Courseaire 1 year ago

Dare I say "Disappointed" in the Democratic turnout for this election.

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

bigD 1 year ago

President

Democrat

Obama: 80.17%

18.83% No Preference

18% of Democrat ballots chose no preference ...WOW!!!!!

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

bigD 1 year ago

State wide 21% chose no preference. What does this say about the re-election of a sitting President?

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

theonewithsense 1 year ago

Well it doesn't say much about Obama at all, since the Republicans are putting up Bozo the Clown as the opposition.

Once again, we get to vote for who is the least damaging. For the record, I'll vote for Bozo the Clown over Obama any day.

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

Toda 1 year ago

I ask my fellow bloggers, "who are we as a country or a state, to determine the rights of other American Citizens?" Our Constitution: Amendment 14 Section 1. ...nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection under the law". This section applies to single parent families and their off-springs.

"No State, shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property.... I ask you again, "who are we to judge?"

Luke 6:37 ESV / “Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven;

Matthew 7:1-5 ESV / “Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye."

1 Corinthians 4:1-21 ESV / This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God. Moreover, it is required of stewards that they be found trustworthy. But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by any human court. In fact, I do not even judge myself. For I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby acquitted. It is the Lord who judges me. Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive his commendation from God. ...

AND THE CLINCHER;

John 8:7 ESV / And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” I am amiss at how many "good" Christians have used verse and scripture to form battle lines for and against Amendment One. As a young lad growing up in Vass, my mother used to tell me "live and let live",

God will make the last judgement call.

If two people want to spend their lives together so be it; or two same sex individuals living or cohabitating (which is a sin in Gods' eyes) and having children out of wedlock is not in keeping with God's Law - you sinners and judges of God's Law. What are the social values and morays of our great nation under God...? Hate, disdain, bigotry, self-centered, egotistical...? Take your pick and select your own poison sipped from a cup of arrogance.

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

AM910 1 year ago

Let's see how some on the boards "interpret" the verses you supplied, Tommy. It seems the good book can looked at differently by everyone, but just not lived by the original way it was written. Everyone seems to have a problem with that.

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

Courseaire 1 year ago

The Book is there to guide the individual life for those that believe. The Constitution is there to guide the Government/Laws as to how it treats all people regardless of their beliefs (which is to treat them equally). No special favors for couples unless it's the same for all couples. No special favors for Christians, no special favors for specific races, no special favors for gender, etc. The Book and the Constitution are not the same thing, nor are they meant to be

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

Toda 1 year ago

True AM910 => True Christians don't have to "use" scripture to defend their position, but only to live their own lives that God has so lovingly given them. I am of the "opinion" that education has a lot to do with peoples' way of rationalizing their positions. I say rationalizing because that is a defense mechanism used to justify ones position. It's so sad that so many are closed minded on topics of consideration when seeing another's objective point of view based on leaned substance, we feed our intellect and souls with objective wisdom as opposed to misunderstanding and hate. But remember, our country is really good at lowering life expectations of others with whom we disagree.

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

Toda 1 year ago

Very true Courseaire => my thread was meant to show a distinct division between church and state. Even though we rest our laurels on the Constitution (TEA Party), others "project" their faith on the Constitution by justifying the ways by the means.

I also am of the "opinion" that churches who used their tax free status to incorporate changing our State Constitution into their church environment should lose their tax free status. Separation of Church and State.

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

The_AnonymusProfit 1 year ago

@ Toda

First let me preface by saying I voted against the amendment.

Now to answer your question,

Our federal government and state governments are set up as 2 entirely different bodies of government, however most American citizens don't realize this. Our federal government is set up as a representative republic, where by we elect officials to make decisions for us, Our state government is set up as a representative democracy, where by elected officials do full fill the same tasks as their federal counterparts, however, many decisions are left to broad vote by the general public, IE A1. Now many have made the 14th amendment argument that no state shall deny...equal protection under the law...however marriage does not nessicarily fall under this category.

Many have argued about the legal issues arising, IE the rights shared by married couples that single couples do not have. Part of the amendment reads "This section does not prohibit a private party from entering into contracts with another private party; nor does this section prohibit courts from adjudicating the rights of private parties pursuant to such contracts." This part of the amendment is basically saying that a legal contract between two citizens giving privildges will still be valid IE, if 2 homosexuals have a legal contract specifying that in the event of death this person is to inheret, (a whill) or in the event that 1 person can not make decisions such as medical, legal, the partner has the authority to (Power of attorney) etc etc.

As far as taxes go the current laws will not allow for the filling of joint income taxes but that may change.

Yet I digress, While I disagree with the decision, part of the way democracy works is that it allows for the majority rule, in this case the majority rule was for the amendment, in this case this allows for the "lobbyist, petitioner, advocate, and activist, to begin reversal campaigns or to propose secondary laws that would for instance change the tax code.

As far as the bible is concerned, the original settlers that came to this country came seeking religious freedom, this does not mean however that the foundation of our country was based on the bible. Our constitution and founding documents are of a secular nature with the understanding that a religion is a key factor in the lives of the inhabitants of America. Our constitution holds that all powers not directly spelled out in the constitution shall be left to the states, the 14th amendment however is not a valid amendment as in all actuality, it was never ratified by the required 3/4th's approval of the states.

While you may feel that the bible is the final word, the true word, its word holds no actual legal value in this country.

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

healthcare_2011 1 year ago

24,223 people voted... that is a big turn out for a primary vote.

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

aggou 1 year ago

Excellent turnout.

I'm glad many Republicans turned out. Hopefully we can register many more this summer so we can make Moore county even more Red.

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

emb6683 1 year ago

When are all the signs going to be policed up and we can return to normal for a few months?

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

Toda 1 year ago

The_AnonymusProfit => Article II, Section 1: Powers of the States.to vote;

Amendment XIV (Ratified July 9, 1868) Section 1:" All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the Jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States, and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizen of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws,"

This Amendment was written in the Bill of Rights along with other Amendments to the Constitution.

Contracts between people or the Law of Agency does not include rights that are for those who are married,,,like dependency status or income tax deductions as with married couples,

"lobbyist, petitioner, advocate, and activist, to begin reversal campaigns or to propose secondary laws that would for instance change the tax code."

Amendment 1:...to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

"understanding that a religion is a key factor in the lives of the inhabitants of America."

Amendment 1 (again): "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;...."

14th Amendment to the Constitution Was Ratified July 28, 1868 On July 28, 1868, the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified. The amendment grants citizenship to "all persons born or naturalized in the United States" which included former slaves who had just been freed after the Civil War. The amendment had been rejected by most Southern states but was ratified by the required three-fourths of the states. Known as the "Reconstruction Amendment," it forbids any state to deny any person "life, liberty or property, without due process of law" or to "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

LINK:http://www.americaslibrary.gov/jb/recon/jb_recon_revised_1.html

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

Toda 1 year ago

The_AnonymusProfit => "While you may feel that the bible is the final word, the true word, its word holds no actual legal value in this country."

No AP that wasn't my point. My point was that people (Christians) select and choose passages in scripture to support their contentions. Even though all but one of the signers of the Constitution were ordained ministers, they would have prayer before each session of architecture, they were all cognizant of the role Catholicism played in early England and law.

I find it so interesting that people look at one verse in Leviticus and skip over all the other Old Testament sins. It's pick and choose the verse that fits ones argument,

I too voted against A-1 because of changing our States Constitution once again to show bias and prejudice, The last time our Constitution was changed was that mixed races could not marry. Goes to show how far we "have not come" in our bigoted society.

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

aggou 1 year ago

Toda,

if you think that's the only verse in the entire Bible that refers to homosexuality as a sin, you're sorely mistaken, and I would advise you go read it again, thoroughly. Go read Romnas 1:24-32, Gen. 19, 1 Cor. 6:9-11, Eph. 5:3-5, Gal. 5:19-21, 1 Tim. 1:9,10, and Jude 7.

There is a multitude of verses which make references to sexual sins as being evil, sleeping with someone whom you're not married too, sleeping with someone before you're married, homosexuality, and every other form of sexual sins people can come up with.

I would kindly ask you to refrain from commenting on issues, (i.e. The Bible) which you don't seem to have a clear understanding of.

If it means I'm considered a "bigot" for standing up for what the Bible says is right, then so be it. I won't answer to men, but to God for how I lived for Him. Do I always approve of the way Christians act towards those who are gay, no. I don't hate anyone who is gay, and It breaks my heart when I hear the way parents act towards their kids, when their kids come out to their parents that they're gay. However, I will still stand by the Bible, which is God inspired, and love that person as Christ would, but show them that it goes against the Bible, and ultimately it comes down to whom you're going to serve, God or man.

Often times I hear, oh all you Christians ever do is say what you're against. While we might make it clear what we are against, that also, in and of itself shows what we are for. We are against gay marriage, which means we are for marriage between one man and one woman. We are against abortion, which means we believe life begins in the womb. We are against sex outside of marriage, which means we are only for a sexual relationship within the confines of marriage, which is the way God intended it. Now, do all Christians follow those verses where God makes each issue clear? No, we are all sinners who fail everyday. That doesn't change the fact that we can come to God for forgiveness. He is the only one who can help us overcome sin.

One last point. A lot of people are like, oh you just hate the gays so you ban them, but why don't you ban divorce, etc. Well, frankly if I could, I would, except in the cases the Bible says are okay for divorce, which is a spouse that is caught cheating. Divorce is a horrible, horrible thing our society has come up with, and more often than not, it doesn't help. However, people in our society would never put such a thing up for a vote, and so to ask questions like those are irrelevant because we are too far gone to ever pass such an amendment.

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

The_AnonymusProfit 1 year ago

@ Toda

No AP that wasn't my point. My point was that people (Christians) select and choose passages in scripture to support their contentions. Even though all but one of the signers of the Constitution were ordained ministers, they would have prayer before each session of architecture, they were all cognizant of the role Catholicism played in early England and law.

I would not disagree that many or most Christians pick and choose how they choose to represent themselves and their book. Myself I separate the legal issues from the religious issues,

As to the 14th amendment

http://www.truthsetsusfree.com/14thAmendment.pdf

http://www.barefootsworld.net/14uncon.html

http://www.usavsus.info/

Just some back ground reading Toda, I do not blame you for not knowing. Most if not basically All Americans have no idea what their government is really doing. Infact pay particular attention to the 3rd website, it details almost every major unconstitutional act our government has committed.

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

Courseaire 1 year ago

I'm just glad that they haven't messed with the 2nd amendment and I can still wear my wife beater shirt.

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

Jibbs 1 year ago

YODA. As usual, you liberals cherry-pick Luke 6:37/Matthew 7:1 stating "Judge not and you will not be judged" to justify your own sin (lack of faith). WE are not making that judgment, GOD has already made that judgment for us. He has declared homosexuality a sin in all the places aggou provided, and you are attempting to change that. Matthew 5:19 states: "Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven..." YOU are attempting to 'annul' His commandments.

If instead of the sin of homosexuality we were talking about the sin of murder or theft, would you still quote Matthew 7:1/Luke 6:37 and say "don't judge!"? When that lunatic shot up the Carthage nursing home, did you say "Don't judge him"? We aren't at all saying we want to 'stone' homosexuals. In fact, we love them and would give the shirt off our backs for them, just like we would the drunkard, the prostitute, the murder, the thief, the tax collector, etc. But we (I) WILL NOT defy God and redefine what He has already called sin.

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

Jibbs 1 year ago

I seriously typed in "YODA" as an accident. I meant "TODA"

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

Toda 1 year ago

"For more than a hundred years now, the courts have applied the 14th Amendment to pertinent cases that have come before them. And although questions have been raised about both its language meaning and the legal correctness of its adoption process, Federal challenges to the ratification of the 14th Amendment have always fallen on deaf ears. Its long time usage and the lateness of the hour doctrines have caused the Supreme Court to accept the 14th Amendment as law(12)."

Thank you AP for your information and a civil discussion which I enjoy. I do my research as well. I find it interesting that the Supreme Court as well as circuit appeals have issues with interpretation.So in defense of applying civil logic to an Amendment that the courts are unable to agree, I offer to share this explanation as well:

"The 14th Amendment to the US Constitution was passed by Congress on June 13, 1866 during Reconstruction. Along with the 13th amendment and the 15th amendment, it is one of the three Reconstruction amendments. Section 2 of the 14th amendment modified Aritcle I, section 2 of the US Constitution. It has had far reaching effects on the relationship between states and the federal government. Learn more with this 14th amendment summary."

Link:http://americanhistory.about.com/od/usconstitution/a/Fourteenth-Amendment.htm

.

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

Toda 1 year ago

aggou => Exactly ~ see my point? As Christians, we can extract any verse from the Bible to justify our cause.

There is a multitude of verses which make references to sexual sins as being evil, sleeping with someone whom you're not married too, sleeping with someone before you're married, homosexuality, and every other form of sexual sins people can come up with." Why do you say I don't understand scripture? My point in all of this being those who have married and divorced can find scripture to justify their behavior. Those living in adultery, children born out of wedlock; but those same people can refer to Leviticus to justify voting for A-1.

"." YOU are attempting to 'annul' His commandments." how did you come to that conclusion? No where did I make any comment about "annulling" the Commandments of God! People use Bible verses to justify why they voted for A-1. "Marriage is between one man and one woman".

Surficit to say, "many "good" Christians skipped over several scriptures and verses to justify their vote. When in fact many of those same people have committed "sins" of equal value.

" would you still quote Matthew 7:1/Luke 6:37 and say "don't judge!", I would be one of the first to inject Robert Stewart for his crime. God hates evil! And since you are fairly new to the blogs, I have written many times about crimes of evil people. For the past 7 or 8 years matter of fact...before the blogs in Letters to the Editor.

My ire is with Sunday Morning Christians who manipulate scripture for their self-serving interests to justify why they say what they do according to the Word of God. While skipping over those sins associated with their behavior,

I think you totally misunderstood what I said....

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

Jibbs 1 year ago

Toda. Why do you say "I would be one of the first to inject Robert Stewart for his crime" (his sin of murder), but then say "Don't judge" when it comes to the sin of homosexuality? Sin is sin, is it not? Believe me, I've committed them all too, but that doesn't mean I should be welcoming sin into my world.

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

clarabelle 1 year ago

It is sin only in "your" eyes. And who the #### are you?

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

CADGR 1 year ago

<33% of registered Democrats voted? Very disappointing. Come on people!!!! You have to get to the polls!!!

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

AM910 1 year ago

Jibbs wrote - Toda. Why do you say "I would be one of the first to inject Robert Stewart for his crime" (his sin of murder), but then say "Don't judge" when it comes to the sin of homosexuality?

We all see the news reports of people killing daily. Murder is a sin and affects many. What part of homosexuality affects you? Are you watching in your house daily? Does it keep you awake at night that there may be a same sex couple just doors away from your home? Will they come in a redecorate your living room when you are not there?

Killing someone and someone being in love with someone of the same sex are two COMPLETELY different things. Which one does the greater harm?

We all have to answer to God - just let us do it individually - group confirmation is not need for anyone.

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

Toda 1 year ago

Wow this has become interesting by way of non-cognizant reasoning and rational.

To the question of sin and rock throwing: I listed several verses from scripture that wasn't brought up as a "defense" for voting for A-1. Sunday morning Christians all jumped on "one man ~ one woman" but failed to mention any of the sin's I listed which is only a few from the Old Testament. IF devote Christians are going to use scripture from Leviticus - are they just being selective or ignoring the other sins they commit daily? That's my question.

Jibbs => why would I say I would inject Robert Stewart? Because I would without hesitation. I'm not defending my threads by no means, What I am saying, is all those who look to scripture as a reason to vote against A-1, they didn't think to concern themselves with all the other sins they commit. But GOD said marriage is between one man and one woman! And I bet they eat pork and shellfish. HYPOCRITES! Selective Bible references to defend their reason for voting for A-1, and then stopping by Smithfield Barbecue for big plate of pork, at a franchise owned by a gay man. HYPOCRITES!

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

Toda 1 year ago

"clarabelle 14 hours, 17 minutes ago It is sin only in "your" eyes. And who the #### are you?"

I'll ask you the same question hiding behind an on-screen avatar...? WHY? Afraid to come out of the closet and let people know who is making snide remarks clocked in anonymity.

Obviously you are a newbie to the boards. To/mmy Da/vis that's Toda which is an acronym for Tommy Davis. Now who the #### are you?

I've written on these boards since The Pilot started on-line blogs; before that Letters to the Editor. What's your story or do you have one...whoever you are in hiding?

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal

Toda 1 year ago

Jibbs 18 hours, 10 minutes ago "YODA. As usual, you liberals cherry-pick Luke 6:37/Matthew"

A question for you Jibbs: Was Christ a liberal or a conservative in you eyes? If it wasn't for political labels, there would be very little to argue about on these boards as well as others....I don't have a label other than a compassionate human being. That's it.

• Sign in to reply
• Suggest removal