Republican candidate Fred Thompson isn't religious...?

Question

I just heard this on MSNBC. He doesn't go to church and he refuses to talk about religion. For those of you who are Republican and religious, is it important that a candidate be religious for you to vote for that person?

wuzzle665: That's precisly the reason he will not get my vote.

Answer 1

Whoa, finally, a guy who's not a schmuck using the faith card to get votes.

He gets my respect on that alone. As for voting, I'll have to look at the issues.

Edit: Ok, looking at the posts the guy does seem to be quite religious, and not above putting his religious views on homosexuality into government. Never mind.

Answer 2

Hmmm... And wherein precisely is it written at the common stone pills that the union of most effective female and male is God's regulation Mr. Huckabee? As to Mr Giuliani, I as a rule surprise what "acts" you've gotten played , hidden away in a gloomy room, wherein it makes it ok. Mitt Romney... Sorry, however this guy is worse then the entire holy rollers and devout fans mixed. I find it irresistible while Republicans spout the bible and faith as their reply to questions, it indicates their incapacity to do any kind of loose pondering. The Bible was once written through guys. It is "managed" through the Vatican. There are many scrolls that have been written that you are going to certainly not, ever see within the Bible... Reason? It does now not shine a well mild or it states matters that the "powers" could now not wish in there. Let's face it, the bible may also be interpreted in lots of methods through distinctive individuals. Some individuals attempt to learn it actually, and follow what it says to brand new occasions, for that reason being equipped to "bend" the verses to intend some thing they want. How approximately... Judge now not lest ye be judged? Republicans of the Religious Right persuasion will have to allow God do the judging and persist with natural politics. Ever heard of separation of Church and State? When it involves Republicans, all you have got to do is suppose of 1 factor so that it will mean you can understand what they're... Bush. Nuff stated. Dawn

Answer 3

It isn't important to me, but I do think that whether they are religious or not, they should keep it separate from their politics.

As for Fred Thompson not being religious... I've seen a speech of his where he says we need to put God back into our laws, as was always intended. Whether he goes to church or not, I find that to be "religious".

Answer 4

Fred may not be religious but he certainly isn't above pandering to that crowd. He anti-gay statements are disappointing to say the least. Personally, I think someone who has imaginary friends should not be permitted to hold public office but I feel the same way about bigots.

Answer 5

Not all Christians believe it is necessary to attend Sunday services. I can accept that belief on its own merits, as I judge him by his own standards.

As a devout practicing Catholic, I will judge all Catholic politicians by Catholic standards. Brownback would get my vote, but he won't be the nomination. So Thompson gets my vote.

Answer 6

Not important to me.

Answer 7

Fred Thompson is not a real conservative.
Conservatives who look to Thompson for salvation need to pause and consider his record—a record that includes these votes:

Americans For Better Immigration rated his voting record with a "C" grade.
http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/prez08_gop1.html
Tancredo, Ron Paul, and Hunter all have much more conservative voting records on immigration.
http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/prez08_gop2.html
http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/prez08_gop3.html

As a confirmed member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) Thompson would support the North American Union.
http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2005/july05/05-07-13.html
http://youtube.com/watch?v=kXevDajb2lo
The CFR wants to allow Mexican trucks "unlimited access" to the United States, including the hauling of local loads between U.S. cities.
The CFR calls for creating a "North American preference" so that employers can recruit low-paid workers from anywhere in North America. No longer will illegal aliens have to be smuggled across the border; employers can openly recruit foreigners willing to work for a fraction of U.S. wages.
The CFR plan calls for massive U.S. foreign aid to the other countries. The burden on the U.S. taxpayers will include so-called "multilateral development" from the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank, "long-term loans in pesos," and a North American Investment Fund to send U.S. private capital to Mexico.


As a proponent of free trade Thompson would support the the NAFTA Superhighway.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBmFrYWPoG8
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul349.html
http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Fred_Thompson.htm#Free_Trade
"Indeed, the image of the highway, with its Chinese goods whizzing across the border borne by Mexican truckers on a privatized, foreign-operated road, is almost mundane in its plausibility.
"Construction of the NAFTA highway from Laredo, Texas to Canada is now underway," read a letter in the February 13 San Gabriel Valley Tribune. "Spain will own most of the toll roads that connect to the superhighway. Mexico will own and operate the Kansas City Smart Port. And NAFTA tribunal, not the U.S. Supreme Court, will have the final word in trade disputes."

He also voted:

♦ FOR restricting the rights of grassroots organizations to communicate with the public. See ACU’s vote 3, 1998.

♦ AGAINST an accelerated elimination of the “marriage penalty.” See ACU’s vote 10, 2001.

♦ AGAINST restraints on federal spending, specifically the Phil Gramm (R-TX) amendment to limit non-defense discretionary spending to the fiscal 1997 levels requested by President Clinton. See ACU’s vote 6, 1997.

♦ FOR the Legal Services Corporation, the perennial liberal boondoggle that provides political activism disguised as “legal services” to Democratic constituencies. See ACU’s vote 16, 1995, and vote 17, 1999.

♦ FOR corporate welfare, specifically the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC). See ACU’s vote 23. 1999.

♦ AGAINST worker and shareholder rights, specifically the Hatch (R-UT) amendment to require unions and corporations to obtain permission from dues-paying members or shareholders before spending money on political activities. See ACU’s votes 4 and 5, 2001.

♦ FOR restricting the First Amendment (free speech) rights of independent groups. See ACU’s vote 23, 1997.

♦ FOR President Clinton’s nomination of Dr. David Satcher as U.S. Surgeon General. Among other things, Satcher opposed a full ban on partial-birth abortion. See ACU’s vote 1, 1998.

♦ FOR handouts to politicians, specifically taxpayer funding of presidential campaigns. See ACU’s vote 6, 1995.

♦ FOR handouts to politicians, specifically congressional perks such as postage and broadcast time funded by taxpayers. See ACU’s vote 13, 1996.

♦ AGAINST property rights and FOR unlimited presidential power, specifically by allowing President Clinton to implement the American Heritage Rivers Initiative, which he established by executive order, without congressional approval. See ACU’s vote 20, 1997.

♦ FOR affirmative action in federal contracts. See ACU’s vote 9, 1995.

♦ FOR an increase in the minimum wage, which, of course, increases unemployment among the young and poor. See ACU’s vote 16, 1996.

♦ FOR open-ended military commitments, specifically in regard to U.S. troops in Kosovo. See ACU’s vote 8, 2000.

♦ FOR the trial lawyers lobby, and specifically against a bill that would put common-sense limitations on the medical malpractice suits that increase health costs for all of us. (Of course! He’s been a trial lawyer himself for some three decades.) See ACU’s vote 18, 2002.

♦ FOR allowing the IRS to require political and policy organizations to disclose their membership—a vote against the constitutional rights of free association and privacy. (The Clinton Administration used such IRS intimidation against conservative groups that opposed them.) See ACU’s vote 11, 2000.

♦ AGAINST impeachment proceedings against President Clinton, specifically the reappointment and reauthorization of managers (drawn from the Republican membership of the House Judiciary Committee) to conduct the impeachment trial in the Senate. See ACU’s vote 1, 1999.

There you have it. The actor who talks like a tough conservative has, in his real political life, voted in all these ways to increase the power of the federal government, limit the rights of taxpayers and individual citizens, and shut grassroots activists out of the political process.

Ronald Reagan he is NOT!
http://www.conservativesbetrayed.com/gw3/articles-latestnews/articles.php?CMSArticleID=1827&CMSCategoryID=19

I will be voting for Ron Paul.