• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If she self-identifies as a "Fool for Christ" ...

Watch the video. Would you vote for Michelle Bachmann?

  • Yes

    Votes: 6 23.1%

  • No

    Votes: 4 15.4%

  • Not just no, but hell no

    Votes: 14 53.8%

  • Other

    Votes: 2 7.7%
  • Total voters
    26
The Libbos are afraid of Bachman, just like you're afraid of Palin.
 
not only no but HELL NO.


Christians are icky! they are crazy!!! they are often even white and conservative!!!!



Those who profess to love Jesus Christ are ingrates, subhuman failures of evolution who can't be assumed to have any kind of a grasp on reality that us, noble, selfless, and humble New York Times Reading Jon Stewart Watching Sophisticates clearly evince.




right?
 
BDBoop said:
And on another note: Gracious, Mr. Wallace.
Click to expand...

good on him for having the grace to apologize, too bad it wasn't on-air; and too bad he didn't demonstrate the ability to phrase that question better live.
 
American said:
Oh come on, all candidates do, don't they?
Click to expand...

Do they? Perhaps. But then again, I'm not exactly a supporter of most candidates. I would hope they would stay away from campaigning in churches.
 
cpwill said:
not only no but HELL NO.


Christians are icky! they are crazy!!! they are often even white and conservative!!!!



Those who profess to love Jesus Christ are ingrates, subhuman failures of evolution who can't be assumed to have any kind of a grasp on reality that us, noble, selfless, and humble New York Times Reading Jon Stewart Watching Sophisticates clearly evince.




right?
Click to expand...

Well, I'm a Christian, and I know you're not talking about me. So you must be talking about you. Right?
 
Goshin said:
You know as well as anyone that 70% or more of Americans profess to believe "that book" in some fashion. Why are you asking a question to which you know the answer? Or is it just another opportunity to use one of your favorite derogatory hate-phrases about religion?
Click to expand...

Argumentum ad populum. Logical fallacies do not impress.
 
She's definitely a fool, but I don't think it's Jesus's fault.
 
I see no reason why someone who is open and honest about their particular brand of faith cannot be trusted to fairly represent the people of this nation.

Much is said here and throughout our society about not judging others based on the community they belong to. I think this is as valid here as it is in many other scenarios.
 
cAPSLOCK said:
I see no reason why someone who is open and honest about their particular brand of faith cannot be trusted to fairly represent the people of this nation.
Click to expand...

I'm not worried about representing the people, I'm worried about being able to make rational, intelligent decisions based on the evidence. If someone admits they believe an invisible man tells them what to do, I'm immediately going to question their rational ability to function.
 
Cephus said:
I'm not worried about representing the people, I'm worried about being able to make rational, intelligent decisions based on the evidence. If someone admits they believe an invisible man tells them what to do, I'm immediately going to question their rational ability to function.
Click to expand...

When's the last time an atheist ran for president?
 
You know, I don't think asking her point-blank "Are you a flake?" is either disrespectful or unprofessional. It's a rough question, but it's an opportunity to address a perceived weakness. Her enemies were already calling her worse, with less chance to answer them; if she can't take a simple interview, she doesn't have the stones for the office she aspires to. Hell, she doesn't have the stones for the office she has.
 
LuckyDan said:
People. Open your bibles. Chill. I know you ****ing HATE her, but dayum! get some persepctive.
Click to expand...

Yes, the death, ressurection, and salvation does seem like foolishness to those who are not Christian. However, this does not give someone a reason to be foolish about nearly everything.
 
Cephus said:
And why do you think quoting a ridiculous book of mythology is going to impress anyone?
Click to expand...

This is the arrogance I've been talking about. This is what I would expect from a militant atheist.
 
megaprogman said:
Yes, the death, ressurection, and salvation does seem like foolishness to those who are not Christian. However, this does not give someone a reason to be foolish about nearly everything.
Click to expand...

You're not going to vote for a Republican anyway, so why the **** are you even here?
 
BDBoop said:
When's the last time an atheist ran for president?
Click to expand...
Guys like Cephus don't realize what a splinter sized minority they are in this world, but they want an atheist president to represent them.
 
BDBoop said:
Well, I'm a Christian, and I know you're not talking about me. So you must be talking about you. Right?
Click to expand...

oohhhh, it's only evangelical Christians who are icky? or is it just Christians who seem to Really Believe What They Claim?
 
megaprogman said:
Yes, the death, ressurection, and salvation does seem like foolishness to those who are not Christian.
Click to expand...

foolishness to the Greeks and a stumbling block to the Jews was how it was descried, as I recalled.


American: Athiesm is Cephus' faith, and he's positively evangelical in it. Discussing the matter with him is.... well, he is good if you wish to sharpen your iron.
 
cpwill said:
American: Athiesm is Cephus' faith, and he's positively evangelical in it. Discussing the matter with him is.... well, he is good if you wish to sharpen your iron.
Click to expand...

There's no faith involved, unless you broaden the definition of faith so absurdly that anything and everything is a faith. I defend reality, period. We simply have no objective evidence whatsoever to support the factual existence of any gods. Whether you like that or not is irrelevant, it is what it is. I am just as adamant arguing against groups who believe in magical pixies or Bigfoot. The fact that theists are so piss poor at defending their beliefs rationally has nothing to do with me, it's a failure in your own camp.
 
BDBoop said:
Is that really someone you want in the White House?



Click to expand...


I really do not give a rats ass what her religious beliefs are or what she claims what her religious beliefs are. What matters is what issues she claims to support and her record on those issues. If she actually supports most of the issues I believe in and has a record( her votes on the issues) then I will vote for her. I do not give a damn if she claims to be a Christian, Catholic, Mormon, Jewish, Muslim or what.
 
Cephus said:
There's no faith involved, unless you broaden the definition of faith so absurdly that anything and everything is a faith. I defend reality, period. We simply have no objective evidence whatsoever to support the factual existence of any gods. Whether you like that or not is irrelevant, it is what it is. I am just as adamant arguing against groups who believe in magical pixies or Bigfoot. The fact that theists are so piss poor at defending their beliefs rationally has nothing to do with me, it's a failure in your own camp.
Click to expand...

I think a belief against God(s) takes faith in the same way as a belief in God(s).

I see evidence of a creator whether my eyes are open or closed. But this is not proof either way. You have chosen to believe against the idea of a creator... you have the same proof a believer does - none.
 
cpwill said:
oohhhh, it's only evangelical Christians who are icky? or is it just Christians who seem to Really Believe What They Claim?
Click to expand...

I did a few decades in a fundy system. It's been a very long time since I've been comfortable with the whole holy roller, speaking in tongues, tongues and interpretation belief system that Bachmann hails from.
 
Wow, if this is the worst people could come up with for Bachmann, i might as well vote for her due to the lack of cons.
 
Reading the press since her announcement, I think she has a REALLY good shot at taking the nomination, and doing well beyond that point as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom