Skip to main content

By Allen Clifton

 

Long ago I reached my tipping point with Republicans as far as it pertains to me being able to take the vast majority of them seriously. It’s not that I want to have such a massive divide between myself and my conservative counterparts, it’s just that I can’t deal with people who are completely irrational.

 

Once upon a time our differences were as such that we could at least find amicable ground on which to find some sort of compromise. Nowadays many Republicans have shifted so far right that Ronald Reagan would have trouble winning a GOP primary. After all, can anyone imagine today’s conservatives voting for someone who passed an amnesty bill for illegal immigrants, negotiated with Iran and raised taxes in 5 of his 8 years as president?

 

Who knew there would come a time when I would long for the days when Democrats and Republicans simply disagreed on how to combat climate change, not whether or not it’s actually real. But the last few years Republicans have created this alternate reality that seems to only exist in their own minds. One where the only requirement for something to be real is their desire for it to be real.

 

Their incessant rhetoric about “fiscal responsiblity” is a great example of this. Despite the fact that a Republican president hasn’t balanced the budget since Eisenhower did it in the 1950″s, Republicans will swear up and down that they’re the party for “fiscal responsibility.” Yet none of these folks can seem to explain how a party is “fiscally responsible” while adding trillions to the debt. You know, like Reagan and both Bushes did.

 

Their rhetoric about guns is another topic where they’re completely irrational. Our Second Amendment literally has the words “well regulated” written in it, yet they oppose pretty much any attempt to “well regulate” guns in the United States. Never mind the fact that tighter regulations on firearms wouldn’t impact a single law-abiding (and mentally sound) American citizen. The reality is, they’ve fallen victim to the fear-mongering propaganda that’s been pushed by the NRA at the behest of the big gun and ammo lobbies. They’ve become so absurd that one of their go-to catch phrases – “the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun” – quite literally says that the only way we can stop a “bad guy” is by letting them shoot and/or kill at least one victim before that “bad guy” can be identified and stopped by the “good guy.”

 

Just think about this for a moment. If someone is armed to the teeth with a Glock holstered to their hip and an AK-47 strapped to their back, and someone with a pistol walking right behind them decides to pull out their gun and fire three rounds into the back of that AK-47 toting individual’s head, how did guns protect them? All they ultimately ended up with is a very well armed corpse, whose murderer may or may not be “stopped by a good guy with a gun.” The only way to stop bad guys with guns is to do everything we can to make sure criminals and the mentally unstable don’t get them. We can pass strict gun laws in this country and still have a nation where tens of millions of law-abiding and mentally sound Americans have guns. But you can’t even begin to have that discussion in a reasonable manner because most Republicans are completely incapable of being reasonable when it comes to guns.

 

Then there are the Bible-thumpers. You know, the people who seem to validate their Christianity by their church attendance. Yet, the two big “Bible issues” Republicans harp on most (abortion and gay rights) are two topics of which Jesus Christ (the man on which Christianity is based) never spoke. Though he did speak quite often about helping people, being generous, giving, helping the needy, providing for the poor and about the dangers of greed.

 

So, one would think that a party claiming to be “all about the Jesus” would be comprised of staunch advocates for programs that help the poor, sick and needy, right? Except, the Republican party doesn’t stand for any of that. In fact, they often push for policies that hurt poor people, while benefitting the richest among us.

 

Not only that, but many times Republicans go out of their way to vilify the poor, often referring to them as “moochers” and “lazy.” Here’s my rule: Until you start following the teachings of Jesus Christ (helping the poor, the sick, the needy, the weak and “loving thy neighbor” – without exception) you should really stop calling yourselves the “party for Christian values.”

 

Even when it comes to their opposition to the Affordable Care Act. Let’s go ahead and state what most of us already know: The “mandate” was a Republican idea from the 90″s. Practically every argument Republicans use against the ACA is nothing but an argument for true universal health care. These are also the people who talk endlessly about “freedom and liberty,” while pushing for laws that restrict and control the private lives of all homosexuals and women.

 

Though let’s not forget how much they claim to love our Constitution. Well, that is until the Supreme Court (otherwise known as the third branch of our government created by that very same Constitution) rules against something they want. Then our Supreme Court Justices suddenly becomes “nine unelected lawyers” who are wielding unconstitutional power over the will of the American people.

 

Which makes absolutely no sense considering the Supreme Court ruling on the constitutionally of a law is exactly what they’re supposed to do. I could literally keep going on and on… and on about the hypocrisy of the GOP. It’s a seemingly endless stream of talking points, empty rhetoric and propaganda.

 

And it’s only getting worse. That’s why I believe the new slogan of the Republican party should be “God, Guns and Bull****.” Hit me up on Facebook or Twitter and let me know if you agree.

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

The Bible does speak out against homosexuality, try 1Cor. 6:9-10 and Rom. 1:26-28, 32.

Christians do believe in helping the poor if they are true Christians, but a lot on the give away programs are able to get out and work. The Bible teaches if you don't work you don't eat. I see this every day in my line of work, yes some need help, some need to get a job. Killing is also condemned and the Bible does not give a age limit on taking lives. One day old or 100 years old, It is still taking lives. Lying is also wrong and our current president seems to be very talented in that area.

Originally Posted by Old American:

The Bible does speak out against homosexuality, try 1Cor. 6:9-10 and Rom. 1:26-28, 32.

Christians do believe in helping the poor if they are true Christians, but a lot on the give away programs are able to get out and work. The Bible teaches if you don't work you don't eat. I see this every day in my line of work, yes some need help, some need to get a job. Killing is also condemned and the Bible does not give a age limit on taking lives. One day old or 100 years old, It is still taking lives. Lying is also wrong and our current president seems to be very talented in that area.

_____

Hey Old, you need to renovate your thinking on the Biblical prescription for helping others.  You say, "Christians do believe in helping the poor if they are true Christians."  If you believe what the Bible says about helping others, you will not limit your help to only those who are true Christians.

 
As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.
 
"Especially" is not the same as "exclusively."
Originally Posted by Contendahh:
Originally Posted by Old American:

The Bible does speak out against homosexuality, try 1Cor. 6:9-10 and Rom. 1:26-28, 32.

Christians do believe in helping the poor if they are true Christians, but a lot on the give away programs are able to get out and work. The Bible teaches if you don't work you don't eat. I see this every day in my line of work, yes some need help, some need to get a job. Killing is also condemned and the Bible does not give a age limit on taking lives. One day old or 100 years old, It is still taking lives. Lying is also wrong and our current president seems to be very talented in that area.

_____

Hey Old, you need to renovate your thinking on the Biblical prescription for helping others.  You say, "Christians do believe in helping the poor if they are true Christians."  If you believe what the Bible says about helping others, you will not limit your help to only those who are true Christians.

 
As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.
 
"Especially" is not the same as "exclusively."

-------------------

I think what he meant to say was, 'Christians, if they are true Christians, do believe in helping the poor.'   That's the way I interpreted it.

Originally Posted by OldSalt:
Originally Posted by Contendahh:
Originally Posted by Old American:

The Bible does speak out against homosexuality, try 1Cor. 6:9-10 and Rom. 1:26-28, 32.

Christians do believe in helping the poor if they are true Christians, but a lot on the give away programs are able to get out and work. The Bible teaches if you don't work you don't eat. I see this every day in my line of work, yes some need help, some need to get a job. Killing is also condemned and the Bible does not give a age limit on taking lives. One day old or 100 years old, It is still taking lives. Lying is also wrong and our current president seems to be very talented in that area.

_____

Hey Old, you need to renovate your thinking on the Biblical prescription for helping others.  You say, "Christians do believe in helping the poor if they are true Christians."  If you believe what the Bible says about helping others, you will not limit your help to only those who are true Christians.

 
As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.
 
"Especially" is not the same as "exclusively."

-------------------

I think what he meant to say was, 'Christians, if they are true Christians, do believe in helping the poor.'   That's the way I interpreted it.

____

I will defer to Old American's explanation if he will come back here and tell us what he meant., but given the context of his statement, I believe my interpretation is correct.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×