About Me

Name:The Ice Princess
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

To Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich and any other egotistical far right Conservative who claims to be concerned with what’s best for this nation

 

To Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich and any other egotistical far right Conservative who claims to be concerned with what’s best for this nation:

It’s wake up time! As a fellow far right Christian Conservative, I say it’s time to support McCain or shut up! No, really, I love you, but put a sock in it- FOR God’s sake (literally). I have always shared most of your views and enjoyed your talents, but I haven’t even been willing to read your columns or buy any new books lately, due to you’re my way or the highway views. I am a representative of that grassroots base that makes you money and I am not alone in my views. I just happen to voice them louder.

These elections are so obviously becoming a repeat of the 1992 elections. In 1992 we had a Moderate Republican in office who accomplished MUCH MORE than, even I ever gave him credit for. He was replaced with this nation’s first completely immoral president, due to the far Right Conservatives and their ‘Moderate no more’ attitudes. Certainly, we’ve had liberal idiots before Clinton, like Carter for example. However, Clinton took the immoral cake and that was thanks to the righteous speeches from the far Right and the idiocy of Perot. That election was essentially given to the left by Newt (yes, I [a far Right Conservative] insulted Newt), Robertson (proclaimed Christian, who actually supported the Right’s most liberal, pro-choice candidate- Giuliani) and of course H. Ross Perot (proclaimed friend of Bush).

Now for the 2008 election cycle, we have far Right Conservatives who are well known, like the aforementioned who want to tear McCain to shreds for a 20% liberal record. Does this sound familiar? Funny! I think I heard something similar before, like in 1992. So, over a 20% liberal record, we will take a 0% Conservative who will leave some of us bankrupt and a nation morally bankrupt.

Before anybody bothers to try to rip me to shreds, like they do McCain, just know that I have spent at least 48 hours of my time, when you add it up, researching every vote and every issue McCain has voted on. Not to mention, all of the other time researching the official voting records of other potentials and the time writing to fight for our GOP to have a chance in `08, whether it has to tone down a bit or not. If you can’t say the same, you can shut up too. No offense to my fellow Conservative, but I’m tired of your far Right views flushing my nation down the proverbial Clinton toilet!

I heard this nation speaking, beginning in `04 and shouting now that they want change and it is up to the far Right just how much change we get. Are we going to get a Mildly Conservative Republican; are we going to get the worse of the two Clintons; or are we going to get a Muslim who has us all bowing to Mecca 5 times a day? Your choice folks and even Newt is saying we can’t win this with just attacks on the left. We have to turn this campaign positive!

Personally, I have been fighting for the far Right as long as I can remember. BUT, the fight for the far Right is over for now folks! There is NO far Right in the 2008 election cycle. Therefore continuing to beat your chest and fight for the far Right will make this nation take a u-turn and head left before you know what happened. Obviously I am one of the few who learned from the 1992 mistakes. Your egos are not worth the outcome. Your disappointments and threats of a 1992 style rebellion would be best suited in letters and opinions expressed directly to our only shot at `08, like it or not- McCain.

If you can climb over your egos, you’ll see that many of the McCstakes made throughout his McCareer are the same mistakes made by Reagan. I know, I know, it is a sin to speak ill of Reagan. He was my favorite president too. I cried when he died too, but he was no more a human than McCain. He started out as a Democrat, don’t forget! McCain has always been a Republican. AND, does anybody remember where amnesty came from? Do your research!

In the spirit of all Moms’ of our generation, “If you don’t have anything nice to say about McCain, don’t say anything at all.”

In the words of my Mom, “Someday when I meet my maker, at least I can say I tried.” Can you? Think about it before you help fast forward us to the day he comes.

God Bless you all and may God forgive our haughtiness before the elections!

The Ice Princess

(Tina)

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Democrats and Their Love for Monkeys

The following motion was one to make it a law that a physician must inform a mother (having an abortion at the beginning of the 6th month [20 wks] of pregnancy or later) of the evidence of fetal pain. Before you read this, please take the time to ask yourself why the majority of the names in BLUE (Democrats) would vote for a motion to protect animals from painful testing and painful slaughter (for food), yet the majority see the pain of a baby as unimportant.
 
Voting on the issue is as follows:
 
FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 526
(Republicans in BLUE roman; Democrats in RED italic; Independents underlined)

      H R 6099      2/3 YEA-AND-NAY      6-Dec-2006      6:49 PM
      QUESTION:  On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass
      BILL TITLE: Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act of 2006
 
PRES
Republican    
210
9
 
10
Democratic
40
152
 
10
Independent
 
1
 
 
TOTALS
250
162
 
20
 
Note: the small amount of blue in the YEAS:
---- YEAS    250 ---
 
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Barrow

Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Beauprez
Berry
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Boozman
Boren
Boustany
Bradley (NH)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Chandler
Chocola
Cleaver
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Costello
Cramer
Crenshaw
Cuellar

Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis (TN)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis
, Tom
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Doyle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
English (PA)
Everett
Feeney
Ferguson
Fitzpatrick (PA)
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon

Granger
Graves
Green (WI)
Gutknecht
Hall
Harris
Hart
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoekstra
Holden
Hostettler
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Istook
Jenkins
Jindal
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Kanjorski
Kaptur

Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
Kildee
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kline
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Langevin
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marshall
Matheson
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre

McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNulty
Melancon

Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mollohan
Moran (KS)
Murphy
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Northup
Nunes
Oberstar
Ortiz

Osborne
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Royce
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Salazar
Saxton
Schmidt
Schwarz (MI)
Sekula Gibbs
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Skelton
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Snyder
Sodrel
Souder
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tanner
Taylor (MS)

Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
 
 
 
NOTE: the small amount of RED below this line and watch out for them:
 
 
---- NAYS    162 ---
 
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Bass
Bean
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Blumenauer
Bono
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carson
Case
Clay
Clyburn
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Edwards
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green
, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth
Higgins
Hinchey
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Johnson (CT)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kennedy (RI)
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kind
Kirk
Kolbe
Kucinich

Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McKinney
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Millender-McDonald
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
(KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Price (NC)
Rangel
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Sabo
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sanchez
, Loretta
Sanders
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz (PA)
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Shays
Sherman
Simmons
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Solis
Spratt
Stark
Tauscher
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velázquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Wexler
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
 

Note: Why was it unimportant to the following people (?):
---- NOT VOTING    20 ---
 
Becerra
Bishop (NY)
Brown (OH)
Cubin
Evans
Ford
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Jefferson
Murtha

Norwood
Nussle
Obey
Otter
Oxley
Paul
Strickland
Taylor (NC)
Watson
Weldon (PA)
 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Defend the GOP!

PAUL FOR PORN:

Support his war on Faith??

 

Before you become so disgruntled with the GOP that you consider throwing away your vote on a third Party:

 

Ron Paul is the most likely person to break out as a third party candidate, despite saying otherwise, since he IS NOT a Republican. He is the most likely person to cause the GOP to lose!

 

I have some examples of who he is, from a credible source:

 

Abortion/ Right to Life:

  • Get the federal government out of abortion decision. (Nov 2007)
  • Not government's role to protect people like Terri Schiavo. (Sep 2007)
  • Voted NO on banning physician-assisted suicide. (Oct 1999)
  • Sanctity of Life Act: remove federal jurisdiction. (Sep 2007)
  • No experiments on frozen embryos. (Sep 2007) which I agree with, but why does he?

If you are okay with states allowing abortion, why are you against stem cell research??? I'm against it ON BABIES at all stages, unless they are UNINTENTIONALLY miscarried or stillborn. I am pro-life!

·  Rated 56% by the NRLC (Nat'l Right to Life Com.), indicating a mixed record on abortion. (Dec 2006)

_________________________________________________________________

 

Gay Marriage:

  • He is FOR gay marriage. 
  • Voted NO on Constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman. (Jul 2006)
  • Don't ask, don't tell is a decent policy for gays in army. (Jun 2007)
  • Protect all voluntary associations; don't define marriage. (Oct 2007)
  • No legislation to counteract the homosexual agenda. (Sep 2007)

Rated 38% by the HRC, indicating a mixed record on gay rights. (Dec 2006)

__________________________________________________________________

 

Affirmative Action/ Civil Rights:

 

Rated 39% by NAACP, indicating a mixed record on affirmative-action. (Dec 2006)

 

Rated 67% by the ACLU, indicating a mixed civil rights voting record. (Dec 2002)

__________________________________________________________________

 

Indecency:

 

  • Not appropriate to prosecute all illegal adult pornography. (Sep 2007)
  • Don't apply broadcast indecency rules to cable networks. (Sep 2007)
  • Voted NO on increasing fines for indecent broadcasting. (Feb 2005)

No wonder the local topless dancers came out in favor of Paul.

__________________________________________________________________

 

Crime:

 

 

Rated 11% by the NCJA, indicating a "soft-on-crime" stance. (Dec 2005):

  • Opposes the death penalty. (Jan 2007)
  • Voted YES on funding for alternative sentencing instead of more prisons. (Jun 2000)
  • Voted NO on more prosecution and sentencing for juvenile crime. (Jun 1999)
  • Voted NO on establishing nationwide AMBER alert system for missing kids. (Apr 2003)

EXCUSE ME? No need to help find missing kids, right? I can't even wrap my head around it. Maybe if he gets in office, John Walsh will take him out.

__________________________________________________________________

 

Drugs:

 

 

Rated A by VOTE-HEMP, indicating a pro-hemp voting record. (Dec 2003)

·  Voted NO on subjecting federal employees to random drug tests. (Sep 1998) 

·  Voted NO on military border patrols to battle drugs & terrorism. (Sep 2001)

·  War on Drugs has abused Bill of Rights . (Dec 2000)

·  Legalize medical marijuana. (Jul 2001)

·  War on drugs is out of control; revert control to states. (Dec 2007)

·  Repeal most federal drug laws; blacks are treated unfairly. (Sep 2007)

·  Inner-city minorities are punished unfairly in war on drugs. (Sep 2007)

·  $500B on War on Drugs since 1970s has been a total failure. (Sep 2007)

__________________________________________________________________

 

Energy & Oil:

 

 

Rated 0% by the CAF, indicating opposition to energy independence. (Dec 2006)

(FRIEND TO OPEC and others who REALLY caused gas hikes)

  • Voted NO on criminalizing oil cartels like OPEC. (May 2007)

__________________________________________________________________

 

War, Trade and Domestic & Foreign Policy:

  • Stop interfering with Latin America; talk & trade instead. (Dec 2007) 
    (BASICALLY- let them send things in, WITHOUT imposing our restrictions)
  • Cut off all foreign aid to Israel
  • We don't need any troops abroad--they don't help our defense. (Dec 2007)
  • Bring all troops home from abroad & save $100B's every year. (Dec 2007)
  • 9/11 resulted from blasphemy of our bases in Saudi Arabia. (Dec 2007)
  • Suicide terrorism stops when we stop intervening abroad. (Dec 2007)
  • Preemptive war is against Christian doctrine of just war. (Sep 2007)
    Now he worries about Christian doctrine, to prove his own point. Use of the Bible: A rule not a tool !
  • No US role in autonomy for Christians in Iraq Nineveh region. (Sep 2007)
  • Pre-emptive war is not part of the American tradition. (Jun 2007)
    So, it is pre-emptive because? So, we weren't attacked? Not to mention, pre-emptive war has been nearly ALL of our wars, in recent history. Did Vietnam, or Germany ever come here and attack us? NO! BUT they were a threat to national security!
  •  Voted NO on deterring foreign arms transfers to China. (Jul 2005)
  • Voted NO on Permanent Normal Trade Relations with China. (May 2000)
    In other words, arm them and make them angry!
  • No constitutional or moral authority for US action in Darfur. (Sep 2007)
  • Voted NO on allowing school prayer during the War on Terror. (Nov 2001)
  • Inappropriate to impose sanctions for persecuting Christians. (Sep 2007)
    They are just Christians, after all, right?? Huh?
  • No restrictions on import/export; but maintain sovereignty . (Dec 2000)  WHAT? HOW?
  • Voted NO on promoting free trade with Peru. (Nov 2007)
  • Voted NO on implementing CAFTA, Central America Free Trade. (Jul 2005)
  • Voted NO on implementing US-Australia Free Trade Agreement. (Jul 2004)
  • Voted NO on implementing US-Singapore free trade agreement. (Jul 2003)
  • Voted NO on implementing free trade agreement with Chile. (Jul 2003)
    I thought he said NO restrictions on IMPORT/EXPORT? Am I the only one confused?
  • Close departments of Energy, Education & Homeland Security. (May 2007)
    I guess we wouldn't need Homeland Security with him in office anyhow, since he seems to be an anti-war leftist.
  • End government secrecy; restore openness of information. (Aug 2007) Like we can all handle the truth??
  • Voted NO on campaign finance reform banning soft-money contributions. (Feb 2002)
  • Voted NO on requiring lobbyist disclosure of bundled donations. (May 2007)
    Oh! So he can get his campaign funds from whatever crooked source he wishes, but the government should disclose everything? And then kickbacks would be okay? Huh?

__________________________________________________________________

 

Immigration:

 

·  No amnesty, but impractical to round up 12 million illegals. (Sep 2007)

·  No amnesty, but border fence isn't so important. (Jun 2007)

·  Those who attack bilingualism are jealous & feel inferior. (Dec 2007)

BASICALLY: Leave immigration like it is?

 

__________________________________________________________________

 

Other:

 

·  Called Bush 41 a "bum"; didn't vote for Bush 43. (Dec 2007)  MEANING, he voted FOR a Democrat!

·  Bush's faith-based initiative is "a neocon project". (Oct 2007) 
I guess that makes me a neocon

·  He stated: First Amendment was written for controversial speech. (Sep 2007) WHAT?

 

I COULD go on!

 

VOTE RESPONSIBLY!

Don't vote without checking the REAL records!

www.OnTheIssues.org

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Is McCain REALLY a RINO?

I don't agree with McCain on ALL issues, BUT I notice more GOP attacks on him than on Rudy. Rudy IS a Social LIBERAL. Rudy is a Moderate fiscal Conservative. Lieberman is LESS Liberal than Rudy and is at least honest in his label.


As for McCain, he may not always be correct, but some people say they'd NEVER vote for him and this attitude comes from reading posts from so called "CONSERVATIVES" bashing him for things that are nonsense. Answer me this, ANYBODY, do you have even one friend or family member (who you associate with) who is liberal, for abortion, or different in key views than you?


If you say NO, you are either very lonely or a bigot, by its strictest definition.


If you say YES, then you have NO right to judge McCain for being seen in the political arena with a "Liberal".

Why are all of these collective Conservatives acting so similarly to LIBERALS with their bashing and banter of real GOP?

I have also NEVER gone after a candidate with biased or weak, unresearched ammunition. Calling McCain, Thompson, Huckabee or even Romeny a Liberal or even a RINO is inaccurate and equally as biased and destructive as what the Liberals themselves do to the GOP. They call us racists, woman-haters, right-wing nut jobs, etc... We know that not to be true.

I used to go to the source directly, in battle with liberals and I always found this type of bashing and banter from them. However, Shame on all of the GOP for false statements about the competition. Many of these people, claming to be Christians are lying (bearing false witness), going on hearsay or exaggerating about the extent of things, to win a verbal battle.

None of the aforementioned GOP members are RINO's or liberals.

Romeny used to be a Social MODERATE, due to his one time views on abortion, which were once even shared by Reagan.

McCain is CONSTANTLY attacked for his REFORM Bill, for his so-called amnesty Bill, etc... DON'T attack him for these things without reading them personally and understanding them first! That is a LIBERAL way of doing things. I have read the Reform Bill, front to back and nearly 100% of what I've seen Republicans attack him for, aren't even a part of it. The so-called "Amnesty Bill" I have NOT read yet. Hence I will NOT comment, without doing so first. McCain may also be catering to the left a bit in being a media-hound, speaking out about waterboarding, being seen with Kennedy, etc. However, there are an awful lot of collective fence sitters who would vote for him in the General Elections, because they are not smart enough to ignore the media. I see that as a good move. I wish the rest of the GOP could understand that things like that can win a General Election. Reagan did it. Now that he was a great president, you NEVER hear about it.

Huckabee is attacked left and right by the Romniacs. Most of it seems to be spun on what a hypocrite and liar he is, without much to base it on. People call him a RINO, when in reality he is almost 100% Conservative, in his history, especially on social issues.
 
Thompson gets it from people who ask if he's qualified because of his experience on Law and Order. Others say there is nothing to base his competency on. Yet others call him Hollywood and say that his career as an actor makes him a Liberal-sympathizer. Was Reagan? Reagan had many who said these things and more and he turned out okay, right?

When we mercelessly and boundlessly attack the real GOP, we open up our party to being insurged by Liberals like Rudy. How do you think he got in as far as he did? Do you want to make it so that we come down to a liberal against a liberal in the General Elections?

I cannot say with certainty who I'll vote for in the primaries, but it won't be anybody who has EVER voted pro-choice. This is not because I know nothing about politics. I have been politically pro-active since before adulthood and I am very much into adulthood now.

As for who should or should not be called a liberal or a RINO (Republican In Name Only), PLEASE BE RESPONSIBLE and look up their voting records either on one of the government websites or
www.OnTheIssues.org

ALSO, If you say you would NEVER vote for somebody in the GOP, be willing to sacrifice the nation. If you don't vote GOP in the generals, you might as well vote for an @$$.

PS- If you can only respond with biased or baseless attacks like a liberal, please don't bother.
FACTS ONLY PLEASE!

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (7) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Are Christians and Mormons truly the same?


Is Mormonism a cult? The word cult refers to a cohesive social group devoted to beliefs or practices that are outside the mainstream. Therefore in America, they would be a cult, except maybe in Utah and a few select areas where they are prevalent. Like Christians would be in a Muslim nation.

Are you a Mormon? I'm not. I'm also not a bigot or a hater of those who choose to follow a different path. However, I felt the need to shed the light on the differences between Christianity and Mormonism (the one’s I am aware of) after commenting on a blog inferring the two are the same. This is in response to some questions posed to me by another blogger. I will also shed light on the reasons that I am aware of, which Christians call Mormonism blasphemous or even occult by less common definition-Secret; disclosed or communicated only to the initiated; hidden from view.

 

The Mormon Faith is NOT the same as the Christian faiths and does not go by all of the same rules. Mormons (at least the missionaries) are told not to share “the truth” of their Faith with anybody, who is a Christian, Muslim or Jew, until they’re convinced of conversion. They are told that when they FIRST share their faith with people who are Christians they are to only speak of Biblical things and may mention the Book of Mormon, without specificity. LDS historian D. Michael Quinn says that LDS leaders ask historians to hide "controversies and difficulties of the Mormon past". According to many Mormons, this hiding of the past and beliefs is for the sake of being looked upon as just another Christian religion and not being looked upon with a cult-like status.

 

Many people I have known who are Christians believe that involvement in this religion will lead to damnation. I believe that (as the Bible says) ANYBODY has the right to salvation and Mormons do read the Bible, so if they ask for forgiveness for their sins, they also can be forgiven, as long as they are clear on what is a sin. The same as any other person.

 

Where I’ve gotten some of my information: My step-mother is a Mormon, I grew up with a very close friend who was a Mormon, I used to work 8 hours a day in the same room with a Mormon, I have dated a Mormon, my in-laws live in UT and many of their friends are Mormons. I was also close with my friend’s brother, a Mormon missionary who told me of the things that he was specifically told not to share with others. The reason (from what they told him) was that we “unenlightened people” could not understand something of such complexity. The way I got him to share these “complexities” was by telling him that my I.Q. is over 150 and I can understand more than the average mind. So, he thought that would be enough to make me see, if he told me everything. It actually made me wonder how he could see what he did. Mormons are warned against close associations with non-Mormons, despite the many I've had. That may be why. I may not have the deep understanding of Mormonism that a Mormon has, but I have a great deal more knowledge of it than most non-Mormons.

 

Mormons DO believe in different things than Christians, for example: Polygamy. That is NOT just a fundamentalist belief. The difference is that (mostly) only the fundamentalist Mormons actually still practice it. After the church renounced Poligamy in 1890, church leaders (even "Prophets") continued to authorize over 200 polygamous marriages and lied about the continuing practice. Jesus himself tells us to follow the laws of the land (and of the Bible) and the Bible says that liars are found detestable by God, despite their right to forgiveness.

Polyandrous marriages (marriage to women who were already married to other men) were also practiced by the “Prophets”, including Joseph Smith, which is adultery, very clearly stated as a sin in the Bible. The Book of Mormon gave the “Prophets” permission to partake in this. The Bible holds a Prophet to a higher standard and does NOT give them rights above man. Even Jesus did not take rights to sin, because it is wrong.

 

Brigham Young claimed that God and Adam were one and the same. This would be Blasphemous according to the Jewish, Christian and Muslim faiths, because that states that God was both sinful and imperfect. He also said that some sins were not atonable by Christ, which disputes the actual words of Christ (blaspheme). He says that Blood Atonement (suicide) was the only way to atone these sins. Suicide is not acceptable in Christianity. These doctrines were officially repudiated by the Mormon Church later, thus proving a major Prophet of the Mormon Church a FALSE Prophet.

 

How Smith got the Book of Mormon started: Joseph Smith, founder of the Mormon Church purchased several Egyptian papyrus scrolls in 1835. He claimed that these scrolls were The Book of Abraham (a lost portion of the Bible). He then turned the documents, along with his own "prophecies" into an addition to the Bible. However, these documents, like the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Prayer of the Apostle Paul, the Gospel of Mary, the Gospel of Judas, etc. were all debunked later as being written FAR too long after the time they were said to be written.

Fragments of the "Book of Abraham" scrolls were tested in the late 60's, after the rediscovery of parts of them along with a letter from one of Joseph Smith Jr.'s wives in a Chicago Museum, and later retested in the 90's. They were proven to be written nowhere near the time of Abraham and have been conclusively shown to be common Egyptian funerary documents unrelated to the content of the "Book of Abraham". Therefore, those and the other texts were never included or added into The Bible. The Mormon Church hired an author with a degree in Egyptology to refute the proof of the scrolls dating and content. This author J.E. Homans, under a different pen-name was later found to actually have NO such degree.

 

Ironically, all of the mentioned documents were followed by some church and they attempt to change some of the laws of the Bible, some even change God’s commandments. Ironically, those Faiths all claim to be the ONLY way to Heaven, by belonging to the particular religion. The Mormon Faith, from what I was told, basically claims that IF you have been told of the Book of Mormon and are mentally capable of understanding, you may not receive salvation without it's laws. That is in DIRECT conflict with The Bible. The Bible gives only one way to Heaven and that is through Christ, NOT ANY religion. Not only that, but it gives EVERYBODY the option of salvation, without commitment to a particular religion. You just can't have more than one God or be an unbeliever. So, IF their faith is the only way to Heaven, then nobody went to Heaven between the years of 00 and 1830 A.D., despite the sacrifice of Christ????

 

Several critics contend that Joseph Smith could not be a genuine “Prophet” because dozens of his prophecies did not come true.

 

Since the compilation of the New Testament, the original documents were investigated and found to be written within less than 100 years after the birth of Christ. There was to be no further written prophecy added after the Book of Revelations; Revelations 22:18. It doesn’t say that miracles, gifts, signs, prophecies, etc. will end, just nothing added. The Book of Mormon was written in the 1800’s.

 

Another difference: Baptism for the Dead (Baptism by proxy) is not justified by the Bible, but it is a Mormon ritual. Jewish groups criticized the LDS church in 1995, after discovering that the church baptized more than 300,000 Jewish holocaust victims.

 

This is a practice that I just don’t personally agree with: Relatives cannot attend a wedding of a Mormon if they are not members of the church. Others claim that the attendance rules are wrong because members of the church cannot attend a Mormon wedding or the temple (even close relatives) if they have not paid their full tithe to the church. This rule along with others, has forced some church members into poverty.

 

In the Book of revelations, it says in the later days there will be many false prophets who show miraculous signs. It also says they will claim other ways to Heaven. The way to recognize who is and is not a false Prophet, is by the fact that they will either abolish some of God's laws, add new ones or claim that Christ was not the son of God. How do you interpret it?

 

The differences are not a reason to bash anybody. Mormons are not a violent bunch and do not deserve any violence or meanness from Christians. Christians have a far too volatile nature towards differences, when we are supposed to embrace people of differences as long as they don’t try to force us away from our practice of Faith. If somebody tries to force a Christian from their faith and: we warn them not to twice; and they again do so, we are supposed to have no more association. The Democrats are a different story, as a party. They try to annihilate our rights of free worship. Also, as a Christian, you must watch out for your Faith (above all) and be careful that no official you elect will try to take it away or make you change it.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (27) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Conservatives and Abortion

Christians; PLEASE read:
 
I recently watched an old Christian movie, called: “The Angel of Sardis”
 
The following statement was made in that movie: “If you try to replace God’s wisdom with human wisdom, you will destroy the very fabric this society was made from”.
 
This rings especially true at election time. As a matter of fact, he was specifically speaking about the liberalization of society. If you can’t tolerate old 70’s movies, I would recommend at least watching the court scene at the end. There were many profoundly prolific or even prophetic statements within that scene.
 
This led me to think a great deal about our future as Christians and that led me to need to speak to the Christians of this nation.
 
It is a liberal statute that became a mutated portion of our Constitution, in Roe -v- Wade. It was NOT Constitutional and the more we allow these things to become or stay a part of it, by electing those who will do nothing, the more meaningless this document will become. This nation was established by Christians, for Christians to have religious freedom and it was NOT meant to exclude people or to give Christians the right to harm those of other Faiths, who practice their Faith within the laws of this land.
 
It has since become a tool for the secular society to oppress our God’s (the ONLY God) will and abuse the rights of the defenseless. The more we feign ignorance in the act of pacifying those who liberalize the laws, the more seems and stitches come out of the fabric that holds us together as a nation.
 
The Bible warns in Revelations 16:15 (In the words of the Lord): “Behold, I come like a thief! Blessed is he who stays awake and keeps his clothes with him, so that he may not go naked and be shamefully exposed.” That speaks of when Christ will come and judge the world. Armageddon- The end times which are supposed to happen when society becomes too immoral. The Bible also clearly tells you in 1 Thessalonians that NOBODY will know what hour that will happen.
 
Christians, answer a few questions:
 
1)      Do you want that hour to be right after you have voted for or decided it will be okay to vote for somebody who thinks abortion should be legal?
2)      How much more immorality must happen to fulfill the prophecies of Revelations?
 
Thou shalt not commit murder.
 
1)      What does it mean?
2)      Does it mean not to kill under any circumstances?
3)      Or is murder the killing of somebody when not defending yourself or others from an imminent threat, especially those who are indefensible?
 
If you don’t think that covers it, how about Proverbs 6:16-19:
16- There are six things the Lord hates, seven that are detestable to him:
            haughty eyes,
            a lying tongue,
            hands that shed innocent blood,
18-              a heart that devises wicked schemes,
      feet that are quick to rush into evil,
19-              a false witness who pours out lies
and a man who stirs up dissension among brothers.

Now ask yourself HONESTLY:
When do you think GOD thinks life begins?
Go back and read the second sentence and then answer that.
 
Many who read this will be frustrated, angry or irritated and tempted to strike out in response.
 
BEFORE you do, ask yourself:
            Why would this anger you?
            Is it something in this message, something you are defensive about or something in you?
Remember: there is time to be forgiven now, but the aforementioned New Testament verses tell you that there may OR may NOT be later.
 
IF you DON’T believe in God and you don’t want to, I guess this doesn’t apply to you. So, don’t bother to respond, unless you want to know more about him, because I will not be led into argument by a non-believer.
 
IF you do believe, you are entitled to interpret God’s laws as you truly believe. However, I caution you not to take it all lightly or fool heartedly. Take the time to research, read and THINK BEFORE YOU VOTE.
 
THE PRIMARIES MAY END UP COUNTING THE MOST
God Bless!
Tina
 
If you agree, please spread the message as far as possible. You have my permission.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It |