Pensees: Why Don’t African-Americans Want Leaders Like This?

On the other hand, most of us reading this to whom it would apply don’t support a liberal candidate whose skin color is like ours (white, brown, etc). To speculate on what Redmond has said a little, it does seem that many in the demographic in question to the degree they have an ideology (or have been indoctrinated or exposed to one), have one that matches Obama’s for the most part. I suppose, however, that the influences that would pass that ideology and worldview on would certainly not be limited to that particular segment of the population.

ok, i need a safe place to ask some questions or at least propose some theories.

i know there’s been this huge outcry that abortion and stuff is not deciding issues in a candidate. this man does not support that view here; he votes pro-life.

concern for life has been a huge distinctive of america, as a country, as compared to other countries. (2% of the world’s abortions are performed in american, but 98% of pro-life funds is spent in america.) does a pro-life view or pro-abortion view effect the other spheres that the government dabbles in, like health care, education, war, etc. ?

restated: does a moral or immoral concern for life in the area of abortion influence how a leader governs other areas in general?

i mean, it’s all over the place here in post-communism. no concern for or repect for unborn life, and this type of disrespect and cruetly is seen in many other venues, like the government health clinics.

is it connected? not necessarily? to what extent? any other countries where you can see this or not?

If

or, is it that there was (here) a pointed disregard of God and any moral standards and that led to abortion, poor and cruel treatment? not so much that pro-abortion is the start, but a general disrespect of God’s laws?

maybe that’s another way to state it better.

Good questions. I have thoughts, but I’ll wait in the hope that others chime in first.

It does seem to me that in making these decisions, the candidate’s regard (or lack thereof) for life in its most basic forms will surely be a factor in indicating how he/she might respect and uphold other matters of God’s order. That being said, it also seems to me that we should also consider how our vote communicates what we uphold and respect, regardless of the outcome of the overall election.

How one views abortion can also indicate the proportion of influence between pleasure and duty for an individual. Consider Douglas Wilson:

I have in recent posts been describing abortion as the bloody sacrament of the secularists. And I do believe that the innocents in that particular carnage are the sacrifice made to the deified god of orgasm. Put another way, sexual pleasure, detached from the fruitfulness of marriage, is one of the greater gods in their particular pantheon. At one end autonomous sexual pleasure is demanded, and at the other end we see that the demand was made in earnest. 40 million abortions means that there had to have been at least forty million orgasms, and our cultural leaders still think the trade-off well worth it.

i just also see that in most of the world, abortion is not even an issue in elections. maybe no where in the world is it an issue.

but most countries of the world are the total pits to live in and they are all trying to live in america. maybe it’s related?

my mom once got into a govt-funded forum on democracy in america. they debated and criticized america (the man from Poland was in tears trying to get people to understand how great america is). but in the end, they all came to the conclusion that democracy is impossible without moral underpinnings.

it is so true! but when most people start to really understand that is when it’s already gone. that’s why i think government is about preserving (Biblical) morality on some level. if they don’t see this as a main job, they themselves and the whole country with them go to the pits of corruption—nothing remains to hold them up.

The author of the article makes a great point saying that African Americans only want certain types of “their own” to lead them. The same can be said of women. Look at the treatment that Sarah Palin received from the media and women’s groups. When they should have been celebrating the rise of women to such a position, they were tearing her down for not being the RIGHT KIND of woman. One woman stated, “the only thing that Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton have in common is a chromosome.” And that wasn’t meant as a complement.

As for the idea of abortion affecting everything else about a candidate, I believe that the acceptance of abortion has a direct line to the whole hearted acceptance of Darwinism, and it fits in with the liberal mindset of total liberty without consequence or sacrifice.

In other words, I would say accepting abortion indicates how they will govern in other areas (stem cell research or welfare), but is also simply one manifestation of throwing off all authority and self control, and only accepting those things that are immediately beneficial with no thought to consequences or how it might affect someone else.

you are being VERY magnanimous. And i will be a little perhaps non-magnanimuos to these rejoicing minority poeple by saying that if sarah palin or alan keyes had been elected, these minority people wouldn’t be celebrating. they would be in the dumps like a lot of republicans are.

i think they are celebrating a world view as much as (or more than?) a skin color. But it’s evangelistic and wise to connect with people thru this factor, i think. at least it gives ground to start being heard and making friendships.

i think camille lewis would deem you a comedy, fwiw :)

sorry, i got my threads tangled!