Actscelerate.com Forum Index Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
@actscelerate Twitter  @actscelerate Facebook 

'Gay married' man leading in polls? (L)
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
   Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Acts-Celerate Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Message Author
Post 'Gay married' man leading in polls? (L) Link
I read an update that says that a candidate who is 'gay married' to another man, with a last name the first four letters of which are 'butt' is winning the delegate count so far in Iowa, a day late.

I don't know how it will turn out.

I'm risk-averse when it comes to elections. While it might be true that Trump might kick Buttigieg in a contest against a gay opponent at the general election, I'd rather see the Democrats pick the least dangerous candidate who has a chance to run against the least dangerous Republican who has a chance. This time, my guess on the Democrat side is Biden.

Here is a viral video of an ill-informed caucus voter who wanted her card back after learning that her candidate is 'gay married' to some other man. https://youtu.be/pTQlwARreXc
_________________
Link
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11485
2/4/20 5:56 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Rigged famousflavius
I think Booty Jig is the democratic Manchurian candidate. If he was running against anyone but Trump, he would prob be elected as the first Gay married president. Golf Cart Mafia Soldier
Posts: 2447
2/4/20 8:19 pm


View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Reply with quote
Post UncleJD
Sodomy in the White House, is that where we're heading? Golf Cart Mafia Capo
Posts: 2877
2/5/20 10:44 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post SCFIRE
I could be wrong cause I'm just a low tech redneck - but I think that was a rigged vote for sure.
Been wrong before. Nope, didn't hear from God on that one. lol
_________________
IT'S GOD'S TIME FOR SOUTH CAROLINA
Acts-celerater
Posts: 675
2/5/20 12:50 pm


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post sheepdogandy
SCFIRE wrote:
I could be wrong cause I'm just a low tech redneck - but I think that was a rigged vote for sure.
Been wrong before. Nope, didn't hear from God on that one. lol


Ditto here.
_________________
Charles A. Hutchins
Senior Pastor SPWC
Congregational Church of God

www.spwc.church
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 7181
2/5/20 1:02 pm


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post Link
SCFIRE wrote:
I could be wrong cause I'm just a low tech redneck - but I think that was a rigged vote for sure.
Been wrong before. Nope, didn't hear from God on that one. lol


LGBT folks tend to be the type that would come out and vote if one of theirs has a shot at being president. Strangely, much of the country have allowed themselves to be brainwashed into thinking that LGBTs should be treated like a minority, like blacks, with special protection against discrimination.

If men went around with signs demanding special legal protections for having a sexual preference for Asians or redheads, no one would take them seriously. But so many think that way about homosexuals now.

So let's say 10% of the country want to see a homosexual president because they think it would be a big breakthrough like having a black president, and that's about 20% of Democrats. Add a couple more percent for people who don't care about that but just like his personality and stances on the issue. If there are four or five candidates in the race, he might win the nomination. Biden or Warren need to drop out. Warren needs to drop out because she is too leftist like Bernie, so I wish she'd drop out, but I doubt that argument would appeal to her.

Maybe Nevada or South Carolina will show that Biden or Warren can take a strong lead.

I'm hoping out of the candidates there, that Biden wins then loses in the general election.

Is anyone going to leave the US if the gay dude wins.

I'm imagining a commercial for him where a creepy, gay-sounding teacher lectures kindergarten students, having them repeat after him, "'It doesn't matter what your sexual preference is. See, Pete Buttigieg is the front runner for the nomination. You can still become president. Do any of you think you might be gay? What about me? Do you find me attractive?' Followed by an announcement. 'Help elect the first gay president. Support Pete Buttigieg for the nomination." Adding a line where the teacher offers the kids some candy or a puppy might be too obvious. Package it all together as a pro Buttigieg ad but without his endorsement on the end. That might turn enough voters off.

Why don't conservative Christians field a Democratic candidate, support him or her enough to keep him/her in the primaries, and then go vote for him/her? It makes perfect sense when there is a Republican incumbent like this year.
_________________
Link
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11485
2/5/20 2:30 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Dean Steenburgh
Quote:
Why don't conservative Christians field a Democratic candidate, support him or her enough to keep him/her in the primaries, and then go vote for him/her? It makes perfect sense when there is a Republican incumbent like this year.


Serious thought here ...right???
Actscelerate is just a microcosm of our national temperature gauge when it comes to agreeing on political platforms.

No!
I want my POTUS to be imperfect like me but I do want him to acknowledge that there is a true divine God who created this world. I don't want a pastor, evangelist, missionary, apostle or prophet. As it is the poor guy would be torn to pieces by the ultra-right & I prefer my Prez with a few mistakes & imperfections.
Trump has aligned himself with the evangelicals & a lot of them are anxious & waiting for the next juicy tidbit so they can continue to use their beam to point out his splinters.

.
_________________
"Empty nest syndrome is for the birds!"

Email me at: SteenburghDean@gmail.com

Church planters are focused on just one thing ...introducing people to Jesus!
What are you focused on?
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4640
2/5/20 9:26 pm


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post Link
Dean Steenburgh wrote:

No!
I want my POTUS to be imperfect like me but I do want him to acknowledge that there is a true divine God who created this world.


I am not sure what you mean. Do you think that Democrats require one to be an atheist to run for office?
_________________
Link
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11485
2/6/20 6:56 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post I never use the word gay roughridercog
When referring to homosexuality.

I'm politically incorrect. Sue me. Laughing
_________________
Doctor of Bovinamodulation
Acts Mod
Posts: 25145
2/10/20 8:11 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
It's pretty rich to hear the "president not pastor" folks clutching their pearls about a homosexual potentially being in the White House, when they have no end of defenses for their strong support of a man who cheated on his wife while she was pregnant with their son.

Sexual morality either matters or it doesn't. Both views are respectable, but choose one and apply it across the board.
Now 67% friendlier!
Posts: 13523
2/13/20 4:28 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Cojak
Dave Dorsey wrote:
It's pretty rich to hear the "president not pastor" folks clutching their pearls about a homosexual potentially being in the White House, when they have no end of defenses for their strong support of a man who cheated on his wife while she was pregnant with their son.

Sexual morality either matters or it doesn't. Both views are respectable, but choose one and apply it across the board.


It ain't the same, it ain't the same, it ain't the same.It ain't the same, it ain't the same, it ain't the same.It ain't the same, it ain't the same, it ain't the same.
I had to say something. LOL Cool Smile Smile

Of course neither is defensible, and I don't think Trumps SINS have been smiled at here, and I will hold my nose and vote for him again unless some other winning possible shows up.BUT my vote won't be so we can have a Mr as the first Lady......... Just me. And yes, I would hold being queer against him as a leader. Queer was appropo when I was growing up. Shocked
_________________
Some facts but mostly just my opinion!
jacsher@aol.com
http://shipslog-jack.blogspot.com/
01000001 01100011 01110100 01110011
Posts: 23439
2/13/20 7:36 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
Cojak wrote:
It ain't the same, it ain't the same, it ain't the same.It ain't the same, it ain't the same, it ain't the same.It ain't the same, it ain't the same, it ain't the same.

With respect, is there any scriptural basis you could offer for them not being the same?

"Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God." - 1 Cor 6:9-10

To be clear -- I am NOT criticizing the "president not pastor" view. For instance, what Dean expressed in this thread. I think that's a valid viewpoint.

What is not valid, IMO, is expressing that view for some sexual sins but not others. You can't say Pete shouldn't be president because he's gay while arguing that it doesn't matter that Trump is an adulterer because he's the president and not a pastor. That is an inconsistent view.
Now 67% friendlier!
Posts: 13523
2/13/20 8:31 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post UncleJD
Dave Dorsey wrote:
Cojak wrote:
It ain't the same, it ain't the same, it ain't the same.It ain't the same, it ain't the same, it ain't the same.It ain't the same, it ain't the same, it ain't the same.

With respect, is there any scriptural basis you could offer for them not being the same?

"Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God." - 1 Cor 6:9-10

To be clear -- I am NOT criticizing the "president not pastor" view. For instance, what Dean expressed in this thread. I think that's a valid viewpoint.

What is not valid, IMO, is expressing that view for some sexual sins but not others. You can't say Pete shouldn't be president because he's gay while arguing that it doesn't matter that Trump is an adulterer because he's the president and not a pastor. That is an inconsistent view.


There are a million other reasons for not wanting Pete in the WH and active sodomy in the Lincoln Bedroom is a disgusting thought. But IF, IF, IF Mayor Pete was the candidate of freedom of religion, saving the lives of the unborn, low taxes, pro-business/jobs, then I and nearly everyone you're attempting to snare with the false dichotomy would most likely vote for him as POTUS over any of the socialist, anti-christ, baby-killing thieves in that field today.
Golf Cart Mafia Capo
Posts: 2877
2/14/20 9:13 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
UncleJD wrote:
There are a million other reasons for not wanting Pete in the WH and active sodomy in the Lincoln Bedroom is a disgusting thought. But IF, IF, IF Mayor Pete was the candidate of freedom of religion, saving the lives of the unborn, low taxes, pro-business/jobs, then I and nearly everyone you're attempting to snare with the false dichotomy would most likely vote for him as POTUS over any of the socialist, anti-christ, baby-killing thieves in that field today.

Come on, UncleJD. What's the false dichotomy? Really going to need you to unpack that one for me.

Yes, there are many policy-based reasons to not want Buttigieg to be president. But this thread wasn't posted to discuss his policies. The bottom line is that anyone who claims Trump's adultery is irrelevant to his qualification as president has NO business talking about Pete's homosexuality as something that disqualifies him from being president.

I'm fine with EITHER position, but intellectual consistency requires the chosen position be applied across the board. There's no false dichotomy in that.
Now 67% friendlier!
Posts: 13523
2/14/20 9:26 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Quiet Wyatt
The simple fact is that we are naturally disgusted with the idea of two men having sex, while heterosexual conduct, if even adultery, while it disappoints us, does not make us sick to our stomach.

Last edited by Quiet Wyatt on 2/14/20 11:24 am; edited 1 time in total
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12544
2/14/20 11:11 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post UncleJD
Dave Dorsey wrote:
UncleJD wrote:
There are a million other reasons for not wanting Pete in the WH and active sodomy in the Lincoln Bedroom is a disgusting thought. But IF, IF, IF Mayor Pete was the candidate of freedom of religion, saving the lives of the unborn, low taxes, pro-business/jobs, then I and nearly everyone you're attempting to snare with the false dichotomy would most likely vote for him as POTUS over any of the socialist, anti-christ, baby-killing thieves in that field today.

Come on, UncleJD. What's the false dichotomy? Really going to need you to unpack that one for me.

Yes, there are many policy-based reasons to not want Buttigieg to be president. But this thread wasn't posted to discuss his policies. The bottom line is that anyone who claims Trump's adultery is irrelevant to his qualification as president has NO business talking about Pete's homosexuality as something that disqualifies him from being president.

I'm fine with EITHER position, but intellectual consistency requires the chosen position be applied across the board. There's no false dichotomy in that.


And I said exactly what I meant, IF he was the pro-life, etc.. candidate we'd all vote for him too. The sodomy is just a disgusting bonus you get with his unacceptable policies, it has nothing to do with the main reasons for not voting for him among the "not my pastor" crowd. It may among the "religious views are all that matters crowd", i.e. the ones that voted for Obama since he's a Christian vs "Romney's a Mormon" crowd, but that was NOT the "not my pastor" faction, so its a false-dichotomy until someone here admits that they are a "not my pastor" for Trump and "not a sinner" for Peter. I would count myself as a "not my pastor" guy and disgusted by the thought of Sodomy in the WH guy, but that doesn't mean I would not vote for him were he the conservative in the race vs Chairman Wow (Bernie) or someone like that.


edit: maybe I'm wrong, but I took the main point of this thread to be, "Are we really at a point in America where we'd elect a Gay POTUS over very similar alternatives (Biden, Koblachar for instance), seemingly BECAUSE he's Gay and that somehow makes him a more desirable candidate??? Mostly speaking of the democratic party.


Last edited by UncleJD on 2/14/20 11:19 am; edited 1 time in total
Golf Cart Mafia Capo
Posts: 2877
2/14/20 11:11 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Quiet Wyatt
By the way, I didn’t vote for Trump last time, voted for the Constitution Party candidate, but this year I feel I must hold my nose and vote for Trump in spite of his ungodly behavior, all things considered. I do not think we can survive as a nation if any of the moral and constitutional reprobates on the Dem side become POTUS. I didn’t buy the lesser of two evils argument last time, but the potential evil is so great this time, I cannot dismiss it. I still don’t like Trump as a person, but I must admit he has done far better for the economy and on religious freedoms than I ever imagined he would do in 2016.

Last edited by Quiet Wyatt on 2/14/20 11:24 am; edited 1 time in total
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12544
2/14/20 11:17 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
The simple fact is that we are naturally disgusted with the idea of two men having sex, while heterosexual conduct, is even adultery, while it disappoints us, does not make us sick to our stomach.

If we are not equally as disgusted with the emotional and spiritual betrayal of adultery, especially against a pregnant spouse, I would contend that our sexual ethics are cultural and not Scriptural.

I appreciate your honesty here, and I think you're exactly right that this is the root of the issue. But "two penises is grosser than betraying a pregnant spouse" is quite a take.
Now 67% friendlier!
Posts: 13523
2/14/20 11:19 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post UncleJD
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
I still don’t like Trump as a person, but I must admit he has done far better for the economy and on religious freedoms than I ever imagined he would do in 2016.


Welcome to the majority (in my opinion), most of us like his policies and results over his personality. Its a bitter pill, but its good for what ails ya
Golf Cart Mafia Capo
Posts: 2877
2/14/20 11:20 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
UncleJD wrote:
edit: maybe I'm wrong, but I took the main point of this thread to be, "Are we really at a point in America where we'd elect a Gay POTUS over very similar alternatives (Biden, Koblachar for instance), seemingly BECAUSE he's Gay and that somehow makes him a more desirable candidate??? Mostly speaking of the democratic party.

That whole thing has been really fascinating. I was reading earlier this week that Pete is taking a LOT of heat from the far left for being a "fake" homosexual because he is not really experiencing discrimination or rejection based on his sexuality.

That's wild to me. As a universal truth, the left always eats its own.
Now 67% friendlier!
Posts: 13523
2/14/20 11:22 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Acts-Celerate Post new topic   Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Acts-celerate Terms of Use | Acts-celerate Policy
World News Network | Acts-celerate Chat
Contact the Administrator.


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group :: Spelling by SpellingCow.