A beginner's work in progress.......
Is this sentiment what you really wanted?
Published on November 28, 2004 By dabe In Politics
This is an article from ABC News. If this is what the righties wanted when they voted for bush, this country is in deep shit. Even if you righties don't support this kind of evangelical stuff, you voted for the candidate who will implement it. These are going to be some really tough times for this country for the next four years, particularly for non christians. The separation of the christian church and the united states is blurring............... As the evangelical in this article said when asked about non christians, "I could care less." Problem is, bush could care less, too.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Evangelicals to Bush: Payback Time
Christian Conservatives Say They Gave Bush 'Moral Mandate'; Call Him to Act on Their Behalf


Among some conservative Christians, there is a belief that President Bush received a "moral mandate" to win the recent presidential election — and they are calling on him act on their agenda now.

"I believe Our Lord elected our president and I believe he put him in office and it is my prayer that he will sustain him in office," said one woman at the Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in Fort Lauderdale, Fla.

Another was asked if she believed that God intervened in the election. "Absolutely," she said.

"Values" voters delivered for the president, and the president must now deliver for them — especially in the courts, said Gary Cass, head of a grassroots political organization affiliated with Coral Ridge, called the Center for Reclaiming America.

"It's about the next 40 years and how the courts are going to affect the world in which my children and grandchildren are going to be raised in," he said.

Cass wants a U.S. Supreme Court that will outlaw abortion and gay marriage. "Do you want to take your children to a National League baseball game for instance and have homosexuals showing affection to one another? I don't want my kids to see that," he said.

Risking God's Wrath

By one measure, conservative Christians comprised 12 percent of the electorate this year — the same as four years ago. But they see themselves as a crucial piece of the president's political base.

They believe that if their agenda is not implemented quickly — if their concerns are not addressed in a timely fashion — God will be angry.

One leading evangelist recently warned, "God's patience runs out."

Dr. James Kennedy delivers sermons at Coral Ridge which are broadcast to three million homes. He said he knows of no timetable for God's wrath, but wants results fast.

He dismissed the concerns of people who worried about the impact of Christian conservatives on the U.S. government.

Repent," he said with a laugh. "Repent. That's what I'd say."

People who are concerned about the influence of Christianity "have never really surrendered their life to God and submitted themselves to his commandments — and if they did that they wouldn't have so much concern about some court saying again that it's wrong," he said.

Asked about the millions of Americans who are not Christian, or have a different interpretation of Christianity, Kennedy said with another laugh: "I couldn't care less. It's true."

"I think that the idea that the worst sin that somebody can commit is to offend somebody is ridiculous," he said.

Evangelicals say Kennedy may seem intolerant, but there's no greater love than upholding the will of God.

ABC News' Dan Harris contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2004 ABC News "

Comments
on Nov 29, 2004
Spare us the chicken little "sky is falling" shit. You don't speak for President Bush. And just because some religious bigot from Lauderdale pops off and some reporter from ABC is dumb enough to take it seriously doesn't make Bush the lap dog of the Christian Right. When will you guys get off this crap? Kennedy is a bigot who speaks only for himself. I'm glad, I suppose, that you think Bush is so powerful, but he can't "implement" any of the stuff you're ranting about. There's a thing called Congress and a small principle called separation of powers. People like Kennedy can "call on him to act on their behalf" all he wants, he just shouldn't hold his breath.

Cheers,
Daiwa
on Nov 29, 2004
Oh boy now God has a right to vote! Hillarious!If I may offer my opinion I'd say that they all think they speak for god. That's like me speaking up for someone I don't even no!

Sincerely,
DNCdude

P.S. Great Article!
on Nov 29, 2004
Maybe this article isn't as funny as I first thought, actually it's downright scary! Think about it hasn't every dictatorship had a religious backing?

Sincerely,
DNCdude
on Nov 29, 2004
Reply By: DaiwaPosted: Monday, November 29, 2004Spare us the chicken little "sky is falling" shit. You don't speak for President Bush. And just because some religious bigot from Lauderdale pops off and some reporter from ABC is dumb enough to take it seriously doesn't make Bush the lap dog of the Christian Right. When will you guys get off this crap? Kennedy is a bigot who speaks only for himself. I'm glad, I suppose, that you think Bush is so powerful, but he can't "implement" any of the stuff you're ranting about. There's a thing called Congress and a small principle called separation of powers. People like Kennedy can "call on him to act on their behalf" all he wants, he just shouldn't hold his breath.Cheers,Daiwa


Well said, Daiwa. I don't know which is scarier: the comments of one riligious nut, or the utter fear people like dabe have of freedom of speech.

this is what the righties wanted when they voted for bush

Among some conservative Christians


Funny that you missed that part of the article, dabe. You immediately jumped to all "righties"

you voted for the candidate who will implement it.


Where in the article does it say Bush will implement it. If anything, he probably won't even listen to these people as he cannot run for re-election and has no need to court people like James Kennedy.

Gee, should we Republicans begin publishing all the crazy comments from leftist loonies, too? After all you have your fringe believers as well.

Free speech is a bitch when you don't agree with it.
on Nov 29, 2004
Well said, Daiwa. I don't know which is scarier: the comments of one riligious nut, or the utter fear people like dabe have of freedom of speech.


Where did she say she feared freedom of speech? Or anyone "like Dabe"? Not one to pick sides though I agree with your argument, Bush speaks for Bush, not the religious freaks, or anyone else.

Sincerely,
DNCdude
on Nov 29, 2004
Where did she say she feared freedom of speech? Or anyone "like Dabe"? Not one to pick sides though I agree with your argument, Bush speaks for Bush, not the religious freaks, or anyone else.


The freedom of speech thing goes along with the idea that anyone can say whatever they want. We don't have to like it or approve of it. Nor does that freedom of speech become a party platform because one person said it.

Dabe is the author of the article, DNC. You have really got to pay more attention if you want to keep receiving attention.

on Nov 29, 2004
Free speech is a bitch when you don't agree with it.


Ain't that the truth.
on Nov 29, 2004
I have no problem with free speech. Leave it to the righties to completely change the subject to deflect the issue. It was just a freakin' warning about what a lot of evangelicals are expecting from their shrubby boy..

Having said that, I really don't think Bush speaks for Bush. Crap, that man can't even string a coherent sentence together.
on Nov 29, 2004
Cardinalsfan, I decided that I couldn't tolerate your racist, misogenist, homophobic baseball between your ears attitude, so I deleted you.
on Nov 29, 2004
Having said that, I really don't think Bush speaks for Bush. Crap, that man can't even string a coherent sentence together.


Hmm...hadn't though of it that way I guess Bush speaks for what Rove/Cheney tells him to speak for. These people really get to me I'm soooo glad you brought it up!

Sincerely,
DNCdude
on Nov 29, 2004
dabe
Leave it to the righties to completely change the subject to deflect the issue


iamheather
Among some conservative Christians. Funny that you missed that part of the article, dabe. You immediately jumped to all "righties"

you voted for the candidate who will implement it.

Where in the article does it say Bush will implement it. If anything, he probably won't even listen to these people as he cannot run for re-election and has no need to court people like James Kennedy.Gee, should we Republicans begin publishing all the crazy comments from leftist loonies, too? After all you have your fringe believers as well.


Where exactly did I change the subject and deflect the issue? You deflected the point I made that George Bush has no heir to the Presidency and therefore doesn't have to take "marching orders" from anyone. He doesn't need to court any Evangelicals.