Embarrassed by church members

For discussion of liberty, freedom, government and politics.
Post Reply
freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by freedomforall »

SmallFarm wrote:
Juliette wrote:
awake wrote:Better to vote for a righteous man who stands for true principles, even if he doesn't win.

Then to support Romney who is probably just as bad or worse than Obama. For I believe Romney has had more light and knowledge offered to him than Obama probably has, yet Romney appears to have rejected it.

We don't vote to 'win' elections, we vote to 'prove' to heaven that we can't be deceived by smiling wolves in sheep's clothing.
I am voting for a righteous man. Mitt Romney!
Calling anyone a "righteous man" is just as much a judgement as calling someone unrighteous. Just wanted to point that out since you're so apt to point out others judgements. :p
Actually, when one thinks about it, we all, as voters, have to make judgement calls. Think about it...we have to judge a candidate in order to even make a decision in our vote. We say "he does this or this, or he does not do this or this, right?

I can't within all reason vote for Obama, his track record is judged by me to be extremely undesirable. Mitt flip-flops, again according to his record...another judgement. I judge that he is not quite up to par when it comes to constitutional requirement; he does, however, have good marks as a Christian, a father, a dedicated family man and clergyman. BUT, unless he can uphold the constitution in its fulness...he isn't my first choice.
Ron Paul has a background of being concerned about our freedom and liberty...though not perfectly. That's what we need in Washington, someone seeking the welfare (not handouts, hee, hee) of the citizens. Having said this, I will support Romney if he becomes the POTUS. He would be a far, far better choice than Obama, because of his christian background, right?

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by freedomforall »

Hey, P51, do your legs ever get tired? I get tired just watching your avatar.

User avatar
AussieOi
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6137
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by AussieOi »

SmallFarm wrote:
AussieOi wrote:
SmallFarm wrote:Juliette, meet AussieOi. :ymhug: :ymcowboy:

hey bro
hope all is well
i dont know about your avatar. looks like you want to jump
these threads aren't that bad are they? ;-)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9Svm8xc1z8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Yep life is good lately. Been working in the sun lots, getting my 2012 garden put in and my goats moved around. Avatar is me sittin on a boulder on Mt. Graham here in Arizona. Mt. Graham is what's known around here as a sky-island, beacause it rises 10,000 feet (don't know the metric) from the desert floor making it catch all the rain clouds. Lot's of pine trees and wild rasperries and wildflowers and lady bugs everywhere. One of my favorite places on the planet.
B-)
okay. a good high rock needs some good music

Take the Devin Townsend "Ghost" album with you next time- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuPeOPKkOa0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
bit mellow for me - i prefer his harder stuff like this one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuouRrjhPCQ&feature=fvst" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
warning swear word alert (early on)

I prefer hard trance, prog metal and Iced Earth (which i dont think many people here would get into) but he might be the tonic

another one i can recommend might inspire is a Dutch guy/band called Guilt Machine- the On this perfect day album http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Om8FgC87C8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
if you like them then wiki Arjen Anthony Lucassen, and go try Star One, Ayreon and Ambeon

just beautiful music



Nan. just busy. real busy. writing, publishing, saving Cowell and all that ;-)

User avatar
AussieOi
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6137
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by AussieOi »

Juliette wrote:
Aussie, thank you for the compliment. Most of the men on this forum are like you.
trust me. im one of a kind


They spar with me but are also respectful.( maybe they feel sorry for me! :))
i dont spar. you win. i concede every time


One of my favorite friends lives in Brisbane. He is blunt,
he is australian

but also humble.
he is polynesian


Your reply was just great!
I am more than willing to admit that I go with my heart, and not so much with intellect. I do know this however. This is the Lord's church. If men or women had to be perfect, to hold a leadership position, there would be no leaders. . I admire my leaders, the GA"s and our Prophet. I don't question them. I don't need to.
i dont believe we need to but i believe we are told to, and should

I am not a follower. I am very fiesty ( I'm sure you are laughing at that statement! haha). But I can honestly tell you, I have never, never, had anything but positive feelings about this church. Everything makes perfect sense to me. I have held several leadership positions. It only increased my testimony. Yes, there are people who frustrate me, but the Gospel is true!
all of which is correct sis
mind you, like Awake tries to get across, the perfection of the gospel has nothing to do with the imperfection of the people who are part of it (and being perfected in it) and vice versa


I am not voting for Mitt Romney because he is LDS. I am voting for him because I think he is a great alternative to what we've got.
can't argue with that
Yes, Ron Paul would have been a good President, but like it or not, he is not accepted or electable. I just hope he has the sense to not dilute the vote.
sigh. is that an LDS warrior talking?
how many analogies can i throw in?
when were you nuetered?, better to die on you rfeet than live on your knees, all it takes for evil to triumph is good people do nothing
im sorry, i think that is an attitude you will look past one day and see the error in it as a way of thinking
have you thought maybe Romney is the one diluting the vote?
Abinadi was unelectable. im not equating ron p with abinadi, just saying good never is popular
wont it worry you to see mitt being popular?



Gingrich is icky. Santorum just wasn't what I wanted. I wanted Mitt in the last election. If we had a candidate besides John McCain, we might not have gotton stuck with Obama. I want him OUT. I pray Mitt can do it!

lol sis. wake up. you know, its not who votes that counts...you know...


You don't like America or most Americans? I love America. My Grandfather, Father and husband have all fought so we can have freedom.
maybe your grandfather. maybe
the rest sorry, no. they were pawns of gadiantons preserving and perpetuating empire


You are controlled and cannot even have a gun. Nope, not here! It is still a great nation!
i could only wish to have a the rights enshrined in your constitution and bill of rights.
if i had one like that, id never let them water it down and trample on it like they do


How can we support the candidate, who in your opinion reflects lds values, when we know he can't win?

well with that attitude held by LDS as a start, no, they never will
but what, you think we can beat the gadiantons too?
har. no. we can't. but our test is to do the right, armour up and go out on the field, ready for battle
maybe if enough people stop blindly supporting the status quo with attitudes like yours...?
im so sad to read that. its like you gave in to the lesser of two evils. obama or romney
you need to be braver juliet, be a leader, not a defeatist.
its not about who wins, its about what people we become through this
its not who wins the battle, its if we will turn up
THATS what sorts the sheep from the goats in this battle
the church leaders will never tell us to stand behind them and fall in. it doesnt work that way
we've been told in the scriptures what to do
its not up to us
that GAs and leaders don't, won't, or can't, is irrelevant
this is our OWN battles.
too many LDS think they need to be commanded.
on the contrary, they need to lead
these are the people god wants as his leaders in his kingdom
which are you going to be juliet?



I value my vote. I am going to place it where I think it can do the most good. Simple as that..
braveheart film. william wallace is out on the field waiting for the flank attack as planned and then his "ally" lines up with the enemy.
mitt, barrack, ron. at the end of the day it wont make a dimes difference cos the USA is going to hell in a handbasket- as they say
but you are voting Darth ahead of Luke, saying the emporer is so bad, but luke wont beat him, so Darth is more likely to be not as bad, so you are throwing your hat in with him.
hows that for an example eh! pretty poor, but as an LDS, come on, you can do better
we need warriors out there juliette. not followers taking the easiest course



I am sorry you left the church. :( My friend in Brisbane has declared that he no longer believes in organized religion. We met him while he was serving a mission in Arizona.
re-read juliette. i teach gospel essentials and LOVE it. i havent left the church, i found Christ. one day you might understand what i mean.
the church is not the gospel. it will not save me. it is just a noun.
i enjoyed bishopric and high council and all that, done very other calling, love this the most.


I could not leave the sweetness this gospel brings into my life.
you don't have to.
what i am saying is that peace and salvation is not found in a building, or in a program, or in a talk. it is found in christ - as you agree i see


Once again, I appreciate your response. :ymhug:
i must be in a mellow mood or something. thats about an annual dose of nice from me. Lyra the Harp must be near Vega. or something like that
peace out

User avatar
Original_Intent
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13008

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by Original_Intent »

Wow Aussie, taht was about the best post ever. You said everything I have tried to say but you did it in a much kinder and better worded way. I lost patience. You didn't.

So the question is WHO ARE YOU AND WHA HAVE YOU DONE WITH AUSSIEOI??!?!?! Just kdding, my brother, you are awesome. And even as an American I understand exacly what you mean when you say you are disgusted iwth America and Americans. Something like we had every blessing heaven could give us, we demanded more, and are choking on our own greed, and you can;t find it in your heart to sympathize....something like that?

You have said some things in the past that did make me question where your heart was. This last post, even though somewhat out of character for you, makes me rejoice for you and to have a brother like you if even on the other side of the planet.

And I ahve not been myself lately either, but not in a positive way. The frustration of being unable to have much of an impact and the years spent trying has really gotten to me lately. Your post, even though not addressed to me, helped a lot. You are exactly right, we aren't coimmanded to win, the victory will be one for us, not by us. We jsut need to "armor up" and show up ready to give it our all.

Thanks again. I loved Braveheart also - I am not sure how historically accurate it was, but the portrayal of someone who didn't sit down and calculate the odds, but just did the right thing the best he knew how - awesome! I was reading in 3rd Nephi yesterday, and I read the part where the hung the enemy leader from a tree and chopped the tree down and then celebrated. And this was not a condemnation, in fact it said they then went on to become a righteous people (at least for the next few years)...I think we have largely become way too soft for anything like that to happen, in fact I think most feel quite morally superior and that such behavior would be barbaric. Anyway...wandered off topic a bit.

Cheers!

lundbaek
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11123
Location: Mesa, Arizona

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by lundbaek »

One sad thing about all this is that so many American LDS voters do not realize their responsibility to understand, uphold and defend the principles of the US Constitution, nor understand the destruction of our country beiong fomented by latter-day gadiantons. It is so much easier to assume that because Mitt Romney holds the priesthood that he is the better choice. They have allowed themselves to be deceived by him and the media, andmade to believe that Ron Paul is a loser. Tragic, really.

User avatar
ChelC
The Law
Posts: 5982
Location: Utah

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by ChelC »

Juliette! What is this power you possess? You have made OI out of his mind ticked off while at the same time anesthetizing Aussie.

:-o

Oh, Aussie. We knew you'd love Americans one day! :ymparty:

[takes cover]

User avatar
marc
Disciple of Jesus Christ
Posts: 10351
Contact:

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by marc »

Cheers for that mellow, yet charitable post and wonderful replies, Aussie.

OI, Braveheart was an awesome film!! A bunch of historical hogwash, but very cool movie.

User avatar
Original_Intent
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13008

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by Original_Intent »

You know what I think would be really helpful? Is some kind of guide where you could GRADUALLY educate people in a non-threatening way so you wouldn;t freak them out and send them screaming for the exits. Something that started with some pretty simple fundamental things and they could progress at their own speed. Possibly have some resources available where they could email to ask questions, etc.

The problem being is unless you know there is a problem, you aren't going to spend the time looking for a solution, even if it is a simplified one. That's part of the frustration of the problem.

I have for MANY years considered how fast a message could spread using the MLM model. Not to make money. Keep money out of it, let them get their own materials but just the idea of "spreading the word" exponentially. And to a large extent, I do believe that is what the Ron Paul Revolution is accomplishing, but it is still slow as it often takes months or years to take seomeone from apathetic to fully involved, educated, and ready to spread the word. or it can happen very quickly if someone suddenly wakes up and becomes very, very motivated.

I think it would be important to keep conspiracy and other scary stuff completely out of it at the early stages. Just education on principles, such as kind of a book club where you read "The Law" and got together once a week to discuss. Or study the Constitution and the writings that influenced the founders such as John Locke's 2nd Treatise on government. (Random thought, did his 1st treatise just suck, or is it just not as well known?)

I have attended some constitution classes in homes where videos were watched and so forth - but it did proceed slowly (took three months to go thru if I recall correctly), and we started with 4 or 5 couples and I think I was the only one that finished (with my sweet wife, of course!)

I also think that some kind of online, self guided course would be awesome, of course the trick would be getting it to go viral, otherwise you would just have another one of billions of web pages with 15 hits a year. But you know, have an introductory level, and then advance from there. Maybe have a survey to kind of evaluate the persons current understanding and inclinations so that the course they followed would be customized to their knowledge level and what they were most interested in. Self-guided learning I feel is so much better than one-size fits all. Anyway I have toyed with the idea for years. It makes me very greatful for the resources that BrianM has provdied witht his forum and LatterDayConservative.com.

User avatar
ChelC
The Law
Posts: 5982
Location: Utah

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by ChelC »

lundbaek wrote:One sad thing about all this is that so many American LDS voters do not realize their responsibility to understand, uphold and defend the principles of the US Constitution, nor understand the destruction of our country beiong fomented by latter-day gadiantons. It is so much easier to assume that because Mitt Romney holds the priesthood that he is the better choice. They have allowed themselves to be deceived by him and the media, andmade to believe that Ron Paul is a loser. Tragic, really.
I agree that it is beyond frustrating. With that said, I still am not sure of the decision I will make. I'm not happy with the choices. It isn't eating me up this year though.

Lundbaek - I am not saying this to be flippant, but I think your genealogical work is of far greater importance than this election. I know it's about much more than a single election to you and I'm not trying to suggest otherwise. I'm not even suggesting you lose your fight. We're supposed to fight for the principle of the Constitution, you are absolutely correct. You are also correct that many members have automatically chosen Mitt for his membership status, which is not the wisest course. I do however think that membership status is not entirely without merit. Assuming two doctors were equally or closely qualified to perform life saving surgery on me, I would prefer the one who also had the priesthood.

But! We do have to consider the credentials and qualifications. We should never blindly choose our politicians. We have to review their past to predict how they will behave. Most people who try to research the candidates are using media to do it. They are getting a lot of filtered information. With all my research and being a pretty big Paul fan in the past, I still have an uneasiness about him that I cannot articulate. I have a LOT of uneasiness about Mitt as well. He seems like a nice man, but I don't know if he has any lines in the sand. Maybe his niceness is part of that. I certainly don't want a President who is above all a people pleaser. Yikes. For all the filters our information goes through, I can just imagine the filters a sitting President is subjected to.

I guess I have found my peace, even being undecided at the moment, because I know that it's conversion that will change things and nothing else. If we spoon feed the Constitution to people who don't want it, they are more likely to reject it. Gospel conversion and education are the keys. I know that with the background my kids are getting, they are likely to become defenders of the Constitution. I am multiplying my influence that way.

Try not to let this awful process rob you of your peace and joy.

User avatar
shadow
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10542
Location: St. George

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by shadow »

Original_Intent wrote:I have for MANY years considered how fast a message could spread using the MLM model. Not to make money. Keep money out of it, let them get their own materials but just the idea of "spreading the word" exponentially. And to a large extent, I do believe that is what the Ron Paul Revolution is accomplishing, but it is still slow as it often takes months or years to take seomeone from apathetic to fully involved, educated, and ready to spread the word. or it can happen very quickly if someone suddenly wakes up and becomes very, very motivated.
That's probably a big part of the problem IMO, Ron Paul. Maybe The Constitution Revolution would be better suited as RP is just an imperfect man who many believe is compromised and doesn't fully understand the Constitution, her blessings and demands! Unfortunately RP has more supporters who want to be free to sin without any recourse than those who recognize the heavy requirements of having the Constitution.

The prelude to any Constitution Revolution would be that the Constitution will only work for a righteous people, and list reasons why. The pot smokers need to understand why they can't do what they do while living under the freedom of the Constitution. The politicians need to know this too so they can recognize when they themselves are off course. If a majority of the druggies, prostitutes and other evil lifestyle voters are supporting you because they want "freedom" to do as they please then there is a problem.

User avatar
ChelC
The Law
Posts: 5982
Location: Utah

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by ChelC »

Original_Intent wrote:You know what I think would be really helpful? Is some kind of guide where you could GRADUALLY educate people in a non-threatening way so you wouldn;t freak them out and send them screaming for the exits. Something that started with some pretty simple fundamental things and they could progress at their own speed. Possibly have some resources available where they could email to ask questions, etc.

The problem being is unless you know there is a problem, you aren't going to spend the time looking for a solution, even if it is a simplified one. That's part of the frustration of the problem.

I have for MANY years considered how fast a message could spread using the MLM model. Not to make money. Keep money out of it, let them get their own materials but just the idea of "spreading the word" exponentially. And to a large extent, I do believe that is what the Ron Paul Revolution is accomplishing, but it is still slow as it often takes months or years to take seomeone from apathetic to fully involved, educated, and ready to spread the word. or it can happen very quickly if someone suddenly wakes up and becomes very, very motivated.

I think it would be important to keep conspiracy and other scary stuff completely out of it at the early stages. Just education on principles, such as kind of a book club where you read "The Law" and got together once a week to discuss. Or study the Constitution and the writings that influenced the founders such as John Locke's 2nd Treatise on government. (Random thought, did his 1st treatise just suck, or is it just not as well known?)

I have attended some constitution classes in homes where videos were watched and so forth - but it did proceed slowly (took three months to go thru if I recall correctly), and we started with 4 or 5 couples and I think I was the only one that finished (with my sweet wife, of course!)

I also think that some kind of online, self guided course would be awesome, of course the trick would be getting it to go viral, otherwise you would just have another one of billions of web pages with 15 hits a year. But you know, have an introductory level, and then advance from there. Maybe have a survey to kind of evaluate the persons current understanding and inclinations so that the course they followed would be customized to their knowledge level and what they were most interested in. Self-guided learning I feel is so much better than one-size fits all. Anyway I have toyed with the idea for years. It makes me very greatful for the resources that BrianM has provdied witht his forum and LatterDayConservative.com.
I think where people probably get turned off is when they feel steered and manipulated. Our goal should really be to present our points about good government, unrelated to specific candidates, policies, or conspiracies. If we did that, and trusted people to think for themselves, we would be in better shape than if we tried to turn everyone into a fan of Ron Paul. He is not the ticket. He may or he may not be the closest person to Consitutional principles, but if you hitch it all to a man you are sunk before you start.

In our home school I will present opposing ideas (occasionally political ideas, but mostly not as they are 6 and 9). I present them as honestly as I can, trying not to be biased. Then I will ask them what they think. With the information presented they do not always agree with me, but they do great!

We have to lose our desire to control people. Just teach good principles and leave them alone. You are planting seeds which are best left to mature in their own good time.

User avatar
ChelC
The Law
Posts: 5982
Location: Utah

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by ChelC »

shadow wrote:
Original_Intent wrote:I have for MANY years considered how fast a message could spread using the MLM model. Not to make money. Keep money out of it, let them get their own materials but just the idea of "spreading the word" exponentially. And to a large extent, I do believe that is what the Ron Paul Revolution is accomplishing, but it is still slow as it often takes months or years to take seomeone from apathetic to fully involved, educated, and ready to spread the word. or it can happen very quickly if someone suddenly wakes up and becomes very, very motivated.
That's probably a big part of the problem IMO, Ron Paul. Maybe The Constitution Revolution would be better suited as RP is just an imperfect man who many believe is compromised and doesn't fully understand the Constitution, her blessings and demands! Unfortunately RP has more supporters who want to be free to sin without any recourse than those who recognize the heavy requirements of having the Constitution.

The prelude to any Constitution Revolution would be that the Constitution will only work for a righteous people, and list reasons why. The pot smokers need to understand why they can't do what they do while living under the freedom of the Constitution. The politicians need to know this too so they can recognize when they themselves are off course. If a majority of the druggies, prostitutes and other evil lifestyle voters are supporting you because they want "freedom" to do as they please then there is a problem.
Ha! Great (feeble?) minds think alike.

User avatar
Andrew Jackson
captain of 10
Posts: 20

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by Andrew Jackson »

InfoWarrior82 wrote:I think either you or I am confused as to what Ron Paul is actually advocating. I believe he's saying: Money backed by Gold & Silver... like the constitution says. Without a private "Federal" Reserve bank in control.
It seems White Feather quoted the Constitution above. You come back with a belief? Who cares about beliefs. What's the truth?

User avatar
Andrew Jackson
captain of 10
Posts: 20

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by Andrew Jackson »

White Feather wrote:
InfoWarrior82 wrote:Just to clarify something. The Federal Reserve IS a private bank.

Can someone give me a direct quote from Ron Paul where he has said he doesn't think that congress should have it's constitutional right to coin money?
I can't find one. Either for or against.
The prospect of American citizens turning away from the dollar towards alternate currencies will provide the necessary impetus to the U.S. government to regain control of the dollar and halt its downward spiral," Rep. Ron Paul said in his final remarks while introducing the bill.
http://www.coinnews.net/2011/03/24/ron- ... t-of-2011/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Competing currencies sounds nice up front. But is it Constitutional as advocated?

Ron Paul has stated “the Constitution still says that only gold and silver can be legal tender”. Article 1, Section 10 (Powers Prohibited of States) from which Ron Paul is basing his conclusion:
No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A1Sec10.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I've added emphasis on both the gold and silver as well as "coin money". Ron Paul might be able to make a stand except we have more clarification and the authorization for that express authority in Article 1, Section 8 (Powers of Congress):
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A1Sec8.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Questions?

The reason states do not have the power to create their own legal tender (other than gold or silver coin) is because that is a power expressly reserved to the Federal government - specifically the representatives of the people in Congress.

One of the primary problems of the Articles of Confederation (which Tom Woods listed above wants to take us back to) is that every state had its own currency, which hindered trade and created economic chaos. The founders revised this in the Constitution by reserving the right to Congress to establish a single currency for the whole nation - which facilitates trade and prosperity (accumulation of happiness/property).

The states are absolutely and completely prohibited by these sections of the Constitution from generating their own currency except for literal gold and silver coins. The founders knew the power of the money creation mechanism and reserved it strictly for representatives of the people. Also by central government directive.

Even if you ignore Article 1, Section 10 which restricts the powers of the States, it would not stand for what Ron Paul wants it to stand for, which is that the Federal government must constitutionally adhere to a gold/silver standard.

Is my interpretation of the Constitution wrong?

It also just seems a little ironic that he has teamed up (The Case for Gold) in the past with a guy (Lewis Lehrman) who is now calling for new global currency (PNAC report) based on gold and his largest fundraiser (Peter Thiel) is the founder of the world's leading digital money company (PayPal). Rand Paul is also involved.

I don't know about you but the hairs on the back of my head stand up and I get just a little suspicious based on everyone that is involved as well as the globalist angle. I can't think of a more perfect scenario for the globalists who are trying to create a global monetary system based on a single currency.

Can you?
Is White Feather correct or is he smoking dope out in left field?

User avatar
Original_Intent
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13008

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by Original_Intent »

shadow wrote:
Original_Intent wrote:I have for MANY years considered how fast a message could spread using the MLM model. Not to make money. Keep money out of it, let them get their own materials but just the idea of "spreading the word" exponentially. And to a large extent, I do believe that is what the Ron Paul Revolution is accomplishing, but it is still slow as it often takes months or years to take seomeone from apathetic to fully involved, educated, and ready to spread the word. or it can happen very quickly if someone suddenly wakes up and becomes very, very motivated.
That's probably a big part of the problem IMO, Ron Paul. Maybe The Constitution Revolution would be better suited as RP is just an imperfect man who many believe is compromised and doesn't fully understand the Constitution, her blessings and demands! Unfortunately RP has more supporters who want to be free to sin without any recourse than those who recognize the heavy requirements of having the Constitution.

The prelude to any Constitution Revolution would be that the Constitution will only work for a righteous people, and list reasons why. The pot smokers need to understand why they can't do what they do while living under the freedom of the Constitution. The politicians need to know this too so they can recognize when they themselves are off course. If a majority of the druggies, prostitutes and other evil lifestyle voters are supporting you because they want "freedom" to do as they please then there is a problem.
And I believe that you have a perception problem regarding Ron Paul supporters. Yes, those groups you mention are a very visible part of the RP group. But you have to acknowledge the part the media plays in portraying that image - when they do interviews of Ron Paul supporters, I am convinced they look for the most scraggly looking, wild eyed hippy in the crowd. I have been to Ron Paul events, and I have associated with many online. I agree with you, the element that you mention are there. There is also ahealthy contingent of atheists, some of them are quite passive about it and a vocal few are very militant and harass believers in very hateful ways. The altter particularly are very regrettable and I feel have been very damaging to the growth of the movement. But, my experience has been that the vast majority are moral, God-fearing, non-substance abusing nor prostitutes not their customers. They are just decent folks who want as little government interference in their lives as possible, and who feel we should not be trying to force people to our way of life at gunpoint around the world AND at home. most of them have an amazingly in depth understanding of the Constitution, as well as the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers, Common Sense, and many other writings from the period. For me it is a unique environment in that I feel surrounded by people who have outstudied and have a superior understanding of the Constitution that I can learn from. Not just some of them. MOST of them.

So perhaps you should consider your sources for your notions about the typical Ron Paul supporter. Because it certainly does not align with my experience.

P.S. Great post, Chelc. You are right. We need to get away from personalities and start talking about principles. This means not pointing out how lacking in them one or the other candidates is. If we talk principles, we will be a lot mroe in agreement, andd people then can exercise their agency in making their decisons and deal witht he consequences, good or bad.

User avatar
shadow
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10542
Location: St. George

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by shadow »

Original_Intent wrote:
So perhaps you should consider your sources for your notions about the typical Ron Paul supporter. Because it certainly does not align with my experience.
Up until a few months ago I was an avid supporter of Ron Paul. I supported him 4 yrs ago and ended up voting for Chuck Baldwin. My experience regarding those who support RP is different than yours. My trust in Ron Paul is different than yours too, but we probably support the same principles.

User avatar
Original_Intent
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13008

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by Original_Intent »

shadow wrote:
Original_Intent wrote:
So perhaps you should consider your sources for your notions about the typical Ron Paul supporter. Because it certainly does not align with my experience.
Up until a few months ago I was an avid supporter of Ron Paul. I supported him 4 yrs ago and ended up voting for Chuck Baldwin. My experience regarding those who support RP is different than yours. My trust in Ron Paul is different than yours too, but we probably support the same principles.
I'll admit, my trust in Ron Paul has been shaken. Deep down, I do still trust him, but I have largely shut up about being an "avid" supporter of him on the forums. Although I have taken the bait and gotten into some regretable heated discussions...in which I certainly contributed to and in some cases was responsible for a spirit of contention.

I absolutely support the principles that he (Ron) espouses, and that his voting record backs up. I also voted for Chuck Baldwin and admire him very much. And I also know that barring a strong spiritual prompting, I could not support or trust Mitt Romney, even if he started saying the right things. Which I don't expect to happen as he is now in General Election mode and I expect his positions to swing even more liberal/moderate. At any rate, I will be prayerfully studying and evaluating what I should do.

User avatar
InfoWarrior82
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10861
Location: "There are 15 on the earth today, you can trust them completely." -President Nelson (Jan 2022)

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by InfoWarrior82 »

Andrew Jackson wrote:
InfoWarrior82 wrote:I think either you or I am confused as to what Ron Paul is actually advocating. I believe he's saying: Money backed by Gold & Silver... like the constitution says. Without a private "Federal" Reserve bank in control.
It seems White Feather quoted the Constitution above. You come back with a belief? Who cares about beliefs. What's the truth?

Is white feather saying Ron Paul wants to do something unconstitutional? I'm not seeing it.

User avatar
InfoWarrior82
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10861
Location: "There are 15 on the earth today, you can trust them completely." -President Nelson (Jan 2022)

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by InfoWarrior82 »

shadow wrote: Unfortunately RP has more supporters who want to be free to sin without any recourse than those who recognize the heavy requirements of having the Constitution.
I vehemently disagree with this statement. It's definitely not the majority, that's for sure.

shadow wrote: The pot smokers need to understand why they can't do what they do while living under the freedom of the Constitution.


If I were you, I'd use a more profound sin as an example rather than using marijuana.

How do you make the direct connection that smoking marijuana (I would never smoke marijuana) would somehow make the constitution disappear?

Would you like to respond to my earlier post?
InfoWarrior82 wrote:We don't lose our constitution because we have some "gay" states, or some "prostitution" states, or some "drug" states. We lose our constitution when we allow our federal government to run unchecked. As it is now. By and large we as a country have been lulled into a false state of security. I would argue that most of this degradation of our society has been accomplished by a centralized effort (secret combinations) by those who seek to usurp power and corrupt the moral standards. We lose our constitution when lawmakers and executives adopt unrighteous and unconstitutional federal laws for the entire nation under the guise of being "for our own good". Liberals cry out for the constitution, but abandon it for the chance to pass a federal law that benefits them. Conservatives cry out for the constitution, but abandon it for the chance to pass a federal law that benefits them. This is how we lose the constitution. Returning to the original intent of our constitution IS repentance. Christ gave us the constitution, did He not? A wicked people will not uphold the constitution. I still think it worth salvaging while at the same time crying repentance (for all sins.) Though, I believe the two great sins that would cost us the loss of our constitution are ignorance and apathy.

User avatar
shadow
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10542
Location: St. George

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by shadow »

InfoWarrior82 wrote:
shadow wrote: Unfortunately RP has more supporters who want to be free to sin without any recourse than those who recognize the heavy requirements of having the Constitution.
I vehemently disagree with this statement. Then you're blind and/or deaf!
shadow wrote: The pot smokers need to understand why they can't do what they do while living under the freedom of the Constitution.


If I were you, I'd use a more profound sin as an example rather than using marijuana.

How do you make the connection that smoking marijuana (I would never smoke marijuana) would make the constitution somehow disappear?
Here's how the connection is made-
Let's say you're my pot smoking next door neighbor. You smoke pot because it's your "right". So you're out in your back yard sitting naked in your hot tub with your male friends smoking pot and having a grand old time. Meanwhile on the other side of the tall fence I built is my 10 yr old daughter weeding the garden, breathing in all that smoke that you and your "friends" are creating. I go out side and notice what's going on so I call the police because I've asked you before to stop smoking that crap around my kids and you simply say it's your "Constitutional right". So the police come over and talk to me and they say "Sorry Shadow, your neighbor is a selfish twit but the Constitution guarantees him that "right". So I get some good people together including government representatives and we create a law that says it's illegal to smoke pot, and it's illegal to be outside naked (just tossed that one in to irritate you and your male friends). So next month you're out in your hot tub, naked and smoking pot with your male friends again. This time I call the police and they go over to your house and arrest you and your "friends". So what do you and your friends do? You hire an attorney and sue the city for creating an unconstitutional law. See how this ends? Either I think what you're doing is unconstitutional because you're infringing on my rights to be outside and not inhale your smoke or you think it's unconstitutional that there is a law that says you can't smoke pot in your own backyard. Again, the Constitution is ONLY for a RIGHTEOUS people! Dope smoking dopes are not righteous people. Yes, the Constitution allows for some sinful behavior, but once a group of sinners get together and demand their so called "rights", amen to the Constitution.
Last edited by shadow on April 18th, 2012, 1:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
shadow
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10542
Location: St. George

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by shadow »

InfoWarrior82 wrote:[Would you like to respond to my earlier post?
InfoWarrior82 wrote:We don't lose our constitution because we have some "gay" states, or some "prostitution" states, or some "drug" states. We lose our constitution when we allow our federal government to run unchecked. As it is now. By and large we as a country have been lulled into a false state of security. I would argue that most of this degradation of our society has been accomplished by a centralized effort (secret combinations) by those who seek to usurp power and corrupt the moral standards. We lose our constitution when lawmakers and executives adopt unrighteous and unconstitutional federal laws for the entire nation under the guise of being "for our own good". Liberals cry out for the constitution, but abandon it for the chance to pass a federal law that benefits them. Conservatives cry out for the constitution, but abandon it for the chance to pass a federal law that benefits them. This is how we lose the constitution. Returning to the original intent of our constitution IS repentance. Christ gave us the constitution, did He not? A wicked people will not uphold the constitution. I still think it worth salvaging while at the same time crying repentance (for all sins.) Though, I believe the two great sins that would cost us the loss of our constitution are ignorance and apathy.
Sure I'll respond, I disagree with much of it!

User avatar
Andrew Jackson
captain of 10
Posts: 20

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by Andrew Jackson »

InfoWarrior82 wrote:
Andrew Jackson wrote:
InfoWarrior82 wrote:I think either you or I am confused as to what Ron Paul is actually advocating. I believe he's saying: Money backed by Gold & Silver... like the constitution says. Without a private "Federal" Reserve bank in control.
It seems White Feather quoted the Constitution above. You come back with a belief? Who cares about beliefs. What's the truth?

Is white feather saying Ron Paul wants to do something unconstitutional? I'm not seeing it.
He stated it wasn't Constitutional and provided support with references to the Constitution. Is he right or wrong? It should be fairly clear cut either way shouldn't it?

You said.
I believe he's saying: Money backed by Gold & Silver... like the constitution says.
Where's your evidence to contradict what White Feather said? Is a belief considered evidence? Should we take your word on what the Constitution says?

I personally don't care about who is right or wrong. What is the truth? It can't be both ways. So what is the truth?

AGStacker
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1270

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by AGStacker »

Jules - Ron Paul is electable. The unelectable nonsense is the fruits of brainwashing at its finest. In fact Ron Paul has a better chance against Obama because he will get votes from many Democrats and Independents. Romney doesn't appeal to either of them. And because Ron Paul supporters understand our situation better than any of the other voters they would not dare vote for anyone else. So yeah, Ron Paul voters could easily upset Mitt's chances to win. But why would I vote for Mitt if it is a proven fact that his and Obama's positions on major issues are the same?

Also, as an economist, without the degree, I can assure you that only drastic cuts like Ron Paul's trillion dollar cuts will do anything to help the economy.

Juliette, Mitt doesn't have the cojones to make the necessary cuts. Could you imagine an economic collapse with a Mormon as president?! The stupidity of 100 years would be blamed on Mormons! I kid you not! I personally wouldn't blame Mitt but the stupidity of the average citizen is sickening. When I hear things like Obama and Bernanke saved the economy I want to vomit. The economy has no chance of recovering under the current admin. Can you believe that people actually believe that printing money to pay debt will save an economy?! If people believe this, they would certainly believe that a collapsed economy under a Mormon was the cause.

I never have suggested that Ron Paul is the Messiah and I'm the biggest Ron Paul fan I know. Anyone suggesting this about any person is foolish.

User avatar
Istand4truth
captain of 100
Posts: 499
Contact:

Re: Embarrassed by church members

Post by Istand4truth »

I have to stress this very strongly:

The idea that Ron Paul supporters are pot smoking hedonists is propaganda served up by the right wing neocon media and paid Republican shills. In my interactions with Ron Paul supporters online I have yet to meet one pot smoking libertarian who supports Ron Paul. I know of many Ron Paul supporters who are very religious conservative Republicans. Most Ron Paul supporters are very good people who are media and internet savvy.
Speaking of myself, I am a lifelong Republican except for a short two year stint in the Constitution party. I come from a long line of conservative Republicans. My mom used to get Eagle Forum newsletters in the mail. My grandpa lived his whole life in Salt Lake City as a staunch conservative Republican who was very opinionated about light rail going in. He had a sign on his front lawn protesting against it. He felt it was wasteful government spending and it would lead the SLC area to financial ruin. I think he was protesting the fact that each ride someone takes on light rail is heavily subsidized and there is a lot of cronyism that goes into the building and maintaining of light rail. I think I get my 'opinionated' genes from him.

I think that I would support states rights to legalize medical marijuana. God has given us plants and herbs to help when we are ill. It seems silly to make them illegal when they could benefit so many people.

I also have to add that I believe Ron Paul supporters are very principled. I think that they would have to be because they are supporting a man who is principled himself. They are dedicated to obeying the Constitution. They support honesty and integrity. I think that who you support for political office says a lot about yourself.
Last edited by Istand4truth on April 18th, 2012, 1:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply