rhino: An interesting poll question for the DP
Submitted by rhino on Tue, 06/12/2012 - 17:09I have a hypothesis regarding this so I would like to ask the membership to weigh-in on this two-part question.
Yes Yes
No No
Yes No
No Yes
That would be sufficient.
1. Are you religious? (It doesn't matter whether it be Christian or whatever and it doesn't matter if you attend services regularly)
2. Are you O.K. with Rand's decision to endorse Mitt? (You don't have to agree, but you need to be O.K. with it)
I will post my hypothesis in a day or two or three.
Thank you in advance for participating.
WAHOR!!!
ditto
well said
~peace
No, No
No, No
I will go with
NO and NO
Yes Yes
To clarify spiritual not religious. Ok with it, but in no way will I support Romney.
In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot.
No Yes.
No Yes.
Agnostic/Athiest and while I don't agree with the endorsement, I'd still vote for Rand.
No and No.
I'm agnostic... religion means nothing to me one way or the other. Points to Buddhism for having the lowest body count of any of the major religions.
I'm not happy with Rand's decision to endorse Romney, especially when his dad's supporters are working so hard at the State Conventions. He's hurt himself with the liberty grassroots in a big way. Of course he has the right to do as he pleases, but he must live with the consequences. If he had remained silent until after Tampa, then I'd have a lot more understanding.
Sam Marsh
Musician
http://www.myspace.com/screwthebastards
Yes, No
The truth has no agenda and doesn't need to be explained.
Alternative questions applying our knowledge about God (being all truth, all wisdom, and all knowing) AND the devil (being the liar, the great deceiver, and the perpetrator of all evil):
Would the Almighty endorse Mitt Romney?
Would the devil endorse Mitt Romney?
No Yes
1. spiritual
2. yes, because Rand Paul made some noise about Ron Paul's agenda in some most right-wing circles (Hannity audience, National Review) and might have reached some Americans who have never even heard of Ron Paul. Yes, there are such poor souls among us, as I learned from the polls I had followed till May. Rand bravely made his solitary Trojan Horse entrance into the viper nests. What follows? Much more Ron Paul on MSMs.
Ron Paul ... forever.
Yes and Yes
Yes: Spiritual but normal, not a church nut.
Yes: I don't like it but as freedom fighters we have to support his right to choose his own path.
You may get misleading responses.
Religious? No. Spiritual? Very
Rand/Mitt? Hell No. I bet Rand is counting his 30 pieces of silver right now.
curious:-)
Yes and yes
yes yes
yes
yes
Both questions require more
Both questions require more than Yes/No answers.
I believe in the -teachings- of Jesus Christ, as well as anyone else who teaches that we should love our neighbor as ourselves, turn the other cheek, etc. We should all follow the teachings of Jesus. I do not go to church. Thomas Jefferson is a personal hero of mine.
I do not know Rand, and while from my perspective it does not seem right for him to endorse Romney, I cannot judge him. He is doing what he thinks is right, and another one of my personal heroes, Ron Paul, raised him. If he thinks what he is doing is right, then he should do it, and we will see in the end what role he has to play in all of this. He has done good for the cause of liberty before, we should not just leave him to the dogs. Judge not.
"we should all follow teachings of Jesus"!
Do you approve the mission concentration camps of the 18th and 19th centuries, where the Native Americans were forced to follow the teachings of Jesus (and also work for the Jesuit, Franciscan or Dominican brothers) and denounce their own true religion and beliefs as well as way of life?
How, as a libertarian or liberty seeker, can you impose any "shoulds" about the beliefs of others?
Ron Paul ... forever.
Instead of should, maybe "it
Instead of should, maybe "it is advisable"? I just think we should be good to each other, and if you are listening to people spew hate, that's not me. Do not take me the wrong way.
I'm not saying the government can determine what you believe. I did not even say I believed in God. We should all follow the teachings of lots of people, and learn, and come to our own conclusions, and try to be good to each other.
OK
I understand your intent. Even a non-Christian can act a Christian way - which certainly would make the world a nicer place. Also, those Christian conquistadors in my comment certainly did not act a Christian way but rather were the Military Branch of their Church.
Still, some Americans may feel bad when we discuss ethics and morality by associating them with "Christian" and Jesus. The Native American Church and the native religions were officially banned in the USA until a couple decades ago. The parent generation of Native Americans were forced to attend English "boarding schools" where Native language of the children was disallowed and punished if used. And a Christian religion was imposed on them depending on type of school. This people still suffer the deep trauma of this upbringing. Last such a school was closed in the 70s I believe.
The US government has not yet officially apologized to the Indians (Canada and Australia did).
Ron Paul ... forever.
You have to FIND an Indian first
in order to apologize to him. That's nearly impossible since they killed them all with guns and then redacted history to blame it on some germs.
John F
is that what they teach you at school?
try here:
https://twitter.com/#!/search/%23NDNZ
Do not post there, they are mean and quite alive!
Or here:
https://twitter.com/#!/search/%23rez
I would keep quiet on that one as well. But here's one more:
https://twitter.com/#!/search/%23NativeAmerican
And here are federally recognized tribes by state. You may start with your own:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federally_recognized_tribes_by_...
Ron Paul ... forever.
First of all,
I don't have a Twitter acct. and have never been on the site.
Second, do you really think that posting a link to a f'ing wikipedia article somehow proves there was no genocide? Do you really think that just because there is a long list of recognized tribes on reservations in this country, that proves something?
The 2010 census data shows that American Indians/Native Alaskans make up about 1% of the population. They are not plentiful. Given that, we are a long way from where we would be if they hadn't been wiped out in this country. Do you want to argue that too? What's your opinion on the Indian Removal Act? Do you believe in the evil Manifest Destiny crap as well?
John F
why are you attacking me?
You did not say THIS in your first comment. Your comment suggests that ALL Indian were killed, and this, as you well know, is what many people believe, it is one of the myths about the Native Americans. I took your comment to it's letter and got mad at it. I hope you understand my point. I know how un-plentiful you are and that the history is as fresh as today.
I was born in a country that knows ethnocide and genocide only too well from very recent history. I spent the last 9 years reading on the history of both Americas and its native people and, trust me, I belong to a very small group of white people who are "on the other side of understanding" of the human tragedy and the immensity of crime that was committed onto this Hemisphere. Because of that reading, and also because of my very personal ties with one of the native tribes in the Latin America. They also have been removed from their island and shipped 1,500 miles across the sea to perish. But they survived and multiplied. But their lands and their culture are in danger.
So let us not prolong this misunderstanding. I am very much on your side.
Ron Paul ... forever.
Sorry about the misunderstanding.
Now that I look back at your post, I guess I can see the neutrality of it. The title smacked me in the face (my fault) and I thought your point was to deny those things. Actually, I couldn't believe it. I apologize for the attack.
I should've been more specific in my post. I didn't mean that the Indians were literally extinct. I was exaggerating to make a point about my stance concerning the origins of this country. To me, they are not so pure as some would make them to be. Again, I apologize.
John F
now we know that the world is a litlle bit better...
...and does not contain the two ignorant fools that we each thought that the other was. It is also good to know that Native Americans have at least two passionate defenders on the DP, a Ron Paul supporters site.
Ron Paul ... forever.
Haha.
Nicely put. That ignorant fool Key Largo doesn't even exist. Haaaaa. Agreed, it is very good to know that.
Wish I could remove my former post, but I can't.
John F
No / Yes
No / Yes
NOTE: I am not advocating violence in any way. The content of the post is for intellectual, theoretical, and philosophical discussion. FEDS, please don't come to my house.
How about
Yes and abstain? I cannot pass judgment about Rand, until the hand is played out. Can't judge on hearsay.
Good answer Hi Nonna I' m glad
I'm so glad you liked the gift. Please check out these 2 threads, they are my only means of sale at this point.
http://www.dailypaul.com/241291/could-use-a-little-help-with...
http://www.dailypaul.com/222470/are-you-ready-for-the-summer...
Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected, once it's realized that our Liberties and Wealth are in Jeopardy. -Ron Paul
He's talking about US too.
http://www.dailypaul.com/222470/are-you-ready-for-the-summer...
no and yes
no not religious, although i was raised to believe in god
yes i am ok with rands endorsement, although i don't agree, i still trust him
Yes, Yes
True I may not agree, but I am okay with it. That does not make me want to vote for Romney.
gigione
Nevermind, Found It
.
Yes Yes
Yes, I am religious, though I've been having trouble getting to church every week.
Yes, Rand made a promise during his campaign in 2010 that he would endorse the presidential nominee in 2012. We Paul supporters argue that the nomination is not over, but his endorsement isn't influencing any of our votes. His constituents, on the other hand, have been under the impression that the nomination was clinched a while ago, and the longer he put off endorsing Romney, the more he seemed to break his word. I think after the MSM's California result, he could not put it off any longer.