Listen in to a panel of evangelicals discuss their thoughts on the 2012 presidential race on the eve of the Iowa Caucus.
Joshua Caucutt – Pastoral Assistant, Denver Sound Church, Co-Host of the Sound Church Guys Video Podcast
Thomas Haskins – Author, In the Words of Our Founding Fathers
Dan Horvatin – TEA Party Leader, Rock River Patriots
Our 45 minute podcast seem to fly by as we spent a surprising good amount of time talking about Congressman Ron Paul, his views and his chances at getting the nomination. But, the majority of the time we looked at issues such as can an evangelical vote for a Mormon candidate, what factors should Christians consider when looking for a candidate and how should we view third party candidates. You won’t want to miss the somewhat-heated discussion surrounding the issue of homosexual marriage. We ended with predictions of just how things are going to turn out for conservatives in 2012.
Mentioned during the show – The Mitt Romney Deception (Podcast with Amy Contrada talking about her books detailing how Mitt Romney is responsible for homosexual marriage in Massachusetts) and Sorry, Governor Romney, Mormonism is a Cult (Podcast with Pastor Dan Gibson, a former Mormon, detailing the history and doctrines of the Mormon church).
Because of problems on our side, Pastor Michael Carl (of Christ the King Church and Ministries, Powerlines News Network and WorldNetDaily) was unable to join us but was willing to give some quick answers to some of the topics mentioned during the broadcast.
Q: How do you explain the rise of Ron Paul this year?
A: There’s no logical explanation for Paul’s surge except that it’s an anti-Romney thing, and/or, the voters in Iowa are highly unimpressed by the crew that the GOP has trotted out before them.
Q: Can Evangelicals vote for a Mormon?
A: Yes, evangelicals can vote for a Mormon. The deeper question is how to defend that position. On the other hand, this is an amazing opportunity Christians didn’t have in the Nixon era and before. The only time a candidate’s religion has surfaced is over Catholic Al Smith and Catholic (nominal) JFK. This is an opportunity to proclaim the true Gospel message without trashing the Mormon. We let the truth speak for itself. However, the ultimate question is whether voting for the Mormon is a sufficient restraint of the greater evil if an atheist, a Muslim, or a complete secular humanist should win.
Q: Any predictions?
A: Romney will be nominated and lose to Obama.
Q: What factors shoudl Christians consider when looking for a candidate?
A: Christians should seek a candidate that most fully embodies the character of 1 Timothy 3 and who supports the worldview of, ‘They are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among them are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.’
Q: How should we consider third party and independent candidates?
A: There’s no easy answer to that because there are good arguments (restraint of greater evil v. ‘the lesser of two evils is still evil) on both sides and faithful followers of Christ have defended both positions.
Q: Do you support a particular candidate?
A: N/A because I don’t know. I’m holding out to see if the Constitution Party shows up this election.
Q: How involved should Evangelicals be in this election?
A: If evangelicals/Bible-believing Christians don’t get involved, they abandon the governance of their country to ungodly men and women. And where is that defensible from Scripture???
Among the Republican candidates for President, you see many trying to contend for the title of “most pro-life” while Governor Romney is still trying to convince people is at least pro-life. But the question is, how do you determine which of these candidates is the most pro-life? Really, about the only thing we use to judge this is voting records and legislation proposed and adopted. However, there is only one candidate who can do more to prove his pro-life credentials and commitment to life – Dr. Ron Paul.
Before serving in Congress, Ron Paul served his community as an OBGYN and delivered thousands of newborns into the world. Talk about a commitment to life! By the way, from the very beginning of his medical practice, Dr. Paul has taken a firm stance against any kind of abortion and has never performed one or allowed one to be performed in his office.
If you are looking for a pro-life candidate, it doesn’t get any better than Dr. Ron Paul.
Ok, so today I was out at Best Buy(I love this store – best customer service ever!) rebuying (ask me and I’ll explain later) my new laptop and got a great deal on a hp tablet for my wife. As I walked back out to my car, I couldn’t help but notice this car with these bumper stickers:
Does it bother anyone else that the same car owner that claims to be a “constitution voter” is an Obama supporter? Have they read the Constitution lately? Ironically, right after seeing that, in the very same parking lot I saw a whole group of people standing by the main road showing their support for Ron Paul. After seeing this car, I felt that a real constitution voter should do something, so I joined them!
Title: Ron Paul: Man of Ideas
Author: Brian Bagnall
Publisher: Variant Press
Publishing Year: 2008
My Rating: 3 out of 5 (1 meaning I hated the book, 5 meaning I loved the book)
Its no secret to anyone that I simply fascinated by any and all things Ron Paul. While I am still not sure who I will support in the GOP race this year, I would have no problem casting my vote for Ron Paul in a general election. I was a Ron Paul precinct captain in 2008 and don’t regret a moment of it. It would be a HUGE step forward for the Republican Party if Dr. Paul were to get the nod. With a unique mixture of Christian values and libertarian principles, it’s hard not to support him. That is, until he starts talking about Iran…
You can imagine my joy when one day at the dollar store I come across this biography of Congressman Paul. Of course, I bought it immediately and read it quickly. This short paperback was a very interesting read. You are not merely reading the story of one man’s life, but a history of political thought and change through the past sixty years. If you are a Ron Paul fan like me, you need buy this book. It’s short and inexpensive.
However, you get what you pay for… The book’s strength is also its weakness. The strength is what I mentioned above, this biography is a civics lesson in disguise. While the lessons learned are valuable, they are also dry. Its gets somewhat boring at times as you drag yourself through the Austrian school of economic thought. I was also irritate that just as I would get into the actual life of Paul I would be led down a contrived, libertarian rabbit-trail that diverts from the real story at hand – the life of Ron Paul. Also, as is the case with many biographies, this book tends to exaggerate the influence, moral character and greatness of its subject.
If you are looking for an in-depth biography of what makes Ron Paul Ron Paul, this book will get you started, and wanting more. But, you can’t beat the price. You get far more than you pay for, by far…
Purchase the book for only $3 at amazon.
Congressman Ron Paul
“If anyone still doubted that this administration’s foreign policy would bring any kind of change, this week’s debate on Afghanistan should remove all doubt. The President’s stated justifications for sending more troops to Afghanistan and escalating war amount to little more than recycling all the false reasons we began the conflict. It is so discouraging to see this coming from our new leadership, when the people were hoping for peace. New polls show that 49% of the people favor minding our own business on the world stage, up from 30% in 2002. Perpetual war is not solving anything. Indeed continually seeking out monsters to destroy abroad only threatens our security here at home as international resentment against us builds. The people understand this and are becoming increasingly frustrated at not being heard by the decision-makers. The leaders say some things the people want to hear, but change never comes…”
Click here to read the full article: http://www.house.gov/paul/index.shtml
“The U.S. Preventive Task Force caused quite a stir recently when they revised their recommendations on the frequency and age for women to get mammograms. Many have speculated on the timing for this government-funded report, with the Senate vote on health care looming, and cost estimates being watched closely. Just the hint that the government would risk women’s health to cut costs is causing outrage on both sides of the aisle.
Even the administration is alarmed at its own panel’s recommendation. One official, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius told women to ignore the new guidelines, keep doing what they are doing and make the best decisions for themselves after consulting with their doctors.
This sounds like an excellent idea to me. As a physician myself, I understand the importance of ensuring that patients are able to consult their doctors and make their own decisions without interference from government bureaucrats or government-favored corporations…”
Click here to read the full article: http://www.house.gov/paul/index.shtml
I could not agree more with Congressman Paul’s ideas as to how to fix healthcare. Get the government out the system, allow people to keep more of their money, thus enabling them to purchase competetively priced insurance packages based on their own determined needs. Oppose socialism, embrace liberty and freedom!
Congressman Ron Paul
Healthcare continues to dominate the agenda on Capitol Hill as House leadership and the administration try to ram through their big government healthcare plan. Fortunately, they have been unsuccessful so far, as there are many horrifying provisions tucked into this massive piece of legislation. One major issue is the public funding of elective abortions. The administration has already removed many longstanding restrictions on abortion, and is unwilling to provide straight answers to questions regarding the public funding of abortion in their plan. This is deeply troubling for those of us who do not want taxpayer dollars funding abortions.
Forcing pro-life taxpayers to subsidize abortion is evil and tyrannical. I have introduced the Taxpayer’s Freedom of Conscience Act (HR 1233) which forbids the use of any taxpayer funds for abortion, both here and overseas.
The most basic function of government is to protect life. It is unconscionable that government would enable the taking of it. However this is to be expected when government oversteps its constitutional bounds instead of protecting rights. When government supercedes this very limited role, it cannot help but advance the moral agenda of whoever is in power at the time, at the expense of the rights of others.
Free people should be left alone to follow their conscience and determine their own lifestyle as long as they do not interfere with other people doing the same. If morality is dictated by government, morality will change with every election. Even if you agree with the morality of the current politicians and think their ideas should be advanced, someday different people will inherit that power and use it for their own agendas. The wisdom of the constitution is that it keeps government out of these issues altogether.
Many say we must reform healthcare and treat it as a right, because that is the moral thing to do. Poor people should not go without healthcare in a just society. But too many forget the immorality of stealing from others in order to make this so. They also forget the morality and compassion that naturally exists in communities when government is not fomenting class warfare with wealth redistribution programs.
Many doctors willingly volunteer, accept barter or reduced payment from patients who can’t pay, or give away services for free. Many charities help the poor with food, housing and healthcare. These charities are much more responsive and accountable for helping people in need than government ever could be. This is the moral way that private individuals voluntarily deal with access to healthcare, but government intervention threatens to pull the rug out from this sort of volunteerism and replace it with mandates, taxes, red tape, wealth redistribution, and force.
The fact that the national healthcare overhaul could force taxpayers to subsidize abortions and may even force private insurers to cover abortions is more reason that this bill and the ideas behind it, are neither constitutional, moral, nor in the American people’s best interest.
Congressman Ron Paul
Political philosopher Richard Weaver famously and correctly stated that ideas have consequences. Take for example ideas about rights versus goods. Natural law states that people have rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. A good is something you work for and earn. It might be a need, like food, but more “goods” seem to be becoming “rights” in our culture, and this has troubling consequences. It might seem harmless enough to decide that people have a right to things like education, employment, housing or healthcare. But if we look a little further into the consequences, we can see that the workings of the community and economy are thrown wildly off balance when people accept those ideas.
First of all, other people must pay for things like healthcare. Those people have bills to pay and families to support, just as you do. If there is a “right” to healthcare, you must force the providers of those goods, or others, to serve you.
Obviously, if healthcare providers were suddenly considered outright slaves to healthcare consumers, our medical schools would quickly empty. As the government continues to convince us that healthcare is a right instead of a good, it also very generously agrees to step in as middle man. Politicians can be very good at making it sound as if healthcare will be free for everybody. Nothing could be further from the truth. The administration doesn’t want you to think too much about how hospitals will be funded, or how you will somehow get something for nothing in the healthcare arena. We are asked to just trust the politicians. Somehow it will all work out.
Universal Healthcare never quite works out the way the people are led to believe before implementing it. Citizens in countries with nationalized healthcare never would have accepted this system had they known upfront about the rationing of care and the long lines.
As bureaucrats take over medicine, costs go up and quality goes down because doctors spend more and more of their time on paperwork and less time helping patients. As costs skyrocket, as they always do when inefficient bureaucrats take the reins, government will need to confiscate more and more money from an already foundering economy to somehow pay the bills. As we have seen many times, the more money and power that government has, the more power it will abuse. The frightening aspect of all this is that cutting costs, which they will inevitably do, could very well mean denying vital services. And since participation will be mandatory, no legal alternatives will be available.
The government will be paying the bills, forcing doctors and hospitals to dance more and more to the government’s tune. Having to subject our health to this bureaucratic insanity and mismanagement is possibly the biggest danger we face. The great irony is that in turning the good of healthcare into a right, your life and liberty are put in jeopardy.
Instead of further removing healthcare from the market, we should return to a true free market in healthcare, one that empowers individuals, not bureaucrats, with control of healthcare dollars. My bill HR 1495 the Comprehensive Healthcare Reform Act provides tax credits and medical savings accounts designed to do just that.