<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffcc" text="#000000">
Jon Glass wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:9dda85c60909242350m2877b4c9s932afe6bb7553c54@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 5:32 AM, Fred A. Miller <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:fmiller@lightlink.com"><fmiller@lightlink.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I don't know of it's the most lame thing I've read or not, but I posted it
for consideration. Just because I post something, DOESN'T mean I subscribe
to it.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
You know, I get a ton of forwarded emails from people. We all know the
type... I can't imagine a single one of them being forwarded to me
just for consideration. :-) If you really don't subscribe to
something, why not post a disclaimer? You post a link, and it is going
to be presumed, due to the fact that you forwarded it, that you
subscribe to it.
</pre>
</blockquote>
'Didn't have time to post a disclaimer. Outside of that, there's
frequently posts <br>
here that I'm quite sure are posted for discussion with the poster
either not <br>
in full agreement or not sure of his/her position.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:9dda85c60909242350m2877b4c9s932afe6bb7553c54@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
Beyond that, if you post, be prepared for discussion, comments and
disagreement (as well as agreement). If you don't want that, again,
let us know.
</pre>
</blockquote>
I posted it for discussion.....never intended it any other way.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:9dda85c60909242350m2877b4c9s932afe6bb7553c54@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">As to political involvement, IMHO, I am and I encourage others to do the
same. Not long ago, a local pastor (not mine) told me that for at least the
past 3 generations, most Christians didn't get involved....kept their mouths
shut and just did "their own thing." Now we're paying the price for that.</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:9dda85c60909242350m2877b4c9s932afe6bb7553c54@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">The issue isn't about involvement, but _how_ we get involved. As
Bible-believers, we ought to be principled in our approach, not
pragmatic, or worse, emotionally-driven. This article was an attempt
to justify the latter, IMO. And that is what our brother was
addressing as well, only giving a well-thought-out counter argument.
</pre>
</blockquote>
I suspect he was doing that, but I'm not certain that was all the
author was <br>
trying to accomplish.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:9dda85c60909242350m2877b4c9s932afe6bb7553c54@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
This issue is certainly one that needs to be discussed, IMO, as the
rhetoric rises to unheard-of decibels! Christians ought to be
principled, reasonable and reasoned in their approach, and above all,
Christ-like. (not poking Nero in the eye, so to speak--leave that to
the infidels[like Rush]) ;-)
</pre>
</blockquote>
I agree that we need to take the "high road," which ISN'T easy these <br>
days, at times. Of course, if Obama and his Czars have their way, <br>
soon we won't be able to voice any Christian position contrary to <br>
their policies or face fines and/or imprisonment. I'm certain that day <br>
isn't very far off.<br>
<br>
Fred<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
A REVOLUTIONARY IDEA!
'Time to put Nana Pelosi in a home!'</pre>
</body>
</html>