The Evangelical Universalist Forum

How To Live Under An Unqualified President by John Piper

So here are the ‘rules’. After 3 years of slinging all the mud they can, they just might be able to kangaroo a President into impeachment - but ONLY when doing the following:

— Ronna McDaniel (@GOPChairwoman) October 31, 2019

According to McDaniel, the rules are:

  1. Schiff must grant permission to Rs to call a witness.
  2. Schiff can instruct a witness not to answer questions.
  3. Schiff decides what evidence Americans/Judiciary sees.
    Oh, and @realDonaldTrump ’s counsel cannot attend
    Sounds great, right?
    Do Dems really think this is on the up and up?
    Does anyone here really think this is out of a genuine concern about America?

And the whistleblower? His ‘evidence’ turns out to be - his OPINION. That’s how we are going to throw the election back into the voter’s faces -'you were wrong, we’re undoing it, and we can prove we’re right because of - opinions."

Yep, I’m mad - not because of love for DT , but because Dems will not admit what is obvious - they want to WIN - at any cost - and to undo what we the people voted for.
Shameful.
No doubt some high sounding words - ‘substance’ ‘high crimes’ ‘for the good of America’ - will be the response - but they are empty words being used to try and erase what we the people voted for.
You cannot justify - in reality, though you might in your own mind - this travesty.

O.K., but as invited, and as I have often on this thread, I responded with arguments that the convincing answer to Peter’s excellent essential question was arguably Yes!

When I do such, I find that you and Dave regularly respond by just ignoring what I’ve actually argued, and pointing (often validly) to the sins you see in opponents, usually the Democrats, Obama & Clinton, and often just posting yet more attack pieces on them from right wing sites.

But why do you imagine that that would show anyone that a case for a Yes hasn’t been shown!

(That same difficulty underlay my explanation of why GOPers focus on just griping about the Process, rather than addressing the Case at issue. I suspicion that when the hearings become public, this tactic will appear to most undecided citizens as less than sufficient, or relevant, and I stated what I perceive GOP senators would thus prefer to argue, in sync with conservative observer, Jonah Goldberg.)

The Dems have attempted to impeach BEFORE HE TOOK OFFICE. This is a matter of record. It’s a FACT. Sorry.
WHY should they be trusted? Answer: they cannot be.

Bob to Steve!

That’s why we need “comic relief”, from the resident - “aspiring” Holy Fool. :crazy_face:

Or something to scare, the S#$T out of everyone! And remind them, they might be leading us to Z-Hell (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9). :crazy_face:

Bob: “Dave regularly responds by (totally) IGNORING the case I myself have just argued,
and instead pointing to the sins of opponents, usually the Democrats…”

You kindly validate my analysis of how you respond, and I appreciate it. Of course I’ve never argued or assumed Dems should be trusted. Who trusts them? I distrust all politicians in power. As I just said, what I expect the public should eyeball is the direct evidence available when the hearings are public
(and only secondarily the conduct of the Dems and GOP in those examinations).

“That one can convince one’s opponents with printed reasons, I have not believed since the year 1764. It is not for that purpose that I have taken up my pen, but rather merely to annoy them, and to give strength and courage to those on our side, and to make it known to the others that they have not convinced us.” G.C. Lichtenberg (1742 – 1799), courtesy of ‘Deogolwulf’

1 Like

Sometimes I feel like Bugs Bunny, on this forum thread. And Yosemite Sam, comes running in to “enlighten” me - with some right-wing “perspective” . Time to hide! :crazy_face:

1 Like

What a perfect description of what happens! I appreciate and resonate with that confession.

So now, Randy - I see you only criticize the right, and have NO HFPZ criticism at all of the dishonest Left? You were the last fun guy to read on this forum, and now you’re gone…no more fair and balanced.

And what the heck does ‘perspective’ have to do with anything? Where does the bias against FACTS come from around here?

Come on, don’t lose heart! Steve, Norm, MM, et al can provide some more of that fun!

Perhaps herein lies wisdom:

Top 5 Reasons I Stopped Caring About Politics

by FREEMANSPERSPECTIVE on July 2, 2013

stop caring about politicsWhen I was young, I felt a need to understand politics, and I spent time studying. But as time progressed, I received diminishing returns on that investment. And in the past few years, I have given it up altogether.

These days, my concern with politics is limited to things like these:

  • Who is making war, and where?
  • Where is the crime occurring in my area?
  • Are there laws that will force me to move my businesses offshore?

Beyond that, I’m really not interested. I see the headlines, but I seldom read the stories. And I’m very happy saying, “I haven’t looked into it,” when people ask my opinion on the day’s ‘news.’

Here’s why:

#5: It eats up a horrifying amount of time and energy

Seriously, start counting the number of hours you spend on this stuff. How many hours listening to political radio, watching political TV, and reading political newspapers?

Then start thinking about the intense energy you spend on it. We all have limited reserves of energy; do you really believe that politics is the highest and best use for yours? What about using your energy to build your business? Or to nurture your children? Or to help a neighbor? There must be a dozen things that are more important than obsessing over the votes of congressmen or Supreme Court judges.

#4: It’s an addiction

If imagining yourself dumping politics makes you feel bad, you probably should dump it.

Try it: Imagine your life, devoid of all politics. How does it make you feel? Empty? Forsaken?

The truth is that millions of us are addicted to politics. People can’t pull themselves away from it – it’s the script that runs in the back of their minds 24/7.

The political addiction is so bad that even strongly religious people spend more time on politics than they do on God. Politics is the obsession of the age.

#3: It doesn’t change anything

There was a popular bumper sticker in the 60s that read: If voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal.

Let’s be honest and admit that the bumper sticker was true. Even the best examples – such as Reagan on the right or Obama on the left – have failed to change much. Government is bigger than ever, the US government is involved in more wars than ever, and the Constitution is being trashed in more ways than ever before. This is progress?

And what of the vaunted elections that they always promote? Personally, I think Alvin Toffler was right when he called them “reassurance rituals.” But, that aside, it is certain that elections are tightly controlled. In the US, two parties firmly control who gets on a ballot and who doesn’t. Everything is scripted; everything requires approval of the party. (The situation is slightly less bad in Europe.)

And please understand that ‘the government’ is far more than 600 faces in DC – it is millions of people in thousands of offices, all pulling together to get more of your money and to spend it upon themselves and their departments.

But even while politics doesn’t actually change much, it does keep everyone locked inside the system and servicing it. To illustrate, here’s a quote I never could forget, and that I hope you’ll never forget either:

Let them march all they want, so long as they continue to pay their taxes.

– Alexander Haig, 1982

So long as everyone obeys the government, why should it care about their complaints? Americans are nearly 100% obedient, so why should the government bother changing anything at all? There is no need.

Politics doesn’t change anything, because its actual goal is to keep the populace reassured and compliant. And in this it has succeeded brilliantly.

#2: In the end, it’s about violence

Here’s a passage from my novel, A Lodging of Wayfaring Men , that expressed this idea:

Coercion is the sine qua non of politics; the thing, without which, politics would not be politics. Indeed, if you remove coercion, politics becomes something else – economics.

Politics cannot exist without force. In the end, it rests on violence. No matter how much they color everything red, white, and blue, violence or the threat of violence underpins it all. As Jim Rogers once wrote, “ Somewhere in every process of taxation, a pistol is involved.

Politics – government – is based upon a single transaction: Taking money from people against their will. Everything else they do falls apart without that.

You may think me rude for pointing this out, or you may come up with justifications for it, but the statement stands: Governments take money that they didn’t earn, by one type of coercion or another. If not, taxation would be voluntary and government would be just another business.

I don’t like dealing with violent enterprises.

#1: Politics is a relic of a barbaric past

Being that I study the ancient past, I can trace men ruling over men back to about 6400 BC. I can trace a government that resembles ours back to about 5000 BC.

So, what else from two thousand years before the Pyramids still rules the lives of men?

If there is any example on Earth of humans failing to evolve, this has to be it.

Men no longer pull plows. They no longer start fires with flint. Nor do they pull sleds or wooden-wheeled carts or rely upon animals for power. We have learned to write, to invent, to navigate, to cover immense distances, to drive, to fly, to reach into the heavens…

And yet this one relic of a primitive past remains. And please don’t tell me that it remains because it is good – people complain about government more than they complain about cancer.

To illustrate government’s barbaric nature, consider this: Thousands of people like me would like to experiment with different ways of living, but we are forbidden. No one is permitted to leave the game. If you try, large armed men will assault you and lock you in a cage, or perhaps they will merely steal your money from the bank you entrusted it to. But in either case, government sycophants will solemnly inform the world that you are an evil-doer.

No exit is permitted and all escape attempts are met with violence. How is this not primitive barbarity?

IT’S YOUR CHOICE.

So, there you have it. You’re big boys and girls and you can make your own decisions, but I have to tell you: I am ever so happy with mine. I am less stressed, more productive, and a clearer thinker.

Every so often, a friend asks me to examine a political issue. And, nearly always, I politely decline; it makes me feel the same as when my mother wanted me to eat liver.

I can’t tell from the call , it’s possible but i really can’t tell because Trump never specifically connected the aid with “the favor.” So you can have your opinion just as Dems have their “obstruction of justice” opinion re the evidence from the Mueller investigation. This whole kangaroo court is based on obtaining people’s opinion.

But with the Dems it’s obvious because Biden boasted about withholding aid and Hillary actually destroyed 30,000 e-mails with bleach bit despite it being under subpoena!

1 Like

I do draw a line and will not fight with people about it and i have no interest in changing anyone’s mind because it doesn’t matter. But i am interested in it and will be glad to discuss and share my opinion because i am the worlds greatest expert on my own opinion.

2 Likes

What a coincidence! So am I on mine!

Yes, that ambiguity was my main point too! (Whether asking help on Biden immediately following the only request for help, and that about military aid, indeed meant that the two were “connected”).

That uncertainty explains why I concluded that people will easily divide according to their wider perceptions and allegiances, and why I stressed that the public should examine the totality of the wider evidence presented in public cross examination. Possibly it will lead to more confidence among a majority as to what Trump’s plan and strategy really was.

Amen, my deepest perception about politics is that on the right and left are many so invested in political drama and their ideologies, as if their happiness in life most depends on who wins office, etc. My experience is that the reality is that my deepest welfare and joy rests far more on things more under my control, such as loving my family, personal relationships, pursuing personal growth and faith, etc.

Well, I was at the health club today. And I discussed two topics, that folks brought up.

  • The Trump Impeachment Inquiry

  • Illinois legalizing recreational pot in 2020

Point 1

Let’s start with topic one. This is NOT a Show Stopper. What Trump should do, is just release the transcript (blacking out any security sections). Admit what was in the transcript - and move on.

Most likely, the House will vote for impeachment. And the Senate will override it. And if the economy is still running optimally (and other positive accomplishments), he will be voted back in.

And you know what? I will vote for him.

Point 2

A friend moved from Illinois to Colorado, a couple of years ago. He finds the property taxes (and state taxes), to be about a quarter - of what we pay in Illinois. And he attributes it, to the weed tax. And it minimizes the black market.

Well, I can’t say anything bad against pot. Unless I say the same stuff about alcohol. And I was part of the Two Feathers Medicine Clan, as an extended Native American family member - for years. And they regularly had peyote and ayahuasca ceremonies. And the ceremonies were all night and done in the traditional ways - for centuries. And fully legal, under US federal law. Now I will neither confirm nor deny, whether I have taken part - or not. But I probably know more, about those sacraments and medicines - than most folks.

And I know about the research into psychedelics, like that show on 60 minutes.

And I’m part of the Facebook groups, of US churches - where this is legal:

  • Soul Quest

  • ONAC

  • Peaceful Mountain Way

So I can’t say anything bad, against legal pot and / or alcohol.

EO Sharing

Now for something I shared, with an EO priest via email today.

I thought I’ll follow up, with some commentary from our Bible study. I have studied the Christian mystics, from the Protestant, Eastern Orthodox, and Roman Catholic traditions. As well as traditions, outside the Christian faith.

  • George Fox, the founder of Quakerism – followed traditional Christian beliefs. And that is also, what Christian writers and theologians I read - also feel. What Quakerism lacks (except in meetings where they have a minister), is a comprehensive set – of Christian beliefs and creeds.

  • The person Fr. BBB mentioned – Joseph Smith, was preaching a gospel – from an angel. Just as Mohammad was. But St. Paul cautions us, from accepting any gospel addition – even if an angel gives it. Now was it a demon, that Joseph Smith and Mohammad saw? Or the result of organic disease and/or psychosis? Historical experts outside these traditions are divided.

I try to be careful, what I say. So that something is not taken out of context and misconstrued.

Just a couple of other observations.

  • Someone gay and actively practicing has no place in a Christian church. I was part of the Quakers in DDD for 6 years. I was attracted by their passivism and Christian mysticism. But when they were going to sponsor a gay wedding, I left them immediately. I did the same for the Episcopal church, after they openly endorsed – gay marriages and clergy.

  • As far as universalism goes, I’m in agreement with Fr. BBB. I hope the universalists are right. It’s not that I don’t have faith in God, to do it. I don’t have faith in mankind, to accept it. And nothing in Sacred Tradition or Holy Scripture - endorses it as a “given”. Having said that, I do know of an EO priest, who openly professes it- via a blog. And an EO scholar, who wrote a book endorsing it – in this century. But I do believe that folks, in other faith traditions – could be among the saved. This is consistent with EO scholarly opinion, as well as Roman Catholic and certain Protestant, denominational theology.

I laid my cards out on the table - for ALL to see

This is how a Holy Fool, lays out all his cards. What them closely, folks. :crazy_face:

It was released and is public information. You can read it.

1 Like

I’ve read it. It’s a nothing-burger.

Bob. Thanks for including me, an innocent foreigner, as a member of your defined cabal. I suppose I should feel honored (note my capitulation to American obfuscation of the English language), but I only feel a deep sadness over what is happening. down south. I doubt that any of my cabal partners experience anything funny about the manipulation of conversations, written or over a telephone.

1 Like