I'd be open to comments or perspective that you may have either here or pm is ok. Surely no one would lose civility over something like this. He he.
Mr. patriot, I would like to address something you said earlier, which is on the topics of morality, religion, and, getting back to the original topic, of Mitt Romney, as it is a belief I believe you and he share:
Since you mentioned government, I can only assume that by "help" you mean forcibly seizing property from it's owner and giving it to the aforementioned beneficiaries... this is not what I normally mean by the word "help," but it is commonly used in this context by people of a certain predisposition toward government, which is certainly the majority view in our society. If I am misinterpreting your view on this, I am sorry, but surely you can understand how I might be confused when the word "help" is so commonly used as a euphamism in this context.
But if I am correct in judging by this statement that you support the forceful redistribution of wealth, I have two questions for you: first, what is your moral/ethical justification for it? And second, do you really think that when Jesus (or whoever the originator of that scripture was) said "help the widows and the fatherless," he meant "go out and initiate violence or the threat thereof against your neighbors to force them to pay for helping the widows and the fatherless?"
+1 That's the way I see it.An unfettered second term obama is far from a "known commodity". Wise up.
Another interesting point of view.I have one vote....it will be for Romney, in a close decision....and I hate that...its difficult to choose the lesser of 2 evils...Romney is going to push us over the precipice sooner than Obama but we're going over regardless...lets just get it over with...before I get too old to defend myself...
Where's the "None Of The Above" option?