Originally Posted by Rabs

http://www.theamericanparty.org/door/


GOD IS OUR FOUNDATION

Those authoring this Constitution declare the American Party to have been brought into existence upon the foundation of its organizers' belief in Almighty God and in Jesus Christ, upon their total commitment to the whole counsel of God's Word, and upon their determination that the American Party shall function, so long as it shall endure, in conformity with His Will. The American Party is and shall remain a political entity which is essentially Christian-oriented. It is our fervent hope that God will use the American Party to bless and save our free Republic.

There are several of the articles which bother me but this one ^^^^^ bothers me the most. We have a variety of religions in this country whose practioners are good solid and patriotic citizens. Does this mean that they would be looked on as less than American?
If some of the hard core Christian Radicals become overly in charge of the party does that mean Jews, Buddhists, Roman Catholics, Muslims, Native Americans, Eastern Orthodox and Greek Orthodox are at risk because their practices do not match. What about Agnostics or Atheists?

I also have my doubts about some other articles such as the one on Law Enforcement. It rings to me of something that would come out of the mouth of a member of Posse Comitatus or a Member of the Shield, Sword and Covent .

Just reading this gives me the heebie jeebies.

Originally Posted by Doody

What I find amusing is the American Party's claim to value all life (in reference to abortion) while fullheatedly endorsing capitol punishment.

Actually I am wating for a new party. I feel that neither the dems or repubs are good right now. For now, I will just wait for something to come along.

Bravo Doody!!!

I noticed that too, I was waiting to see if anyone else notice that.

First mmarsh: you are actually wrong in your statements on religion and The Constitution.

The only Constitutional consideration towards religion is that of protection of expression, its right there in the same clause as freedom of speech.

I've read the above topic starter and see nothing inhearantly Isolationist in there.

There is the recognition of a true fact. You can piss away endless streams of "foriegn aid" and you will accomplish exactly ZERO.

Poverty is the product of disfunctional culture. No amount of aid will change that. As long as a people wish to practice those elements of their culture that create, exaggerate and enforce poverty then they'll remain in poverty.
The only example of "foriegn aid" accomplishing anything was the Berlin Airlift. and that was much much more of a military necessity rather than your standard feel good type operation. We've yet to see if aid to Iraq and Afghanistan will produce any real long term bennies..but those are both much much more military necessities than "foriegn aid"

I do like the part where US Military will no longer be sent into battle for more than..what was it??? 48 hours?? without direct Congressional action officially calling it War. For way too long those inbred mouth breeding snot gobblers on the hill have been able to hide behind half steps and twisted words. Either it's a war or we aint fighting. That's how it should be.

Grimmy

'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion'

1. That seems pretty clear to me, I dont see how I'm wrong. It clearly states Congress shall not endorse religon. Most of the religous right doesnt argue this, they merely state that what they do isnt a establishment of religon in government. I, like many Americans happen to disagree.

2. Well they are against the international groups, against Foreign Aid, and pretty restictive on international trade (no Trade with China for example). Sounds pretty isolationist to me...

3. Foreign Aid, well without it Europe would be part of the Soviet Union (no marshall plan), or Nazi German (no lend-lease). Isreal would have ceased to exist (no military or economic aid) and Africa and Asia would have descended into the ninth plane of hell after WWII. Thats just a start. As for poverty most experts agree that poverty can be dealt with, the New Deal was one such program. History has shown Peasant uprisings, French revolution, Russian revolution that governments that let poverty get out of control, dont stay in power very long. A lesson we in America could stand to learn.

4. War. We agree at last.

Sorry but the American Party stands for values that I dont, some of which I think are really BAD ideas. I am all for a multiparty system, and if people want to vote American Party be my guest, but I have more in common with conservative Republicans (which is next to zero ) than I do with these guys.

I beleive theres a diffrence between killing 8month old fetus and 45 year old murderd. IMHO

On a side note nice to see you posting again Corocotta.

That's something I dont understand myself.

How can folks draw a moral equivalence between a human being that's just beginning life and a human being that's committed the foulest of crimes.

PS scratch any pro abortionist deep enough and you'll find the same "mud people" arguements and rationalizations that the Nazis used.

Scratch away Grimmy. Let's see how deep we go before you declare me a Nazi.

Originally Posted by mmarsh

'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion'

1. That seems pretty clear to me, I dont see how I'm wrong. It clearly states Congress shall not endorse religon. Most of the religous right doesnt argue this, they merely state that what they do isnt a establishment of religon in government. I, like many Americans happen to disagree.

I always love it when this defence is thrown up. If you take a gander at the congressional records around 1800, you will find that the capitol building was actually used for church services. This is a great example of how we have twisted 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion'. In no way does having a "religious reference" endorced by a government force a religion upon anyone. Remember, people who left Europe came to the US to practice the religion of their choice. In England, there was only one church...the church of England. So the Americans set up a system where the Government would not pass laws forcing religion. The Founding Fathers saw nothing wrong with openly being faithful. Does having the 10 commandments on government property twist your arm and force you to be Christian? I think not.

Anyway, enough of the religion debate.

To abortion and the death penalty. If someone truley values all life and uses the teaching of the Bible, then killing a murderer is totally hypocritical. That's why I had to bring it up since the American party claims to be religious.

im not a extremly religious, however you can use the teachings of the bible to justify killing murders. Eye for a eye. What has a fetus done that it deserves to be killed. Just to clarify I beleive most abortions are a personal moral issue, but when we get to partial birth abortions its flat murder. I wont describe how that procedure is done but do some research and uhm its quite gruesome.

*DUMB QUESTION ALERT*

So does this mean that there will be a third presidential candidate?