The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum Who are you voting for?

I certainly respect an individual's right to vote for whoever their conscience allows. But what I am concerned about is the appearance of what seems to be the belief that a Christian man or one who most closely adheres to Christianity would be the best individual to be the President of the United States; in fact a leader of any country. I would like to suggest that this, along with making one's decision based upon one or two moral issues, e.g. abortion, pornography, etc., is not particular what God would have believers to do. Why? Because the task and responsibility of ruling a country requires far more than ethics. Can one doubt that Pat Robertson is a "moral" man; far more so that either Bush or Kerry? Yet which one here would cast his/her vote for him?

The qualifications for leadership should include, undeniably, a strong moral base. But morals alone do not a President/leader. How many men are exponentially more moral than ANY of the current candidates; including those of the Constitution and Libertarian parties. For example, wouldn't most here admit that their Pastor(s) are very upright men and hold to biblical truth to the extent that they far exceed that of all the political candidates? But who here really believes that their Pastor could serve as the President? Simply put, there is far more to being President than being pro-choice, or holding to heterosexual marriage, etc.

Evil is in the world and resides in every man's heart. Therefore, IMHO, it comes down to voting for the most qualified for the OFFICE; i.e., the "lesser of evils" through whom God is going to work His eternal plan; whether it be for judgment or blessing upon the people of the land.

That's my

I'm happy to say that I think that Mr. Peroutka has a better idea of how the country should be run according to its own constitution than Mr. Bush does. But I do agree with you on not making one's vote dependent on one issue. And I haven't, despite appearances. I think he is on the money regarding government's role, on education, and on several other issues. I also like the Libertarian platform on those issues, especially in my own state; however, I am questioning whether those issues could outweigh the evil of the influence of pornography, which would skyrocket under Libertarian governor and representatives. But I do think the issue of abortion is a matter that must be resolved: the President of the United States is bound to do all he can protect the lives of the citizens of his country. The GOP has not done well: it was on Nixon's watch that Roe v. Wade happend, and that administration did nothing to stop it. A bloodbath has ensued. This is not just a moral, but a Constitutional matter. It was illegal, and Mr. Bush has not addressed that, and apparently has no plans to.

Neither do I disagree that it is a mistake to think one ought to vote for the "most moral man". Peroutka is not some kind of saviour. There are some things about his platform that I do question, but on the whole, none of those things even come close to the number of things that I quetion on the GOP's. If there is an evil, I believe Mr. Peroutka is the least of them.

What difference does it make what they said and still do say the nature of intelligence? It just demonstrates their myopic naivete when it comes to the nature of terrorists and the enemies of what is really western values. There were people who opposed FDR vehemently before and after our involvement in the European theater of WW2. It was none of our business according to them. Where they right?

Fred