Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > General Discussion > Religion & Philosophy
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Religion & Philosophy Discuss More Americans Say Personal Immorality Not Disqualifying for Elected Officials at the General Discussion; Originally Posted by foundit66 Can you contribute to the discussion or is meaningless mocking all you have? Can you explain ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 09-25-2017, 09:57 PM
Bat Bat is offline
Hinged
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 1,700
Thanks: 71
Thanked 1,123 Times in 675 Posts
Default Re: More Americans Say Personal Immorality Not Disqualifying for Elected Officials

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
Can you contribute to the discussion or is meaningless mocking all you have?

Can you explain the shift over time as documented in the article?
Or maybe they saw both candidates as morally deficient and voted for the one they saw as the lesser of two evils.

I know I saw both candidates as morally deficient, worthless, horrid and not worthy of my vote so I didn't vote for either of them.
Some decided to vote for what they saw as the lesser of two evils (on both sides). I see voting for the lesser of two evils still being a vote for evil.
What about you, did you vote for a candidate that you truly felt was a great candidate and would be a great leader of this nation? Or did you vote for the lesser of two evils? Or did you refuse to cast a vote for the offered manure?

I sleep well at night knowing that I stuck by my principles and didn't cast a vote for piece of dung.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Bat For This Useful Post:
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 09-25-2017, 10:02 PM
Surly's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Midwest
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,253
Thanks: 2,797
Thanked 3,060 Times in 2,393 Posts
Default Re: More Americans Say Personal Immorality Not Disqualifying for Elected Officials

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bat View Post
Or maybe they saw both candidates as morally deficient and voted for the one they saw as the lesser of two evils.

I know I saw both candidates as morally deficient, worthless, horrid and not worthy of my vote so I didn't vote for either of them.
Some decided to vote for what they saw as the lesser of two evils (on both sides). I see voting for the lesser of two evils still being a vote for evil.
What about you, did you vote for a candidate that you truly felt was a great candidate and would be a great leader of this nation? Or did you vote for the lesser of two evils? Or did you refuse to cast a vote for the offered manure?

I sleep well at night knowing that I stuck by my principles and didn't cast a vote for piece of dung.
I did the same. Neither were worthy of a vote.
__________________
Grab her by the *****, Vote Roy Moore.

-Donald
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 09-25-2017, 10:08 PM
Bat Bat is offline
Hinged
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 1,700
Thanks: 71
Thanked 1,123 Times in 675 Posts
Default Re: More Americans Say Personal Immorality Not Disqualifying for Elected Officials

Quote:
More than seven in ten (72%) white evangelical Protestants say an elected official can behave ethically even if they have committed transgressions in their personal life—a 42-point jump from 2011, when only 30 % of white evangelical Protestants said the same.
When are we going to see statistics about black evangelicals? Last I looked, black evangelicals exist.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 09-25-2017, 11:00 PM
Joe Shoe's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,168
Thanks: 808
Thanked 1,552 Times in 1,057 Posts
Default Re: More Americans Say Personal Immorality Not Disqualifying for Elected Officials

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bat View Post
When are we going to see statistics about black evangelicals? Last I looked, black evangelicals exist.
And in fact, there are a LOT of them.
__________________
What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand???
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 09-26-2017, 11:20 AM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,519
Thanks: 10,079
Thanked 15,231 Times in 9,231 Posts
Post Re: More Americans Say Personal Immorality Not Disqualifying for Elected Officials

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bat View Post
Or maybe they saw both candidates as morally deficient and voted for the one they saw as the lesser of two evils.

Why would the standard itself change?

If I have to hire somebody for a job and I have to choose between an a-hole and a jerk, that doesn't suddenly make them no longer an a-hole or a jerk. It just means I have limited options.

If they had said "Despite moral deficiencies, we have to choose a president", that would be more in line with what you're discussing.
What the poll demonstrated is people abandoning their morality. As in, they won't have to concern themselves with a President's morality even if we are voting between a (hypothetical) pristine Democrat and an immoral Republican.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bat View Post
I know I saw both candidates as morally deficient, worthless, horrid and not worthy of my vote so I didn't vote for either of them.
Some decided to vote for what they saw as the lesser of two evils (on both sides). I see voting for the lesser of two evils still being a vote for evil.
What about you, did you vote for a candidate that you truly felt was a great candidate and would be a great leader of this nation? Or did you vote for the lesser of two evils? Or did you refuse to cast a vote for the offered manure?
I voted for the lesser of two evils.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bat View Post
I sleep well at night knowing that I stuck by my principles and didn't cast a vote for piece of dung.
Understandable, but in the end your abstinence didn't change the outcome either.
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 09-26-2017, 11:24 AM
Surly's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Midwest
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,253
Thanks: 2,797
Thanked 3,060 Times in 2,393 Posts
Default Re: More Americans Say Personal Immorality Not Disqualifying for Elected Officials

For years I have not understood how a Christian could be a conservative republican. But hey, that is just me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post

Why would the standard itself change?

If I have to hire somebody for a job and I have to choose between an a-hole and a jerk, that doesn't suddenly make them no longer an a-hole or a jerk. It just means I have limited options.

If they had said "Despite moral deficiencies, we have to choose a president", that would be more in line with what you're discussing.
What the poll demonstrated is people abandoning their morality. As in, they won't have to concern themselves with a President's morality even if we are voting between a (hypothetical) pristine Democrat and an immoral Republican.



I voted for the lesser of two evils.



Understandable, but in the end your abstinence didn't change the outcome either.
__________________
Grab her by the *****, Vote Roy Moore.

-Donald
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 09-26-2017, 11:30 AM
Conservative Sage
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 16,401
Thanks: 9,452
Thanked 9,962 Times in 6,081 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to AZRWinger
Default Re: More Americans Say Personal Immorality Not Disqualifying for Elected Officials

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
Joe, I'm going to try to dumb this down for you. Again.
You said:But the problem with such a claim is it only (possibly) looks at ONE of the data points in the article.
There were TWO data points demonstrating a shift in position over time.

You keep wanting to focus on the last data point and assess that leadership is not black and white.
But the problem is that ignores the past where they have had much higher focus on morality for governmental leadership.

You repeatedly insist on ignoring both data points.



You are doing that thing again where you ignore what others are saying while you blindly repeat yourself, failing to appreciate that your response has already been acknowledged and addressed.

To repeat, there are two data points at hand here
More than seven in ten (72%) white evangelical Protestants say an elected official can behave ethically even if they have committed transgressions in their personal lifea 42-point jump from 2011, when only 30 % of white evangelical Protestants said the same.


WHY was there that 42% shift? A rather HUGE shift over that relatively short time-frame.
It's all about ignoring how much of a moral **** Trump is. Evangelicals suddenly realized that to support Trump, they would have to jettison that morality.
And they did...
It is almost surreal to see you criticize others for allegedly ignoring inconvenient facts when you habitually edit other people's comments to delete facts that expose the falsehood of your claim or to create strawmen.

In your braying about a shift among white evangelicals you ignore the text in the same survey stating there has been a shift across the political spectrum. Oh never mind the inconvenient data point, just pontificate about other people jettisoning their morality because well they might have voted differently from what your moral preening dictates.

Evangelical Christians by definition draw their morality from the teachings of Jesus Christ not from what someone tells them. That is a stark contrast from the fungible, ends justifies the means excuse for morality practiced by Democrat elites most notably the Clinton's. Naturally the shift was not as great among Democrats who long ago accepted morality as a partisan weapon having no fixed mooring.
__________________
The Democrat's strategy for the Trump Presidency is the same one used by Stalin's secret police chief "show me the man and I will show you the crime."
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 09-26-2017, 11:37 AM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,519
Thanks: 10,079
Thanked 15,231 Times in 9,231 Posts
Default Re: More Americans Say Personal Immorality Not Disqualifying for Elected Officials

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
It is almost surreal to see you criticize others for allegedly ignoring inconvenient facts when you habitually edit other people's comments to delete facts that expose the falsehood of your claim or to create strawmen.
I have told you repeatedly in the past that I won't quote your dumb thread derailment or strawman arguments.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
In your braying about a shift among white evangelicals you ignore the text in the same survey stating there has been a shift across the political spectrum. Oh never mind the inconvenient data point, just pontificate about other people jettisoning their morality because well they might have voted differently from what your moral preening dictates.
It's not ignored. The fact that other groups have shifted as well was acknowledged in post #1.
I can't help it if everybody that responded afterwards wanted to talk exclusively about the Evangelicals. But of course, you blame me for that...


Moreover, post #1 also had an interesting quote about unaffiliated Americans.
e.g. atheists.
Notably, religiously unaffiliated Americans have remained constant in their views; six in ten (60%) believe elected officials who behave immorally in their personal lives can still perform their duties with integrity, compared to 63% in 2011.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
Evangelical Christians by definition ...

Unless we are going to play the "no true Scotsman" game, this claim is absolutely bogus.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
Evangelical Christians by definition draw their morality from the teachings of Jesus Christ not from what someone tells them.
That's like saying "I'm not eating a fruit. I'm eating an apple!"
Jesus would still be a person...

And moreover, who stands in the pulpit each Sunday and asks for donations.
So that guy isn't telling them about morality?



Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
That is a stark contrast from the fungible, ends justifies the means excuse for morality practiced by Democrat elites most notably the Clinton's. Naturally the shift was not as great among Democrats who long ago accepted morality as a partisan weapon having no fixed mooring.
And this is the part where you just completely make up facts not in evidence...
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 09-26-2017, 11:37 AM
GottaGo's Avatar
Sanity is overrated.
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Miles to go before I sleep
Posts: 11,970
Thanks: 9,806
Thanked 7,929 Times in 5,068 Posts
Default Re: More Americans Say Personal Immorality Not Disqualifying for Elected Officials

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post

Why would the standard itself change?

If I have to hire somebody for a job and I have to choose between an a-hole and a jerk, that doesn't suddenly make them no longer an a-hole or a jerk. It just means I have limited options.
You've limited yourself, the choices aren't limited. You can either look at a third candidate, who, while imperfect, meets most of the standards you need (want) while being neither a a**hole or a jerk.

You chose to think inside the box you were given, rather than thinking of other possibilities. Reasons why we still have a narrow channel two party system that has not served this country well for decades.

Quote:
If they had said "Despite moral deficiencies, we have to choose a president", that would be more in line with what you're discussing.
What the poll demonstrated is people abandoning their morality. As in, they won't have to concern themselves with a President's morality even if we are voting between a (hypothetical) pristine Democrat and an immoral Republican.
How far someone is willing to 'bend' their morality would be based on the understanding of humans, and as I've said before, the degree of moral/judgment lapse.


Quote:
I voted for the lesser of two evils.
That, unfortunately, was what a great many people did - on both sides. Says something is pretty rancid in our political system, doesn't it?


Quote:
Understandable, but in the end your abstinence didn't change the outcome either.
While I have no clue who Bat voted for (or didn't), there were other choices out there. Some would call it foolish to vote for someone not on the 'main' tickets, but unless people actually start voicing their opinions via that 'other party' vote, there always will be only a choice between an a**hole and a jerk.

Since others like to hold the UK up for their healthcare, maybe it's time to look at their political system too?
__________________
Your life is the sum total of the choices you make.
If you don't laugh at yourself, a whole bunch of people will volunteer to do it for you
I never lose. I either win, or I learn....
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 09-26-2017, 11:44 AM
Joe Shoe's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,168
Thanks: 808
Thanked 1,552 Times in 1,057 Posts
Default Re: More Americans Say Personal Immorality Not Disqualifying for Elected Officials

Quote:
Originally Posted by Surly View Post
For years I have not understood how a Christian could be a conservative republican. But hey, that is just me.
One word:
abortion.

For many pro-lifers, it's THE make-or-break issue. If the Democrats were to change to a truly pro-life platform, many, many people, myself included, might seriously consider being one.
Though I could ask the same question about atheists ... why would atheists (who often claim to value individual and human rights) be against the freedom to defend oneself adequately (gun freedoms)?
But hey, that's just me.
__________________
What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand???

Last edited by Joe Shoe; 09-26-2017 at 11:49 AM..
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
americans, disqualifying, elected, for, immorality, more, not, officials, personal, say

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0