Monday, November 01, 2004

take the pagitt challenge

okay, doug has challenged that those of us who are voting and have made up our minds to spend some time thinking about what happens if the 'other guy' wins.

he writes:

I think each candidate for president should be asked, "Given the fact that the other guy has the potential to be president, what do you think would be the upside to that? What benefits would we see if he wins?"
my favorite line is:

When you ask a fundamentalist (the ultimate extreme of "my side" "your side" people) to change their mind, you are asking then to concede far more than a point. You are asking them to leave a community.

Opinions on topics should not create "sides".
coming from a 'fundamentalist background' i want to stay far away from that danger again, so i will take his challenge and try to come up with some 'good things' that might happen if gwb wins on tuesday (or whenever it is they declare a winner).

gosh, this is harder than i thought i might be...

-our child tax benefit won't change.
-he loves his daddy and wanted to get the guy who tried to kill him. (that's why we're in this misguided war really isn't it?)
-i could brainstorm a ministry that might be able to get federal funding for 'faith based initiatives'.
-99% of my church will be happy and i won't have to listen to them whine for 4 years.
-i won't have to take any responsibility for having voted for him.
-he'll have to clean up the mess he's made in iraq.

okay, i'm done. i truly can't think of any more... have i become a democratic fundamentalist? help me!

i know it won't be the end of the world if he wins, we've made it through 4 years, 4 more isn't going to end the world as we know it. i just really want god out of the war. and i'd really like gwb to take responsibility for the mistakes he's made. until he does that i really don't feel like i can trust him.

oh and dick chaney scares the hell out of me. too much power with a bad attitude. i'm also a bit freaked out where that power level will lie if they get in again, and then pass the torch onto someone like arnold or rudolph who don't have the church's best interests at heart... that line of separation between church and state really has gotten blurry hasn't it? remember church - that line was there to protect US!

i will lay this at the feet of james dobson if this intimacy between church and state goes poorly for the church. okay, rant over.

No comments: