Sharron Angle: Entitlements Turn Government into God, Violate 1st Commandment

If the candidate insists on violating the first amendment of the constitution by attempting to establish a ntational religioun, she ehould remember the words of Paul. First women should be suject to the man, and not attempt to take on leadership roles in either church or society. Second, from the letter to the Romans, christians be subject to the civil government, for it has been placed over you by God. Given these two statements, she, as the "good Christian" she claims to be should pull out of the election and be subject to the words of Paul, and the government.

First off, the amendments to the constitution were allowed to be created and then created because the founding fathers new that future generations would need to grow, ie nixing slavery, right to vote, etc. Alright, I'll have a say about separation of church and state. Religion is the belief and worship of a supreme being or the philosophy of some supernatural existence (and then it has to be recognized by the government as a religion - kind of odd) . Any being that is supreme would have the ultimate say on how we should live our lives and give judgement on those who do not live as the supreme being believes. Those who have been documented, assigned, declared, or credited as understanding the wishes of said supreme being are those would be given the greatest degree of credibility. Therefore, the greater the religious leader the more power. If the government were to create laws that respected the establishment of a religion (a religion of the state) , they would hand the keys over to the leaders of that religion. Hey, does this sound familiar. Anybody here heard of any countries that established laws respecting certain religions. How about the entire mideast. It is only because of religious zealots in the US that we have "In God We Trust" on money or "Under God" in the Pledge. I don't want the government in any religion because the religion they favor may not ultimately be the one I would choose to believe. Stay out of my religion and I'll keep my religion out of the government. Otherwise, I might someday be bowing down to Zeus. (How very Greek of me)

She is not a zealot. She's being interviewed on a religious oriented show and is making comparisons the viewers can relate to. Yes, if you depend on the government for EVERYTHING, are you not making government the God in your life? Evidently the govt dependent folks in New orleans did not have enough sense to just get out of the city on their own before Katrina hit them. They kept waiting for govt run buses to take them away. They lost the ability to think and act for themselves. At least a religious person believes they are accountable for their actions to someone. Ditch Harry Reid.

Angle has been grossly misquoted about Social Security. Anyone who thinks she wants to leave seniors high and dry with no SS benefits is very much mistaken. What Angle is proposing is that the government will no longer be able to raid the SS trust fund. The government has been taking money from the SS trust fund for years and this means that all the money you and I have put into it is long gone to pay for their pet projects. Angle wants to end that, not the entire Social Security program. Reid and the rest of the Demorats have been lying and AOL and Lawrence are backing them up.

Numbers, concepts and ideas can be made to look anyway you wish if you work at it long enough. The truth is unimportant. Let us just look at two areas and see where this story might be a little tilted to the left. 50% of all American wage earners pay 97% of all Federal Income Tax. The lower 50% pay the rest. The top 10% of wage earners pay 71% of those taxes, so what, some pay a lot and some pay a little or nothing. Are her numbers off that much, no not really. Now about praying to G*D and asking for help, who she look to? Should we chastise all Americans who do this on a daily basis? If we did there would be a whole of chastisen goin on around here don’t you think?

C'mon Sharron. Get off the "God" thing. We all respect your right to worship whomever you please but please keep it out of politics. Some of us were really excited about you bumping that fossil Reid, but now it's coming down to "the lesser of the evils". Please show some individuality and "Jan Brewer gumption".
We already have a religious zealot in the white house.

Why does Sharron want to become a part of something (government) that she believes should not exist? It's so easy to throw around rhetoric with a slant towards some group or faith (Christianity in this case). It's mumbo jumbo because it confuses the issue at hand. Unfortunately, many Christians will probably buy into the rhetoric simply because it's slanted towards their beliefs - even if there is no logical basis to it! Do you depend upon your car to get you to work? Oh no, that's idolatry! We are supposed to depend upon God to supply our needs, not a machine! I'm not saying who should or shouldn't win the election. I'm just tired of hearing all this rhetoric from politicians who want to get into government - a government they want to see shrink. HELLO?

Does Sharon Angle undestand the seperation of church and state? I don't care about the 10 commandments, I do care about the constitution.

I suppose I don't understand the meaning of a 'secular government'. Is that a government which gives the church (god) a tax free status on church business and operations, puts god on the money, places god in the pledge of allegiance, places god in the public oaths of office, and prays to god during government functions such as congressional assemblies?

What would Jesus do?
Jesus supported those in need. He would give away all his possessions. He would shelter those in need, feed the hungry, comfort those in need. Jesus was much more "liberal" in his deeds and speech. He would want people educated. He would want us to protect the natural world which he would consider as a gift from his father. Stewardship, love, giving, understanding....
What Jesus would not do?
Jesus would not carry a gun but want us to lay them down. He would not turn his head from others but offer his love and guidance. Jesus would not start wars but try to find the best way to live with others. Jesus would not have hatred in his language but want all to love each other as they are. He would not want us to spoil the land but conserve it for the generations to come.
So what sounds more like Jesus, the Religious right wing or the liberal conscious? The answer is pretty obvious. The religious right are religiously wrong in most of their agenda while the liberal conscious abide by more of the sayings of Jesus without having to worry about quoting the commandments. Think about that when you want to vote for the "more" religious people on the ballot. Jesus would have been a liberal democrat. In reality, Judas was really more of the right wing mentality. He was constantly critical of Jesus' giving and of who he associated himself with. Maybe the religious right should change their saying to, "What would Judas do?".