I have always admired and respected Billy Graham. He is such a great example to me of a man who practices what he preaches. From all I have seen and heard, he's lived a faithful (to God) life....with humility and grace....his entire life. Kudos to him for calling on Christians to, to the best of their abilities, vote for candidates who, as close as possible, will represent their values as a whole.
It's interesting to me, that the "values as a whole" thing is totally up to debate. As it's hard to reconcile my beliefs with some of the crazier beliefs of the right wing/religious right. They let them dictate their beliefs way too much imho AND demand that it be my (or others) beliefs too. It's difficult for me to accept people who trumpet the bible and then say stuff about gays, or birth control or equal rights or other things. Not saying you do that. If we're going to base our vote on biblical values, I would hope we'd vote for the guy who is anti-war, pro women and wants everyone to have health care. And since that guy doesn't exist, I hope we don't let one "value" dictate everything. If abortion is your #1 issue, I think thats sad. It's not as major an issue as people make it out to be. i would hope a value that is more important would be how a candidate treats his fellow man, treats women, treats children, treats other countries, believes in equality and is not a proponent of war in the least. But than again, even in my point I'm making it's hard to pinpoint a single point. point point point. I said point! Wanna fight about it!?
In a nutshell, I support what is related in Graham's ad. That said, I'm not attempting to push those beliefs on you, though. As I had mentioned, you're certainly free to vote as your personal convictions lead you. Hopefully, we can then (figuratively) have a beer on Wednesday and agree to support our new President and local leaders to the best of our respective abilities.
I didn't mean to imply you were doing any of that. I'm mostly talking of religious leaders who are getting in politics. Sure, they have the right to, but imho, they should be impartial. Because as someone who isn't religious, I think they need to be consistent in their beliefs. BG aside, I think there is a lot of hypocrisy in religion and politics. In the real world, religion isn't something that always can be used.
Why? We all have opinions and are therefore not impartial. What I hear you saying is that we are all free to express or opinions and beliefs except religious leaders. I think that is both wrong and rather hateful talk, ie, we can do it but you can't as it levels the playing field.
Read his comments again. There is some truth in what he's relating. They weren't hard and fast statements.
Seems very un-Christlike to put an ad in a journal whose very name is focused on the pursuit of mammon. It also takes some serious Bible cherry picking to come up with the current version of marriage (co-equal monogamy focused on love) to be "the biblical definition of marriage." But oh well. Like he says, he too will pass, and the definition will continue to evolve as it has for quite some time.
Why's that? The Bible says it's the love of mammon where the problems (sin) arise.....not the pursuit, thereof. Shoot. Abraham, himself, had a bazillion head of cattle. He was rich beyond measure. So, too, was Job in the end. Oh, and let's not forget Solomon................. In New Testament times, the Biblical definition of marriage consists of one man and one woman. No cherry picking involved there.
So if you just ignore the first 3/5 of the bible, it's one man/one woman. Nope, no cherry picking there.
not that it isn't obvious anyway, but the fact that the religious right places the issue of gay marriage above romney's mormonism is just more evidence that this issue is driven by simple bigotry.
