Not when the guy with 500,000 votes doesn't take office.

If only we could get GW's administration to read and follow the beatitudes and in particular, "Blessed are the peacemakers for they will be called the children of God."

Bob Wilson

 

Not to threadjack,

The US is not a democracy in theory or in practice because in a democracy, there is only a majority rule, while in a republic of laws, there are legitimate and protected minorities.

America created as a constitutional Republic the "rule of law."

 

The problem with using the bible for these kinds of arguments is that anybody can find passages in the bible to justify a behavior or suggest a certain behavior is appropriate--regardless of how despicable that behavior is. You can quote many passages that sound nice, and I can quote many passages that are pure hate--and supposedly the work of god.

http://www.nobeliefs.com/DarkBible/D...leContents.htm

Therefore, it is best to leave the bible out of logical discussions.

 

I'd have to agree that of every political persuasion, there are good and bad examples of spirituality. Pres. George W. Bush and Rev. Al Sharpton pray to the same God but disagree on most everything political. While I could cite other examples, the point is made.

I'll agree that the US energy policy is sorely lacking by this Administration, but otherwise would prefer not to get partisan.

 

A few points:

Al Gore doesn't practice what he preaches

Al Gore is an American politician, not [insert religious icon here]. Hypocrisy is human. As long as you don't point the finger at anyone in specific, I don't take offense when you mention things we can do to improve. Furthermore, in the movie, there's a vignette where Gore talks about how his family raised tobacco for years. Then his sister died from lung cancer and his family realized that they had contributed to it. Some people have commented on it as superfluous, but I felt he was trying to make a point that we have to learn from our mistakes, come to terms with them, and move on.

Has he made some efforts? Yes. Has he done everything possible? No. Have I done everything possible? No. A Prius would've been more efficient for my driving habits, but I got the HCH2 instead because it looked better. I have turned my thermostat up 2 degrees, but that just means 72; also, I leave the bedroom unit on when out because of the dog. I don't have meat at every meal, but I'm not going vegetarian. And sometimes, on weekends, I just go for a drive in the country. Yeah, it's wasting gas.

And can somebody tell me what's worse: if I've got a recyclable can with food residue on it, should I waste the water to rinse it, or just toss it out rather than have it smell up the recyclable bin? It always seemed like a catch-22.

George Bush lost the popular vote, but won the election

So did John Quincy Adams (1824), Rutherford B. Hays (1876), and Benjamin Harrison (1888). Nobody said it was a perfect system. Had Bush been booted from office in '04, we could complain that it was a mistake. But what it comes down to is that almost 50% of voters really did want him in 2000. (And let's face it: no matter how much one despises Bush, it was impossible to get excited about Kerry.)

I would be delighted if Gore ran in '08. I can't think of a better way of saying, "Boy, what a mistake 2000 was!" But I sincerely doubt the Democratic party will give him another shot.

The environment crosses party lines

No, it doesn't. While it's true that some conservatives, some moderates, and some liberals are concerned, once you start drawing lines, the environment gets left out. Both major parties are catch-alls, and their priorities are subject to the whim of pollsters. What do you say we disband the Republican and Democratic parties and reorganize into several parties, with predefined goals?

 

Point 1:

Ever heard of the "Electoral College?"

Point 2:

Wars are not fought for VIOLENCE. They are fought for PEACE.

 

Really? Historically speaking, this hasn't worked out so well. I would say the two sides in the Lebanon crisis aren't fighting for Peace. The Iraq war is arguably not about Peace, but other interests.

Seems like they are often fought for other things like Territory, Oil, Religion, Political Oppression, etc.....

 

Actually these wars are fought for peace. Usually the ones who start the war feel that "they" won't have any peace until the can dominate, enslave, and other-wise repress those that they have attacked.

Naturally, they are not concerned with the peace of the oppressed. But hey, give them credit for fighting for peace anyway!

Mike

 

Don't forget "Revenge". Seems like we're getting a fair bit of that these days.

 

The topics of war and religon are emotionally charged and also somewhat off topic. Please steer your way back on topic. You all have not done anything wrong but my spidey sense feels trouble brewing.....