Should Christians support Obama?

[DOMS]

de?nounce/diˈnouns/

[TABLE="class: ts"]
[TR]
[TD]Verb:[/TD]
[TD][TABLE="class: ts"]
[TR]
[TD]

1. Publicly declare to be wrong or evil.
2. Inform against.

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
If he denounces god, he is acknowledging he exists.

And he declared all of religion to be wrong. What's so confusing?

 

[hoyle21]

If broken down into denominations Atheist would now be the second largest religious group in America.

Catholics 25%
Atheist 15%
Lutheran 14%

Are the top three.

 

[hoyle21]

Anyway, not sure I can vote Obama. My home value was decimated under the man and has only gotten worse. He does not know how to fix this thing. Time for someone else to take over.

Obama wasn't president in 2007.

 

[heavyiron]

Obama wasn't president in 2007.

I never said he was brother.

 

[DOMS]

Obama wasn't president in 2007.

It's a good thing he hasn't been the president for over three years and made promises about fixing the problem.

 

[heavyiron]

If a CEO can't fix things when he says he can you give him a few years then find someone else. If a quaterback can't get things back on track you give him a few seasons then find someone else. Its just the way the world works.

Obama gave it a shot but its time to move on.

 

[hoyle21]

It's a good thing he hasn't been the president for over three years and made promises about fixing the problem.

Admittedly it's slow, but your 401K, property value, and the stock market are all considerably higher than before he was president, which actually started in 2009.

Let's ignore all other global factors while we're at it.

 

[hoyle21]

If a CEO can't fix things when he says he can you give him a few years then find someone else. If a quaterback can't get things back on track you give him a few seasons then find someone else. Its just the way the world works.

Obama gave it a shot but its time to move on.

To Romney? Who while as governor during the boom years led a state that ranked in the bottom of all economic factors?

 

[heavyiron]

To Romney? Who while as governor during the boom years led a state that ranked in the bottom of all economic factors?

Unfortunately the way our system works is you basically get two choices. I just can't see us maintaining the spending Obama wants. It doesn't work in business or our housholds so I would rather have a man that reduces spending.

 

[DOMS]

Admittedly it's slow, but your 401K, property value, and the stock market are all considerably higher than before he was president, which actually started in 2009.

Let's ignore all other global factors while we're at it.

BBC News - Federal Reserve cuts forecast for US economic growth

 

[hoyle21]

I'm going third party, Gary Johnson is my candidate, but past actions and historical data shows that Romney will be as bad, if not worse than Obama.

 

[hoyle21]

Unfortunately the way our system works is you basically get two choices. I just can't see us maintaining the spending Obama wants. It doesn't work in business or our housholds so I would rather have a man that reduces spending.

I absolutely assure you Romney will continue the spending spree. That's not a new trend, just a big deal because a black guy is doing it.

 

[hoyle21]

BBC News - Federal Reserve cuts forecast for US economic growth

Again that's a global issue. The entire planet is in the same shoes.

 

[heavyiron]

I'm going third party, Gary Johnson is my candidate, but past actions and historical data shows that Romney will be as bad, if not worse than Obama.

I wish the third parties were more mainstream. They get killed when it comes time to vote. Our whole system basically funnels us to two candidates, maybe three. Its not much of a choice.

 

[LAM]

If a CEO can't fix things when he says he can you give him a few years then find someone else. If a quaterback can't get things back on track you give him a few seasons then find someone else. Its just the way the world works.

Obama gave it a shot but its time to move on.

1). it typically takes 5 years for the economy of a country to recover from a financial collapse.

2). it takes decades to restore wealth lost from a housing asset bubble burst (40% of the total wealth of the working class)

3). it takes legislation to decrease income inequality which would greatly improve our consumption based economy

* GOP economic policy increases income inequality with top down grants which only makes the economy more sluggish

 

[exphys88]

Unfortunately the way our system works is you basically get two choices. I just can't see us maintaining the spending Obama wants. It doesn't work in business or our housholds so I would rather have a man that reduces spending.

If only we could do the same with congress since they are the ones that really make things work or not.

 

[hoyle21]

I wish the third parties were more mainstream. They get killed when it comes time to vote. Our whole system basically funnels us to two candidates, maybe three. Its not much of a choice.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm

Read up Heavy. And unlike Romney or Obama his record backs up his beliefs.

 

[exphys88]

And he declared all of religion to be wrong. What's so confusing?

if he denounces god, he is acknowledging he exists, therefore he must not be an atheist. Maybe he was a buddhist, they denounce religion too.

The problem with you calling him an atheist is that you have yet to back it up with evidence. I'm all ears and eyes for you to share what convinced you of this.

 

[heavyiron]

I absolutely assure you Romney will continue the spending spree. That's not a new trend, just a big deal because a black guy is doing it.

Naw, I don't care what color he is. Its the future spending spree that is truely frightening. He took a good idea like health care and is projected to spend us into oblivion. I just don't think that level of future spending is sustainable. Its a boat load of future spending on top of already massive present spending.

 

[heavyiron]

Gary Johnson on the Issues

Read up Heavy. And unlike Romney or Obama his record backs up his beliefs.

Looks interesting. Do you honestly think he has a shot at winning???

 

[hoyle21]

Looks interesting. Do you honestly think he has a shot at winning???

No, I don't believe he will win. My hope is he gets enough votes for the libertarian party to qualify for federal campaign funds like the dems and repubs. At least then it would be a more equal playing field in future elections.

 

[DOMS]

if he denounces god, he is acknowledging he exists, therefore he must not be an atheist. Maybe he was a buddhist, they denounce religion too.

The problem with you calling him an atheist is that you have yet to back it up with evidence. I'm all ears and eyes for you to share what convinced you of this.

You keep substituting words. He's not denouncing god, he denounced all of religion.

I was convinced by information that I read in books. I can find web pages that agree and disagree with me. You'll simply not find the comprehensive study on him that you will in a book. Understanding the motivations of a someone takes more than reading a quote or two. Hitler only believed in one thing: himself. Everything else was a tool to amassing power. Whether you take my word on it or not doesn't matter to me. I'm simply laying out the facts.

As for "denounce", you're understanding it incorrectly. From your own posted definition:

1. Publicly declare to be wrong or evil.

There's nothing about believing the thing you said is wrong.

 

[exphys88]

You keep substituting words. He's not denouncing god, he denounced all of religion.

I was convinced by information that I read in books. I can find web pages that agree and disagree with me. You'll simply not find the comprehensive study on him that you will in a book. Understanding the motivations of a someone takes more than reading a quote or two. Hitler only believed in one thing: himself. Everything else was a tool to amassing power. Whether you take my word on it or not doesn't matter to me. I'm simply laying out the facts.

As for "denounce", you're understanding it incorrectly. From your own posted definition:

1. Publicly declare to be wrong or evil.

There's nothing about believing the thing you said is wrong.

denouncing religion does not mean he's an atheist. The fact is that he never claimed to be atheist, yet he claimed to be christian. was he lying to win acceptance, maybe, but there is still no proof that he actually held the belief that there is no god. It's just a game that christians like to play, as if being atheist makes you more likely to kill. Additionally, all of the people that actually did the killing for him were primarily christian.

 

[DOMS]

denouncing religion does not mean he's an atheist. The fact is that he never claimed to be atheist, yet he claimed to be christian. was he lying to win acceptance, maybe, but there is still no proof that he actually held the belief that there is no god. It's just a game that christians like to play, as if being atheist makes you more likely to kill. Additionally, all of the people that actually did the killing for him were primarily christian.

A game that Christians like to play? You mean like how atheists play the "religion has killed...blah, blah, blah"? Like that?

It's funny how anti-religious people like to dish out this or that negative fact about religion, but get all ass-hurt when you point out that all the greatest killers of the 20th century, to the sum of over 100,000,000 people, were atheists.

I didn't study Hitler because I wanted to prove he was anything. I studied him because he was interesting enough to want to understand. It's the same reason that I Caesar, the Pharaohs of Egypt, Robert Mugabe, and MLK.

 

[hoyle21]

Christians are over represented in prisons percentage wise, and atheist are under represented.

 

[exphys88]

A game that Christians like to play? You mean like how atheists play the "religion has killed...blah, blah, blah"? Like that?

It's funny how anti-religious people like to dish out this or that negative fact about religion, but get all ass-hurt when you point out that all the greatest killers of the 20th century, to the sum of over 100,000,000 people, were atheists.

I didn't study Hitler because I wanted to prove he was anything. I studied him because he was interesting enough to want to understand. It's the same reason that I Caesar, the Pharaohs of Egypt, Robert Mugabe, and MLK.

I consider you a very intelligent person, so I'm shocked when you avoid the fact that atheists don't kill in the name of atheism or specifically because they're atheists, yet many religious people have killed specifically because of their religious beliefs. The communists didn't kill in the name of atheism anymore than they did because they were tall. This is an important concept that you surely get, yet avoid for some reason.

 

[DOMS]

I consider you a very intelligent person, so I'm shocked when you avoid the fact that atheists don't kill in the name of atheism or specifically because they're atheists, yet many religious people have killed specifically because of their religious beliefs. The communists didn't kill in the name of atheism anymore than they did because they were tall. This is an important concept that you surely get, yet avoid for some reason.

I never said that atheists kill in the name atheism. I don't know where you got that.

I just pointed out that, in the last century, all of the greatest mass murderers were atheists; no more, no less.

 

[exphys88]

I never said that atheists kill in the name atheism. I don't know where you got that.

I just pointed out that, in the last century, all of the greatest mass murderers were atheists; no more, no less.

they were lots of things; males, fathers, sons, brothers and maybe even some of them loved certain types of foods. The difference is that many religious people have specifically killed because of their religious beliefs, which put religion at fault. You can't say the same for atheists.

 

[DOMS]

they were lots of things; males, fathers, sons, brothers and maybe even some of them loved certain types of foods. The difference is that many religious people have specifically killed because of their religious beliefs, which put religion at fault. You can't say the same for atheists.

The atheists kill in the name of race, nationality, and ideologies. Which is so much better.

 

[exphys88]

The atheists kill in the name of race, nationality, and ideologies. Which is so much better.

religious people kill for these same reasons, plus they kill because they think god wants them to.