Christian Principles in an Election Year

[Franklin Jefferson]

Worth reposting, I think. This is from the National council of
Churches

"Christian Principles in an Election Year" offer criteria for judging
candidates

The full text of "Christian Principles in an Election Year" follows,
and is available on the NCC's Web site at:
http://www.ncccusa.org/electionyearprinciples.html
as well as a study guide to the principles:
http://www.ncccusa.org/electionyearprinciplesguide.html.

Christian Principles in an Election Year

Our Christian faith compels us to address the world through the lens of
our relationship to God and to one another. Public discourse is
enhanced as we engage civic leaders on the values and ethics affirmed
by our faith. At the same time, religious liberty and the integrity of
our democracy will be protected as candidates refrain from using
faith-based organizations and institutions for partisan gain. We offer
these ten principles to those seeking to accept the responsibility that
comes with holding public office.

1. War is contrary to the will of God. While the use of violent force
may, at times, be a necessity of last resort, Christ pronounces his
blessing on the peacemakers. We look for political leaders who will
make peace with justice a top priority and who will actively seek
nonviolent solutions to conflict.

2. God calls us to live in communities shaped by peace and cooperation.
We reject policies that abandon large segments of our inner city and
rural populations to hopelessness. We look for political leaders who
will rebuild our communities and bring an end to the cycles of violence
and killing.

3. God created us for each other, and thus our security depends on the
well-being of our global neighbors. We look for political leaders for
whom a foreign policy based on cooperation and global justice is an
urgent concern.

4. God calls us to be advocates for those who are most vulnerable in
our society. We look for political leaders who yearn for economic
justice and who will seek to reduce the growing disparity between rich
and poor.

5. Each human being is created in the image of God and is of infinite
worth. We look for political leaders who actively promote racial
justice and equal opportunity for everyone.

6. The earth belongs to God and is intrinsically good. We look for
political leaders who recognize the earth's goodness, champion
environmental justice and uphold our responsibility to be stewards of
God's creation.

7. Christians have a biblical mandate to welcome strangers. We look for
political leaders who will pursue fair immigration policies and speak
out against xenophobia.

8. Those who follow Christ are called to heal the sick. We look for\
political leaders who will support adequate, affordable and accessible
health care for all.

9. Because of the transforming power of God's grace, all humans are
called to be in right relationship with each other. We look for
political leaders who seek a restorative, not retributive, approach to
the criminal justice system and the individuals within it.

10. Providing enriched learning environments for all of God's children
is a moral imperative. We look for political leaders who will
advocatefor equal educational opportunity and abundant funding for
children's services.

Finally, our religious tradition admonishes us not to bear false
witness against our neighbor and to love our enemies. We ask that the
campaigns of political candidates and the coverage of the media in this
election season be conducted according to principles of fairness,
honesty and integrity.

Photos and stories also available at:
http://umns.umc.org

[b***@juno.com]

Post by Franklin Jefferson
1. War is contrary to the will of God. While the use of violent force
may, at times, be a necessity of last resort, Christ pronounces his
blessing on the peacemakers. We look for political leaders who will
make peace with justice a top priority and who will actively seek
nonviolent solutions to conflict.

There is a time for war, and a time for peace. So says the Bible. But
liberals like to ignore that little verse, don't they?

They also like to forget the very basic distinction between individual
ethics and governmental ethics. Chrisitian Individual ethics is
pacifist, but governmental ethics involves the use of violence to make
it possible to practice an individual ethics based on pacifism.

Post by Franklin Jefferson
2. God calls us to live in communities shaped by peace and cooperation.
We reject policies that abandon large segments of our inner city and
rural populations to hopelessness. We look for political leaders who
will rebuild our communities and bring an end to the cycles of violence
and killing.

Agreed.

Post by Franklin Jefferson
3. God created us for each other, and thus our security depends on the
well-being of our global neighbors. We look for political leaders for
whom a foreign policy based on cooperation and global justice is an
urgent concern.

Cooperation with whom? Some nations are worth cooperating with. Others
you have to speak through your gun barrel.

Post by Franklin Jefferson
4. God calls us to be advocates for those who are most vulnerable in
our society. We look for political leaders who yearn for economic
justice and who will seek to reduce the growing disparity between rich
and poor.

Actually, the poor are blessed, and the rich are under a curse.
Material concerns have very little to do with the Kingdom of God. We
certainly don't want to give any more money to poor people. Every extra
bit of money is just a little bit more curse that we would be heaping
upon the poor folk.

This is a major blind spot of liberals. They have accepted the Marxist
idea that economics are what really drives history. From this false
premise, they deduce their entire class warfare model of what the
income distribution ought to be.

Post by Franklin Jefferson
5. Each human being is created in the image of God and is of infinite
worth. We look for political leaders who actively promote racial
justice and equal opportunity for everyone.

Agreed.

Post by Franklin Jefferson
6. The earth belongs to God and is intrinsically good. We look for
political leaders who recognize the earth's goodness, champion
environmental justice and uphold our responsibility to be stewards of
God's creation.

True enough.

Post by Franklin Jefferson
7. Christians have a biblical mandate to welcome strangers. We look for
political leaders who will pursue fair immigration policies and speak
out against xenophobia.

Fair immigration does not mean "illegal" immigration. Keep in mind the
major reason why Latin American nations have such messed up societies.
It is precisely because they don't have a habit of obeying the law. And
now this scoff-law attitude is spreading to America by illegal
immigration.

Respect for laws is basic to build a good economy. We must not reward
scoff-laws, or we will pay dearly with a changed culture that no longer
considers laws something to be honored.

Post by Franklin Jefferson
8. Those who follow Christ are called to heal the sick. We look for\
political leaders who will support adequate, affordable and accessible
health care for all.

Government is not to do what the Church is commanded to do. It is the
church, not government, which is supposed to help the sick.

Post by Franklin Jefferson
9. Because of the transforming power of God's grace, all humans are
called to be in right relationship with each other. We look for
political leaders who seek a restorative, not retributive, approach to
the criminal justice system and the individuals within it.

Translation: throw the concept of "justice" out of the justice system.
Replace it with the concept of "psycho-therapy" in which every criminal
is a victim to be reformed.

This is based upon the false notion that crime does not actually
deserve to be punished.

Post by Franklin Jefferson
10. Providing enriched learning environments for all of God's children
is a moral imperative. We look for political leaders who will
advocatefor equal educational opportunity and abundant funding for
children's services.

We look for political leaders who will advocate for a parent's right to
send their children to any religious school they want using government
money.

The current public school monopoly is devastating to the Chrisitan
moral fabric of America. I myself have a friend who simply HAS to send
his son to public school, since he can no longer afford Christian
school.

This is a major injustice. In fact, it may be the worst injustice of
our times. To force Christian taxpayers to pay for a public school
system that actively undermines their beliefs!

I read part of a textbook on sociology recently. The book mentioned the
surprising religiosity of America in comparison with other
industrialized democracies. And then the book made a very revealing
comment. It said (I paraphrase)

"Although America is surprisingly religious, we expect it to eventually
become just as secular as the rest of the industrialized world. And
when that finally happens, EDUCATION will be the secular replacement
for RELIGION."

In other words, the secular mindset substitutes education for religion.
If that doesn't sound like a trumpet call to arms, I don't know what
would.

Christians: IT IS HAPPENING. They are trying to substitute "education"
for the gospel of Christ. This is happening under our very noses, and
with our tax money.

[shegeek72]

Post by b***@juno.com
There is a time for war, and a time for peace. So says the Bible. But
liberals like to ignore that little verse, don't they?

Just because it says that doesn't mean war is right.

Post by b***@juno.com
They also like to forget the very basic distinction between individual
ethics and governmental ethics. Chrisitian Individual ethics is
pacifist, but governmental ethics involves the use of violence to make
it possible to practice an individual ethics based on pacifism.

Most governments are patriarchal and since men tend to be more violent
and less moral than women the world is violent and war-like.

Post by b***@juno.com
Actually, the poor are blessed, and the rich are under a curse.
Material concerns have very little to do with the Kingdom of God. We
certainly don't want to give any more money to poor people. Every extra
bit of money is just a little bit more curse that we would be heaping
upon the poor folk.

So someone who cannot feed and clothe their family shouldn't get any
more assistance?

The is one of the planks of Christianity that I disagree with. I think
one can have luxury and still be religious. When you go to a church is
it a shack or an expensive building with high ceilings and glorious
colored-glass? Look at how abundant nature is; why should we deny
ourselves abundance on the misguided belief that poverty equals
spirituality?

Post by b***@juno.com
This is a major blind spot of liberals. They have accepted the Marxist
idea that economics are what really drives history. From this false
premise, they deduce their entire class warfare model of what the
income distribution ought to be.

The second plank of the Communist Manifesto is a progressive system of
taxation. Think about that when you get a paycheck with 40 - 60% of it
taken (confiscated) in taxes. The Founding Fathers wrote in the
Constitution that all direct taxes must be equally apportioned. The
16th Amendment does NOT allow an income tax without apportionment, as
we're led to believe. [I've done over 100 hours of research on the
income tax, have written two books on it and am working on a third.]

Post by b***@juno.com
Government is not to do what the Church is commanded to do. It is the
church, not government, which is supposed to help the sick.

Then you think all health care should be privatized?

Post by b***@juno.com
We look for political leaders who will advocate for a parent's right to
send their children to any religious school they want using government
money.

This would be in violation of the separation of church and state.

Post by b***@juno.com
This is a major injustice. In fact, it may be the worst injustice of
our times. To force Christian taxpayers to pay for a public school
system that actively undermines their beliefs!

Everyone has the freedom to home school their children.

[Matthew Johnson]

Post by shegeek72

Post by b***@juno.com
There is a time for war, and a time for peace. So says the Bible. But
liberals like to ignore that little verse, don't they?

Just because it says that doesn't mean war is right.

You miss the point. It _does_ mean that war is not _unconditionally_
wrong. But that is all Bimms had to prove.

Post by shegeek72

Post by b***@juno.com
They also like to forget the very basic distinction between individual
ethics and governmental ethics. Chrisitian Individual ethics is
pacifist, but governmental ethics involves the use of violence to make
it possible to practice an individual ethics based on pacifism.

Most governments are patriarchal and since men tend to be more violent
and less moral than women the world is violent and war-like.

Try telling that to the war dead who died when a woman leader attacked
them, as when Indira Ghandi ruled India, or Golda Meir Israel, or even
when Boudicea committed war crimes against the civilian population of
Roman cities.

Post by shegeek72

Post by b***@juno.com
Actually, the poor are blessed, and the rich are under a curse.
Material concerns have very little to do with the Kingdom of God. We
certainly don't want to give any more money to poor people. Every extra
bit of money is just a little bit more curse that we would be heaping
upon the poor folk.

So someone who cannot feed and clothe their family shouldn't get any
more assistance?
The is one of the planks of Christianity that I disagree with.

This is a classic fallacy, the "straw-man". How typical of you.to sink
to it. That is NOT "one of the planks of Christianity"; it is, at
best, a distorted version of a 'plank' of a VERY narrow group of
'Christians'.

That it is not a plank of Christianity should have been clear enough
from Mat 25:31-46. But if that was not clear enough, even the
discussion of that passage recrurring in this NG many times over the
years should have been enough to make it clear.

But if even that was not enough, there is still the authority of
St. John Chrysostom, whose saying is well known among the Orthodox,
that no monk is saved without fasting, and no layman without
almsgiving. Such was his uncompromising interpretation of Mat 25:31-46
and Lk 16:19-31.

Post by shegeek72
I think one can have luxury and still be religious.

Well, so what? It is not the 'religious' who are saved. Besides: if
even understanding the authority of the Gospel is so difficult for
you, then you are far too weak to accomplish this far harder task:
having wealth, but resisting the temptation to fall into the same
error as the rich man of Lk 16:19-31. Why, you have already wasted far
too much money on unnatural "medical" procedures, carving a lie into
your own flesh.

[snip]

Post by shegeek72

Post by b***@juno.com
We look for political leaders who will advocate for a parent's right to
send their children to any religious school they want using government
money.

This would be in violation of the separation of church and state.

That is a controversial conclusion. Of -course- you believe it. But of
-course- your opinion carries no weight with Christians -- only with
pseudo-christians like Brenda.

[snip]

[shegeek72]

Post by Matthew Johnson
Try telling that to the war dead who died when a woman leader attacked
them, as when Indira Ghandi ruled India, or Golda Meir Israel, or even
when Boudicea committed war crimes against the civilian population of
Roman cities.

Yes, there were female leaders who sent troops into battle. However,
the vast majority of governmental systems, for centuries past, have
been formed, and controlled by, males. It was males who first fought
and killed their own species.

Post by Matthew Johnson
Well, so what? It is not the 'religious' who are saved. Besides: if
even understanding the authority of the Gospel is so difficult for
having wealth, but resisting the temptation to fall into the same
error as the rich man of Lk 16:19-31. Why, you have already wasted far
too much money on unnatural "medical" procedures, carving a lie into
your own flesh.

You've deduced this from how much study into transsexualism? You've
read how many articles on transsexuality? Attended how many seminars?
Talked to how many transgender people?

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by shegeek72
This would be in violation of the separation of church and state.

That is a controversial conclusion.

No, it's not. It's well-accepted by law scholars and the Supreme Court.