# GENERAL FORUM > IN THE NEWS >  Teamsters to endorse Obama... GO OBAMA!

## Fat Guy

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The International Brotherhood of Teamsters plans to endorse Sen. Barack Obama for president, two Democratic sources tell CNN.

Obama is scheduled to meet with Teamster President James Hoffa in Austin, Texas, on Wednesday, according to The Associated Press.
The union is expected to announce its endorsement soon after the meeting, AP reported.

The 1.4 million-member Teamsters union is the third labor organization to throw its support behind the senator from Illinois in less than a week.

The 1.9 million-member Service Employees International Union endorsed him Friday and the 1.3-million member United Food and Commercial Workers Union endorsed him on Thursday.

A union's endorsement can give a candidate's campaign a significant boost because union members often act as "ground troops" to canvass neighborhoods and work the phones. 

Obama has been on a political roll since Super Tuesday two weeks ago. He has won 10 straight Democratic contests, including the Wisconsin primary and Hawaii caucuses on Tuesday.

The union endorsement could help Obama in his struggle against Sen. Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination, particularly among the lower-income voters Clinton is targeting.

Exit polls of Wisconsin voters suggested that Obama was winning over some blue collar voters, a group that had voted for Clinton in previous primaries and caucuses.

Among Wisconsin voters making between $15,000 and $30,000 a year, Obama edged out Clinton 52 percent to 46 percent. Obama had a 56 percent to 44 percent advantage over Clinton among voters making between $30,000 and $50,000.

The Teamsters' backing may also help Obama in Ohio, which holds primaries on March 4, and Pennsylvania, which holds its primary on April 22. 

According to AP, Ohio and Pennsylvania have some of the highest levels of unionization in the country. More than 15 percent of the Pennsylvania's workforce are union members, and over 14 of Ohio's workers are unionized.

There is no guarantee, however, that a big union endorsement will lead to a delegate carrying a state.

Before the Nevada caucuses in January, Obama won the support of the Culinary Workers Union and the Service Employees International Union of Nevada. Clinton, however, carried the state over Obama, by 51 percent to 45percent.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/...ama/index.html

He's got my Vote... :7up:

----------


## RA

Do you know his position on anything?

Other than he is change for hope for the future?

----------


## Fat Guy

> Do you know his position on anything?
> 
> Other than he is change for hope for the future?


*Do you have any other questions roidattack???* :Aajack: 



*Barack Obama on Abortion:*

	Voted against banning partial birth abortion. (Oct 2007) 
	Stem cells hold promise to cure 70 major diseases. (Aug 2007) 
	Trust women to make own decisions on partial-birth abortion. (Apr 2007) 
	Extend presumption of good faith to abortion protesters. (Oct 2006) 
	Constitution is a living document; no strict constructionism. (Oct 2006) 
	Pass the Stem Cell Research Bill. (Jun 2004) 
	Protect a woman's right to choose. (May 2004) 
	Supports Roe v. Wade. (Jul 1998) 
	Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007) 
	Voted NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions. (Jul 2006) 
	Voted YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives. (Mar 2005) 
	Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance. (Dec 2006) 

*Barack Obama on Budget & Economy:*

	Bush & GOP dug budget hole; need 1 or 2 years to dig out. (Dec 2007) 
	Take China "to the mat" about currency manipulation. (Dec 2007) 
	Regulate financial instruments to protect home mortgages. (Aug 2007) 
	Return to PayGo: compensate for all new spending. (Oct 2006) 
	Bush's economic policies are not working. (May 2004) 
	Supports federal programs to protect rural economy. (May 2004) 
	Voted NO on paying down federal debt by rating programs' effectiveness. (Mar 2007) 
	Voted NO on $40B in reduced federal overall spending. (Dec 2005)

*Barack Obama on Civil Rights:*

	Being gay or lesbian is not a choice. (Nov 2007) 
	The politics of fear undermines basic civil liberties. (Oct 2007) 
	Ok to expose 6-year-olds to gay couples; they know already. (Sep 2007) 
	Better enforce women's pay equity via Equal Pay Act. (Aug 2007) 
	Strengthen the Americans with Disabilities Act. (Aug 2007) 
	Has any marriage broken up because two gays hold hands? (Aug 2007) 
	We need strong civil unions, not just weak civil unions. (Aug 2007) 
	Legal rights for gays are conferred by state, not by church. (Aug 2007) 
	Disentangle gay rights from the word "marriage". (Aug 2007) 
	Gay marriage is less important that equal gay rights. (Aug 2007) 
	Gay rights movement is somewhat like civil rights movement. (Aug 2007) 
	Let each denominations decide on recognizing gay marriage. (Jul 2007) 
	Racial equality good for America as a whole. (Jun 2007) 
	Put the Confederate flag in a museum, not the state house. (Apr 2007) 
	Supports health benefits for gay civil partners. (Oct 2006) 
	Muslim heritage gives Obama unique influence in Muslim world. (Oct 2006) 
	Opposes gay marriage; supports civil union & gay equality. (Oct 2006) 
	No black or white America--just United States of America. (Oct 2006) 
	Marriage not a human right; non-discrimination is. (Oct 2004) 
	African-Americans vote Democratic because of issue stances. (Jul 2004) 
	Forthright on racial issues and on his civil rights history. (Jul 2004) 
	Defend freedom and equality under law. (May 2004) 
	Politicians: don't use religion to insulate from criticism. (Apr 2004) 
	Supports affirmative action in colleges and government. (Jul 1998) 
	Include sexual orientation in anti-discrimination laws. (Jul 1998) 
	Miscegenation a felony in 1960 when Obamas practiced it. (Aug 1996) 
	The civil rights movement was a success. (Aug 1996) 
	Voted NO on recommending Constitutional ban on flag desecration. (Jun 2006) 
	Voted NO on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage. (Jun 2006) 
	Rated 89% by the HRC, indicating a pro-gay-rights stance. (Dec 2006) 
	Rated 100% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance. (Dec 2006) 

*Barack Obama on Corporations:*

	End tax breaks for companies that send jobs overseas. (Aug 2007) 
	Hold corporations responsible for pensions & work conditions. (Aug 2007) 
	Tax incentives for corporate responsibility. (Jun 2004) 
	Close tax loopholes for US companies relocating abroad. (Jun 2004) 
	REAL USA Plan: Reward companies that create domestic jobs. (Jun 2004) 
	Voted YES on repealing tax subsidy for companies which move US jobs offshore. (Mar 2005) 
	Voted NO on reforming bankruptcy to include means-testing & restrictions. (Mar 2005)

*Barack Obama on Crime:*

	Lack of enforcement sets tone for more hate crimes. (Dec 2007) 
	Need justice that is not just us, but is everybody. (Jun 2007) 
	Some heinous crimes justify the ultimate punishment. (Oct 2006) 
	Videotape all capital punishment interrogations. (Oct 2006) 
	Battles legislatively against the death penalty. (Jul 2004) 
	Supports alternative sentencing and rehabilitation. (Jul 1998) 
	Voted YES on reinstating $1.15 billion funding for the COPS Program. (Mar 2007) 
	Rated 75% by the NCJA, indicating a mixed record on criminal justice. (Dec 2005)

*Barack Obama on Drugs:*

	2001: questions harsh penalties for drug dealing. (Oct 2007) 
	Do not lower drinking age from 21 to 18. (Sep 2007) 
	Smokes cigarettes now; smoked some pot in high school. (Feb 2007) 
	Admitted marijuana use in high school & college. (Jan 2007) 
	Deal with street-level drug dealing as minimum-wage affair. (Oct 2006) 
	Understand why youngsters want to use drugs. (Aug 1996)

*Barack Obama on Education:*

	We need a sense of urgency about improving education system. (Sep 2007) 
	Nationwide program to reconstruct crumbling school buildings. (Sep 2007) 
	STEP UP: summer learning opportunities for disadvantaged. (Aug 2007) 
	We left the money behind for No Child Left Behind. (Aug 2007) 
	Pay "master teachers" extra, but with buy-in from teachers. (Aug 2007) 
	Sends kids to private school; but wants good schools for all. (Jul 2007) 
	Supreme Court was wrong on school anti-integration ruling. (Jul 2007) 
	Incentives to hire a million teachers over next decade. (Jun 2007) 
	Pay teachers more money & treat them like professionals. (Jun 2007) 
	Public school system status quo is indefensible. (Oct 2006) 
	More teacher pay in exchange for more teacher accountability. (Oct 2006) 
	Guarantee affordable life-long, top-notch education. (Jun 2006) 
	Provide decent funding and get rid of anti-intellectualism. (Jul 2004) 
	Address the growing achievement gap between students. (May 2004) 
	Will add 25,000 teachers in high-need areas. (May 2004) 
	Supports charter schools and private investment in schools. (Jul 1998) 
	Free public college for any student with B-average. (Jul 1998) 
Voting Record

	First Senate bill: increase Pell Grant from $4,050 to $5,100. (Aug 2007) 
	Sponsored legislations that recruit and reward good teachers. (Sep 2004) 
	Voted YES on $52M for "21st century community learning centers". (Oct 2005) 
	Voted YES on $5B for grants to local educational agencies. (Oct 2005) 
	Voted YES on shifting $11B from corporate tax loopholes to education. (Mar 2005)

*Barack Obama on Energy & Oil:*

	Fuel efficiency and Middle East stability help on fuel costs. (Oct 2007) 
	Nuclear power ok if we safeguard against waste & terrorism. (Sep 2007) 
	Explore nuclear power as part of alternative energy mix. (Jul 2007) 
	Cheney met environmentalists once; but Big Oil 40 times. (Jul 2007) 
	Cap-and-trade carbon emissions; raise CAFE standard. (Jun 2007) 
	Stop sending $800M a day to Mideast dictators for oil. (Mar 2007) 
	Wants Detroit to build more hybrids & use more ethanol. (Oct 2006) 
	We cannot drill our way out of our addiction to oil. (Oct 2006) 
	3-way win: economy, environment, & stop funding terror. (Jun 2006) 
	Conserve, develop alternative fuels, increase efficiencies. (Oct 2004) 
	Sponsored legislations that improve energy efficiency. (Sep 2004) 
	20% nation's power supply from renewable sources by 2020. (Sep 2004) 
	20% renewable energy by 2020. (Jul 2004) 
	Invest in alternative energy sources. (Jun 2004) 
	Increase CAFE to 40 mpg. (Jun 2004) 
	Tradable credits for renewable energy. (Jun 2004) 
	Renewable Fuels Standard: require ethanol in fuel supply. (May 2004) 
	Voted YES on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies. (Jun 2007) 
	Voted YES on making oil-producing and exporting cartels illegal. (Jun 2007) 
	Voted YES on factoring global warming into federal project planning. (May 2007) 
	Voted YES on disallowing an oil leasing program in Alaska's ANWR. (Nov 2005) 
	Voted YES on $3.1B for emergency oil assistance for hurricane-hit areas. (Oct 2005) 
	Voted YES on reducing oil usage by 40% by 2025 (instead of 5%). (Jun 2005) 
	Voted YES on banning drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. (Mar 2005) 
	Rated 100% by the CAF, indicating support for energy independence. (Dec 2006)

*Barack Obama on Environment:*

	Reduce mercury and lead to protect community health. (Aug 2007) 
	Protect the Great Lakes & our National Parks and Forests. (Aug 2007) 
	Give Katrina contracts to locals, not to Halliburton. (Jun 2007) 
	Three months working on minority students recycling. (Aug 1996) 
	Voted YES on including oil & gas smokestacks in mercury regulations. (Sep 2005)

*Barack Obama on Foreign Policy:*	Obama Doctrine: ideology has overridden facts and reality. (Dec 2007) 
	China is a competitor but not an enemy. (Dec 2007) 
	Willing to meet with Fidel Castro, Kim Jung Il & Hugo Chavez. (Nov 2007) 
	Invest in our relationship with Mexico. (Sep 2007) 
	Strengthen NATO to face 21st-century threats. (Aug 2007) 
	$50B annually to strengthen weak states at risk of collapse. (Aug 2007) 
	No "strategic ambiguity" on foreign policy issues. (Aug 2007) 
	My critics engineered our biggest foreign policy disaster. (Aug 2007) 
	China is a competitor, but not an enemy. (Aug 2007) 
	Meet with enemy leaders; it's a disgrace that we have not. (Jul 2007) 
	No-fly zone in Darfur; but pay attention more in Africa. (Jun 2007) 
	Europe & Japan are allies, but China is a competitor. (Apr 2007) 
	Palestinian people suffer-but from not recognizing Israel. (Apr 2007) 
	FactCheck: Palestinian suffering from stalled peace effort. (Apr 2007) 
	Protested South African apartheid while at college. (Feb 2007) 
	Focus on corruption to improve African development. (Oct 2006) 
	Supports Israel's self-defense; but distrusted by Israelis. (Oct 2006) 
	Visited Africa in 2006; encouraged HIV testing & research. (Oct 2006) 
	Never has US had so much power & so little influence to lead. (Jul 2004) 
	US policy should promote democracy and human rights. (Jul 2004) 


*Barack Obama on Health Care:*	FactCheck: Reducing obesity would save $18B, not $1T. (Dec 2007) 
	Being poor in this country is hazardous to your health. (Dec 2007) 
	Problem isn't mandating coverage, but affording it. (Nov 2007) 
	FactCheck: Coverage plan might leave 8.5 million uninsured. (Nov 2007) 
	Tackle insurance companies on reimbursement system. (Oct 2007) 
	Help young people deal with the cost of medical education. (Oct 2007) 
	Government healthcare like members of Congress have. (Sep 2007) 
	Morally wrong that terminally ill must consider money. (Sep 2007) 
	FactCheck: Correct that insurance lobbying cost $1B. (Sep 2007) 
	National smoking bans only after trying local bans. (Sep 2007) 
	Increase competition in the insurance and drug markets. (Aug 2007) 
	National Health Insurance Exchange for private coverage. (Aug 2007) 
	Reform failed in '90s because of drug company lobbying. (Jul 2007) 
	Health plan cuts typical family's premium by $2,500 a year. (Jun 2007) 
	Give people the choice to buy affordable health care. (Jun 2007) 
	Take on insurance companies; drive down health care costs. (Jun 2007) 
	National insurance pool & catastrophic insurance. (Apr 2007) 
	Employers are going to have to pay or play. (Mar 2007) 
	Need political will to accomplish universal coverage. (Mar 2007) 
	Address minority health needs by more coverage & targeting. (Mar 2007) 
	Healthcare system is broken without lifetime employment. (Oct 2006) 
	The market alone can't solve our health-care woes. (Oct 2006) 
	Health care tied to balancing costs and taxes nation wide. (Jun 2006) 
	Allowing seniors to bulk purchase will save taxpayers' money. (Oct 2004) 
	Crises happen in our lives and healthcare is necessary. (Oct 2004) 
	Believes health care is a right, not a privilege for the few. (Sep 2004) 
	Allow prescription drug re-importation. (May 2004) 
	Will expand health coverage & allow meds to be re-imported. (May 2004) 
	Ensure access to basic care. (Jul 1998) 
AIDS

	We need condom distribution to deal with the scourge of AIDS. (Aug 2007) 
	Homophobia prevents talking about HIV/AIDS. (Jun 2007) 
	Got tested for AIDS, with wife, in public, in Kenya. (Jun 2007) 
	Lead global fight against AIDS. (Jul 2004) 
Voting Record

	No need to mandate coverage; just let people afford it. (Jul 2007) 
	Voted YES on requiring negotiated Rx prices for Medicare part D. (Apr 2007) 
	Voted YES on expanding enrollment period for Medicare Part D. (Feb 2006) 
	Voted YES on increasing Medicaid rebate for producing generics. (Nov 2005) 
	Voted YES on negotiating bulk purchases for Medicare prescription drug. (Mar 2005) 
	Improve services for people with autism & their families. (Apr 2007)



*Barack Obama on Homeland Security:*
	Restore habeas corpus to reach Muslims abroad. (Dec 2007) 
	Give 18-year-old women opportunity to serve. (Dec 2007) 
	Human rights and national security are complementary. (Nov 2007) 
	America cannot sanction torture; no loopholes or exceptions. (Sep 2007) 
	Repeal Don't-Ask-Don't-Tell. (Aug 2007) 
	Support veterans via the Dignity for Wounded Warriors Act. (Aug 2007) 
	We are no safer now than we were after 9/11. (Aug 2007) 
	Register women for draft, but not for combat. (Jul 2007) 
	Close Guantanamo and restore the right of habeas corpus. (Jun 2007) 
	Address the deficiencies in the VA system. (Jun 2007) 
	The cost of the Iraq war should not shortchange VA benefits. (Jun 2007) 
	Make sure the outpatient facilities work for veterans. (Jun 2007) 
	Get first responders the healthcare and equipment they need. (Mar 2007) 
	Comprehensive plan for our veterans healthcare. (Mar 2007) 
	Need to be both strong and smart on national defense. (Oct 2006) 
	Grow size of military to maintain rotation schedules. (Oct 2006) 
	Battling terrorism must go beyond belligerence vs. isolation. (Oct 2006) 
	We are currently inspecting 3% of all incoming cargo. (Oct 2004) 
	Increase funding to decommission Russian nukes. (Jul 2004) 
	Give our soldiers the best equipment and training available. (Jul 2004) 
	Balance domestic intelligence reform with civil liberty risk. (Jul 2004) 
	Voted NO on removing need for FISA warrant for wiretapping abroad. (Aug 2007) 
	Voted YES on limiting soldiers' deployment to 12 months. (Jul 2007) 
	Voted YES on implementing the 9/11 Commission report. (Mar 2007) 
	Voted YES on preserving habeus corpus for Guantanamo detainees. (Sep 2006) 
	Voted YES on requiring CIA reports on detainees & interrogation methods. (Sep 2006) 
	Voted YES on reauthorizing the PATRIOT Act. (Mar 2006) 
	Voted NO on extending the PATRIOT Act's wiretap provision. (Dec 2005) 
	Voted YES on restricting business with entities linked to terrorism. (Jul 2005) 
	Voted YES on restoring $565M for states' and ports' first responders. (Mar 2005) 


*Barack Obama on Immigration:*
	Comprehensive solution includes employers & borders. (Nov 2007) 
	Undocumented workers come here to work, not to drive. (Nov 2007) 
	Support granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. (Nov 2007) 
	FactCheck: Lightning IS likelier than employer prosecution. (Nov 2007) 
	Illegal immigrants' lack of ID is a public safety concern. (Oct 2007) 
	Immigration system is broken for legal immigrants. (Sep 2007) 
	Reform must include more border security, and border wall. (Sep 2007) 
	Sanctuary cities show that feds are not enforcing law. (Sep 2007) 
	Pathway to citizenship, but people have to earn it. (Aug 2007) 
	Let's be a nation of laws AND a nation of immigrants. (Aug 2007) 
	Do a better job patrolling the Canadian and Mexican borders. (Jun 2007) 
	Give immigrants who are here a rigorous path to citizenship. (Jun 2007) 
	Extend welfare and Medicaid to immigrants. (Jul 1998) 
	Voted YES on comprehensive immigration reform. (Jun 2007) 
	Voted NO on declaring English as the official language of the US government. (Jun 2007) 
	Voted YES on building a fence along the Mexican border. (Sep 2006) 
	Voted YES on establishing a Guest Worker program. (May 2006) 
	Voted YES on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security. (May 2006) 
	Voted YES on giving Guest Workers a path to citizenship. (May 2006) 
	Rated 8% by USBC, indicating an open-border stance. (Dec 2006)
Barack Obama on Jobs:
	Paying more at Wal-Mart is worth it for having US jobs. (Dec 2007) 
	Give public safety officers collective bargaining rights. (Aug 2007) 
	Chief co-sponsor of IL ENDA, against gay job discrimination. (Aug 2007) 
	Chicago's Soldier Field stadium construction created jobs. (Aug 2007) 
	Pres. candidates can afford minimum wage; most folks can't. (Jul 2007) 
	Make the minimum wage a living wage. (Jun 2007) 
	Burdens of globalization are placed on the backs of workers. (Mar 2007) 
	Owes unions who endorsed him; that's why he's in politics. (Oct 2006) 
	Working full-time should mean enough to support a family. (Oct 2006) 
	Overrode federal overtime rules and raised the minimum wage. (Sep 2004) 
	Make sure that African-American men have access to jobs. (Jul 2004) 
	Fund Trade Adjustment Assistance for service workers too. (Jun 2004) 
	Increase IL minimum wage to $6.50 an hour. (Jun 2004) 
	Tax cuts for the rich do not create jobs. (May 2004) 
	Obama will strengthen unions and workers' rights. (May 2004) 
	Voted YES on restricting employer interference in union organizing. (Jun 2007) 
	Voted YES on increasing minimum wage to $7.25. (Feb 2007) 
	Voted YES on raising the minimum wage to $7.25 rather than $6.25. (Mar 2005)


*Barack Obama on Social Security:*	FactCheck: Removing $97,500 cap would be $1.3T tax increase. (Nov 2007) 
	Cutting benefits & raising retirement age are wrong answers. (Nov 2007) 
	The wealthy should pay a bit more on the payroll tax. (Oct 2007) 
	Privatization puts retirement at whim of stock market. (Sep 2007) 
	Stop any efforts to privatize Social Security. (Aug 2007) 
	No privatization; but consider earning cap over $97,500. (Jul 2007) 
	Stock market risk is ok, but not for Social Security. (Oct 2006) 
	$2000 tax credit for Working Families Savings Accounts. (Jul 2004) 
	Voted NO on establishing reserve funds & pre-funding for Social Security. (Mar 2007)


*Barack Obama on War & Peace:*
	Surge strategy has made a difference in Iraq but failed. (Nov 2007) 
	Clinton has not been consistent on the Iraq War. (Oct 2007) 
	Leave troops for protection of Americans & counterterrorism. (Sep 2007) 
	Hopes to remove all troops from Iraq by 2013, but no pledge. (Sep 2007) 
	Surge has not succeeded because it ignores political issues. (Sep 2007) 
	Tell people the truth: quickest is 1-2 brigades per month. (Sep 2007) 
	No good options in Iraq--just bad options & worse options. (Aug 2007) 
	Be as careful getting out as we were careless getting in. (Jul 2007) 
	Troops not dying in vain; but we need plans for success. (Jul 2007) 
	We live in a more dangerous world because of Bush's actions. (Jun 2007) 
	Case for war was weak, but people voted their best judgment. (Jun 2007) 
	War in Iraq is "dumb" but troops still need equipment. (Apr 2007) 
	Increase ground forces in Iraq to decrease troop rotations. (Apr 2007) 
	Open-ended Iraq occupation must end: no military solution. (Apr 2007) 
	Begin withdrawal May 1 2007; finish by March 31 2008. (Apr 2007) 
	Open dialogue with both Syria and Iran. (Apr 2007) 
	Withdraw gradually and keep some troops in Iraq region. (Mar 2007) 
	Iraq 2002: ill-conceived venture; 2007: waste of resources. (Feb 2007) 
	Longtime critic of Iraq war. (Nov 2006) 
	Saddam did not own and was not providing WMD to terrorists. (Oct 2004) 
	Initial military was extraordinarily successful in Iraq. (Oct 2004) 
	Invading Iraq was a bad strategic blunder. (Oct 2004) 
	We must make sure that Iraq is stable having gone in there. (Oct 2004) 
	Advance the training speed and get the reconstruction moving. (Oct 2004) 
	Democratizing Iraq will be more difficult than Afghanistan. (Oct 2004) 
	Never fudge numbers or shade the truth about war. (Jul 2004) 
	Set a new tone to internationalize the Iraqi reconstruction. (Jul 2004) 
	Iraq war was sincere but misguided, ideologically driven. (Jul 2004) 
	Not opposed to all wars, but opposed to the war in Iraq. (Jul 2004) 
	International voice in Iraq in exchange for debt forgiveness. (Jul 2004) 
Mideast/Asia/Afghanistan

	Meet directly for diplomacy with the leadership in Iran. (Nov 2007) 
	Committed to Iran not having nuclear weapons. (Oct 2007) 
	Iran military resolution sends the region a wrong signal. (Oct 2007) 
	Deal with al Qaeda on Pakistan border, but not with nukes. (Aug 2007) 
	Get al Qaeda hiding in hills between Afghanistan & Pakistan. (Aug 2007) 
	Military action in Pakistan if we have actionable intel. (Aug 2007) 
	FactCheck: Yes, Obama said invade Pakistan to get al Qaeda. (Aug 2007) 
	Focus on battle in Afghanistan and root out al Qaeda. (Jun 2007) 
	Bush cracked down on some terrorists' financial networks. (Jun 2007) 
	Iraq has distracted us from Taliban in Afghanistan. (Apr 2007) 
	Iran with nuclear weapons is a profound security threat. (Apr 2007) 
	We are playing to Osama's plan for winning a war from a cave. (Oct 2006) 
	Terrorists are in Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Iran. (Oct 2004) 
	Problems with current Israeli policy. (Jul 2004) 
	Engage North Korea in 6-party talks. (Jul 2004) 
	Use moral authority to work towards Middle East peace. (Jul 2004) 
Voting Record

	Voted to fund war until 2006; now wants no blank check. (Nov 2007) 
	Late to vote against war is not late to oppose war. (Jun 2007) 
	Spending on the Cold War relics should be for the veterans. (Jun 2007) 
	Would have voted no to authorize the President to go to war. (Jul 2004) 
	Voted YES on redeploying US troops out of Iraq by March 2008. (Mar 2007) 
	Voted NO on redeploying troops out of Iraq by July 2007. (Jun 2006) 
	Voted YES on investigating contract awards in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Nov 2005) 

*Barack Obama on Welfare & Poverty:*	Stop Fraud Act: full disclosure in subprime lending. (Sep 2007) 
	Engages people of faith on all aspects of his public service. (Aug 2007) 
	Community organizer on Chicago's South Side. (Feb 2007) 
	Black churches minister to social needs out of necessity. (Oct 2006) 
	Welfare receipts know how to become successful but need help. (Jul 2004) 
	$100M increase in IL Earned Income Tax Credit. (Jun 2004) 
	Inner city problems are the painful truths. (Aug 1996) 
	Exorcise the ghostly figure that haunts black dreams. (Aug 1996)

 :Bbiwin:

----------


## kfrost06

So you can copy and paste, good. Can you explain some of these like, Welfare receipts know how to become successful but need help. (Jul 2004)? or Military action in Pakistan if we have actionable intel. (Aug 2007)? We must make sure that Iraq is stable having gone in there. (Oct 2004)? We cannot drill our way out of our addiction to oil. (Oct 2006)?

What does any of that mean? He wants to attack Pakistan stay in Iraq the oil and welfare say nothing.

----------


## kfrost06

Vote for me, kfrost06 I am for a successful future(2008), I am for accountability (2008), For a better economy (2008), A cure for AIDs (2008), more jobs (2008), etc

----------


## kfrost06

My favorite:

No good options in Iraq--just bad options & worse options. (Aug 2007)

He has my vote now too! Go Obama

----------


## Fat Guy

> What does any of that mean? *He wants to attack Pakistan stay in Iraq the oil and welfare say nothing*.


You take a few ambiguous statements and twist it into this…??? Wow that’s weak. 

There are many more clear statements in this posting, than the few out of context statements from public speeches he made that you took to make a poor point and spin it around, that can clearly show his position / stance on public policy.

*You should try reading the entire post*… You might learn something of value.  :Welcome:

----------


## kfrost06

No, I took nothing out of context, I got it from your post and now you cry foul. Read what you copy and paste before you post it.

----------


## kfrost06

Register women for draft, but not for combat. (Jul 2007) 

WTF is this?

No "strategic ambiguity" on foreign policy issues. (Aug 2007)

because his are just so clear

----------


## Fat Guy

kfrost I hate to break it to you but I think you just don’t get it. I have read the statements and to me the positions are clear. I know it’s hard for some people to comprehend certain ideas but if you have any questions I will try to help you understand

----------


## Act of God

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jj4VK9wVAi0

awesome interview with a supporter/senator (I believe)

----------


## alphaman

I have no idea how a man could call himself a Christian and take those positions on social issues. Talk about a hypocrite...

----------


## Oki-Des

He is the only one for 3rd term abortions though. I think that this practice is absurd. If a baby is 9 months developed, you should not be able to kill the baby before the head comes out of the woman and call this an abortion.

----------


## Tock

> I have no idea how a man could call himself a Christian and take those positions on social issues. Talk about a hypocrite...


How about the www.godhatesfags.com people? They're Christian, and they picket at the funerals of dead US servicemen. 

Christians take all sorts of positions on all sorts of issues. They used to burn people for witchcraft. Now they don't. Which group is right?

----------


## Big

> Vote for me, kfrost06 I am for a successful future(2008), I am for accountability (2008), For a better economy (2008), A cure for AIDs (2008), more jobs (2008), etc


I like Ron Paul, but you make a worthy candidate kfrost. Based on your stance on the pertinent issues, I'm throwing my support behind you.

----------


## SMCengineer

^^If your endorsing him than I'll vote for Kfrost as well. Plus, I like his policy of a "better economy."

----------


## RANA

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jj4VK9wVAi0
> 
> awesome interview with a supporter/senator (I believe)


I heard that on the radio today, wow did I laugh my ass off

----------


## Fat Guy

*http://www.barackobama.com/index.php*

----------


## Pooks

They didn't mention his STANCE on BUSH TAX CUTS.. that are due for renewal.

thats a big one...

If i remember correctly from the post in the lounge if u make like 30grand a year or more. the bush tax cuts save u like 5grand.

----------


## Carlos_E

> They didn't mention his STANCE on BUSH TAX CUTS.. that are due for renewal.
> 
> thats a big one...
> 
> If i remember correctly from the post in the lounge if u make like 30grand a year or more. the bush tax cuts save u like 5grand.


That's incorrect. Can you provide a link to back that?

----------


## alphaman

> How about the www.godhatesfags.com people? They're Christian, and they picket at the funerals of dead US servicemen. 
> 
> Christians take all sorts of positions on all sorts of issues. They used to burn people for witchcraft. Now they don't. Which group is right?


Have you lost your mind? 

What in the world makes you think I would say those people are true Christians, and how did you get that from my statement about Obama?

Now that Logan's gone... you've got to bait someone though, I guess.  :Icon Rolleyes:

----------


## alphaman

> That's incorrect. Can you provide a link to back that?


What are you saying is incorrect?

----------


## Carlos_E

> What are you saying is incorrect?


I'm referring to his comment about the tax cuts.



> if u make like 30grand a year or more. the bush tax cuts save u like 5grand.

----------


## Carlos_E

> I have no idea how a man could call himself a Christian and take those positions on social issues. Talk about a hypocrite...


I don't know how you can call yourself a Christian and then judge someone else's beliefs. Thou shall not judge. Aren't you being a hypocrite?

----------


## alphaman

> I'm referring to his comment about the tax cuts.


Are you saying that Obama is for the tax cuts or that Pooks' numbers are off?

----------


## Carlos_E

> Are you saying that Obama is for the tax cuts or that Pooks' numbers are off?


Pook's numbers are off.

----------


## alphaman

> I don't know how you can call yourself a Christian and then judge someone else's beliefs. Thou shall not judge. Aren't you being a hypocrite?


*sigh* so now we are talking about the Bible... first of all "thou shalt not judge" is not in the Bible. If you can find it, please show me where it is. ( http://www.biblegateway.com ) It is often referred to as the false 11th commandment and is often used by liberals in response to their being called out on something by a Christian.

What the Bible does say about this...





> 2 Tim. 4:2-5
> 
> 2Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encouragewith great patience and careful instruction. 3For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. 5But you, keep your head in all situations, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, discharge all the duties of your ministry.



As far as Obama goes, I would like to hear what he has to say about his postions on late-term abortions (among other things) and how they apply to his faith. Something tells me we may.

----------


## alphaman

I just wanted you to admit that Obama will raise taxes.  :Wink: 

Here are the real numbers.... and they are substantial...


46 million married couples would receive an average tax cut of $1,716.

34 million families with children would receive from an average tax cut of $1,473.

6 million single women with children would receive an average tax cut of $541.

13 million elderly taxpayers would receive an average tax cut of $1,384.

23 million small business owners would receive tax cuts averaging $2,042.

3 million moderate-income families would see their income tax burden eliminated entirely.

----------


## kfrost06

> *sigh* so now we are talking about the Bible... first of all "thou shalt not judge" is not in the Bible. If you can find it, please show me where it is. ( http://www.biblegateway.com ) It is often referred to as the false 11th commandment and is often used by liberals in response to their being called out on something by a Christian.
> 
> What the Bible does say about this...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As far as Obama goes, I would like to hear what he has to say about his postions on late-term abortions (among other things) and how they apply to his faith. Something tells me we may.


Very nice post alphaman! Keep up the good work

----------


## alphaman

Thanks!

meanwhile Carlos is probably fervently seaching Bible Gateway for his precious 11th commandment.... lol

----------


## Tock

Quote:
Originally Posted by *Tock*  
_How about the www.godhatesfags.com people? They're Christian, and they picket at the funerals of dead US servicemen._ 

_Christians take all sorts of positions on all sorts of issues. They used to burn people for witchcraft. Now they don't. Which group is right?_





> Have you lost your mind?


Sure did. Years ago. I thought that was obvious.  :Haha:  :0piss:  :Icon Pissedoff: 




> What in the world makes you think I would say those people are true Christians,


IMHO, anyone who beleives they are a Christian, well, that's good enough for me. Who am I (or you, for that matter) to say that they are not?

Quakers beleive themselves to be Christians, as do Christian Scientists, Congregationalists, Mormons, Baptists, Shakers, snake handling pentecostals; Jerry Falwell beleived himself to be a Christian, as do The Pope, lots of converts in US prisons, Jimmy Swaggart, Bill Clinton, most everyone in the KKK, Mother Teresa, and lots of other people with very different interpretations of the Bible. Once upon a time, so did I.

Those idiots at www.godhatesfags.com beleive themselves to be Christians. They focus on a few Bible verses, and their interpretation of those verses are quite orthodox. If anything, when they advocate capital punishment for gays, they cite Bible verses supporting their view. If you oppose capital punishment for gays, well, you're opposing explicit Bible directives. 

So,
if we agree that Christians comply with requirements expressed in the Bible, 
and if the www.godhatesfags.com idiots agree that gays should be treated the way the Bible says (executed),
and if you disagree with those idiots,
then those idiots are more Christian than you are. And for that, I warmly congratulate you.








> and how did you get that from my statement about Obama?
> 
> _I have no idea how a man could call himself a Christian and take those positions on social issues. Talk about a hypocrite..._


My point was, 
Christians take wildly different positions on all sorts of issues. Some say you can't get into Heaven unless you're baptized with water, some extend that requirement to include the Holy Ghost, some say you get into Heaven by following tradition and ritual and doing what religious authorities tell you to do. Some say you don't have to be baptized at all. 
One of the 10 Commandments says, "Keep the Sabbath Holy." There is no agreement in Christiandom about what day actually is the Sabbath, much less about how to keep the Sabbath holy, or even if it's necessary to do so.

It's a minor point in this discussion, but worthwhile to point out that there is little agreement on much of anything amongst Christians.

----------


## Tock

> *sigh* so now we are talking about the Bible... first of all "thou shalt not judge" is not in the Bible. If you can find it, please show me where it is.


I agree, "Thou Shalt Not Judge" isn't in the Bible. However, something quite similar _is_ in the Sermon On The Mount:

Luke 6:37
"37": Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven: 









> As far as Obama goes, I would like to hear what he has to say about his postions on late-term abortions (among other things) and how they apply to his faith. Something tells me we may.


I'd like to hear what Christian politicians have to say about adultery. After all, the adultery issue rates its very own Commandment: 

Exodus 20:14
Thou shalt not commit adultery.

IMHO, things specifically mentioned in the Bible should be addressed before things that aren't, especially adulterers and Sabbath-breakers who the Bible says should be put to death:

_Leviticus 20:10_
_And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death._ 

_Exodus 31:15_
_Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death._ 


So, before Obama (or any politician, for that matter) comments on issues of lesser Biblical significance like abortion, I'd like to hear what they have to say about _life and death_ issues like adultery and Sabbath-breaking.

What do you think?

----------


## Tock

> *sigh* so now we are talking about the Bible...


I can't beleive you had a Bible study without me . . .

 :No No:

----------


## RA

> *Do you have any other questions roidattack???*


A cut and paste answer isnt what YOU know about him. ...and you didnt give all that blather in your original post as a reason why you were voting for him.

----------


## alphaman

> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Tock* 
> 
> 
> IMHO, anyone who beleives they are a Christian, well, that's good enough for me. Who am I (or you, for that matter) to say that they are not?


Well... I will admit that I used the wrong choice of words, Obama's relationship with God is between him and God. But that's not to say that I think anyone could ever argue that abortion isn't wrong in the eyes of God. That could never stand up to scriptual scrutiny.





> Quakers beleive themselves to be Christians, as do Christian Scientists, Congregationalists, Mormons, Baptists, Shakers, snake handling pentecostals; Jerry Falwell beleived himself to be a Christian, as do The Pope, lots of converts in US prisons, Jimmy Swaggart, Bill Clinton, most everyone in the KKK, Mother Teresa, and lots of other people with very different interpretations of the Bible. Once upon a time, so did I.


I realize that there are different groups of people that believe different things and call themselves Christians. But again, that doesn't mean all the views they have line up with the scripture. And if you studied the Bible like you say say you did... you know that just as well as I do.





> Those idiots at www.godhatesfags.com beleive themselves to be Christians. They focus on a few Bible verses, and their interpretation of those verses are quite orthodox. If anything, when they advocate capital punishment for gays, they cite Bible verses supporting their view. If you oppose capital punishment for gays, well, you're opposing explicit Bible directives.


And again... if you know the Bible, you would know that in Jesus, there is a New Covenant. Not one of Law, but one of Grace. Does the Bible list homosexuality as a sin? Yes. Does it mean that God hates gay people, no. You can try to sensationalize it all you want, but facts are facts. 










> My point was, 
> Christians take wildly different positions on all sorts of issues. Some say you can't get into Heaven unless you're baptized with water, some extend that requirement to include the Holy Ghost, some say you get into Heaven by following tradition and ritual and doing what religious authorities tell you to do. Some say you don't have to be baptized at all. 
> One of the 10 Commandments says, "Keep the Sabbath Holy." There is no agreement in Christiandom about what day actually is the Sabbath, much less about how to keep the Sabbath holy, or even if it's necessary to do so.
> 
> It's a minor point in this discussion, but worthwhile to point out that there is little agreement on much of anything amongst Christians.


All the things you listed above are interpretation issues. I challenge you to find a verse that could be interpreted as saying, "murdering a baby when it could survive on it's own because the mother doesn't want it to live, is okay" or abortion at all, for that matter. In Leviticus, chapter 20, where the verse you love to talk about is... it lists child sacrifice as a horrible sin. And it could be argued that an abortion is a sacrifice. A sacrifice for the mother's "life" or "freedom" or whatever other excuse she may have.

----------


## Fat Guy

> A cut and paste answer isnt what YOU know about him. ...and you didnt give all that blather in your original post as a reason why you were voting for him.


I am sorry that you werent clearer. I thought you were looking for Obamas positions so I thought I would post this 



> Do you know his position on anything?
> 
> Other than he is change for hope for the future?


BTW, here is the answer to your original question. Yes. If there is anything more specific you would like to know just let me know.

----------


## alphaman

> I agree, "Thou Shalt Not Judge" isn't in the Bible. However, something quite similar _is_ in the Sermon On The Mount:
> 
> Luke 6:37
> "37": Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven: 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You can see above that I've addressed these things in my last post. (see covenant of law vs. covenant of grace). 

But I will point out that if Obama tried to pass legslation sayiing that people shouldn't be penalized in divorce court because it's okay to cheat on your spouse, I would say that's against what the Bible says. I'd say the same if he tried to pass a law that we all had to work on Sunday. etc..

And after all if you look in Lev 20... it seems that child sacrifice is at the top of God's list in things that are punishable by death. He not only mentions it first (before the gay thing), but there's a whole paragraph about it and He repeats it 3 times!! And as explicit as he describes the punishment for such a crime, I'd say He feels more strongly wbout it than any other issue in the chapter.




> Leviticus 20
> Punishments for Sin 
> 1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 "Say to the Israelites: 'Any Israelite or any alien living in Israel who gives [a] any of his children to Molech must be put to death. The people of the community are to stone him. 3 I will set my face against that man and I will cut him off from his people; for by giving his children to Molech, he has defiled my sanctuary and profaned my holy name. 4 If the people of the community close their eyes when that man gives one of his children to Molech and they fail to put him to death, 5 I will set my face against that man and his family and will cut off from their people both him

----------


## Pooks

> I'm referring to his comment about the tax cuts.


Here is the thread, with the source inside. 

http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=331063

Single making 30K - back in 1999 under Clinton paid $8,400 in Taxes.

Single making 30K in 2008 after Bush tax cuts pays $4,500 in taxes.

so a person making 30k saves $4000 a year tnx to Republican tax cuts.

---

Like I mentioned before.. the Democrats always try to associate the middle class with the poor, with people who have no jobs, are on welfare and other wack ass stuff...

I've been a middle class citizen since I left High School in 1999...
Thats 8 years of employment.. and as far as welfare goes.. I've been on unemployment maybe 1 month..

and the vast majority of middle class American's can relate to that..

the fact is we do not have much in common at all with the poor of this nation.. So the democrats trying to group us with the drug dealer, and heroin addicts is a faulty argument.

on the other hand, I believe we can relate a lot more closely with the wealthy and the well off in this nation..

and with Bush tax cuts, and more tax cuts in the future if Republicans stay in office, we can use that money to help launch our own businesses, and really get America going again, like back in 03-07 years.

Which will create more opportunities and more jobs for even those that are on hard times.. and than if responsible they can also start their own businesses.

----------


## Tock

> And after all if you look in Lev 20... it seems that child sacrifice is at the top of God's list in things that are punishable by death. 
> 
> _Leviticus 20_
> _1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 "Say to the Israelites: 'Any Israelite or any alien living in Israel who gives [a] any of his children to Molech must be put to death._


It's not so much against child sacrifice as it is against giving their children to Molech. One might make a case that while it's not ok to give children to Molech, it might be ok to give them to a different god. Less-lech, perhaps. 

Also . . . there is the story (admittedly fictitious -- don't you agree?) about Jepththah and the daughter he sacrificed. Here is Wikipedia's take on things:

------------------------------------------------
Another instance of human sacrifice mentioned in the Bible is the sacrifice of Jephthah's daughter in Judges 11. Jephthah is victorious in battle against the children of Ammon and vows to sacrifice to God whatsoever comes to greet him at the door when he returns home. The vow is stated in Judges 11:31 as
"_Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the LORD's, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering_." When he returns from battle, his virgin daughter runs out to greet him. That he actually does sacrifice her is shown in verse 11:39 "_And it came to pass at the end of two months, that she returned unto her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed_". This example seems to be the exception rather than the rule, however, as the verse continues "_And she was a virgin. From this comes the Israelite custom that each year the young women of Israel go out for four days to commemorate the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite."_. 
-------------------------------

Well, as unfortunate as that tragedy was, Jehovah, who evidently was in regular communication with his favorite guy (Jepththa), didn't object to this bit of child sacrifice. 

Let's assume a few things:
1) Jehovah is all-powerful, all-knowing
2) Jehovah knew that Jepthah was about to sacrifice his daughter
3) Jehovah could have intervened to save an innocent life, but chose not to.

So, we can safely conclude from that story that Jehovah doesn't object too strongly to child sacrifice, if at all. Contrary to the prohibitions against such things of Leviticus 20 (see above), Jepthah was not punished for what he did, even though he did what he did in full view of Jehovah. Thus, child sacrifice is not, as you allege, "at the top of God's list in things that are punishable by death."

----------


## Tock

> Well... I will admit that I used the wrong choice of words, Obama's relationship with God is between him and God. But that's not to say that I think anyone could ever argue that abortion isn't wrong in the eyes of God. That could never stand up to scriptual scrutiny.


So say some theologians. Others say different. Who's gonna settle this theological difference of opinion? IMHO, it shouldn't be the US court system. Or you.
I'll be happy to settle it, though. My opinion on theological matters is better informed than anyone elses, so it should count for more. 









> I realize that there are different groups of people that believe different things and call themselves Christians. But again, that doesn't mean all the views they have line up with the scripture.


So say you. Which views are "True" or "Correct" or "line up with the scripture" is something that only I can decide (or maybe only certain theologians can decide, or only American politicians can decide, or only the Pope can decide; or only the GodHatesFags.com people can decide).

Get my point?











> And again... if you know the Bible, you would know that in Jesus, there is a New Covenant. Not one of Law, but one of Grace.


Theologically speaking, I'll agree. 

However, the minute someone tries to live by the old Law and forgets Grace, then they are mistakenly thinking that their "filthy rags" of self-righteousness (as the Bible puts it) are sufficient to earn God's approval & entry into Heaven.

So, the minute someone says that people are obliged to live according to the Old Testament Law condemning homosexuality, as the www.godhatesfags.com people do (and, as I suspect you do), then they themselves are under the Old Law, and not the New Covenant. 










> All the things you listed above are interpretation issues.


Yep. And these are _religious_ issues that can be (and are) interpreted either way. So, why should everyone be required by law to comply with either Bible interpretion? IMHO, it would be best for the secular government to allow people to indulge their own religious views any way they wish, and not pass laws that mandate either interpretation. 










> I challenge you to find a verse that could be interpreted as saying, "murdering a baby when it could survive on it's own because the mother doesn't want it to live, is okay"


How about the event reported in Exodus (again, fictitious) where 

1) Jehovah told Moses to tell Pharaoh to *"Let My people go!"*
2) then Jehovah "hardened" Pharaoh's heart so that he would refuse the request
3) then Jehovah murdered the first born son of every Egyptian family, to punish Pharaoh for refusing the request

What's up with that? Jehovah definitely comes across as a sadistic dude; a SOB, and not something to be worshipped and revered. 
Of course, that's just my opinion. Other folks might think that sort of thing is ok.

----------


## Carlos_E

> Well... I will admit that I used the wrong choice of words, Obama's relationship with God is between him and God.


Indeed it is and that's what I was calling you on.

----------


## SMCengineer

> Here is the thread, with the source inside. 
> 
> http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=331063
> 
> Single making 30K - back in 1999 under Clinton paid $8,400 in Taxes.
> 
> Single making 30K in 2008 after Bush tax cuts pays $4,500 in taxes.
> 
> so a person making 30k saves $4000 a year tnx to Republican tax cuts.
> ...


Bush's tax cuts were nice, but let's not kid ourselves and think that this has any real value when government spending continues to grow. Being fiscally conservative means more than just tax cuts.

----------


## kfrost06

> Bush's tax cuts were nice, but let's not kid ourselves and think that this has any real value when government spending continues to grow. Being fiscally conservative means more than just tax cuts.


Very well said and thats one major reason why many conservatives dislike Bush.

----------


## kfrost06

Well, not just conservatives others too dislike that.

----------


## Carlos_E

> Well, not just conservatives others too dislike that.


..and others dislike Bush for several other reasons.

----------


## alphaman

** Disclaimer ** I am not mad at Tock at didn't intened for any of these posts to seem inflammatory. Tock and I have been through this type of thing many times. I apologize in advance if anyone is offended.  :Smilie: 





> It's not so much against child sacrifice as it is against giving their children to Molech. One might make a case that while it's not ok to give children to Molech, it might be ok to give them to a different god. Less-lech, perhaps.


That's preposterous and you know it. I was just pointing out that child sacrifice was shown to be a greater sin than homosexuality in the passage YOU CITED. I can cite a ton of verses that condemn child sacrifice in the Bible. 

I shouldn't have even pandered to your "skipping record" of an agenda... and of course.... that's what you always want to talk about. You have more of a hang-up on homosexuality than anyone I have ever come across. You perpetuate what you try to alieviate by doing this.





> Also . . . there is the story (admittedly fictitious -- don't you agree?) about Jepththah and the daughter he sacrificed. Here is Wikipedia's take on things:
> 
> ------------------------------------------------
> Another instance of human sacrifice mentioned in the Bible is the sacrifice of Jephthah's daughter in Judges 11. Jephthah is victorious in battle against the children of Ammon and vows to sacrifice to God whatsoever comes to greet him at the door when he returns home. The vow is stated in Judges 11:31 as
> "_Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the LORD's, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering_." When he returns from battle, his virgin daughter runs out to greet him. That he actually does sacrifice her is shown in verse 11:39 "_And it came to pass at the end of two months, that she returned unto her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed_". This example seems to be the exception rather than the rule, however, as the verse continues "_And she was a virgin. From this comes the Israelite custom that each year the young women of Israel go out for four days to commemorate the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite."_. 
> -------------------------------
> 
> Well, as unfortunate as that tragedy was, Jehovah, who evidently was in regular communication with his favorite guy (Jepththa), didn't object to this bit of child sacrifice. 
> 
> ...



You are hilarious Tock. As easily as you can pull this highly controversial, and widely misunderstood passage from your arsenal, you must know that she wasn't sacrificed. 

Under the Law, his firstborn already belonged to God.. so sacrifice was pointless... out of the question... not possible... and detested by God. Jephthah was upset because he had to force his daughter to serve God solely in her life, and not to marry (notice that she knew this too, and wasn't worried about a short life, but rather the fact that she would remain a virgin). 

Jephthah tore his clothes because he knew his line was coming to an end, which was a horrible thing to an Israelite in this time. It was his punishment for making a vow to God because he wanted something for his offer, before he gave it up to God (kinda like when people say, "God, do this one thing and I'll be good... I promise). 

He intended to offer God an animal as was customary in this time, and was stricken when he first saw his daughter, realizing what he had done.

If anyone is interested, this link does a good job explaining in more detail... 

http://www.lavistachurchofchrist.org...hsDaughter.htm

----------


## alphaman

> So say some theologians. Others say different. Who's gonna settle this theological difference of opinion? IMHO, it shouldn't be the US court system. Or you.


Hah... got me there.










> So say you. Which views are "True" or "Correct" or "line up with the scripture" is something that only I can decide (or maybe only certain theologians can decide, or only American politicians can decide, or only the Pope can decide; or only the GodHatesFags.com people can decide).
> 
> Get my point?


I see the point you're trying to make, but it's incorrect and skewed by listening to people rather than actually examining the scripture. Some things line up, and some don't. Proof-texting has run amuck, but that doesn't mean that one can't derive truth from scripture.











> Theologically speaking, I'll agree. 
> 
> However, the minute someone tries to live by the old Law and forgets Grace, then they are mistakenly thinking that their "filthy rags" of self-righteousness (as the Bible puts it) are sufficient to earn God's approval & entry into Heaven.
> 
> So, the minute someone says that people are obliged to live according to the Old Testament Law condemning homosexuality, as the www.godhatesfags.com people do (and, as I suspect you do), then they themselves are under the Old Law, and not the New Covenant.


Jesus didn't come to wipe the Law away, but to fufill it. The New Covenant doesn't mean the Law was wrong, but rather, that it's not a matter of salvation. The minute you thnk your "righteousness" will get you into heaven is the moment it becomes as filthy rags. The point of that verse is to show that your righteousness will never get you into heaven... that you need the grace of God by accepting that you can't do it on your own... but that you need his GRACE. 








> Yep. And these are _religious_ issues that can be (and are) interpreted either way. So, why should everyone be required by law to comply with either Bible interpretion? IMHO, it would be best for the secular government to allow people to indulge their own religious views any way they wish, and not pass laws that mandate either interpretation.


While some things are hard to interpret in the Bible, ending a life that God created for selfish purposes is not. It is forbidden.




> Exodus 20:13
> 
> 13 "You shall not murder.












> How about the event reported in Exodus (again, fictitious) where 
> 
> 1) Jehovah told Moses to tell Pharaoh to *"Let My people go!"*
> 2) then Jehovah "hardened" Pharaoh's heart so that he would refuse the request
> 3) then Jehovah murdered the first born son of every Egyptian family, to punish Pharaoh for refusing the request
> 
> What's up with that? Jehovah definitely comes across as a sadistic dude; a SOB, and not something to be worshipped and revered. 
> Of course, that's just my opinion. Other folks might think that sort of thing is ok.







> Exodus 1:22 
> 22 Then Pharaoh gave this order to all his people: "Every boy that is born [a] you must throw into the Nile, but let every girl live."


War is ugly. The same assault was committed on God's people regardless of the Pharaoh receiving warnings. Unfortunately, the innocent have paid for the sins of others throughout history, as is the case with the aborted.

----------


## Carlos_E

Can you take this to PM?

----------


## alphaman

> Indeed it is and that's what I was calling you on.


Thanks for keeping me honest.  :Smilie: 

I should have used a different choice of words.

----------


## Tock

Oh, brother . . . All this theology is making my head swim. 

(that's enough for this post)

----------


## alphaman

> Can you take this to PM?


COnsidering the last comment from Tock... no. But I'm glad you said something... I'm going to bed.

----------


## kfrost06

> Can you take this to PM?


why? I enjoyed reading it. Good job Alphaman and don't worry about Carlos he can't stand when someone has an opinion different then his so he'll come on here with one line comments to try to belittle you. He does it to me and you and Logan13(well until he got Logan banned). He never has anything productive to add either just pathetic demeaning one line comments like the one above.

----------


## alphaman

> why? I enjoyed reading it. Good job Alphaman and don't worry about Carlos he can't stand when someone has an opinion different then his so he'll come on here with one line comments to try to belittle you. He does it to me and you and Logan13(well until he got Logan banned). He never has anything productive to add either just pathetic demeaning one line comments like the one above.



Well, I'm glad you enjoyed it, but I'm afraid it becomes too much for some at times. I actually came back here after a long break with the intention of not getting into Biblical arguments.

----------


## Carlos_E

> why? I enjoyed reading it. Good job Alphaman and don't worry about Carlos he can't stand when someone has an opinion different then his so he'll come on here with one line comments to try to belittle you. He does it to me and you and Logan13(well until he got Logan banned). He never has anything productive to add either just pathetic demeaning one line comments like the one above.


Don't be an ass. The discussion of religion is off topic. This is a thread about the Teamsters and Obama. If you want to have a religious discussion start a new thread or keep it to PM.

----------


## RA

Your going too far tock. What does this have to do with the discussion?




> Oh, brother . . . All this theology is making my head swim. 
> 
> Alphaman, let's go back to just having sex . . . we don't have to talk about anything. Just sex. I'll even let you be on top.
> 
> Whaddaya say?

----------


## Tock

Alphaman,

I owe you an apology. And here it is.

That invitation I made a few posts ago was way out of line. If I had made a similar comment to anyone in most businesses, I'd be fired. If I wasn't fired, the business owner could have been sued for running a workplace with a hostile environment.

So, I apologize. I acknowledge and take 100% responsibilty for my rude, crude, and socially unacceptable remark, and promise never to repeat this mistake ever agaiin. (Where's the animated doober for "remorse?")

Not that it mitigates my responsibility in the slightest, I will mention that while I was not intoxicated when I posted the comment, I had somewhat tired of the theological nature the conversation had evolved into, and I was also somewhat weary from a day of hard labor and dealing with difficult employees. So, my usual sense of restraint was compromised, which resulted in the tactless and unwarranted remark that, I am sure, alarmed and offended yourself and others.

I hope you will accept this apology in the spirit it is intended. Also, I hope that anyone else who had the misfortune to witness my lapse into coarse prose, will likewise accept my profuse apologies.

--Tock

----------


## Tock

> Your going too far tock. What does this have to do with the discussion?


You are correct.

See my post, above.

----------


## alphaman

Tock-

It grossed me out a bit, but I wasn't horribly offended. I've been on the giving end of that type of comment before, so I guess I got what I deserved, huh? lol 

I found the theological stuff a bit tiring as well. I don't have it like I used to. And I learned a long time ago that I can't convince you of any of it. 

Just do what I've asked you for the past month and all will be well. lol 

alpha

PS- Thanks for the sincerity.

----------


## Carlos_E

Awwww... Group Hug!!! 

 :LOL:

----------

