Welcome to TruthTalkLive.com!

Today’s Issues, From a Biblical Perspective!

What Does Sarah Palin believe ?

Posted by truthtalklive on October 13, 2008

On today’s show Stu welcomes Michael Patrick Leahy,  the author of “What Does Sarah Palin Believe?”  More information on Mr. Leahy. As always thanks for listening and we look foward to your comments!

Previous Shows Done on Sarah Palin:

Truth Talk Live: Oct 2nd 08

Truth Talk Live: Sept. 19th 08

Truth Talk Live: Sept 10th 08

AFTER THE SHOW CHECK OUT THE PODCAST! 

We will be giving away 5 Copies of this book today! So better listen!

We will be giving away 5 Copies of this book today! So better listen!

 

Advertisements

81 Responses to “What Does Sarah Palin believe ?”

  1. I’m online now, happy to respond to any questions about the interview.

    Michael Patrick Leahy

  2. Stanley said

    Sarah Palin believes that Obama associates with terrorists, which isn’t true. Bill Ayers is not a terrorist. He is a professor, and was citizen of the year in Chicago. She is a liar and is unfit to hold office of any type, much less the Vice President.

  3. Brad said

    Just want to be clear, Stanley – are you saying that telling a lie automatically disqualifies one from being fit for office? Or does that just apply to Palin?

  4. Stanley said

    No. I’m saying she is a liar and is unfit to be in office for a number of reasons:
    A. She doesn’t believe in proof. (She is a religious conservative)
    B. She is a hypocrite. (She calls Obama a terrorist, even though she was in the same organization as Timothy McVeigh)
    C. She is a liar. (She calls Obama a terrorist)
    D. She isn’t intelligent. (See: Press interviews)

    I am more qualified. I don’t see Russia from my house, but I’ve BEEN there!

  5. Stanley said

    BTW, Religulous is hilarious and true.

  6. Anon said

    do us all a favor and go back…for good

  7. Tripp said

    I read all of this and could have posted numerous other links. I feel comfortable calling him a terrorist.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Ayers

  8. I think the evidence is quite clear that Bill Ayers is an unrepentant domestic terrorist.

  9. Duncan said

    You go Stanley! Speak the truth brother!

    It’s 10:00 EST and there are only 5 posts on today’s controversial subject?!! Did the “Rupture” happen and I missed it? Is everyone out celebrating Columbus Day or something? Maybe it’s because Stu embarassed his guest Mr. Leahy and himself today with another one of his silly, rambling tirades in an attempt to push his agenda of electing McCain/Palin by demonizing Obama, who IS by-the-way, a fellow Christian (not a Muslum or an Arab, as if all Muslim’s and Arab’s are terrorists anyway)! Mr. Leahy will probably defend Stu, but anyone with a shred of objectivity know what they heard. It’s bad enough when he baits people with conflicting views to call in and then talk over the top of them while they’re trying voice their opinion, but to do that to his own guest to get him to say what he wanted him to say?! It was truly embarassing. I know, I know Mr. Mod… it’s Stu’s/your show and you’ll… blah, blah, blah… whatever. What a Hack!

    What Does Sarah Palin believe? I’ve got a question for ya… Who cares what Sarah Palin believes? Do you evangelicals believe it’s OK for her to abuse her power as Alaska’s Gov.? Do you think it’s OK for her to flat out lie and provoke people to say un-Christian, irresponsible things about Obama at her speaking engagements? Guess what? Mainstream America does not care if she believes in creation; main-stream America does not care if she’s Pro Life; main-stream America is concerned with the real issues like the economy, healthcare, education, Iraq, staying in their homes, and putting food on their tables. Period! That’s why Obama & Biden will win. You can live in a fantasy world and think otherwise, but it’ll be just that… fantasy.

    Look (Obama says that a lot ya know), you folks had your golden-boy Bush in office for the past 8 years; 8 years before that you had his daddy; the 8 before that you had Reagan; did any of those guys change Roe-V-Wade or stop gay rights from progressing? No and No, and neither would McCain & Palin! Main-stream American’s and the politicians they elect will never let that happen, so give it up; focus on what really matters, and don’t let the talking heads lead you to believe any different, ’cause it just ain’t so Joe (six-pack).

  10. Hey Duncan,

    Sorry “brother”, but that was your last post.

    Your tirades have proven to be too offensive for us. We’ve let you get away with too much and now you’re calling our host a “hack” yet he’s done nothing to you.

    Now, you’ll just have to listen. Enjoy!

    Moderator (NOT STU)

  11. Stanley said

    He participated in terrorist acts in the past, but I thought you guys were big on forgiveness…
    Hes not a terrorist, hes a model citizen and a board member for a charity…

    I think McCain is an honorable man, who (more or less) stands up for his beliefs, but choosing Palin as a running mate says something about his judgment.

  12. Stanley said

    Why are we being moderated?

  13. Hey Stanley,

    We’re always monitoring and moderating the comments. Mr. Chapman walked a fine line for quite awhile and we decided to let it slide, for the most part. However, we decided that he had crossed that line in his last post. Based on that, our decision was to move forward and stop his constant badgering and belligerence on here.

    Thank you,
    Moderator (not Stu)

  14. Stanley said

    Fair enough. Just wonderin.

  15. Anthony said

    Mr Moderator,

    Looking at Duncan’s tirade. He didn’t call Stu a hack. He just stateds “What a hack!” Last I check the word “hack” even used as slang is not an offensive word. Are we re-defining words, as we are re-dining someones beliefs base on a name such as Barack “Hussein” Obama? I been listening to this show daily for about 2.5 years and the tone of the show is rather interesting. You say you don’t endorse a candidate but somehow this man’s name comes up daily on this show. This show was about a VP and last I check Obama is running for President. So how is it that Palin is being compared to the man who is running for the highest office in the land and she is running for the 2nd? I am not a Obama supporter.

  16. Hi Anthony,

    Duncan’s many, many tirades resulted in several warnings. We ran out of warnings.

    Moderator (not Stu)

  17. Kash said

    I think we walk a fine line between patriotism and idolatry in this country.

  18. Kash said

    Hmmm, does everyone else see the “Your comment is awaiting moderation” after my name? Or is it just my computer? I’m pretty sure I’ve never been on a tirade, but I do present different opinions than the host.

    Mr. Moderator: I totally agree that it is within your right to try to keep the tone civil, but doesn’t Stu sort of encourage tirades on the show?

  19. A said

    Moderator,

    Please clarify what got Duncan booted from this blog. Was it name calling or his disagreement with Stu’s point of view? How do you define tirade? I have seen more name calling from other bloggers and there are others that disagree with Stu. Stu constantly asks people to call in or blog with their dissenting opinions. I am glad that Duncan shared his opinions while he thought that he was free to do so. I am fortunate to know him personally so I will continue to benefit from his insight…even when we disagree.

    My personal opinion is that dissenting views are allowed as long as they can be shouted down. Very often that is the case on the show. I hope that my view is incorrect because I really like this avenue for discussion.

    Regarding the show, I do not know what Ms. Palin believes. At times she seems genuine and at other times she seems to only regurgitate the party line. I tend not to be a fan because of her affiliation with the red machine. My concern with many (not all) in the Republican party is that love for mankind is difficult to see. I consider this to be true of many Dems as well. Overall, the Democrat focus on the economy, healthcare, education, Iraq, and other issues seems to be more consistent with Christlike qualities (being like Christ is about much more than our position on two issues…ask Him for yourself). Many voters feel that the Republican party is filled with those who choose to hate those not like them. Hopefully this is not the case but it sure feels that way.

    I have previously mentioned the book unChristian which was referenced by a caller yesterday. I encourage all of you to pick up a copy to better understand why many non-believers are disenchanted with Christians. The same sentiments are applicable to the Republican party.

    In His Love…

  20. Stanley said

    What is patriotism? Blindly accepting any law or act from the government? Putting America first in front of the well being of the less fortunate? Jesus wouldn’t be a patriot, he’d be a globalist, and so am I.

  21. Mike S. said

    As well as compassion and socialism!!

  22. F. L. A. said

    You cannot mock the Moderator, Duncan.

    Stanley, they also delay posts after banning someone from the site in the event that said banned individual or his friends tries to retaliate with a nasty post, they have time to delete it/them. Such a situation usually lasts but only a few days.

    Yes Kash, and it’s a really wiggly line too!

  23. A said

    FLA: I am not Duncan. Read some of my previous posts to see my independent thoughts. We disagree on evolution for example. I do not dare mock the moderator at risk of being kicked off. I had to call Duncan to tell him what was said lately.

  24. F. L. A. said

    I know that you are not Duncan, A. My post was delayed by the moderation processes, so it ended up in a position on this site that may have made it’s message appear a little odd.
    I enjoy your posts, and agree with your post#19.

  25. Stanley,

    Concerning your comments on Bill Ayers, where you say “He participated in terrorist acts in the past, but I thought you guys were big on forgiveness.”

    You are right that as Christians we believe in forgiveness. We are all sinners, and often require God’s forgiveness.

    Forgiveness, however, requires first admission of sin, expression of sincere regret, requesting forgiveness, and “sinning no more.”

    Ayers has admitted he committed harmful terrorist acts, but to this day has not admitted that his acts were either criminal or sinful, and has not asked for forgiveness, nor has he expressed regret for his actions.

    Any Christian will tell you that lacking admission and request for forgiveness, no foregiveness should or will be granted.

  26. Kasha said

    Mr. Leahy,

    I am curious about your views on Governor Palin’s associations with the Alaska Secessionist Party, which has violent anti-American rhetoric on their web page in addition to quotes from their founder that are worse than anything Rev Wright ever said.

  27. Kasha,

    Thank you for your question.

    To my knowledge, Sarah Palin has no association with the Alaska Secessionist Party. Her husband may have attended a meeting of this group in the 1990s.

  28. Mike S said

    In addition to post #25, Ayers has been taped claiming that he wished he had done more. Regarding his terrorist type activity.

  29. Kasha said

    Mr. Leahy,

    Her husband was a member until recently. She addressed a convention of the Alaskan Independence Party earlier THIS YEAR in which she praised their aims. Governor Palin’s connections with the AIP are also furthered by her connection to Wally Hickel, a former Alaskan governor. Hickel was elected on the AIP ticket. He served as the co-chairman of Governor Palin’s campaign in 2006.

    If Obama had been associated to this extent with an anti American group, republican Christians would be crucifying him.

    THe double standard makes a mockery of Christianity. We Christians are already hypocritical enough, without adding on partisan politics masked in righteous rhetoric.

    Both Governor Palin and Senator Obama are equally valid Christians, in that they are both baptized believers in Christ. To imply otherwise for political gain is dishonest, in my opinion. If you disagree with Obama on the point of abortion, that is a valid enough point without trying to tie him to terrorists and Muslims and lack of patriotism.

    William Ayres is not a close personal friend of Obama any more than Vogle, the founder of the Alaskan Independence Party who said “I don’t give a d^%$& for America and her d*&^%$$d institutions” is a close friend of Gov Palins. But they both have associated with questionable people, as has any politician who is active in any large arena.

    Remember, the Pharisees didn’t think much of Jesus’ companions, either.

  30. Stanley said

    If you truly believe what you do, don’t you wish you can do more?

  31. Stanley said

    What about her speech to the ASP’s convention showing her support for the movement?

  32. Kasha,

    I am not familiar with the address, the quote, or the context of the speech you say Governor Palin gave to the Alaskan Independence Party earlier this year.

    With regards to your argument that both Governor Palin and Senator Obama are equally valid Christians, I must disagree.

    First, let me say that an individual’s personal faith should not be the standard by which their political candidacy should be evaluated. How their faith has influenced their political decisions in their public record, however, is a very valid concern.

    With regards to Governor Palin’s faith, it is clear that she is simply what she professes — a Bible believing, non-denominational Christian.

    With regards to Senator Obama’s faith, I will take his profession of Christian faith as genuine. However, I note that his profession of Christian faith is to a heretical faith–Black Liberation Theology–which is by no means consistent with the faith of mainstream Christians. Further, the correct question to ask about Senator Obama is not “Is he a Christian?” or “Is he a Muslim?” . The correct question to ask is “How does his profession of Christian faith fit within his overall belief structure?”

    The answer to the latter question is simple–Senator Obama’s profession of Christian faith is simply a political tool which he uses to secure his own power, and advance his left-wing, socialist Saul Alinsky inspired political agenda.

    Should he be elected President, you can expect to see a new age Obama theocracy emerge, one that will actively seek to infringe on the freedom of speech and freedom of religion of any Americans who do not support him politically.

  33. A said

    I pray earnestly for people who feel that they are justified in putting ourselves on the throne to judge the authenticity of other people’s Christian faith…for whatever the reason. God can deliver us all from a position of moral superiority and arrogance if we allow Him to do so.

    Mr. Leahy: Do you apply the same manner of criticism on Senator McCain and others? This is very scary and downright pharisaical…

    This is another example of why we should all read the book unChristian.

  34. A said

    oops – themselves…

  35. Kash said

    Mr Leahy,

    You say:
    “The answer to the latter question is simple–Senator Obama’s profession of Christian faith is simply a political tool which he uses to secure his own power, and advance his left-wing, socialist Saul Alinsky inspired political agenda.”

    I find that statement troubling in its arrogance. You propose to know Obama better than he knows himself. And since when is a Black church heretical? Please tell me EXACTLY what heretical positions his church holds. His children were also baptized in that church. Are you saying they are not Christians also, just because his father disagrees with your political views?

    The past 8 years we have had what political evangelicals have been hoping for since the 60s – a born again president. We gained one judge on the supreme court who MAY help eventually overturn Roe v Wade. We also got the following: an unfinished war against Osama Bin Ladin and the Taliban (our true enemies of 9/11) which left a broken country in which our enemies are now stronger than ever, an incompetently waged war against Iraq in which in spite of poor equipment our brave troops won Bagdad but then were failed by the administration which had no plan for keeping the peace (and because of that a more powerful Iran), meanwhile back in the states the troops’ benefits were cut and their medical care neglected. We have an increase in children in poverty and without health care. We have an economy in shambles in spite of all of the tax breaks that Republicans are still saying will “stimulate” the economy, and a net loss of domestic jobs. And meanwhile, abortion is still legal. Was it worth it?

    I believe that George W. Bush’s faith is genuine, but I think he was used to manipulate a lot of Christians into demonizing others for political gain. I once thought that McCain was honorable enough to not fall into that trap and would not let power corrupt him. THe last few months of his campaign have convinced me that just the QUEST for power has corrupted him. But I would never demonize him to the extent that his followers are demonizing Barack Obama. And should he be elected, I will pray that he returns to the McCain of last summer. But from his current policies (what I can make of them, they change so often) I am not hopeful.

    Once again, Christians are allowing themselves to be manipulated by the fear of the “other.” Perfect faith drives out fear. It doesn’t bother me that many evangelical Christians are going to vote for McCain. It bothers me that they seem to think it is “Christian” to try to use fear and falsehood to drive the country apart in order to get their candidate elected.

  36. Kash said

    “Should he be elected President, you can expect to see a new age Obama theocracy emerge, one that will actively seek to infringe on the freedom of speech and freedom of religion of any Americans who do not support him politically.”

    What proof do you have of this outrageous statement?

    The only thing I know of that is in danger of restricting my freedom of speech is the Patriot Act!

  37. Kash said

    You say:
    “With regards to your argument that both Governor Palin and Senator Obama are equally valid Christians, I must disagree.” Then you say, “With regards to Senator Obama’s faith, I will take his profession of Christian faith as genuine.” Those two statements are contradictory. You can not be a little bit Christian. You either are saved, or you are not.
    Then you say:
    “First, let me say that an individual’s personal faith should not be the standard by which their political candidacy should be evaluated. How their faith has influenced their political decisions in their public record, however, is a very valid concern.” Later you say, “The answer to the latter question is simple–Senator Obama’s profession of Christian faith is simply a political tool which he uses to secure his own power, and advance his left-wing, socialist Saul Alinsky inspired political agenda.” Again, you contradict youself. You are judging him by what you THINK he believes.

    Again, why can’t you all be McCain supporters without being Obama denigraters? My disagreement with McCain is on issues. I want health care for all children, lower taxes for the middle class and higher taxes for “rich” people (I count as one, by Obama’s definition, by the way, but feel it is my patriotic duty during war to pay more taxes), and an end to the war in Iraq. Does that make me a socialist? Or a concerned, Christian American?

  38. A,

    I am not judging Senator Obama’s profession of faith.

    I am simply pointing out the fact that his profession of Christian faith is a profession of faith in the Afro-centric Black Liberation Theology of the Trinity United Church of Christ which he attended for about 20 years. That theology is a heresy, not consistent with mainstream Christian theology.

    Read any respected Christian theologian and you will see they all make the same clear point.

  39. A said

    Please help me to understand why some people believe that voting for candidates from one political party is the Christian thing to do. Is is because of the differing views on abortion and homosexuality alone? Are there other reasons?

    I understand the strongly held positions that millions of people hold in opposition to abortion. I share a hatred of the action but not feel hatred toward those who involve themselves in it. What evidence do we have that the “right” elected officials will do more to carry out policies that will complement this view?

    I do not fully understand what seems like hatred toward homosexuality and those involved in it. I am not comfortable with the thought of the actions but I do not beleive that God wants me to hate those involved in it. I feel the same way about smoking, drinking alcohol, robbery, dishonesty, and obnoxious behavior. I am not belittling “the sin” but I am concerned about those who weigh some sins heavier than others. Without Christ, we all stand condemned. I am not making this up. It is clearly communicated from Genesis to Revelation.

    The real danger is not who wins the election. It is the mindset and attitude of many people and how they treat others. The book unChristian says that Christianity has an image problem. How others view Christians is the real problem at hand and how they view us is largely based on how we treat them and each other. Many Christians honestly believe that God’s greatest purpose for His people is to fight the culture war. That is millions of miles away from what is true. His greatest purpose for us is to glorify Him. How you ask…I am glad you asked. When Jesus was asked about the greatest commandment, He said to love God and love others. Are we doingnit and do people feel loved around us? That was what it was like to be around Jesus. Our coworkers, neighbors, family, and friends should feel the same way. During Communion every first Sunday, my pastor reminds us that the Bible tells us to examine ourselves. We must also do this everyday, throughout the day.

    In His Love…

  40. Stanley said

    “Should he be elected President, you can expect to see a new age Obama theocracy emerge, one that will actively seek to infringe on the freedom of speech and freedom of religion of any Americans who do not support him politically.”

    This is why I don’t particularly like neo-conservatives and religious conservatives. There is no reason to think Obama would do that, but you’ll say it for scare tactics to help your man get elected. This highlights the difference between fundamentalists and non-fundamentalists. Fundamentalists don’t understand the burden of proof. Why would you possibly think Obama would impose a theocracy? He isn’t a fundamentalist, hes more of a bible moralist. I’d be much more concerned with Palin (if she ever came into power and my worst nightmare comes true) because she is a fundamentalist, and believes that other opinions are fundamentally wrong.

  41. A and Stanley,

    Both of you seem to be making the same errors that are common among secular progressives and evangeliphobes. Rather than listen to the actual arguments presented, you create your own “straw man” caricatures of politically conservative Christians which are uniformly false.

    A– Your post on number 38 is responding to a set of arguments made by someone other than me. Respond to my arguments, please, not the arguments of others you invent and attribute to me.

    Stanley — If you look at Sarah Palin’s track record, you will note that there is no danger of a theocracy from her governance–she is a firm believer in the Constitutional Separation of Church and State, and has been consistently supportive of an Alaskan “live and let live” philosophy. Obama, on the other hand, dangerously mixes church activism and political activity, all towards the purpose of forcing his socialist policies on the rest of us. He considers himself a prophet, the successor of Martin Luther King, and encourages others to regard him in that manner. One need merely look at the grade schoolers on the internet singing their “hymn to Obama” to confirm that danger.

    Here is but one example of the dangers to freedom of speech that will be posed by an Obama administration. It’s a column from Michael Barone, recently found in the Washington Times.

    The Coming Liberal Thugocracy

    http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/13/the-coming-thugocracy/print

    BEGIN BARONE ARTICLE

    I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors,” Barack Obama told a crowd in Elko, Nev. “I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face.” Actually, Obama supporters are doing a lot more than getting into people’s faces. They seem determined to shut people up.
    That’s what Obama supporters, alerted by campaign e-mails, did when conservative Stanley Kurtz appeared on Milt Rosenberg’s WGN radio program in Chicago. Mr. Kurtz had been researching Mr. Obama’s relationship with unrepentant Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers in Chicago Annenberg Challenge papers in the Richard J. Daley Library in Chicago – papers that were closed off to him for some days, apparently at the behest of Obama supporters.
    Obama fans jammed WGN’s phone lines and sent in hundreds of protest e-mails. The message was clear to anyone who would follow Mr. Rosenberg’s example. We will make trouble for you if you let anyone make the case against The One.
    Other Obama supporters have threatened critics with criminal prosecution. In September, St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch and St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce warned citizens that they would bring criminal libel prosecutions against anyone who made statements against Mr. Obama that were “false.” I had been under the impression that the Alien and Sedition Acts had gone out of existence in 1801-’02. Not so, apparently, in metropolitan St. Louis. Similarly, the Obama campaign called for a criminal investigation of the American Issues Project when it ran ads highlighting Mr. Obama’s ties to Mr. Ayers.
    These attempts to shut down political speech have become routine for liberals. Congressional Democrats sought to reimpose the “fairness doctrine” on broadcasters, which until it was repealed in the 1980s required equal time for different points of view. The motive was plain: to shut down the one conservative-leaning communications medium, talk radio. Liberal talk-show hosts have mostly failed to draw audiences, and many liberals can’t abide having citizens hear contrary views.
    To their credit, some liberal old-timers – like House Appropriations Chairman David Obey – voted against the “fairness doctrine,” in line with their longstanding support of free speech. But you can expect the “fairness doctrine” to get another vote if Barack Obama wins and Democrats increase their congressional majorities.
    Corporate liberals have done their share in shutting down anti-liberal speech, too. “Saturday Night Live” ran a spoof of the financial crisis that skewered Democrats like House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank and liberal contributors Herbert and Marion Sandler, who sold toxic-waste-filled Golden West to Wachovia Bank for $24 billion. Kind of surprising, but not for long. The tape of the broadcast disappeared from NBC’s Web site and was replaced with another that omitted the references to Mr. Frank and the Sandlers. Evidently NBC and its parent, General Electric, don’t want people to hear speech that attacks liberals.
    Then there’s the Democrats’ “card check” legislation that would abolish secret ballot elections in determining whether employees are represented by unions. The unions’ strategy is obvious: Send a few thugs over to employees’ homes – we know where you live – and get them to sign cards that will trigger a union victory without giving employers a chance to be heard.
    Once upon a time, liberals prided themselves, with considerable reason, as the staunchest defenders of free speech. Union organizers in the 1930s and 1940s made the case that they should have access to employees to speak freely to them, and union leaders like George Meany and Walter Reuther were ardent defenders of the First Amendment.
    Today’s liberals seem to be taking their marching orders from other quarters. Specifically, from the college and university campuses where administrators, armed with speech codes, have for years been disciplining and subjecting to sensitivity training any students who dare to utter thoughts that liberals find offensive. The campuses that once prided themselves as zones of free expression are now the least free part of our society.
    Obama supporters who found the campuses congenial and Mr. Obama himself, who has chosen to live all his adult life in university communities, seem to find it entirely natural to suppress speech they don’t like and seem utterly oblivious to claims this violates the letter and spirit of the First Amendment. In this campaign, we have seen the coming of the Obama thugocracy, suppressing free speech, and we may see its flourishing in the four or eight years ahead.

    END BARONE ARTICLE

  42. Stanley said

    TTL, there is a good show idea for ya’ll. A fairness doctrine show.

    Its a difficult question. If people in the media are lying about you, and people believe it because they heard it on an AM 830 or some sort, should you allow them to lie about you, or should you have equal right to defend yourself…

    There are some really good people on AM 830, but also some very evil ones. I forgot his name, but there is one guy who sues teachers for requiring students to watch a “liberal” documentary. The guy is nothing but a crook.

  43. A said

    Mr. Leahy: You are new to this blog and do not realize that not all comments are directed at the program guest. My questions and comments are directed to all bloggers on this site. I assign no arguments to you. If you do not feel that these comments are directed to you, you may choose not to reply without being insulting (a friend was expelled this week for being insulting). I see no need for hostility between brothers in Christ. Are you saying that the “caricatures” that I described in #39 do not exist or that this is not the majority of politically conservative Christians? My point is that many people view politically conservative Christians in this manner. Do you disagree?

    I did as you a specific question in # 33. I may have missed your response.

    Mr. Leahy: Do you apply the same manner of criticism on Senator McCain and others? This is very scary and downright pharisaical…

  44. A.

    This thread specifically relates to questions about Sarah Palin, my book on Sarah Palin, and my book on Barack Obama.

    With regards to your questions about “applying the same manner of criticism to Senator McCain and others” and your further accusation that “this is very scary and downright pharisaical” I did not respond because your question was not at all related to my book, my arguments, or my posts here.

    Perhaps you might try and articulating your question about Senator McCain more clearly in a way that directly relates to my book. Further, you cavalierly throw out an accusation that “this…is downright pharisaical” but provide no evidence to support that contention. It’s my policy not to engage in dialogues which are based merely on unfounded accusations.

    I assume that we are both Christians.

    As a Christian, I would suggest that you not make an accusation of another Christian without a basis in fact.

  45. A said

    Mr. Leahy,

    Calm down my brother. This really is not a battle. The enemy is Satan not those who disagree with you. I apologize for using the adjective “pharasaical” which has clearly made your blood boil. That was not my intention.

    I have no questions about Senator McCain but about your comments. You provided the evidence of your judgment of Obama’s faith not being credible. My “accusation” is founded on your own words. Here are your comments in #32

    “With regards to Senator Obama’s faith, I will take his profession of Christian faith as genuine. However, I note that his profession of Christian faith is to a heretical faith–Black Liberation Theology–which is by no means consistent with the faith of mainstream Christians. Further, the correct question to ask about Senator Obama is not “Is he a Christian?” or “Is he a Muslim?” . The correct question to ask is “How does his profession of Christian faith fit within his overall belief structure?”

    The answer to the latter question is simple–Senator Obama’s profession of Christian faith is simply a political tool which he uses to secure his own power, and advance his left-wing, socialist Saul Alinsky inspired political agenda.”

    I would like to know your thoughts about my other questions directed to you in #43.

  46. A.

    With regards to your questions from #39….

    I think it’s quite clear that abortion is a sin in God’s eyes, and that life begins at the moment of conception. Anyone who has performed an abortion, had an abortion, or encouraged someone to have an abortion has committed a sin. This is not to say there is no redemption for people have committed such sins. The first step, of course, is to acknowledge the sin, then to ask for forgiveness.

    Abortion is not illegal, thanks to Roe vs. Wade, but I would argue that Roe vs. Wade is probably one of the worst decisions ever made by the US Supreme Court. As a matter of public policy, as opposed to theology, I favor any candidate who supports Supreme Court nominees that are likely to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

    I think any Christian who supports Barack Obama, the most avid promoter of abortion rights and the man who actively opposed the right of those babies who survived abortion attempts to live, must recognize that on this one issue they are casting a vote in direct contradiction of the very fundamental basis of Christian belief. Barack Obama is an egregious violator of the civil rights of people in the earliest stages of human development.

    On the matter of homosexuality, I think it is also clearly a sin, but that redemption is available for sincere repentance. I recogize that there are some Christians who are also gay. They, to my mind, are not living all the principles of a Christian life, but much the same can be said for Christians who are not gay.

    Homosexuality is not illegal, nor would I support any candidate who attempts to make it illegal. Broadly speaking, there is plenty of room for Christian fellowship and tolerance for any Christian who struggles with overcoming sin of all kinds.

  47. Kash said

    I am still waiting for someone to provide proof of specific heretical docrtines from Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago.

  48. Kash,

    That’s simple.

    Just go to their website. Read their afro-centric mission statement.

  49. Kash said

    I have.
    i don’t see the heresy.

  50. Kash said

    Mr. Leahy,
    I thought your post #46 was quite honest and presented valid reasons for voting against Obama. Why do you (and others) feel the need to stretch the truth in order to make him appear scary or anti-American or unChristian?

  51. Kasha said

    I am posting this again because it seems to have been lost in moderation.

    Mr. Leahy,
    I have been to TCC’s website and read their statement. I do not see anything that qualifies as “heresy.” Which part of it do you take as heresy?

    Also, I thought your post #46 was an excellent and reasonable explanation of why you don’t support Obama. Why must Obama also be made out to be scary, unAmerican, and unChristian to try and convince people not to support him?

  52. Kash,

    I just went and looked at the Trinity United Church of Christ site. They’ve completely redone it in the past 2 months. They’ve toned down the “afro-centric” nature of Black Liberation Theology, and don’t appear to mention it on the site now. I’ll give it a more thorough review later.

    Here’s an entry from Wikipedia that summarizes the heresies of the Black Liberation Theology taught there:

    START WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE

    Theologians such as theology scholar Dr. Robert A. Morley take a dim view of black theology. Morley’s paper “The Goals Of Black Liberal Theology” is one widely quoted paper citing specific criticisms of black theology.

    He states that black theology turns religion into sociology, and Jesus into a black Marxist rebel. While making statements against whites and Asians, it promotes a poor self-image among blacks, and describes the black man as a helpless victim of forces and people beyond his control. Black theology calls for political liberation instead of spiritual salvation.

    Fundamentally, it is not Bible-based, Christ-honoring theology from this critical viewpoint. [24] Anthony Bradley of the Christian Post interprets that the language of “economic parity” and references to “mal-distribution” as nothing more than channeling the views of Karl Marx.

    He believes James Cone and Cornel West have worked to incorporate Marxist thought into the black church, forming an ethical framework predicated on a system of oppressor class versus a victim much like Marxism.[25]

    END WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE

  53. A said

    Mr. Leahy: Thanks for the info from Wikipedia. This is insightful. I also appreciate your friendlier tone in post #46. We can disagree without being disagreeable.

    Kasha: I like your last question in #51. I think the answer is that many consider themselves to be in a culure war and all is fair in it.

  54. Mike S. said

    There is a rumor going around that our beloved host might be celebrating a birthday today??

  55. A said

    Everyone,

    What is “the very fundamental basis of Christian belief” as mentioned in #46?

    Also, some believe that forgiveness only follows an admission of sin. Is this position substantiated in Luke 15 or Romans 5? Let us not forget what Jesus said from the cross. There are several Old Testament examples as well. I believe the Bible teaches us that God’s forgiveness precedes our request for forgiveness. As we become more like Christ while enhancing our understanding of God’s grace, we too will offer forgiveness before it is even asked.

    Mr Leahy: I realize that these questions do not directly relate to your book or your visit to the radio show. These blog comments often drift away from the original topic. You may choose not to respond.

  56. Mike S. said

    Please allow me to attempt an answer to your question A. I would say that the fundamental basis of Christian belief is that life is precious. So precious that Christ gave His “precious life” so that we could have life in Him through faith alone!

  57. abc's said

    Looking in as an outsider, I would say that the only fundamental Christian belief shared among all Christians is that there is an eternal afterlife.

  58. Mike S. said

    If you loosely define “Christian” as anyone who makes the claim to be a Christian, then you are probably right Abc. I used to be one those claimers (for over 30 years) who did not have a clue what it really meant to trust Jesus Christ for my salvation.

  59. abc's said

    Mike S.

    Yeah, when I think of Christians it brings to mind Jews, Catholics, all the different Protestants, Mormons, Latter Day Saints, etc.

  60. Maz said

    Abc’s: To be a true Christian, you have to believe in and follow Jesus Christ…hence the name CHRISTian. Accepting, believing and following Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is the fundemental. Ofcourse you have to accept also that He died for your sin on the cross and that He rose again from the dead. You have to believe these things to be SAVED. That is SAVED from the penalty of your sin and SAVED from being sent to Hell.
    And Jesus told Nichodemus (a religious Jewish leader!) ”YOU MUST BE BORN AGAIN.”

  61. Tripp said

    Here’s one to pass around:

    http://www.snopes.com/rumors/noflags.asp

  62. John said

    I liked Nichodemus from “The Secret of NIMH”1982.

  63. A,

    I am surprised that you need a more detailed description of “the very fundamental basis of Christian belief”.

    It is simply this — that every human life and soul is precious in God’s eyes.

    This includes the embryo created at the moment of conception.

  64. Kasha said

    “It is simply this — that every human life and soul is precious in God’s eyes.

    This includes the embryo created at the moment of conception.”

    It also includes Iraquis, Iranians, poor children throughout the world (a child dies from hunger every 7 seconds on average), illegal immigrants, etc. It even includes convicted criminals (remember the other two crosses on the hill that day).

    I guess Black Liberation Theology, as decribed by its founder Cone (I did some reading today), doesn’t bother me so much because I agree that God is very concerned with the poor and powerless in the world. And Jesus did tell the rich young ruler to sell all his possessions and give the money to the poor – it doesn’t get much more Marxist than that. (And no, I am NOT a Marxist or a socialist, but I do believe in government safety nets for citizens). When Black theology began back in the 60s, a lot of the poor and powerless in this country were black. We have made great strides as a country, but that doesn’t mean our work to “even the playing field” is done. It just needs to be modified to the current reality.

    So, Mr. Leahy, I understand your concerns and that Black Theology violates your political views. I still think that calling it “heresy” is going too far and contributes to the atmosphere of “us against them” that I think is so damaging in this country right now.

  65. A said

    Mr. Leahy,

    I am not asking for a more detailed description of “the very fundamental basis of Christian belief” like you asked me in #63. I am interested in knowing your thoughts (since these are your words in #46) and thoughts of other bloggers. Your answer explains your passion for the unborn. This is your opinion and I respect it. I also disagree.

    My understanding of “the very fundamental basis of Christian belief” has less to do with humans and much more to do with God. Our purpose is to glorify Him in all that we say and do. This is the main difference between a God-centered worldview and a man-centered worldview. Many believe that our purpose is to fight the culture war (and against our ideological enemies). Jesus says otherwise…check the scriptures.

    You are free to continue with your opinion without the threat of me trying to change it.

    Shalom…

  66. F. L. A. said

    Are you Jewish, A.?

  67. A said

    I am a Christ follower. Why do you ask? I use the Jewish term for peace from time to time when I am moved to do so.

  68. A and Kash.

    Black Liberation Theology is a heretical Christian school of thought, in which a political ideology masquerades as Christian faith.

  69. Barney said

    Like the family values plank of the Republican Party platform!

  70. Tripp said

    Barney – You’re such a flaming liberal.

    This also addresses the BLT:

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/this_could_be_the_game_changer.html

  71. F. L. A. said

    Post#67, I was only curious A.
    My curiosity was aroused from your use of the Jewish term.

    Now Barney,[Unless I am reading too much into your post]if you are thinking of Senator McCain and his new wife as inspiration to your post#69, then in all fairness we must remember those Democrats in the past who’s actions were less than honorable in regards to extramarital affairs. If Hillary Clinton was still with Senator Barack Obama would it not be just as justifiable to bring up the exploits of her husband as a negative example of the Democratic Party? Or would this not count, being a hypothetical situation?

  72. Mike S. said

    Barney’s position is that since one of the Republicans platform is family values, then it’s hypocritical. The liberals don’t have that problem (morals) so they can’t be hypocrites!! 🙂

    just kidding!!!

  73. A said

    Regardless of who you vote for, you’ve got to love the comedy at last night’s Alfred E Smith Memorial Foundation dinner. We should learn a lesson from the civility displayed by both candidates. Rather than their differences and heated battle, they took an evening to focus on something in which they both agree. That is our commitment to the greater good.

  74. Stanley said

    Why do you think people are democrats? Because they hate you and want to counter you opinion out of spite? I think its mostly because they want sound economic policy and giving financial aid to the people living off the scraps from your table. Do republicans have no compassion?

  75. Mike S. said

    I agree A. That was great. Stanley, take a look at Joe Bidens charitable giving. Where is his compassion. Tell me, is it really compassion if it’s mandated by the government? I have a new nickname for Obama. Robamahood!!

  76. Barney,

    Thanks for weighing in.

    However, your comment reveals that you completely misunderstand the distinctions between orthodox Christian faith, heretical Black Liberation Theology, and Republican and Democratic policies.

    I said:

    “Black Liberation Theology is a heretical Christian school of thought, in which a political ideology masquerades as Christian faith.”

    You said:

    “Like the family values plank of the Republican Party platform!”

    First, I was a delegate to the Republican National Convention and I can tell you there was zero discussion of what you refer to as “the family values plank.” While most Republicans do subscribe to the philosophy that a strong family unit is the fundamental building block of society, it’s not really a point of emphasis for the political platform of the party.

    Second, the Republican party is a political party, not a church or a religious faith. So your comparison to my statement about Black Liberation Theology clearly fails on that count.

  77. Barney said

    Someone takes themselves seriously, huh?

  78. A said

    I read #76 a couple times to be sure I read it right. At the GOP convention, there was zero discussion of family values??? That really surprises me because many people have told me that this is the very reason that they vote Republican. If only they knew…

    I will continue to pray for both sides of the aisle.

  79. Beck said

    I listened to this program today and I just read through several of the comments. So many of them do not relate to the topic…am I in the wrong place?

    Here goes anyway, I believe that Sarah Palin is a woman of great moral character and strength. I believe she is a breath of fresh air in this “me, me, me” world of ours.

    I applaud her for one thing – putting herself last. Few of us can compare with her selfless sacrifices and service. No, she isn’t perfect, but she strives to do the right thing. The right thing by whom is what has so many people running scared. She strives to do the right thing by God. She believes the Bible is the word of God and in it are his instructions for all Christians.

    It’s tough these days to put your religion and your religious views out there for so many non-believers to condemn. I admire her for not hiding who she really is. She doesn’t make excuses for her beliefs and she readily admits that she is growing and learning everyday, wow – a real person. I do not see one ounce of arrogance in this woman – wow, again.

    She is the opposite of what our country has accepted as status quo. She is guided by her Creator, not power, not wealth, not popularity. She answers questions with an honest answer because she isn’t afraid to reveal who she is. Look at how many people strive to cover their tracks and dodge questions these days?

    There are so many things about Sarah Palin that I respect and, quite frankly, I think her judgment, her character, her dedication to her state, her country, her family and God qualify her to be trusted more so than any other person that is running for the office of POTUS or VP.

    Her views scare liberals because they are fearful of losing their freedom to live according to the way they want to live. But you can’t make everyone happy and have order. Order is created by rules. Rules that are best for all of society. We rose to become a great nation based upon the rules that our founding fathers believed were best for our nation. Those rules were based on God’s word. So many people have forgotten this. Sarah Palin hasn’t.

  80. Janette said

    Thank you Beck, you took the words right out of my mouth(You are a lot more eloquent than I could have been). Thank God for Sarah Palin. May God bless her and use her in making this country once again, “One Nation Under God”.

  81. Hi Janette –

    We’ve turned this old site off and we’re now located at http://www.truthtalklive.com.

    We have posted your comment here:

    http://www.truthtalklive.com/2008/10/13/what-does-sarah-palin-believe-in/

    Thanks! Moderator

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

 
%d bloggers like this: