Rick Warren's Unfair Civil Forum
Related Categories: Politics
Best selling author and pastor Rick Warren's attempt at a civil forum between the two presidential candidates was a miserable failure for one very important reason - the fight was unfair. If I was Obama's manager and this forum was a boxing match, I would have thrown in the towel and cried out to the referee for mercy when McCain began to answer questions. By McCain's third verbal punch, as Obama's manager I would have yelled out, "Stop the fight!" Below is a excerpt of the CNN Forum.
Click here to view/read more...
When asked about his position on abortion, Obama claimed that the answer to when life begins is "above his pay grade." What in the world did that mean? Since when is the single issue dividing this nation above the pay grade of the president of the United States? In contrast, McCain said "life begins at conception." Period and exclamation point. What? A politician who actually answers the question? On closer examination, Obama did answer the question in the context of another question: "Which Supreme Court justice would you NOT have nominated?" It was a brilliant question because the answers of the candidates clearly revealed the stark ideological divide between two men.
Obama said he would not have nominated Clarence Thomas. Hmmmmm. The most conservative of all the justices would not be the pick of unarguably the most liberal senator in the U.S. congress. But carefully consider WHY he would not have picked Thomas. Obama would not have selected Thomas because in Obama's opinion Thomas lacked EXPERIENCE necessary for the job. Are you kidding me? Senator Obama, what about your lack of experience for running our country? What EXPERIENCE do you bring to the presidency? You have never run a company. You have never held an executive office. And, you have been in the senate for a whole TWO YEARS with one of those years being spent on the campaign trail. There is something really wrong with this picture. Judge yourself by the same statements and you disqualify yourself from the highest office of our land.
In contrast, McCain said he would never have nominated Justices Ginsberg, Stevens, Breyer, and Souter. His reasons? All of these justices have proven to be the enemies of strict constitutional interpretation. In other words, rather than interpreting the constitution, all of them legislate from the bench.
In my opinion, this is one of the most critical issues of this election since the next president will likely nominate two justices when mercifully two of the more liberal ones retire. The abortion question will finally be answered in the Supreme Court and the state courts. The ideology between the two men was a clear as we can get. Their worldviews could not be more different. Their worldviews will determine their choice of Supreme Court justices. If you are a liberal, then vote for Obama. If you are not, then vote for McCain.
Before this debate even started I already knew that Obama was not my choice due to his ideology, philosophy of government, theology, and especially his judicial intent. Conservatives need to grow up. For evangelical leaders to imply they will stay home and not vote is the wrong message. No one is more pro-life than I am. Yet, the protection of the most vulnerable of our citizens, babies in the womb, will be decided in the courts. The civil forum has shown us clearly where each candidate stands. The choice could not be any clearer. If you are pro abortion, then vote for Obama. If you are pro life, then vote for McCain.
In His Grip,
PB

I was skeptical of this civil forum with I first learned it was the brainchild of Faith in Public Life, a leftist organization which purports to hold Judeo-Christian faith, without the Judeo-Christian values - read pro-choice, pro gay/gay marriage, etc.. I am pleased, however, with a cursory examination of my brother Pastor Warren's questions. I am even more pleased with Senator McCain's answers. In the past I have been occasionally unsettled by Senator McCain's willingness to undermine the speech of conservatives and to associate himself with individuals with an anti-Christian agenda. And while he would not be my first choice for a candidate, it has readily become apparent that he is the only choice we have if we hope to put someone who fears God into the most powerful position in the world.
While God will still be sovereign regardless of who wins, and we as Christians are still to submit to the winner in any case so long as it does not conflict with God's law - I believe it is imperative that we work to honor God in our government and affairs by putting someone there who will honor God in his thoughts and deeds.
Just vote the Bible. Christians shouldnt represent the Republican party,the Demecratic party, the Libertarian party,the Green party or the Pity party. We represent the Kingdom of God!
I think it is clear that if Barack Obama is elected it is because our country is due for more tough love. However, as a believer in Christ, I do think it is my responsibility to vote forr the candidate who at least appreciates the gift of life that God has given each of us.
it comes to a face to face forum where he has to answer tough questions, he was no match for the likes of McCain.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzWynvBLJ4I
McCain isn't "pro-life" ... he is simply "anti-abortion."
He had no problem dropping bombs on civilians and committing mass murder for the state when he was a pilot in the 60's.
And he has been the biggest supporter of America's war against Iraq ... a nation that never attacked the U.S. ... which has led to hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilian-non-combatant deaths & thousands of American boys dead (for a war that took place under false pretenses to boot).
He is a secular-humanist warmonger.
And a Christian pastor such as yourself should have grave reservations about endorsing another "State-is-God" warmonger.
A war is not mass murder (unless it is an illegal war or genocide). Calling a man a secular-humanist warmonger without anything more than an allusion to his war service, which is undisputed among all reasonable thinkers, undermines the point I think you're trying to make.
I fought in Iraq. The U.S. is not in a war against Iraq, and it hasn't been since 1991 when Iraq did attack a U.S. ally. Your numbers are exaggerated. Your hyperbole is misplaced. And your anger barely concealed. If you're angry because we're at war with terrorism, consider this. President Bush has a better record against terrorism on U.S. soil than any modern time president going back more than 50 years. 7 years without an attack on American soil is not only "pretty good" but excellent. And the anger you feel in your heart right now when I justify President Bush reveals what is in your heart.
While there are many who will be so kind as to ignore your comments, I cannot. I am a Christian first, and I'm not sure how far down the line being an American is. But as a Christian, I cannot stand by while the innocent are called unrighteous (President Bush) and the guilty are praised (those who would support or condone terrorism in the name of peace).
Finally, our country is in trouble. It's in trouble because our people don't think. They can hardly repent when they would readily support a man who is willing to kill babies outside the womb (look it up, your man Obama voted for infanticide three times in Illinois) and condemn a man who is seeking to protect the innocent world-wide, not just on American soil. In fact, they can be hardly said to be thinking. If my tone is harsh, then ask yourself why is it that 'Christians' can no longer agree on what is right and what is wrong? Do we both have the same spirit of Christ living within us?