RE: Comparing where the candidates stand on religion.
September 25, 2012 at 3:02 pm
(This post was last modified: September 25, 2012 at 3:14 pm by Napoléon.)
(September 25, 2012 at 1:50 pm)cratehorus Wrote: you're just saying we should abolish Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid
What a fucking ridiculous leap you just made, this is actually worthy of hall of shame material IMO.
(September 24, 2012 at 6:21 pm)whateverist Wrote: Well you just keep faith with what you believe then. Blowhard man says there is no appreciable differences between the candidates in terms of their approach to religion.
I'll clarify one more time so you might get it.
What he said about either candidate with regards to their religious stance is irrelevant to the actual point he was making.
In actuality the presidential candidate can be whatever they wish, so long as the label themself a christian.
THE POINT:
American presidential candidates must call themselves christian. Otherwise there is more chance of a pig flying than them winning.
What you're saying with regards to who is or is not more christian, or the differences between them is not in any way diminishing Penn's overall point.
Sure, he may be wrong, there may be applicable differences, but what he was saying was that they don't bloody matter. So long as they call themselves christian.
In effect he has the exact same mindset as you when you say you would rather have a christian who is good at the job than an atheist who is awful. Why? Oh that's right, because he made the point that the label they choose to give themselves is actually completely irrelevant to getting the job done.
You get it now? Is it really that hard to understand? I put all the important bits in bold so you might more easily identify them.
