the fact he's wrong.
One more thing, stop telling us what we believe, I know what I blieve and it's obvious you don't have a clue.

Answer 9

One can be a person of faith without using one's faith as a political bludgeon as has Mr. Bush. Don't you get it? The difference between having faith and using faith?? We resent Mr. Bush using his alleged faith to promote his agendas which are of questionable morality.

Answer 10

On your question. She is is both lying an is not a viable candidate. This is all about getting the Clinton machine back in office. This country needs new blood in the Presidents office. Rudy or Obama are so far the best two choices. The rest are retreads. There are a few more that have not officially put in their name to run yet that would be a good choice.