Mayor Pete Attacks Trump's Faith...

[Tassman]

It was this steaming pile of horsie poo with which you began this derail.

What you charmingly refer to as “horsie poo” was directly relevant to the OP, which was: “Mayor Pete Attacks Trump's Faith...Which is fair, but mayor Mike is a homosexual married to a man. How is that compatible with the Christian faith?”

My response was that “it is the interpretation of scripture that makes the difference”. When slavery was acceptable many people felt able to justify it via scripture. Just as the likes of Buttigieg, as a practicing Christian, interpret scripture in such a way that homosexuality is OK with a loving God.

Yes, you do. A LOT.

Just as you frequently snip posts in a smart-alecky way so as to change their meaning. All very cute.

[Cow Poke]

What you charmingly refer to as “horsie poo”...

...is pretty much any post by you, including ones where you make incredibly ignorant and incorrect statements, then just continue to repeat the same things over and over and over and over.

But I've come to accept the fact that you just can't help it! It's your anti-Christian bigotry in action.

[carpedm9587]

BACK ON TOPIC again....

Time features Pete Buttigieg and husband in ‘First Family’ cover

So, aside from being gay and having a "husband", what qualifies Mayor Pete for the office of POTUS?

One could (and did) ask the same question of the current holder of that office. I'd say he's no worse off than Trump - and better in a LOT of ways.

That being said, while the mayor of some cities can justifiably make a claim to having more executive experience than the governors of many states, I don't think South Bend, Indiana (pop around 100K) is one of those cities. NYC, LA, Chicago, Houston, Phoenix, and Philadelphia, sure. Indeed, the smallest state (by pop) is Wyoming at 577K, so I'd even look seriously at mayors of Vegas, Portland, and Boston, or pretty much any of the top 35 cities (all have populations above 500K). At 301, South Bend doesn't strike me as enough experience n a sufficient scale, though he has been mayor for 7 years.

But then again, Obama did not have a lot of experience. Personally, I think anyone who voted for Trump has probably lost a great deal of credibility in the "what qualifications does he have" discussion. Trump had two qualifications I know of: the ability to play the media like a fiddle and rouse his "base" at the drop of a MAGA hat.

[Cow Poke]

One could (and did) ask the same question of the current holder of that office. I'd say he's no worse off than Trump - and better in a LOT of ways.

That being said, while the mayor of some cities can justifiably make a claim to having more executive experience than the governors of many states, I don't think South Bend, Indiana (pop around 100K) is one of those cities. NYC, LA, Chicago, Houston, Phoenix, and Philadelphia, sure. Indeed, the smallest state (by pop) is Wyoming at 577K, so I'd even look seriously at mayors of Vegas, Portland, and Boston, or pretty much any of the top 35 cities (all have populations above 500K). At 301, South Bend doesn't strike me as enough experience n a sufficient scale, though he has been mayor for 7 years.

But then again, Obama did not have a lot of experience. Personally, I think anyone who voted for Trump has probably lost a great deal of credibility in the "what qualifications does he have" discussion. Trump had two qualifications I know of: the ability to play the media like a fiddle and rouse his "base" at the drop of a MAGA hat.

So, aside from "Trump is bad", no real answer for what qualifies Mayor Pete to be POTUS. Just a bunch of Whataboutism.

[carpedm9587]

So, aside from "Trump is bad", no real answer for what qualifies Mayor Pete to be POTUS. Just a bunch of Whataboutism.

Actually - that's a good call. Much of that post WAS "whataboutism," and you're right to call me on it.

As for Buttigieg's qualifications - beyond appearing to be a decent and honorable human being, and 7 years of experience as mayor of a largish city (so some executive/government roots), for those of us who actually care about qualifications, there isn't much else there. His military experience is a plus (certainly more than Trump did), but it doesn't appear to be the kind of military experience that men like Bush Sr., Cain, Kennedy, and Eisenhower brought to the office and I think it's a mistake for him to over emphasize it.

In short, I put him ahead of Trump, but well behind people like Biden, Kasich, Jeb Bush, Sanders, and Warren. I'd put him about at par with O'Rourke and Harris - which isn't saying a great deal.

[Cow Poke]

Actually - that's a good call. Much of that post WAS "whataboutism," and you're right to call me on it.

As for Buttigieg's qualifications - beyond appearing to be a decent and honorable human being, and 7 years of experience as mayor of a largish city (so some executive/government roots), for those of us who actually care about qualifications, there isn't much else there.

Obviously, running a country is WORLDS different than running - as you call it - a "largish" city.

I put him ahead of Trump, but behind Biden, Kasich, Sanders, and Warren. I'd put him about at par for O'Rourke and Harris - which isn't saying a great deal.

Have you looked at the claims of racism against him?

[Tassman]

...is pretty much any post by you, including ones where you make incredibly ignorant and incorrect statements,

My argument was that the interpretation of scripture varies e.g. the likes of Buttigieg, as a practicing Christian, interprets scripture in such a way that homosexuality is OK with a loving God. And when slavery was acceptable many people felt able to justify it via scripture. Both statements are demonstrably true, not at all "incredibly ignorant and incorrect" as you typically claim.

then just continue to repeat the same things over and over and over and over.

Because they are NEVER addressed OR, as in the case of ‘slavery’, focused solely on the bizarre claim that a major Christian denomination (the SBC) did NOT base one of its major platforms (slavery) upon scripture. Either way, many did attempt to justify slavery and I provided some of the texts used to do so.

But I've come to accept the fact that you just can't help it! It's your anti-Christian bigotry in action.

Diddums!

[seer]

My argument was that the interpretation of scripture varies e.g. the likes of Buttigieg, as a practicing Christian, interprets scripture in such a way that homosexuality is OK with a loving God.

No, he is not interpreting Scripture he is ignoring it, rejecting it. He (you) have no argument, as I have demonstrated more than once.

[Cow Poke]

My argument was that the interpretation of scripture varies e.g. the likes of Buttigieg, as a practicing Christian, interprets scripture in such a way that homosexuality is OK with a loving God.

It's a moronic argument - he's not "interpreting scripture", he's bastardizing it.

And when slavery was acceptable many people felt able to justify it via scripture.

So, you're abandoning your goofy claim that the SBC actually TAUGHT that?

[Cow Poke]

Tass, here's something you don't seem capable of grasping....

Rationalizing and Justifying...

There are things which Christians tend to want to do, and often they will either find a way to justify it by scripture, or simply ignore scripture.
That's what slave owners who were Christians did. Many simply looked for any biblical support they could to justify their sinful actions.
They weren't holding slaves "because the Bible said it was OK" - they were forcing the Bible to allow them to do that which was sinful.

Mayor Pete is going well beyond that. He's ignoring scripture that declares homosexual conduct a sin.

Here's a pretty good explanation of the subject for you to ignore and/or mock:

Is homosexuality a sin? What does this mean?

God's design for natural sexual relationships is part of His plan. Homosexuality falsifies what God designed. Sin often means not only rejecting God but denying or rejecting how and why we are made. Though it may be considered acceptable by some today -- even in some churches -- it is not acceptable to God. And we need to take that seriously.

Sexual sins were rampant in the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. (This is the origin of the word sodomy.) Despite warnings, they refused to repent. God destroyed those cities and it was recorded as a warning to all future generations (Genesis 18:20-21, Genesis 19:4-5, 2 Peter 2:6). Some additional scriptures on homosexuality are found in:

• Leviticus 18:22
• Leviticus 20:13
• Romans 1:26-27

The price paid for homosexuality and other fornications are told in:

• 1 Corinthians 6:9-10
• Jude 6-7
• Romans 1:18

In spite of the growing secular humanist trend to think "it's ok to be gay," it's not a righteous lifestyle. Most vocal Christians are not homophobic, but are trying to share Christ's love for homosexuals and trying to keep them from horrific judgment.

[carpedm9587]

Obviously, running a country is WORLDS different than running - as you call it - a "largish" city.

Have you looked at the claims of racism against him?

I've seen various news about it. So far I'm not impressed. I have not seen anything that is directly about him. It appears to be attempts to paint him with the words/actions of others (e.g., members of the police force, etc.). I expect politicians to get hauled through the muck in this day and age. I look for evidence about the quality of the person.

Buttigieg strikes me as young, idealistic, and energetic. I think his "fresh face" captured attention for a bit. In general, I like him. I do not think, however, that he is presidential material (yet). I also think Trump would clean his clock in the general election, and a good deal of that would be based in the continuing anti-gay position of so many in our country. It's not just - but it is the reality. If Trump is to be shown the door in 2021, Buttigieg is not the one to do it.

[Cow Poke]

I've seen various news about it. So far I'm not impressed. I have not seen anything that is directly about him. It appears to be attempts to paint him with the words/actions of others (e.g., members of the police force, etc.). I expect politicians to get hauled through the muck in this day and age. I look for evidence about the quality of the person.

Yeah, they really need to have something a little more concrete if they want to make that claim.

Buttigieg strikes me as young, idealistic, and energetic. I think his "fresh face" captured attention for a bit. In general, I like him. I do not think, however, that he is presidential material (yet). I also think Trump would clean his clock in the general election, and a good deal of that would be based in the continuing anti-gay position of so many in our country. It's not just - but it is the reality. If Trump is to be shown the door in 2021, Buttigieg is not the one to do it.

[KingsGambit]

I'm not going to wade through 45 pages to see if it's been discussed, but Jacob Wohl (the conservative activist who famously told the media that truth doesn't matter but all that matters is how many people he can get to believe a claim he makes) was caught trying to get men to accuse Mayor Pete of raping them.

I'm relieved that this hasn't made him into a sort of martyr, and kind of surprised too.

[Tassman]

No, he is not interpreting Scripture he is ignoring it, rejecting it. He (you) have no argument, as I have demonstrated more than once.

This is your opinion. Buttigieg obviously disagrees.

[Cow Poke]

This is your opinion. Buttigieg obviously disagrees.

Because he wants to continue his lifestyle and pretend it's OK with God.