Is Sarah Palin an Esther for Our Day?
September 23, 2008 | 79 Comments
9/23/08: Is Sarah Palin an Esther for Our Day?
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
Category:
Current Events
Comments
79 Responses to “Is Sarah Palin an Esther for Our Day?”
Leave a Reply
Listen Live Online
Ask Dr. Brown
Subscribe to the Podcast
September 24th, 2008 @ 7:35 pm
Sorry guys, but Sarah Palin is a joke, and Tina Fay is the example of that joke. And I don’t think that Esther can be in this category.
Did you know that she jumped on the bridge to nowhere idea only after it was rejected? Did you know that she was still contracted to fund a road to nowhere even though the bridge was no to be built? Did you know that the media was no allowed to broadcast audio during her visit with world leaders at the UN? Did you also know that in the Vice Presidential debate, the McCain camp told Biden that he could not direct anything to Palin?
I will listen to the broadcast as soon as it is posted, but I think after a few Pailn based topics, something just has to be said…pandering to the hillary voters for fear of losing the election. Out of all the Republicans in our nation, Sarah Palin is the best choice to run our country? Are you kidding me?
September 24th, 2008 @ 8:47 pm
Ryan,
I wish you were joking, but I guess you’re not. By all means, listen to the broadcast.
September 24th, 2008 @ 11:31 pm
I look forward to hearing this show when it becomes available. Palin is undoubtedly the most exciting thing to happen to the GOP in some time. Ryan and other lefties may criticise her for a perceived lack of experience, but the fact that she is staunchly pro-life and pro-traditional marriage is reason alone to vote for her. You see the fight against abortion and the homosexual agenda are the most pressing and important needs not just of the USA but of the whole western world. Christians cannot afford to vote for a candidate who supports baby killing and affirms gay ‘marriage’ just because they don’t like the Republican Party.
September 25th, 2008 @ 12:07 am
Interesting points Ewan. But to call her an “Esther of our day”?
September 25th, 2008 @ 6:01 am
I must have missed this broadcast. I am wondering about the context of the question? Who is posing the question, and why is the comparison being made between Palin and Esther? As I recall from the Bible, Esther was highly and uniquely placed at a specific time in history, allowing her the opportunity to risk her own death to save her people. Haman (Boooo!), the author of the plan to destroy the Jews, was destroyed and Mordechai (Yaaaay!) was exalted for his service to King Ahasuerus. Are some making the Democratic party or Senator Obama out to be Haman? (Booo!) If so it’s an interesting form of character assassination.
What other possible parallels are being drawn? Both Esther and Palin are women of faith, one secretive and the other outspoken. Both were beauty contestants (so to speak), though Palin’s experience did not cause her to be married to the most powerful man of the age. One could argue that she is “married” to but not controlled by a political party. What is it that Palin is risking her life for? Certainly by being openly Christian, opposing abortion, and opposing gay marriage she risks her political credibility in the secular arena. Has God placed her in her current role? I don’t know, but I’ve heard that Palin certainly thinks so. Her entrance into the Vice Presidential candidacy has certainly breathed new life and hope into the GOP. Are some projecting that Palin will, by God’s providence, help to avert another Jewish holocaust? I don’t know… unless someone enlightens me as to the basis of the above titled question, I will stand with Glenn’s comment above.
What I do find interesting is that the call for Palin to exemplify the virtues of Esther came from her former Pastor… after she asked him for biblical examples of good leadership. This is quite a wonderful and encouraging story, if true. It is far better, in my eyes, than former first Lady Clinton’s goal of emulating Eleanor Roosevelt. May Palin’s service, in whatever capacity, glorify God.
I wonder… there are other strong and important women in the Scriptures, such as Myriam, Deborah, Rachab, Ruth… Why did the Pastor choose Esther (Hadassah) over these or any other biblical example of leadership?
September 25th, 2008 @ 6:45 am
Until I hear the program I would have to assume that the reference to Palin being an ‘Esther for our day’ is simply that she may have been raised up ‘for such a time as this’. Abortion is the most serious moral issue facing our respective nations (USA and Australia) bar none, and defending the traditional family comes a clear second.
Please pray for us here in Victoria, Australia. Our state parliament of Victoria is attempting to fully legalise abortion on demand. The bill has already been passed through the lower house a couple of weeks ago and will be debated in the upperhouse in about 10 days time. This is our last chance to stop the bill. If passed, Victoria will be the first state in Australia to have legalised abortion and the other states are waiting to see what happens and will likely pass similar legislation if it is passed in Victoria. The bill allows for abortion on demand for any reason up to 24 weeks. From 24 weeks up to birth, all that is required is that two doctors agree – in reality this would just be a formality – abortion on demand up until birth!
September 25th, 2008 @ 6:57 am
Ewan, it’s sad that you the would assume that I am a “lefty” as you put it; I guess ignorance is bliss…
Ewan, pro-traditional marriage? (I know you are referring to gay marriage versus straight marriage) But, her preggie daughter is not married, is that considered traditional?
Again, a woman coming into power usually signifies that the nation is under judgement…
September 25th, 2008 @ 7:02 am
My source for the above is CNN; Owned by Time Warner, which Dr. Brown sometimes plugs on his shows…
Please guys, if you are listening to fools like Hannity or Rush, please turn off your ears to their partisan agenda.
September 25th, 2008 @ 8:00 am
Ryan, from your previous comments re Obama, the Iraq war, etc., I felt it justified to call you a lefty. If I am wrong, when are you going to say something that would demonstrate otherwise? When someone sounds like a lefty, then I usually assume them to be a lefty.
Why are you going on about the Bristol Palin pregnancy again? I already told you that that is irrelevant. Do you think her mother approves? Give us a break. Sarah Palin would no more approve of her daughter’s actions than do you or I. Your man Obama on the other hand, is on record as endorsing same-sex marriage, same sex couple adoption, and the repeal of DOMA!
You are straining out gnats whilst swallowing camels if you think having a female vice president is a sign of judgment but having a couple of pro-death Democrats is fine.
September 25th, 2008 @ 10:00 am
Ewan, you cannot just call something irrelevant; it is a fact, it is reality, she was brought in because of her stance on family values. So then it is very relevant and should not be hidden from the forum. You cannot hide truth, for if you do then that is irresponsible on your end.
And it is not my fault that you have not read my stance, not only on homosexual marriage, but on homosexuality in general.
To align with one party, whether democrat or republican is also irresponsible. Don’t allow yourself to fall into the game that is politics, it is a lose/lose situation.
September 25th, 2008 @ 2:43 pm
Ryan and Ewan,
True, the actions of one’s family often reflect upon oneself. However, in spite of the stance Sarah Palin has taken, many are making her pay for the mistakes of her daughter. Sarah Palin and her husband Robb may indeed believe in, defend, and teach (to their children) about the virtues of traditional marriage. But Bristol has free will. She chose to engage in pre-marital intimacy in contradiction to what she may have been taught. This is regrettable on many levels. However, Bristol and her boyfriend have not shirked their responsibilities to each other and their coming child. They are getting married, and had already planned to do so before news of her pregnancy was made into public entertainment. Their shouldering of the consequences, acceptance of their responsibilities, and commitment to their future speaks volumes of their character… which also reflects (quite well indeed) upon Sarah and Robb. That they have not hidden or denied this situation also speaks well of them. For many voters this situation should serve to demonstrate that Palin has real world experience with the concerns and experiences of real world people: teen pregnancy, abortion, and marriage just to scratch the surface.
Ewan, I agree with you that abortion is the most serious moral issue in the US and Australia. I am happy to pray with you for the defeat of legalized abortion in Victoria, Australia… I’m sure many others are as well. Thanks for letting us know about this development. If Palin has been placed by God to meet this issue in the US, I happily await the fight. I definitely pray for the overturning of Roe v Wade. May the hearts of those who support it be changed as well. On other blogs some have suggested a hope that she (by virtue of being a woman of faith, and being firmly against abortion and homosexual marriage) will have the respect of Islamic leaders here in the US and abroad. I hope that this will be so, but my experiences in the Middle East, and the general attitude toward women, tell me not to hold my breath. Yet, truly, in God all things are possible.
Ryan, I agree with you in part concerning Hannity and Rush. Though I don’t think them to be fools, I find them to be very partisan whether such stubbornness and single-mindedness is for the good of the nation or not. However, I do listen to them as I fear to throw the baby out with the bath-water. From time to time they do make or express (grudgingly admitted) valid points and concerns. I don’t trust any party’s agenda, or any commentator’s agenda, out of hand. Not only are they not accountable to the people, they can be just as fallible as I.
September 25th, 2008 @ 3:05 pm
Dez,
Before you go too far with what Bristol did, just know that Sarah got pregnant with her son out of wedlock, and eloped with her husband. So the sins of the mother carried over to the daughter
September 25th, 2008 @ 5:08 pm
First off, I wrote that Sarah’s husband is Robb… my bad; his name is Todd. Yes, my face is red with embarrassment.
Ryan, I appreciate the new info, but this seems like a diversionary tactic. What is your reference for this information, and can it be confirmed as true? If what you present is true, why would anyone bother to attack Sarah through Bristol? Why not directly address what Sarah and Todd are responsible for? Did this supposed pre-marital pregnancy (Sarah’s) occur before or after she came to faith and accepted her view of traditional marriage? The full context of this story is important. The truth is not a buffet wherein we get to pick and choose what suits us, and leave the rest.
Again, I present: However, Bristol and her boyfriend have not shirked their responsibilities [and apparently neither did Sarah and Todd, if your info is true] to each other and their coming child. They are getting married, and had already planned to do so before news of her pregnancy was made into public entertainment. Their shouldering of the consequences, acceptance of their responsibilities, and commitment to their future speaks volumes of their character… which also reflects (quite well indeed) upon Sarah and Todd. That they have not hidden or denied this situation also speaks well of them.
If what you present is true, then surely when Sarah speaks of her belief in the importance of a traditional marriage, she can speak with the experience of knowing the consequences of the other side. If what you present is true, it could point to possible hypocrisy, but could also point to her brokenness and submission to God’s ways, which transcend and are in opposition to her own choices. We can both spin this positively or negatively ad nauseum.
It is apparent to me from your previous comments that you view Palin as an illegitimate choice for candidacy… a cheap vehicle for gathering votes, and/or a hypocrite. Whom would you approve, and why? Surely this is academic, since Palin is the VP candidate for the GOP. Do any of the candidates from any party survive your scrutiny (justly applied) and standards? My apologies, as these are my diversions… but I am also curious to know.
After hearing the audio file for the Palin topic I am rather surprised about the depth and breadth of the attacks as I have not been keeping up with the MSM’s pursuit of Palin. If she’s got the courage to face such a vicious and personal onslaught and turn the other cheek, I’ll know that this is supernatural. I would also see her in this as less an Esther, and more of an Elijah.
September 25th, 2008 @ 6:16 pm
Ryan, I’m not aligining myself with either of the major parties, but I do call myself a conservative. I’m involved with a Christian minor party in Australia. http://www.cdp.org.au/vic/candidateewanmcdonald.asp
September 25th, 2008 @ 7:39 pm
I’m curious, has anyone here seen/heard Palin’s preaching at her old ‘church’?
I’ve actually seen videos of her preaching to the congregation there and I’m curious if anyone else has and if so what your thoughts are.
Thanks!
Glenn
September 25th, 2008 @ 7:50 pm
Sarah Palin eloped in August 1988 to Todd Palin, her first son Track was born on April 20, 1989. You can do the math
I don’t like spinning things, here is the fact, I see that you are willing to spin or justify their actions. As if marrying the person absolves their premarital actions. Traditional marriage, from what I remember is marriage first, then kids, so far the Palin family has got this wrong twice.
I just look at the facts. I don’t like Obama’s views on promoting gay rights, for civil unions; but he has been right on a lot of other matters, like the War in Iraq (setting up a timeline for pulling troops out, regulating Wall Street, etc)
I like McCain less, but I look at the fact that he is not in great health, and if he does die in his term, she is who we are stuck with. Again, was she the best that the Republican party has to offer? I mean really??
I could tell you more facts about both candidates (Obama/McCain) that are not widely known; but we are talking about Palin right now.
September 25th, 2008 @ 8:05 pm
Okay Ryan, I’ll do the math.
There are 263 days between August 1st 1988 and April 20th 1989 (see here: http://www.timeanddate.com/date/durationresult.html?m1=8&d1=1&y1=1988&m2=4&d2=20&y2=1989&ti=on). And 233 days between August 31st 1988 and April 20th, 1989.
According to wikipedia: “Childbirth usually occurs about 38 weeks from fertilization (conception), … The date of delivery is considered normal medically if it falls within two weeks of the calculated date.” (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pregnancy).
So a normal pregnancy is within 252 and 280 days. Going by your dates, she had somewhere between a 233 day pregnancy, and a 263 day pregnancy.
Where is your issue?
September 25th, 2008 @ 9:59 pm
“I will listen to the broadcast as soon as it is posted, but I think after a few Pailn based topics, something just has to be said…”
One of the fruits of the spirit is self control. If you can wait until the audio is posted, the comments might be relevant. Of couse you have just illustrated the “wild, over the top, emotional attacks against Sarah Palin” spoken of in the show. Good job.
” So the sins of the mother carried over to the daughter ”
Justify that in light of the new testament, please. Give it your best shot.
September 25th, 2008 @ 10:02 pm
She was already impregnated when they eloped, there, that is my issue. It would not be an issue if she did not parade around her “christianity” like you are all doing.
I have provided you with truth, it takes some time to sink in. I take no credit for myself; because facts are facts.
Quit justifying this hot chick’s actions…
September 25th, 2008 @ 10:09 pm
Has anyone heard/seen Palin’s preaching? It is very important. I would encourage anyone in this forum to go find audio/video of her preaching/teaching before believers. It is very serious. What she says in those messages contains things that she doesn’t say to the general public.
September 25th, 2008 @ 10:26 pm
Have you seen her interview with CBS News’ Katie Couric? I would encourage everyone here to go to Youtube and watch it. I do feel sorry for her that she doesn’t know anything about what is going on in our society or about her candidate she is backing.
September 25th, 2008 @ 10:31 pm
” So the sins of the mother carried over to the daughter ”
Ryan, how does this apply to a believer in Jesus? Its an alien concept to me and I’m trying to understand what you mean.
September 25th, 2008 @ 10:50 pm
It means that Bristol Palin’s father and mother did not instill abstinence values to their eldest daughter which is instructed by G-d.
If you are a believer in Jesus as you put it, then you will do your best to lead by example, and/or teach his lessons to your offspring so that they might not make your same mistakes.
September 25th, 2008 @ 11:15 pm
OK, now we are getting to the root of things. I’m not sure who G-d is, perhaps you are referring to God? Is it ok for you to read “God” but you can’t type “God?” Interesting.
The wonderful thing about being a beliver in Jesus, as I put it, is forgiveness. Jesus can forgive you of your sins- and they no longer count against you. How cool is that?
I think if I had to face damnation for just breaking one commandment once, I would be in trouble. Did you ever tell a lie? Just a little one?
And you are right, you do your *best* to teach these things to your offspring. Unfortunately, or fortunately depending on how you view it, your offspirng have a free will, can and will make their own decisions. Smetimes as a parent you don’t like those decisions, but you continue to love them anyway. God is like that, and that’s why he sent his son Jesus to die on the cross – he loved us so much that he sent the messiah to be sacrificed like a lamb as an atonement for our sins. Once and for all.
Do you know about that? Are you a believer in Jesus?
Under the new covenant the curse of sin is broken. That means that THE SINS OF THE MOTHER DO NOT PASS DOWN TO THE DAUGHTERS. OR FATHERS TO THE SONS. The Holy Scriptures tell us that Old things are passed away, behold all things are new.
I’m praying for you. Let me know where you stand in your relationship to Jesus.
-Bill
September 25th, 2008 @ 11:15 pm
Palin is the way to go. She would be a wholly capable leader BECAUSE she doesn’t have any experience. She hasn’t been corrupted by the political system! Not only will she prove to be an able VP, but in the likely occurrence that McCain dies, she is the one I want to have behind the nuclear codes. She’s got such a strong will, I know she won’t be afraid to use them when non-christians threaten our way of life. Palin/McCain 08.
September 25th, 2008 @ 11:28 pm
Thanks for that Bill;
I never said or meant literally that Sarah’s sins are now Bristol’s to own. I, as I clearly stated above, just said that because Sarah’s family values are skewed, she then, knowingly or unknowingly passed them onto her offspring, but still passed them nontheless.
People need to stop making excuses and take a look at the situation as a whole; this sort of goes back to what Dr. Brown had said on another show about “Leading a double life” That is a stretch but the only reason why I bring this up is because everyone, including her party, as well as herself; prance around and try to tote this lady as being pro-family values; when her own family is in disarray.
But, there are other reasons as to why she is not a good candidate to lead the free world; I stated them in the first blogged response.
Bill, I hope you come to know Yeshua as I have, once you have that intimate relationship with him I think you will start to see the world even more clearly. Please pray for clarity, I hope your eyes will be then open to see Palin for what she really is, John McCain’s personal cheerleader.
September 26th, 2008 @ 12:06 am
I’m not sure I would want to hold something that she did ~18 years ago against her today. I suspect that she has repented (she did get married) and is not promiscous (sp?) today. And so its under the blood. And many children who were not conceived out of wedlock get involved in fornication, so the premise is faulty. The bottom line is we are all born into the world of sin.
Her “family values” sound pretty good anyhow.
And I would be remiss if I didn’t mention that Obama was concieved out of wedlock and the evidence suggests his father was a polygamist. I don’t think it really bears in the discussion but I mention it for the other readers who may be unaware.
I’m not sure her whole family is in disarray. Having a Down’s syndrom child is not disarray, it’s life. Her adult (by biblical standards) daughter is getting married. She is not going to be “punished” by having a child, but BLESSED by having a child.
I don’t think anyone is “prancing around” toting her as “pro-family” values, but I will tell you this, coming from a small town where people
cling to their guns and bibles (I have ~10 of each) she is the first candidate in a long time that I can really identify with.
I thought the premise of the show was good. Have you listened to it yet? I think the focus was “why the unwarranted attacks?” And the spiritual dynamics that may be at play. If I wanted to discuss politics, I’d probably go over to littlegreenfootballs.com and have an intelligent conversation. I don’t think that partisan politics is the focus of this blog.
I’m not going to play the game that I’m hearing from God to vote a certain way, and you are hearing from God to vote the other way. The really cool thing is my wife votes the same way I do, so unless you have a wife that votes the same way you do, I’m one vote up!
Youir comment ” to see Palin for what she really is, John McCain’s personal cheerleader.” is rather patronizing. I guess it almost sounds sexist and that you are demeaning her because she is a woman. The insinuation is that she has no brain. Well, all I can say is she got the nomination and you didn’t. I’m not going to pray that God will confirm your ad hominum attack.
BTW, I’ve had an “inimate relationship” with Jesus since the early 70’s when I was a Jesus Freak. I’ve been at it a long time – seeking hard after him. So don’t hold your breath hoping I will see the world more clearly. I guessing I’ve seen a lot more of it than you.
Going to bed now. Later
September 26th, 2008 @ 2:10 am
Glenn, please share. I am unaware of what she has preached to her congregation.
Marcus and Bill, many good points, thank you
Ryan says: Sarah Palin eloped in August 1988 to Todd Palin, her first son Track was born on April 20, 1989. You can do the math.
So what you’re telling me is that you don’t have proof to back up your claim, and that you are assuming a premarital scenario. You could be right, but it is just as likely that you are wrong. The time period presented by Marcus is feasible, and gives Sarah the benefit of the doubt outside of actual proof to the contrary. Do we know whether or not Track was a premie? Viability for a fetus is generally around seven months. Nothing I have presented proves you wrong, but nothing you’ve presented proves you right. Again I ask, “What is your reference for this information?” Could it be possible that your disapproval of her as a candidate is coloring your perception of her character? (Which plays into the subject discussed in Dr. Brown’s show.)
Ryan says: I just look at the facts. I could tell you more facts about both candidates (Obama/McCain) that are not widely known; but we are talking about Palin right now.
Excellent! Please provide some and back them up with references. Otherwise what you share is unsupported, undocumented personal opinion, possibly gossip… or even libel. I don’t care if you are for her or against her as a candidate. But either way, back up what you present.
I haven’t justified her actions or those of Bristol. I have merely stated that by accepting fault, taking responsibility, not hiding or denying the nature of Bristol’s pregnancy, and this young couple’s commitment to marriage paints a positive picture of the character of this couple and the values taught to Bristol by Sarah and Todd. If they were as wanton and hypocritical as they are made out to be, one would expect to see quite different evidence of their values: abortion, denial of the situation, denial of responsibility, break-up of relationship, resentment, anger, an exclusive tell-all by the prospective father in a gossip rag, etc.
September 26th, 2008 @ 4:34 am
You can check out one of her recent messages on YouTube:
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4LjsfWbZLA
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQq4b5IQhq8
I’d like to know anyone’s thoughts who watches one or both of them.
Grace to you all,
Glenn
September 26th, 2008 @ 7:33 am
Glenn, I’m going to assume that you are concerned about these quotes:
“I think God’s will has to be done in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built, so pray for that.”
“Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending them out on a task that is from God. That’s what we have to make sure that we’re praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God’s plan.”
That she is exhorting others to pray that God’s will be done is rather encouraging. It would seem that she believes that unless God’s will is involved and followed in unifying the people and companies needed in building a gas line, that such an endeavor will come to naught. In my opinion she clearly wants the line to come to fruition. I infer that she is hoping that her desire lines-up with God’s will.
Concerning the military, the prayer is more ambiguous in my opinion. I get the impression that she wants the assembly to pray for the safety of the deployed forces. Also that the country and its leaders will send them to perform a task that is within God’s will. I’m not sure if she is saying that the war is God’s will, but instead that the US is to use its armed forces in accordance with God’s will. She wants the congregation to pray that there is a plan (I infer this to be a national plan, which she seems unsure if such exists), and that such a plan is in God’s design.
What do you take from it Glenn? and fellow bloggers?
September 26th, 2008 @ 7:37 am
Hey everyone,
I’ve been thinking hard lately about who to vote for and who not to vote for – or to even vote at all. I guess I’m kind of in a catch-22 type of place. And I don’t even have a word from the Lord with regard to any of it.
I don’t even know where to start…
I mean… on the one hand a candidate can have an awesome stance on the economy and on international policy, but their stance on issues like Abortion, Marriage, etc, are totally off. On the other hand a candidate can have a great position on moral issues, but have an economic policy that stinks generally and specifically makes things harder for the working middle class, for the sick, for widows, for orphans, ruins the healthcare system, and their international policy bites the dust hard.
When it comes to moral issues, let’s take for example Abortion. It is wrong – PERIOD. Killing unborn babies simply stated is MURDER – no question. Now, consider our culture. We murder an untold number of millions of babies per year in the U.S. If we make it strictly illegal then people are still going to do it – just in an illegal way (unless we have heaven-set REVIVAL – which we NEED SO BADLY!!). Take Rudy Giuliani (former Mayor of New York) for example. While he was in office he didn’t directly work on banning abortion. Instead he worked hard on programs that encouraged adoptions and other options for pregnant mothers seeking an abortion. What was the outcome? Adoptions in New York went up by something like 133% (if I remember correctly) and the abortion rate in New York dropped by almost 20%. (By the way, if my figures are off please correct me.)
So, do you guys see where I’m going with this? I remember years ago reading Charles Spurgeon’s biography by Lewis Drummond where it talks about how Spurgeon would vote liberal because it was best for the country economically, etc, while saying that it was the *Church’s* job to bring moral reform via revival and changed hearts.
By the way, in saying all this I’m not saying that I stand in any particular position with regard to it. But just to say that I don’t know where to stand on it… and to ask if you all have any thoughts.
Many spoke so a lot on that other blog post “Should We Legislate Morality” or something like that. And it seems that some who posted certain things there are now on this forum so adamant about getting someone like Palin into office who can now “legislate some more morality”.
Does anyone have anything to throw out there?
September 26th, 2008 @ 8:00 am
Dez,
Thanks for your imput. Frankly, I’m not sure what to think. It does strike me as a bit strange though. I can’t say it sits totally well. Do you know what I mean? Like, with the whole pipleline thing… she seems to think she KNOWS that it IS God’s will to have the pipeling in Alaska and to pray it. Like you said, she’s not just putting it out there and saying, “Hey, we need to pray about this… etc..”.
The whole thing doesn’t sit too well though.
Glenn
September 26th, 2008 @ 8:12 am
All legislation is enacted morality – so let’s just get past that point for a start.
It is a great fallacy and a lie of the pro-abortion camp to say that if abortion were illegal there would be just as many abortions but they would be illegal. Fact is there would be only a fraction of the present abortion rate if it were to become illegal.
If we took the thinking, that it is the church’s job to bring about moral reform (which it is) and the state has no role to play in it, to its logical conclusion we wouldn’t have laws against rape or murder either. That abortion is murder as you say demands that it be outlawed.
See Arguments against abortion for a thorough refutation of the all the common pro-abortion arguments.
September 26th, 2008 @ 8:17 am
If God is for development and all the benefits it brings to humanity, then He would be for the pipeline. If on the otherhand God is against development and his plan is for humanity to scratch around in the dirt, then He would be against the pipeline.
September 26th, 2008 @ 8:18 am
Ewan,
Good points.
September 26th, 2008 @ 8:22 am
So, do you think she’s totally fine in saying what she said? In being so adamant about it being “God’s will” and having her whole congregation pray it as such?
September 26th, 2008 @ 8:43 am
Without knowing all the details of the project, I couldn’t say for sure, but I could quite conceivably believe that it is in line with God’s will. I believe God’s plan for mankind includes the responsible development of the earth’s resources for the benefit of mankind – so I can easily believe an oil pipeline is OK by God. (I don’t believe in anthropogenic global warming due to CO2 – so that isn’t a factor in the use of fossil fuels as far as I’m concerned.)
September 26th, 2008 @ 8:48 am
BTW, I’ve listened to this show now and agree that the attacks on Palin can really only be explained by attributing at least a part of it to supernatural opposition.
September 26th, 2008 @ 9:39 am
Glenn,
I wouldn’t characterize a few brief comments as a guest as a service as “preaching”
Theologically, trying to reconcile various thoughts of what is “God’s will” in the political realm can be very confusing. I don’t see it as much different that 2 opposing footbal teams praying before a game.
In her defense, she said “Our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God.” Note she did not say “the Republicans” or “The President.” In her careful choice of words she acknowledged that ALL government is ordained of God (a hard concept to grasp when considering some totalitarian governements) and she acknowleded that one of the prime roles of our Federal Government, as designed by the framers, is for the National Defense.
Once our leaders – both the executive and legislativbe branches – execute a plan many believe that it is our role to support them in prayer. Certainly if my son was deployed to Iraq I would want people praying for him and I would hope and trust that he was in God’s perect will for his life.
Regarding the gas pipline, she stated “I think that God’s will has to be done IN UNIFYING PEOPLE AND COMPANIES to get that gas line built.” I would think that once the political decision to build a pipleine is made that it would be a good thing to see Unity and not division which would hinder the political decision that had been made.
Is it possible that her political decisions will be affected by her personal convictions? Indeed- all politicians fall back on their personal convictions and backgrounds.
And remember the context of where she was speaking; I’m sure she had dozens of life-long friends in that congregation.
Don’t get too bent out of shape about this, because regardless of what she declares as God’s Will, God has his own ideas. And so we should pray that God has his way, and that we don’t hinder that process.
The down side of all of that is that God may have things in store that we care not for. In this world ye shall have tribulation, but be of good cheer!
-Bill
September 26th, 2008 @ 2:31 pm
Not Satan Says:
September 25, 2008 at 11:15 pm e
“Palin is the way to go. She would be a wholly capable leader BECAUSE she doesn’t have any experience. She hasn’t been corrupted by the political system! Not only will she prove to be an able VP, but in the likely occurrence that McCain dies, she is the one I want to have behind the nuclear codes. She’s got such a strong will, I know she won’t be afraid to use them when non-christians threaten our way of life. Palin/McCain 08.”
I take it you are mocking her perceived lack of experience, correct? If you are saying that Christians should blow-up non-Christians, then your comment here is completely inappropriate and will be removed.
Moderator
September 26th, 2008 @ 4:44 pm
Interesting Bill, thank you.
September 26th, 2008 @ 4:52 pm
Dez, I will address your question, very soon; right now time does not allow.
But I wanted to let you know so that you don’t think I forgot or did not see or if you thought I might not have information to back up any of my facts.
Stay tuned…
September 26th, 2008 @ 5:57 pm
The more I study Palin’s policy the more I like a lot of it. Ryan, in terms of her positions on the Issues – where do you find fault?
Of course, I really disagree with her position on healthcare.
September 26th, 2008 @ 6:50 pm
What is her position on healthcare?
September 27th, 2008 @ 1:15 am
Ewan,
She believes that healthcare should be “market and business-driven” (from Alaska Governor’s Office press release, Jan 19th, 2008). I don’t think it should, I actually lean more toward a government-run and funded healthcare system (and, fyi, I’m oversimpifying it by saying simply that – there is, of course, much more involved in it).
‘Healthy’ example: If I’m not mistaken – the U.S. is the only Western nation (or only developed nation, period) where you have to PAY to have a baby. I believe the standard total cost is somewhere between $18 to $20,000. I’m a U.S. citizen, but where I am now in New Zealand it’s free. The gov’t pays for it. You can even stay in the ward for as long as you need in order to recover (the Mom, I mean
). It’s the same in Canada, Aust, etc, etc.
That is actually something that kind of buggs me about the “Republican” way of “politics”. (And just a note, I don’t equate “Republican” with “Christian”).
I’m always open to reasoning about it though (the healthcare issue).
Another thing Ewan. You stated, “I believe God’s plan for mankind includes the responsible development of the earth’s resources for the benefit of mankind – so I can easily believe an oil pipeline is OK by God.”
I agree with, “I believe God’s plan for mankind includes the responsible development of the earth’s resources for the benefit of mankind”, but just because that pipeline is “OK by God” does that mean it is “God’s will” the way that she was preaching about it? (Did you watch the video?) She was telling them to pray that the gas pipeline would happen (!!), not to seek God for His timing, to give her wisdom in the decision, to move upon the hearts of the people involved if it was actually somthing He specifically wanted to happen. Frankly, Ewan, it just seems a bit presumptuous to me. Do you see where I’m coming from?
And it’s a bit fishy too – you know, a gas pipeline would bring a lot of MONEY to her state… (not saying that’s the reason WHY, but it is just a little unsettling).
By the way, are you aware of the issue for the funding of the “Bridge to Nowhere”? Not that it’s some BIG issue, but just curious if you are aware of it.
Glenn
September 27th, 2008 @ 2:34 am
No problem, Ryan. I’m looking forward to your response. Thanks for the “heads up”.
September 27th, 2008 @ 3:06 am
Thanks Glenn,
Just because the U.S. is the only Western or developed nation that doesn’t have a socialised health system, doesn’t mean all the other countries have it right. As you rightly said, Australia does have a socialised health system and a very expensive one it is too. It’s good to go to the hospital and not have to pay but someone else (the taxpayer) has to pay. It is a huge burden on the public purse.
I prefer a private system with some form of compulsory private health insurance. It comes back to a person’s philosophy of government – are you a socialist or a free marketeer?
September 27th, 2008 @ 3:54 am
Thanks for the response brother Ewan.
Socialist? Free Marketeer? I am neither
And the issue is not just the price of giving birth to children… as you probably well know.
Did you have a chance to watch the Presidential debate? (I’m asking this for a reason, not just for small talk.)
September 27th, 2008 @ 9:02 am
Glenn, that was more of a rhetorical question than one specifically aimed at you. But my point was, why would you think that socialised medicine is better than the system you have now? There is no such thing as a free health system – someone has to pay for it and a socialised system is more than likely to be a less efficient (more expensive) one.
No I haven’t seen the debate. I don’t know if it was on Australian TV but in any case I don’t have TV at home.
September 27th, 2008 @ 5:43 pm
Not sure if it was on TV – neither do I have one – but it was online at cnn.com; they break it up into 3 sections.
Anyway, if you get a chance to watch you’ll see where the two sides stand on the economy, on healthcare, on tax issues, etc. Frankly, if Obama only held to a few conservative values then I would vote for him in a quick sec.
September 28th, 2008 @ 5:07 am
Thanks Glenn. I don’t watch much video online due to speed and download limits on my internet connection.
September 28th, 2008 @ 7:39 am
Here you go, I hope none of these links get removed or taken down. I know that most will view these skeptically, and that is fine; but just know that the facts don’t lie, politicians do
UN & Palin:
http://news.bostonherald.com/news/national/politics/2008/view/2008_09_23_CNN_pulls_TV_crew_after_Palin_bans_reporter
s_at_UN_confab_/srvc=home&position=recent
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/23/palin.foreign.policy/index.html#cnnSTCText
Palin and Road to Nowhere:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/24/palin.road.to.nowhere/index.html#cnnSTCText
VP Debate:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/27/campaign.wrap/index.html#cnnSTCText
http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/09/22/vp-debate-made-easier-for-palin/
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/us/politics/21debate.html
Palin Eloped and Conceived out of wedlock:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBh0wH5kqGQ&feature=related
Just for extra on Palin:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cP12aNzocSc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z75QSExE0jU
September 28th, 2008 @ 1:26 pm
Hmm, guess my other post didn’t go thru, ok well as promised, here are some links to support my claims:
UN & Palin:
http://news.bostonherald.com/news/national/politics/2008/view/2008_09_23_CNN_pulls_TV_crew_after_Palin_bans_reporters_at_UN_confab_/srvc=home&position=recent
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/23/palin.foreign.policy/index.html#cnnSTCText
September 28th, 2008 @ 1:27 pm
Is there any reason why my posts are not showing up in this particular blog?
I see that other people are able to support with links…
September 28th, 2008 @ 2:06 pm
Ryan,
Akismet and Wordpress decide what is and is not spam, so it’s out of our control, all we can do is approve posts that were marked as spam.
Thanks,
Marcus French
Line of Fire Moderator
September 28th, 2008 @ 2:09 pm
oh ok, my bad then; the post for 1:26pm then is a duplicate.
I thought that it was becuase I provided too many links; good info to know!
Thanks for the info Marcus!
Ryan
September 29th, 2008 @ 1:18 am
Ryan, thanks for the references! I will look over them in the next couple of days. I did, of course, check out the pregnancy video.
Certainly the link you provided points to premarital conception. I think the very purpose of the report is to lead the audience to that conclusion. To do this CNN poses three clues: 1) not meeting their friends at the state fair (big deal), 2) rushing to get eloped This does look poorly, but is not conclusive. Money and time constraints (like pregnancy) are two big reasons for eloping. Does not having rings mean that one is eloping due to pregnancy? No. It could indicate a lack of money or a desire to save money. Time constraints can be related to other things than pregnancy, like school or work. My [and others'] parents eloped in a rush because the groom had military orders and was shipping out in a few days. When interviewing Sarah’s father Chuck, the CNN reporter had a great opportunity to ask outright if the two were married due to pregnancy. Instead he asked if Chuck was upset about the couple eloping. Perhaps he did ask, but did not receive the answer he was looking for… either way it makes for poor investigation, but great TV. 3) Track being born 8 months after the marriage. Truly this is the big hurdle to get over. However, it is also not conclusive. The report is leading viewers without excluding all other possibilities. Though not likely, Track could be a premie (as I stated before).
A report in Slate describes viability as early as the 23rd week: http://www.slate.com/id/1060/
Planned Parenthood agrees with this view: http://www.ppacca.org/site/pp.asp?c=kuJYJeO4F&b=139571
Premature birth and labor (before the 37th week) occurs in approximately 7% of all births according to this site:
http://www.babycentre.co.uk/pregnancy/labourandbirth/labourcomplications/prematurelabour/
Did something induce an early labor?: drug reaction, vehicular accident, the low pressure from a storm front… not likely, but I still believe we haven’t seen all the facts. 55 seconds of innuendo does not make an airtight case. It is, however, enough time to cast doubt.
I find fault with the reporting for the lack of depth (or perhaps with whomever edited the clip for not showing the whole story), but with your reference I concede the high probability that you are right… that Track was conceived out of wedlock. I do not concede that it is fact without proof. Nor do I concede that such an episode destroys her credibility. I still believe that the 20 year marriage speaks for itself. I refer you back to the comments of Bill, Ewan, Marcus, and myself on Sept 25 and 26.
My apologies to the moderator for carrying this off of the topic “An Esther for our day”, but the discussion has been interesting.
September 29th, 2008 @ 11:13 am
OK… I’ve looked at the first set of vids and articles…
Except one, the Boston Herald link went to an error page. Ryan, could you find the article again and repost the addy?
I’m not having a prob with the “Road to Nowhere” as the plan was approved and signed before she came to office. The 400 mil bridge plan she nuked, of which 223 mil was Federal funding. 26 mil of this federal funding was used to pay for the already approved road to nowhere. She saved her taxpayers 177 mil by refusing the bridge, but what she did with the remainder of the federal funding (197 mil) I don’t know. This may have been given back or redirected into the repairs of other roads, bridges, ports, etc. It would be interesting to see where the money went. But for the moment I have no ill feelings for her judgment.
As for the VP debate agreement, again I have no issues as both parties agreed to it. The agreement on the stringent structure of the VP debate provides more open and direct debate in the Presidential debate(s). Both sides are going to jockey to put themselves on better ground… this is the nature of competition and war. Obama does better in debate on stage with large audiences. McCain does better in small town square style meetings. Both sides knew Biden to be far more experienced in foreign policy than Palin, as well as more experienced in debate, so McCain lost his strong choice in debate venue to shore up Palin. This is not unusual or dirty. This is strategy… and both sides benefit from it.
The interview blunders show her greatest weakness, that she seems ill-informed and ill-prepared to answer the questions posed to her on national economics and foreign policy. She seems to push through the interviews rather than engage them. Either she doesn’t know the material (as in the Bush Doctrine question) or doesn’t know how to elaborate on her fellow candidate’s position. Her wordy responses make her look very bad, as (at best) they give the perception of one who is dodging the questions. At the worst, she appears ignorant.
I’ll get back to you on the UN links later. It might not be until tomorrow as I have some errands to run before tonight (Erev Rosh HaShanah). It would be great to hear from the rest of the folks here too. Another set of eyes to see with can’t hurt, can it?
Thanks again, Ryan
Shanah Tova!
September 29th, 2008 @ 11:17 am
Folks,
Are these not relative trivialities? I would say so.
And does any of this stuff explain the media’s frenzied attack against Sarah Palin? I would say not.
September 29th, 2008 @ 11:27 am
So far I am in agreement with you, Dr. Brown. Nothing screams out to me that she’s the demon that she’s been described to be.
September 29th, 2008 @ 3:44 pm
I would agree with Dr. Brown (more or less). Although, her seeming evasiveness in answering questions doesn’t sit to well with me. I’m sure it could be for various reasons though.
September 29th, 2008 @ 5:07 pm
I nevver said she was a demon, sure you can turn a blind eye to all of her failures, but I beg the question:
Is she the best qualified to potentially be the leader of this nation?
and
Is she the best the Republican party has to offer the American people?
September 29th, 2008 @ 5:18 pm
Ryan,
Answers to your questions, in my opinion:
Who knows
and
Who knows
I.e., How could we ever qualify these things? I mean… really…
I would assume (hopefully not incorrectly) that everyone knows (more or less) that we “ain’t got much to choose from”
. It’s not like we have much of a choice brother. Especially considering the fact that we’re a Republic – it doesn’t help give us more choices.
September 29th, 2008 @ 7:42 pm
No matter who wins, we all lose… lol
Well the person who I would like to speak with foreign leaders (who will give them eye contact) is Barry.
But, to return to the context of the theme, I don’t think any of these candidates should be compared to these historical figures/persons.
September 30th, 2008 @ 5:05 am
My apologies Ryan, I did not mean to accuse you of demonizing Sarah Palin. I was writing in context to the broadcast. I’m sure you’ve heard the show and heard all of the examples the Dr. Brown shared. Apart from those, I’ve seen and heard many though various media, as well as the conversations among local folks. Are the attacks against her numerous, vehement, and “over the top”? I think so. Are the attacks in the natural or the supernatural, I don’t know. It’s shaky ground to base my opinion on feelings, but it feels supernatural to me. I think we’ll know more as the time to election day gets shorter.
September 30th, 2008 @ 5:55 am
But she’s not the Presidential candidate, she’s the VP candidate, and she has more experience than Obama anyhow who is the Presidential candidate. We should be thankful that such a strong pro-life and pro-family candidate is even running. McCain was not the first choice of the conservative Christian groups – that was Huckabee or Romney. McCain is considered too liberal, so it is great to have Sarah as his VP candidate. As I’ve said before, even if Sarah lacks experience she is still miles ahead of the pro-abortion, pro-same sex marriage Democratic team.
September 30th, 2008 @ 6:13 pm
Obama is not pro-same sex marriage, he defines from his own mouth that marriage is between a male and a female. McCain’s health is in question, not because he is 73, but because he has seen the hospital too many times to he should have his own turnstile. So in the even of his death, Palin would assume his role as leader…how hard is that to understand?
September 30th, 2008 @ 8:21 pm
Obama is not pro-same sex marriage, he defines from his own mouth that marriage is between a male and a female. McCain’s health is in question, not because he is 73, but because he has seen the hospital too many times to he should have his own turnstile. So in the even of his death, Palin would assume his role as leader…how hard is that?
September 30th, 2008 @ 10:41 pm
Here’s an example of the type of over-the-top critisism of Sarah Palin. Tell me this isn’t supernaturally inspired.
September 30th, 2008 @ 11:09 pm
From here:
October 1st, 2008 @ 4:08 am
Ewan says: As I’ve said before, even if Sarah lacks experience she is still miles ahead of the pro-abortion, pro-same sex marriage Democratic team.
I agree, and she exemplifies a motto I have used when screening new hires to projects I have worked on… “Attitude and Aptitude.” Experience is good, but a good and proper attitude, combined with an aptitude for the work to be done goes a long way toward choosing the best candidate. I think of David, who as a youth had no military training and had never worn armor. But his heart was right before God, and he had an aptitude built from years as a shepherd defending his father’s flocks. It wasn’t the most experienced warrior who killed Goliath and won the day against the Philistines… it was God working through an inexperienced youth with attitude and aptitude.
The experience issue should not matter to Obama or his supporters, since it is “Washington experience” that he has criticized in this election race, admitted that he does not have, and used as an example of why he is best to lead the cleaning of the halls of Congress… because he is not tainted by the experience of Washington’s business/politics as usual. This I feel is another over the top criticism of Palin, as the lack of experience is supposed to be admirable of Obama, but a weakness for Palin. It also shows hypocrisy in criticizing Palin as a fabricated VP candidate, chosen merely to garner votes (of women). It is the experience issue that led Obama to choose Biden, which gave him more credibility toward foreign policy, and solidified support for his candidacy.
October 3rd, 2008 @ 9:28 am
Melanie Phillips make a few pertinent points in this article:
The double standards of American Jews
October 3rd, 2008 @ 9:49 pm
What a great job Sarah Palin did last night at the debate, she alleviated any worry I had about her ability to communicate well.
October 3rd, 2008 @ 10:33 pm
I agree. She held her own with Biden. I wonder how it will be spun, though.
October 4th, 2008 @ 5:08 am
Yes she did a great job. The whole debate was broadcast live here in Australia on the public TV broadcaster (ABC) which was a first for an American VP debate. Our own lefty media have been unusually quite about it which suggests to me that Sarah didn’t give them much material for them to use to beat up on her.
October 4th, 2008 @ 5:15 am
Oh, and check out this short YouTube video using footage from the debate:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCunBErZZJE
October 4th, 2008 @ 10:06 pm
I didn’t expect her to do a job during the debate.
Funny how Palin agreed with Biden when it came to the topic of same-sex couples…
October 5th, 2008 @ 8:51 am
Ryan,
How can you say that: “Obama is not pro-same sex marriage, he defines from his own mouth that marriage is between a male and a female.”?
You need to listen to the earlier show Is Obama Telling the Truth About Same-Sex Marriage?
He has defined from his own pen that he does indeed support same-sex marriage.
Here is the letter that Obama sent to the Alice B. Toklas Democratic Club:
Notice that Obama uses the phrase “full equality under the law”; says that he supports repealing DOMA (which defines marriage as between one man and one woman); is opposed to measures to amend the California Constitution to block same sex marriage (even calling them “divisive and discriminatory”); and congratulates gays for “getting married”. I mean, how much clearer does it have to be? See also this report.
October 15th, 2008 @ 7:35 am
Michelle Malkin has a roundup on the topic of insane leftist rage against Sarah Palin in particular and McCain-Palin in general. See it here.