Conservative Christian Party?

Conservative Christian Party?

Joined
Oct 23, 2004
Messages
7,369
Reputation
492
Points
20
Age
77
Location
Illinois, and I DID obtain my concealed carry perm
NOTE TO OUR MODS: I'm hoping to have a somewhat sensible conversation about a topic that no one else seems to have covered. It's political in nature, and could stir a lot of emotion. Feel free to move it to the Mudpit, if everyone gets too rowdy!

Recently, Dr. James Dobson of Focus on the Family has raised the possibility a third party, especially, if Rudy Giuliani is the nominee of the GOP for President. He even talked to Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas (and Presidential candidate) about running for the Presidency on the ticket of a "Conservative Christian Party". Gov. Mike wisely refused the offer.

I will give you my take on this idea, and let you discuss:

Personally, I'm frustrated that Christians have had to choose between two evils for as long as I can remember. Note that I don't include President Bush in this "evil". I was a cautious supporter of Bush in 2000, and an enthusiastic supporter of him in 2004. But for most of my life, as a conservative who is also a Christian, I've had to use one hand to vote, and the other to hold my nose, in the voter's booth.

However, I'm absolutely opposed to a third party for "Christians". This opposition has nothing to do with the frustration that I know Dr. Dobson and other Christians feel. It is a hardcase assessment that splitting the GOP means tacitly accepting a greater evil, at least in 2008. A Conservative Christian Party means that Hillbilly gets her wish to be Nanny-in-Chief of the United States, with all that means for issues that mean a lot to me (chiefly, abortion).

I realize that there's some people who believe that we should "send the GOP a message". But sending this message puts Hillary in the White House.

I realize that there's other people who believe that Christians should have a safe haven to vote in, and want the notion of a Conservative Christian Party to be permanent. But even if successful, in the long run, such a party would still take decades to get to where the GOP is, now. And, in the meantime, it would put Hillary in the White House.

And everyone should note that the political structure of the United States is purposely stacked against third parties.

So, what do you think? Discuss, and please keep it civil (or else, this ends up in the Mudpit).
 
Don't need it, we already have the American Independent Party which is just as good.

And the AIP's number of elected officials in America is?

The above isn't an attack on what you said, Thanatos. It's a re-statement of what I said about the decks being stacked against third parties, in the United States.
 
And the AIP's number of elected officials in America is?

The above isn't an attack on what you said, Thanatos. It's a re-statement of what I said about the decks being stacked against third parties, in the United States.

:(

It's true, unfortunately. The Republicans didn't even rise to power until major events rocked the country.

And with the possibility of another Clinton in the White House, many people who are tempted to leave the Republicans aren't, simply because a vote for anything else is a wasted vote that could be used to fight againt Hillary.
 
What would be the difference between a "Conservative Christian Party" and the current GOP?

Oldgamer said:
Discuss, and please keep it civil (or else, this ends up in the Mudpit).
If you want it civil, you might want to think about refraining from using terms like "Hillbilly" and "Nanny-in-Chief" to refer to Hillary.
 
I don't want religion indirectly involved with the government as it is with the GOP right now. Why in hell would I want anything to do with a CCP?
 
Special third parties just for radicals to vote for have the advantage of acting as a lightning-rod to draw away their contaminating influence as interest groups for mainstream parties. If Republican officials realise that there's no point in trying to fudge their policies to appeal to Christian Conservatives as much as possible while still keeping a hold on their mainstream voters, then they will stop campaigning on the promise of religious fundamentalist-inspired ideas. This will effectively keep Christian radicalism out of politics altogether - they can safely be ignored.
 
I was reading a statement by a rather influential evangelical leader, I forget exactly who, but he said something to the effect of. "We [Christian Conservatives] need to show the rest of the GOP that they can't just call Hillary and expect us to fall in line." He wanted to vote for a candidate that he could fully support, choose what he felt was right over what he felt was easy.
 
Bah, the Bible Belt just needs to secede. That'll solve the problem.

If you can't separate government from religion, you're too stupid to vote.
 
Bah, the Bible Belt just needs to secede. That'll solve the problem.

If you can't separate government from religion, you're too stupid to vote.

I guess the founding fathers wouldn't be allowed to vote in your secular utopia. Nor would 90% of Americans.

Thankfully we have this little thing called the first amendment to protect us the type of paradise you would impose.
 
I guess the founding fathers wouldn't be allowed to vote in your secular utopia. Nor would 90% of Americans.

Thankfully we have this little thing called the first amendment to protect us the type of paradise you would impose.

I probably should have elaborated.

A Christian Party would muddy the waters. It would bring religious beliefs to the table, where they shouldn't be. It isn't illegal, it's just stupid. Religion can't hold itself up in the modern political climate.
 
A Christian Conservative Party would be the absolute worst thing that could happen this country if it was elected.
 
I probably should have elaborated.

A Christian Party would muddy the waters. It would bring religious beliefs to the table, where they shouldn't be. It isn't illegal, it's just stupid. Religion can't hold itself up in the modern political climate.

Um, they should absolutely be at the table.

Your religious belief, or lack thereof has every right to be at the forefront of your decision making process when it comes to voting.

Believe in whatever god you want, and have the freedom to vote according to the morals you believe that god gave you.

I am also not sure how religion can't hold up in the modern political climate when 89% of Americans believe in a God.
 
I am also not sure how religion can't hold up in the modern political climate when 89% of Americans believe in a God.

The Bible preaches death to homosexuals, not to mention genocide, incest, and a whole range of other things.

Religion is part of your moral system, so of course it's a part of your decision-making process. I just think that the government (and the parties) should be secular. Just because 89% of Americans believe in a God, doesn't mean they want a government subservient to their religion (which any Christian party will be.)
 
Religion is a personal thing. Why would anyone want to vote for a person who seeks to implement it into the government?
 
She tried to enact legislation against Video Games, plus I find her to be too much of a politician.

That still doesn't explain the irrational hatred most of the board members have against her.
 
I actually think its a good idea provided it actually aspires to be a REAL party and not just one of the many minor "protest" parties we end up. While I hate the pc term the US does need more diversity in political parties, two choices simply isnt enough as it allows one of the two to wield too much influence and without any pressure to compromise.
 
The Bible preaches death to homosexuals, not to mention genocide, incest, and a whole range of other things.

Religion is part of your moral system, so of course it's a part of your decision-making process. I just think that the government (and the parties) should be secular. Just because 89% of Americans believe in a God, doesn't mean they want a government subservient to their religion (which any Christian party will be.)

Your personal interpretation of the bible changes nothing. To you it may preach that, to others it preaches loving your neighbor and many virtuous things.

We are not in the business of imposing our view of various religions on others.

I do not mind a Muslim voting based on his religion, even if I believe muhammad was a pedophile and its teachings are violent. Because I also recognize that a peaceful person will take the good tenants to base their life and morals on, and a bad person will use the bad to justify behavior they would most likely already be engaged in without the blessing of a diety.
 

Site News

Thread Statistics

Created
Oldgamer,
Last reply from
Sosobra,
Replies
98
Views
4,351

Site Polls

  • Axis & Allies

  • Battleship

  • Checkers

  • Chess

  • Clue

  • Go

  • Monopoly

  • Risk

  • Stratego

  • Other


Results are only viewable after voting.
Back
Top Bottom