• 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!

Why do most white evangelicals vote Republican?

dairyair said:
That is suppose to be the case but many voice how sinful a gay person is based on OT writings. So they aren't really following the NT in some cases. Usually when it suits their ideology only.
Click to expand...

The moral law of the Old Testament was never repudiated by Jesus. Only the civil and ceremonial Law.

Since homosexual sex was prohibited by moral law it stands as illicit.
 
nekrodev said:
Marriage is not explicitly defined as requiring a man and a woman, except in some places, and in some cases. There are places and religions where it is possible to marry multiple people. In the United States, and the West, generally, marriage does NOT require a man and a woman. Your opinion does not change this. And you have no understanding of law or culture, as opposed to the natural sciences.
Click to expand...

It is a violation of moral and natural law. Marriage was universally understood to be between members of the opposite sex until the post modernist movement set to destroy society
 
dairyair said:
It's actually predictable.
Liberals are for a path towards equality.
Liberals are for letting people live their lives and not have gov't dictate their private lives.
Rs who are christian, want everyone to be just like them. And don't want all humans to have equal opportunities.
Click to expand...

Unless you don’t wish to be enslaved by homosexuals to serve their wedding, unless you reject a delusional man’s claims to be a woman, or unless you wish for your tax dollars to not support evils like contraception and abortion.

Liberals are not about letting people live their lives as they want. That is simply false
 
People, ask yourself.

Why would any Christian vote for the abortion party?

Why would any Christian vote for the Gay party.

Why would any Christian vote for someone who champions these values and others that Christians dislike?
 
EMNofSeattle said:
They cannot contract to a marriage because by definition a marriage does not take place between two people of the same sex. This would be like saying you can reject the law of gravity to insist otherwise
Click to expand...

BS. Marriage in the USA is simply a contract between 2 people who want to share lives and assets together. It has many advantages over single people. Especially in legal things like insurance, beneficiaries, etc. It's a legal document.
 
apdst said:
The Leftists are the ones trying to violate the 2nd Amendment.
Click to expand...

How's that related to evangelicals voting republican?
Can we stay OT?
 
dairyair said:
BS. Marriage in the USA is simply a contract between 2 people who want to share lives and assets together. It has many advantages over single people. Especially in legal things like insurance, beneficiaries, etc. It's a legal document.
Click to expand...

Yes.

That's what it has been denigrated to by the left. It used to mean more.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Back when society was sane adultery was a crime.
Click to expand...

And today, Conservative Christians don't care. They voted an adulterer to be prez. Showing adultery never was meaningful in the 1st place.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Which civil rights?
Click to expand...

civil rights plural noun
Definition of civil rights
: the nonpolitical rights of a citizen
especially : the rights of personal liberty guaranteed to U.S. citizens by the 13th and 14th amendments to the Constitution and by acts of Congress

But to be more accurate. I should say all rights in general. Not limited to civil.
 
dairyair said:
And today, Conservative Christians don't care. They voted an adulterer to be prez. Showing adultery never was meaningful in the 1st place.
Click to expand...

They will vote for a sinner. We all sin. They sin. They will not vote for the party that advocates sinning is not a sin.
 
dairyair said:
And today, Conservative Christians don't care. They voted an adulterer to be prez. Showing adultery never was meaningful in the 1st place.
Click to expand...

Not true. I am gravely concerned for the President’s soul as I do not know if he has made effort to repent of his numerous acts of adultery. He has been remarried twice and allegedly had other extramarital affairs. However the evils of unjust war, black slavery and abortion which were openly promoted and celebrated by Hillary Clinton on the orders of Barack Obama were far more grave in matter. As far as secular elections go there is nothing in Christian teaching which forbids voting for an adulterer. King David was an adulterer and the Israelites were still bound to allegiance to him
 
EMNofSeattle said:
The moral law of the Old Testament was never repudiated by Jesus. Only the civil and ceremonial Law.

Since homosexual sex was prohibited by moral law it stands as illicit.
Click to expand...

Moral law is man's law. And man has a right to change laws.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Yes.

That's what it has been denigrated to by the left. It used to mean more.
Click to expand...

It still means just as much. Only now, more groups are afforded said meanings.

If more means denigration to you. So be it.
 
dairyair said:
Moral law is man's law. And man has a right to change laws.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. Moral law is created by god and then revealed to us. Man can only change civil law. Your soul is at serious risk if you refuse to abide by moral law
 
Lord of Planar said:
Yes.

That's what it has been denigrated to by the left. It used to mean more.
Click to expand...
Your marriage, on an emotional level, means whatever you and your spouse feel it means. Do you think it is within the power of the state to determine how much you love and value each other? Do you think your god cares what the government thinks?

The state is there to determine and adjudicate your rights and obligations to each other and you children in civil society. How you see your union emotionally and spiritually is left to you.



Sent from my LG-H872 using Tapatalk
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Unless you don’t wish to be enslaved by homosexuals to serve their wedding, unless you reject a delusional man’s claims to be a woman, or unless you wish for your tax dollars to not support evils like contraception and abortion.

Liberals are not about letting people live their lives as they want. That is simply false
Click to expand...

No one is forced to be enslaved to gay weddings.
But businesses are forced to abide by the state laws they ask to get a business license in. When a business agrees to pay for said business license, they agree to the laws of that state.
This is such an old topic and a pointless one at that.
 
kitsune said:
Your marriage, on an emotional level, means whatever you and your spouse feel it means. Do you think it is within the power of the state to determine how much you love and value each other? Do you think your god cares what the government thinks?

The state is there to determine and adjudicate your rights and obligations to each other and you children in civil society. How you see your union emotionally and spiritually is left to you.



Sent from my LG-H872 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The claim the secular states denigration of marriage has no effect on the culture and thus impacts people’s marriages is folly.

It is shown that marriages where the woman uses contraceptives are more likely to end in divorce, and yet secular authorities not only approved it for sale, they promote the pill. This creates an environment where people who are not fully educated believe it is ok to use
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Not true. I am gravely concerned for the President’s soul as I do not know if he has made effort to repent of his numerous acts of adultery. He has been remarried twice and allegedly had other extramarital affairs. However the evils of unjust war, black slavery and abortion which were openly promoted and celebrated by Hillary Clinton on the orders of Barack Obama were far more grave in matter. As far as secular elections go there is nothing in Christian teaching which forbids voting for an adulterer. King David was an adulterer and the Israelites were still bound to allegiance to him
Click to expand...

Whatever it takes to set morals aside to vote for someone.
I decided neither were good enough to vote for. So I voted neither.

I also don't get taken down rabbit holes of propaganda to make my decision either.
 
dairyair said:
No one is forced to be enslaved to gay weddings.
But businesses are forced to abide by the state laws they ask to get a business license in. When a business agrees to pay for said business license, they agree to the laws of that state.
This is such an old topic and a pointless one at that.
Click to expand...


Sodomy used to be illegal too, and the liberal response was definitely not “well that’s just the law so tough luck”

In fact you have lied about both your proposition liberals want less government and that liberals support the law, which are contradictory positions to start with
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Incorrect. Moral law is created by god and then revealed to us. Man can only change civil law. Your soul is at serious risk if you refuse to abide by moral law
Click to expand...

Then the OT is in play.
Not 1 letter of the law is forgiven until heaven and earth have passed.

the god of abraham isn't god to all people of the world. Just to those who believe it.
So, moral laws are societal. And subject to change.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Sodomy used to be illegal too, and the liberal response was definitely not “well that’s just the law so tough luck”

In fact you have lied about both your proposition liberals want less government and that liberals support the law, which are contradictory positions to start with
Click to expand...

I have not lied at all. Are personal attacks against TOS at this site?
How does your god feel about saying lies about what others have said?
 
dairyair said:
I have not lied at all. Are personal attacks against TOS at this site?
How does your god feel about saying lies about what others have said?
Click to expand...

It is not a personal attack to point out the dishonesty of your positions
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Sodomy used to be illegal too, and the liberal response was definitely not “well that’s just the law so tough luck”

In fact you have lied about both your proposition liberals want less government and that liberals support the law, which are contradictory positions to start with
Click to expand...

If "sodomy" laws had been enforced across the board, 90% of the population would be in jail.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Yes.

That's what it has been denigrated to by the left. It used to mean more.
Click to expand...

Then I guess you think its a damned shame that the church decided to get into bed with the government, right?

You can try to pin the degradation of marriage on liberals all you want, but the fact is that if the church had kept its sacrament to itself instead of trying to get special benefits for those that entered into that arrangement, this wouldn't be an issue.

Oh, and for the record, just as many conservatives **** on the sacrament as liberals, so I would try to get too far on that high horse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom