Michigan GOP cancels event with Utah’s Republican governor

Published on April 30th, 2009

Daylife/AP Photo used by permission

Utah Governor Jon Huntsman, Jr. and a “pure” Republican

A Michigan Republican says she canceled an event set to be attended by Utah’s moderate GOP governor because it would have betrayed the party’s values.

Kent County, Mich., Republican Chairwoman Joanne Voorhees canceled the party fundraiser scheduled for Saturday, which was to be attended by Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr…

“The voters want and expect us to stand on principle and return to our roots,” Voorhees was quoted by the Grand Rapids Press as saying in an e-mail. “Unfortunately, by holding an event with Governor Huntsman, we would be doing the exact opposite.”

Voorhees didn’t specify in the e-mail why the fundraiser was canceled, and she didn’t return calls to the Tribune. However, the group Campaign for Michigan Families praised the cancellation, saying it was because of Huntsman’s support of civil unions for same-sex couples.

So, Republicans are going to win elections – by turning away Republicans who win elections?

74 users responded in " Michigan GOP cancels event with Utah’s Republican governor "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 Sea Lawyer said, on April 30th, 2009 at 6:10 am

Smells like a winning strategy to me…

Instead of jumping to the Democratic Party, these moderate Republicans would be better served to abandon that sinking ship and reform into a new one.

# 2 Olo Baggins of Bywater said, on April 30th, 2009 at 6:10 am

Smaller is bigger.

# 3 bobbo said, on April 30th, 2009 at 6:17 am

Well, if we multiply this by 2.1 and run the demographic for 2 election cycles, the GOP will be reduced to a midnight candle vigil for lost sperm in Bumfuck Texas.

IOW==pressure on the Dem Party to fracture into left and right. How do you like your socialism?

# 4 Alex said, on April 30th, 2009 at 6:32 am

“the GOP will be reduced to a midnight candle vigil for lost sperm in Bumfuck Texas.”

Assuming Texas doesn’t secede first, of course.

# 5 Paddy-O said, on April 30th, 2009 at 6:35 am

Kinda strange. Just because the guy is okay with civil unions? Obama is against Gay marriage and the Dems are okay with that position.

# 6 chuck said, on April 30th, 2009 at 6:45 am

The Republicans are too big to fail. Give them a government bail-out.

# 7 Dallas said, on April 30th, 2009 at 6:50 am

Amusing to watch the GOP party struggle with how to be relevant again.

If the GOP feels compelled to cart that whiny bitch with her winks and smirks to reinvigorate the party, I think it will just draw in the usual fringe:

* The KKK
* Delusional granny saying “Obama is a Muslim”
* Timothy McVeigh wannabees
* The Alfred1 “religious freaks R US”
* The Paddy-O “I’m an expert because of Google”
* The MikeN “I’m here cause I got nutt’n to do”

# 8 Mojo Yugen said, on April 30th, 2009 at 6:57 am

I’m still trying to wrap my head around the phrase “Utah’s moderate GOP governor”.

# 9 Phydeau said, on April 30th, 2009 at 7:27 am

I think stuff like this is the natural conclusion of the Republican Party’s Southern Strategy. When you start appealing to fear and hatred to win votes, you need to keep the fear and hatred going year after year to galvanize the electorate. It’s the opposite of the “big tent” philosophy. In the short run, fear and hatred are big motivators to get people out to vote. But in the long run, it consumes itself. Those who don’t agree with the fear and hatred are purged from the party.

I think very few people can sustain fear and hatred in themselves for long periods of time. It’s corroding to the soul. The ones who can are the GOP’s dwindling base. Thus as the GOP gets smaller, the voice of the hateful and fearful gets louder and louder.

# 10 Mr. Fusion said, on April 30th, 2009 at 7:39 am

. . . and the Republican Party rapidly becomes a regional force.

# 11 MikeN said, on April 30th, 2009 at 7:39 am

Funny how people tell the Republicans what to do to win elections, but even if the GOP did that , they’d still vote for the Democrat.

# 12 Mr. Fusion said, on April 30th, 2009 at 7:42 am

#7, Dallas, and #9, Phydeau,

Well said, both.

#7, Dallas,

Unfortunately, the truth doesn’t count as satire so I can’t award the you the humor prize.

# 13 orangetiki said, on April 30th, 2009 at 7:45 am

Caption for photo:

Palin “Hey what are you doing back there?”

Huntsman “Hurry up we have to make more babies before the Muslims take over. We’ve already lost Europe”

# 14 Mr. Fusion said, on April 30th, 2009 at 7:47 am

#5,

Obama is against Gay marriage and the Dems are okay with that position.

The Democrats do not require unrestrained obedience as do the Republicans. They will tolerate differing views among themselves.

When are you going to post that link about all those Americans committing war crimes and atrocities against civilians during WWII? Someone as smart as you shouldn’t have any trouble finding some back-up to what you posted.

# 15 Paddy-O said, on April 30th, 2009 at 7:50 am

# 14 Mr. Fusion said, “The Democrats do not require unrestrained obedience as do the Republicans. They will tolerate differing views among themselves.”

Correct. That’s why they are ahead in the game. That was the gist of my comment.

# 16 Ah_Yea said, on April 30th, 2009 at 7:51 am

Hold it, Michigan GOP’er doesn’t want to be in the same room with the Utah Governor?

I would have thought she would have had more of a problem with Romney, also from Utah.

After all, wasn’t it Romney who said that it would be better to let the Automotive companies go into bankrupcy and then rebuild them?

And didn’t Obama take the Automotive states based on the promise that he wouldn’t let the car companies go bankrupt because no one would buy a car from a bankrupt company?

Foolish Romney, thinking he could win an election by telling the truth!

# 17 Alfred1 said, on April 30th, 2009 at 8:09 am

So, Republicans are going to win elections – by turning away Republicans who win elections?

Yes, that is precisely how we will.

Of course opponents always tell their opposition what they are doing wrong…so they can win…

So I don’t expect any here to realize the soundness of this strategy…

Its call representing the people…the majority of whom are not for same sex couples etc ad nauseam…

We can tolerate your existence, we will not advance your agenda and teach our children its blessed by God…as you insist we do.

The majority is looking for someone to advance their beliefs in the political square…

You liberals have had all the fun…its our turn now…you could advance your cause through all parties…and the courts…

So at least leave us the Republican party…you do believe in diversity, don’t you?

# 18 MikeN said, on April 30th, 2009 at 8:11 am

>all those Americans committing war crimes and atrocities against civilians during WWII?

So Fusion, do you agree with Jon Stewart that dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima was a war crime?

# 19 Alfred1 said, on April 30th, 2009 at 8:22 am

#1 Very slick sea lawyer (slang for fomenter of malcontent)

You’d like a third party divide the opposition…

But RINO’s are democrats…and you should welcome them into your big tent.

We want to represent the majority of the people…not the loony fringes as you do.

so you can have them…they are well represented by your party.

We want to represent those Americans who work for a living, pay their taxes, want less government in their lives and do not want our schools become liberal reeducation centers where loon agenda is drilled incessently into the minds of our children.

# 20 jescott418 said, on April 30th, 2009 at 8:22 am

I think the Rebublican’s will have to wait for their Right wings beliefs to become popular again. I for one am against any parties because they require too much of a fall in line policy. Sometimes people just think outside of a certain box and they should not be shunned for this. No matter Rebublican or Democrat.We would be better off to have people running for office on their own stances and not of a certain party.

# 21 Olo Baggins of Bywater said, on April 30th, 2009 at 8:52 am

Alfred, the number of Americans who currently claim to be Republican is around 25%. The trend is headed…

Your 1983-era agenda is done and over, demonstrably ineffective, and voters tossed it out of Washington like yesterday’s dog shit. Clinging to Newt’s Contract on America is like 1909’s horse breeders telling farmers that tractors will never catch on.

# 22 Mr. Fusion said, on April 30th, 2009 at 8:57 am

#17, Alphie, the Evangelical, Sociopathic, Right Wing Nut, Loon, and Quaalude Queen,

>So, Republicans are going to win elections – by turning away Republicans who win elections?

Yes, that is precisely how we will.

Of course opponents always tell their opposition what they are doing wrong…so they can win…

So I don’t expect any here to realize the soundness of this strategy…

For once you are correct. Only a brain dead Republican could explain that. Alienate your base and the voters in order to win, ya riiiight!

Its call representing the people…the majority of whom are not for same sex couples etc ad nauseam…

There is increasingly a shift to tolerate gay marriage and lifestyles. Even those apposed to it are more neutral. Why? Because the Evangelical Christians have pushed normal people to the left with their rhetoric and extreme demands.

# 23 GregA said, on April 30th, 2009 at 8:59 am

#19,

Obviously you are not a student of demographics. You ARE the loony fringe. You are an extreme and diminishing minority that is rapidly becoming irrelevant.

Your postings are that of a madman, like the guys in Hyde park in London.

# 24 Mr. Fusion said, on April 30th, 2009 at 9:00 am

#18, Lyin’ Mike,

I don’t answer for Stewart. I only want Cow-Patty to answer the question.

# 25 Phydeau said, on April 30th, 2009 at 9:03 am

We can tolerate your existence, we will not advance your agenda and teach our children its blessed by God…as you insist we do.

Hey Alfie, no one’s asking your god to bless their union… we’ve heard what your god thinks, he’s a pretty nasty and bigoted guy (strangely like his followers, how about that). You don’t have to allow those eeeevil homosexuals to get married in your church, OK? There there now.

Ya know, this used to work pretty good, painting Democrats as shiftless lazy bums who never met a huge government program they didn’t like. But that dog just won’t hunt any more. And that’s all you have left… the Republicans don’t have anything except fear and hatred nowadays.

And why is it that the same wingnuts who claim to have such a strong foundation, bedrock family values, blah blah blah, are so afraid of their kids getting “reeducated” by the schools? Why the hell are they so insecure if they’re teaching their kids such rock-solid bedrock values?

# 26 Paddy-O said, on April 30th, 2009 at 9:36 am

# 25 Phydeau said, “Ya know, this used to work pretty good, painting Democrats as shiftless lazy bums who never met a huge government program they didn’t like. But that dog just won’t hunt any more.”

Really? You say that after they just passed the largest one in history? Weird.

# 27 dogday said, on April 30th, 2009 at 9:40 am

When you lose sight of original values and start to grade on a curve it leads to moral relativism which is a bankrupt concept.

Republicans may never win another election as the US turns toward a post modern view.

# 28 jbellies said, on April 30th, 2009 at 9:50 am

Why don’t conservatives propose that the gov’t get out of the marriage biz? Leave it to the churches. Wouldn’t that also solve their internal dissention, or do they just like to argue (no question mark, rhetorical question).

# 29 Alex said, on April 30th, 2009 at 10:11 am

#25:
“And why is it that the same wingnuts who claim to have such a strong foundation, bedrock family values, blah blah blah, are so afraid of their kids getting “reeducated” by the schools? Why the hell are they so insecure if they’re teaching their kids such rock-solid bedrock values?”

Because, well… I think I shall borrow a quote:

“Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock: and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it did not fall, for it was founded on the rock.

“But everyone who hears these sayings of Mine, and does not do them, will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand: and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it fell. And great was its fall.”

# 30 tcc3 said, on April 30th, 2009 at 10:20 am

I’ve often argued that point. “marriage” for gays is the wrong argument. “Civil unions” for everyone is the right argument.

If the Conservative Christians were really concerned about religious freedom, then thats the argument they would support. The concern is reduced ability to push their lifestyle on everyone else. Gotta keep butts in the pews, you know.

# 31 Phydeau said, on April 30th, 2009 at 10:29 am

#29 My point, Alex, is why are the wingnuts so afraid their kids will be corrupted if what they’re teaching at home is so good’n'right’n'true? The wingnuts don’t seem to have much confidence in their principles, despite their loud bloviations.

#26 Paddy O’Troll, please, you and Alfie and the other wingnuts just keep on doing what you’re doing. Keep raving about Socialistic Commies and Communistic Socialists while Obama presents a calm, rational demeanor to the American public. You wingnuts are so losing the battle of perception.

You’n'Alfie might have some shred of credibility if you demonstrated an ability to at least understand the arguments for doing what Obama is doing — what the economists are saying. But no, you yammer about spending without any context. To quote the kids: FAIL.

# 32 Alex said, on April 30th, 2009 at 10:53 am

#31 – I know – I’m supporting your point, based on Alfie’s own logic.

# 33 Dallas said, on April 30th, 2009 at 10:58 am

Republican party plans a come back!
http://bit.ly/4mtMyr

Seems the GOP is launching an outreach program where they will leave their bubble and see what Americans care about. I think that is awesome!

They also created a Facebook account, looking for a new “logo and getting something pierced.

Sounds like a plan.

# 34 Phydeau said, on April 30th, 2009 at 10:59 am

OK, I understand Alex, sorry, was being dense.

# 35 Phydeau said, on April 30th, 2009 at 11:01 am

Is anyone else having trouble displaying this comment section? The URL comes from the title of the article, and when it has certain characters in it, the page refuses to display.

To get around it, I have to manually replace the apostrophe in the URL with “'”

# 36 Alfred1 said, on April 30th, 2009 at 11:02 am

In light of these wonderful events I have concluded a third party is not necessary…Rush Limbaugh is right…the RINOs are leaving on their own…and the base will no longer tolerate them as the lesser of two evils…

RINOS are chameleons on plaid…they will do well in the Democratic Big Tent…

Just don’t bend over in front of Bruno

# 37 Olo Baggins of Bywater said, on April 30th, 2009 at 11:03 am

From CNN:

As to the future of the GOP, Steele wasn’t overly optimistic, maintaining that the outlook of his party isn’t great as of now.

“Well the future lies down the road a bit. I mean, look, I’m not going to sit here with, you know, pie-in-the-sky talking about, you know, how wonderful things are. They’re not,” he said.

But like his Republican colleague, Olympia Snowe, Steele insisted there is room for moderates in Republican Party, saying the notion that the party is exclusive “is just crazy.”

Alfred, your leader has spoken. Unless….he’s not the real leader of the GOP…

# 38 Alfred1 said, on April 30th, 2009 at 11:14 am

#37 I’ll Rush Limbaugh answer you:

“Michael Steele, you are head of the Republican National Committee. You are not head of the Republican party. Tens of millions of conservatives and Republicans have nothing to do with the Republican National Committee…and when you call them asking for money, they hang up on you.”

Serious though was being given to a third party…but the Republican Party is the ONLY successful third party in history…so we conservatives have decided to remain, and run the RINOs and moderates out.

# 39 Phydeau said, on April 30th, 2009 at 11:26 am

#38 Serious though was being given to a third party…but the Republican Party is the ONLY successful third party in history…so we conservatives have decided to remain, and run the RINOs and moderates out.

Was that the royal “we” or the editorial “we”? Have you’n'Rush been toying with this idea for a while, then?

But seriously, I appreciate it when someone takes a firm and principled stand, no matter how clueless or self-destructive it might appear to be.

Maybe you could summon all card-carrying Republicans to a meeting, an inquisition if you will, to determine whether they are worthy to remain in the Republican party. Bad news: boiling in oil for the RINOs and moderates is no longer a possibility… people are so wishy-washy, not like the old days!

# 40 Olo Baggins of Bywater said, on April 30th, 2009 at 11:39 am

Thanks. Is this quote recent?

Traditionally RNC chair IS the leader, but Rush is attempting to change that. How can it possibly work? When Specter’s GOP opponent needs cash, along with dozens of others, who’s going to have it? Not the GOP, if Rush has his way. And will ideologically pure Republicans take cash from the inclusive GOP?

Will Rush start paying for campaigns? Yeah, right.

Rush is leading the GOP into a tar pit, and you know how long things stay there, right? He does…

# 41 sargasso said, on April 30th, 2009 at 11:46 am

In Soviet Russia, comrades of impure political philosophy sent to gulag.

# 42 Alex said, on April 30th, 2009 at 12:05 pm

In Soviet America, gulag sends *you* to comrades of impure political philosophy!

# 43 Mr. Fusion said, on April 30th, 2009 at 12:17 pm

#38, Alphie, Evangelical, Sociopathic, Right Wing Nut, Loon, Limbaugh Sycophant, and Quaalude Queen,

…but the Republican Party is the ONLY successful third party in history…so we conservatives have decided to remain, and run the RINOs and moderates out.

So only the pure remain. Your own inquisition. Soon, all RINOs will need to wear a donkey on their chest and “donate” their goods and money to the Party.

# 44 Alfred1 said, on April 30th, 2009 at 12:20 pm

#40 Yes, March 2,09…

http://huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/02/steele-takes-on-rush-limb_n_171135.html

Its not just Rush, or Levin…we conservatives suffered under Bush…hating the growth of Government…we wanted the “peace dividend” to pay down the debt…we wanted the increased revenue of lower tax rates to pay down the debt…

We expected the contract with America would expand…and Government would finally shrink, not expand.

I and many conservatives didn’t agree with invading Iraq…we cringed when we started nation building…to us, the whole thing was a fiasco…Saddam, an enemy, was in a box, impotent.

I wanted regulations on production back…the liberal loon programs dropped…

Consider, China is capitalist, its market FREE—it doesn’t require regulate a fraction we do…

New business are forming all the time…its growth rate is almost in the double digits!

Our economy could be growing now…if Government stepped back and let it…it needs to get out of the way…not get into it…

A conservative leader who can articulate the message of freedom, and its consequence, free markets…can win..

We need a contrast to “yes Government can” when everyone who has ever wanted “customer service” in a government office, knows the Government can’t.

The fact Obama wasn’t asked one question about our declining economy proves he is vulnerable…big time…he media advocates shudder to think what will happen if the people begin demanding results for their trillions…

# 45 Alfred1 said, on April 30th, 2009 at 12:21 pm

I meant to say:

I wanted regulations on production ROLLED back…the liberal loon programs dropped…

# 46 MikeN said, on April 30th, 2009 at 12:23 pm

>Traditionally RNC chair IS the leader,

No he isn’t. Check out Jay Cost’s HorseRaceBlog for some detailed posts on this. The party chairmen are all about fundraising, and candidate support.

# 47 James Hill - The Destroyer of You said, on April 30th, 2009 at 12:40 pm

Look at all those crap posts. Time for me to save another thread.

#1 is in the right ballpark, but misses the point. Republicans like Huntsman are letting the far right guys fade out over the next few years… putting him in good position to take the party nomination in ‘12. That’s how moderates (and more specifically, fiscal conservative moderates… the only type of Republican the average Joe really likes) are going to wind up back in charge.

Personally, I think the Obama supporters should be rooting for Huntsman. While he has has money and a strong base, I don’t see him winning a Presidential election… ever. Then again, the more Obama fails as a President, the more than 55% who voted for him gets paired down.

# 48 Olo Baggins of Bywater said, on April 30th, 2009 at 12:52 pm

MikeN, you got a link to a specific article?

Regardless, how does a frakken radio host become this powerful…one who cannot and will not ever run for office? IMO he’s in this for personal gain which contradicts the needs of the GOP and the USA. GOP loses, he wins. Think it through…

# 49 Mr. Fusion said, on April 30th, 2009 at 12:54 pm

#47, Jimmy Heel,

Hey, your fly’s down.

# 50 Dallas said, on April 30th, 2009 at 12:54 pm

#47 James Hill-The Foot odor said…“Personally, I think the Obama supporters should be rooting for Huntsman.

I disagree. The Obama supporters should continue to let the GOP rot away w/o any help.

When that eventuality happens, the remaining loonies latch onto existing related organizations (ie. KKK, Palin groupies, etc) and simply disappear as a political influence.

# 51 Mr. Fusion said, on April 30th, 2009 at 1:05 pm

#44, Alphie, Evangelical, Sociopathic, Right Wing Nut, Loon, Limbaugh Sycophant, and Quaalude Queen,

So instead of following a democratically elected leader, you end up obeying a neo-con mouth piece that is out for himself, NOT the Republican Party. That fits right in with the rest of your rambling, disconnected, stooopid comments.

And who is to say that your brand of conservationism is any better than Steele or Spector’s brand is disingenuous. These are the guys that have been doing the heavy lifting, not your flashy greedy radio shock jocks.

# 52 Dallas said, on April 30th, 2009 at 3:37 pm

Oh this is good:
The more often Americans go to church, the more likely they support torture !! WOW what a surprise.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/04/30/religion.torture/index.html

# 53 Phydeau said, on April 30th, 2009 at 4:33 pm

#52 Dang… and the fundies love torture most of all:

White evangelical Protestants were the religious group most likely to say torture is often or sometimes justified — more than six in 10 supported it. People unaffiliated with any religious organization were least likely to back it. Only four in 10 of them did.

So much for religion having a civilizing effect on people…

# 54 deowll said, on April 30th, 2009 at 5:14 pm

In the article it sounds like a dullard who doesn’t know anything about history is talking. The party faithful of both parties vote the party line because they have no other valid options other than stay home and let the other party run the country.

The war and the election is determined by the independents who pretty much think both parties smell like a herd of skunks. The independents vote for the person they think is most moderate in nearly all cases though appearing competent and trustworthy certainly matters.

# 55 Alfred1 said, on April 30th, 2009 at 5:43 pm

#52 So you wouldn’t resort to torture to learn the location of wife and children who were being brutally tortured, sexually assaulted, bodily disfigured, and slowly executed?

The survey asked if torture could ever be justified…I am shocked 100% didn’t say yes…

I wouldn’t hesitate, I’d do a Jack Bower dance all over your head.

# 56 Alfred1 said, on April 30th, 2009 at 5:47 pm

#51 I am an American citizen…I don’t obey because someone is elected…I consent to follow our Government…but there are limits I’ll not cross:

21…Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s. (Mat 22:21 KJV)

# 57 tcc3 said, on April 30th, 2009 at 6:29 pm

That sounds like a pretty heavy endorsement for keeping religion out of politics. Hmmm.

# 58 Alfred1 said, on April 30th, 2009 at 6:41 pm

57 Secularists don’t realize keeping Government out of religion is a teaching of Christ:

21 They say unto him, Caesar’s. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s. (Mat 22:21 KJV)

# 59 Alfred1 said, on April 30th, 2009 at 6:44 pm

#57 U didn’t answer the point…

Would you torture the one who knew where your parents/wife/children were being tortured…who smile and laughed in your face he was happy they would die horribly, after being tortured without mercy?

I am shocked anyone not say yes and I dispute those who would, are human.

# 60 Phydeau said, on April 30th, 2009 at 7:04 pm

#59 Alfie, your torture question is pure 100% hypothetical, no chance of it happening in the real world. It is pointless to ask people what they would do in a situation that has a 0.0000000001% chance of happening.

You torture fans are just trying to rationalize your support of torture. That’s good! Deep down somewhere in you, you know it’s wrong, otherwise you wouldn’t feel compelled to make bogus arguments to convince others to agree with you. So there’s hope for you yet.

# 61 Phydeau said, on April 30th, 2009 at 7:07 pm

Regarding religion and government: England has a state church. Church attendance is much lower there than it is here. People who want a state religion here should be careful what they wish for. Alfie is smart fundie to want to keep religion out of the government.

# 62 Alfred1 said, on April 30th, 2009 at 7:10 pm

#60 Incorrect…I consider my countrymen…my family.

The poll left the personal aspect open…therefore more people answered in the affirmative than they would have if it were worded differently.

You don’t care if religious people are misrepresented and slandered, it fits your agenda…

Rather than relying upon a flawed poll, discuss MY agreement with President Bush’s actions…if anything, I might have been willing to use even more severe forms of interrogation.

I have no moral problems with protecting my family…which includes my extended family, my country men…I am my neighbor’s keeper…

And if an evil person can be made to save lives…I think it evil one not do so.

# 63 Alfred1 said, on April 30th, 2009 at 7:17 pm

U secularists misinterpret Christian pacifism…you think it the only correct view, but its incorrect and most Christians historically have realize defending one’s family or country is a Christian duty:

10 Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest’s servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant’s name was Malchus.
11 Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?
12 Then the band and the captain and officers of the Jews took Jesus, and bound him,
(Joh 18:10-12 KJV)

We should not equivocate…Jesus’ mission was to die as prophesied…therefore, Peter’s defending Him was not God’s plan…

But if it weren’t Jesus, then Peter’s action was proper…

Consider Peter walked with Christ for about three years…yet he had a sword…

One does not carry a sword to butter toast.

Jesus never told him “lose the sword” and it obviously was not a concealed weapon.

So also the other disciples likely had swords…

If anyone attack my family, or my country, I will deal with it…

If anyone insult me…or abuse me in the service of my God, I will turn the other cheek…

The two events are not analogous…there are incompatible properties relevant to the Christians use of force.

# 64 Alfred1 said, on April 30th, 2009 at 8:32 pm

#61 a straw man…you defeat them well…but you prove thereby…

Of the three kinds of people who populate the world: those who make things happen; those who watch things happen—U are among the last, those who wonder what happened.

# 65 Mr. Fusion said, on May 1st, 2009 at 1:24 am

#64, Alphie, Evangelical, Sociopathic, Right Wing Nut, Loon, Limbaugh Sycophant, and Quaalude Queen,

A few years back, I regularly taught Health and Safety classes. You are the kind of person that falls in the first group; you make things happen. It is too bad that that is the most dangerous group to be around.

Yes you make things happen. Only you don’t think about what you are doing. You have no regard for your actions or the effect on other people. You myopic view is so self centered that all you can see is how something effects you.

People like cut corners. You chose the expedient way over the safe way. Your way too often has the consequence of injuring someone else. But, because it is your way, you won’t see the dangers present.

The worst problem with your type is that they refuse to see the light. It doesn’t matter if it is an industrial setting or driving a car. The odds are you are much more likely to be in an serious accident than someone who can think rationally.

Thankfully I am not you. Or like you.

# 66 Mr. Fusion said, on May 1st, 2009 at 1:35 am

#59, Alphie, Evangelical, Sociopathic, Right Wing Nut, Loon, Limbaugh Sycophant, and Quaalude Queen,

If someone kidnapped and injured my family I would wish the worst on them. BUT that is why we have a police department that will investigate and (hopefully) bring the perpetrator to justice and a judiciary that will prosecute and judge him impartially.

Sure I could extract my revenge and I might even feel good about it. The chances are pretty good that I might find the wrong person and injure an innocent person. Would you care?

America is built on respecting our laws and institutions. Why do you hate America? Why do you hate yourself?

# 67 Dallas said, on May 1st, 2009 at 4:04 am

#55 Alfred1 said “So you wouldn’t resort to torture to learn the location of wife and children who were being brutally tortured, sexually assaulted, bodily disfigured, and slowly executed?

Alfred1, interesting set of conditions but we’re talking about a broad government “policy” that is both prohibited by treaty obligations and immoral.

Incidentally, do you support abortion under the “right conditions”?

# 68 Uncle Patso said, on May 1st, 2009 at 4:12 am

# 55 Alfred1 said, in part:

“#52 So you wouldn’t resort to torture to learn the location of wife and children who were being brutally tortured, sexually assaulted, bodily disfigured, and slowly executed?”

and, in post #59:

“Would you torture the one who knew where your parents/wife/children were being tortured…who smile and laughed in your face he was happy they would die horribly, after being tortured without mercy?”

Oh, don’t you just HATE it when that happens? I know I just HATE it when that happens. Oh man, if I only had a nickel for every time that happened to me, I WOULDN’T EVEN HAVE A SINGLE NICKEL! AND NEITHER WOULD YOU!!!

How’s this: what if that guy knew the answer to a really, really hard riddle, but he wouldn’t tell you the answer? I mean a really, really, REALLY hard riddle! How about if he cut you off in traffic and you missed the light at the corner and you were just really royally pissed off? How about then? How about if you just didn’t like his attitude? How about if you didn’t like his sexual orientation, national origin, choice of church and/or his skin color or the way he holds out his little finger when drinking his tea? Where does it stop?

You like quoting from the Bible; here’s one from Matthew, Chapter 22:

37 And He said to him, ” ‘YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND.’ 38 “This is the great and foremost commandment. 39 “The second is like it, ‘YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.’ 40 “On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.”

There was something in there about turning the other cheek, too. Funny, I don’t remember anything in there about torture…

# 69 the real alfred said, on May 1st, 2009 at 4:48 am

The Republicans are acting like losers, hence they’ll lose. The Democrats finally learned that doesn’t work so they’re winning.

# 70 Alfred1 said, on May 1st, 2009 at 5:04 am

#68 I am shocked you don’t consider your fellow Americans your family…you want them to pay for your health care, don’t you?

# 71 Alfred1 said, on May 1st, 2009 at 5:10 am

#68 Its not surprising you don’t understand scripture…why should it be different from everything else.

We love God with all our heart, and our fellows…

That requires I do everything in my power to protect my fellows…from evil…

And if that requires torture to force them to abort their plan…or reveal where its happening so it can be stopped…

I’ll do a Jack Bower reenactment, in a heartbeat…with gusto.

Turn the other cheek applies to what Christ was talking about….and it wasn’t torture.

If for my service to God I am attacked in any fashion, I must turn the other cheek…

I turn my cheek.

If my family is attacked…OR my country, I don’t turn their cheek, I defend them to the best of my ability.

# 72 Olo Baggins of Bywater said, on May 1st, 2009 at 5:26 am

Too bad there isn’t anything in the Bible about being smart.

# 73 Mr. Fusion said, on May 1st, 2009 at 6:38 am

#72, Mr. Baggins,

There is. It’s that blank page at the very back.

# 74 Mr. Fusion said, on May 1st, 2009 at 6:44 am

#71, Alphie, Evangelical, Sociopathic, Right Wing Nut, Loon, Limbaugh Sycophant, and Quaalude Queen,

#68 Its not surprising you don’t understand scripture…why should it be different from everything else.

Because it is made up of fairy tales. Tha worst thing though is how you, and most self righteous holy rollers, like to pick specific pieces that fit their argument instead of the general theme of the message.

Do you really think Jesus would condone torture? Look inside yourself and tell us that Jesus would have purposely inflicted pain and suffering on someone else in order to achieve an end.

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!