UTExan said:

---

---

Blue star

UTExan said:

---

---

I agree, but I'm not sure what this has to do with the subject of the thread. I don't think anyone here is arguing against forgiveness.

UTExan said:

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

Everyone bemoaning post modernism and lack of faith as a standard seems to forget the obvious, that the OP was like inspired by reading the politics board, one which is predominantly Christian.

---

I would suspect OP disagrees vigorously with most of Forum 16 posters regarding POTUS, foreign policy, criminal justice policy and other issues which he can elaborate himself.

---

I'm pretty sure I disagree with everyone on Forum 16, but that's because we have fundamental disagreements on the role, or necessity, of the state itself. I'm not sure what that disagreement has to do with integrity and character. We can disagree and still both have integrity. We can disagree and both be people of character. Since the partisan realm was brought up, here's a good example of this shift on the importance of character that I'm kind of referring to:

Not picking sides or defending whoever that tweet is referring to, but there are some differences between doing things in the oval office and doing them a decade before you run for elected office at all.

I can be a character reference for anybody who needs one.

RetiredAg said:

---

k2aggie07 said:

---

Not picking sides or defending whoever that tweet is referring to, but there are some differences between doing things in the oval office and doing them a decade before you run for elected office at all.

---

True, but Graham made no such distinction. He simply said if Bill were willing to mislead his wife and child, then what would prevent him from doing so as President. That "misleading" is a reflection of his character whether in office, or out. Graham saw that in 1998, but he doesn't seem to view it as a reflection of the current POTUS' character and the people's ability to trust him.

Please note, this was not meant to make this a debate about Trump, but moreso to reflect what seems to be a shifting view on the importance of character in a person.

---

I think the shift is on the view of government and it's permissiveness of religious practice, not leaders. That shift has forced believers into uncomfortable choices which are then portrayed as referendums on their character, rather than a reactionary response of increasing desperation. Eight years of not a peep on O's character and all of a sudden it's a question for every conservative believer to account for.

Quote:

---

Eight years of not a peep on O's character and all of a sudden it's a question for every conservative believer to account for.

---

This highlights my point. There may not have been a peep from those of the Obama tribe, but there were plenty from the opposing tribe. Now, it's flipped. So in this example, it seems that character and integrity don't matter when it comes to those within ones tribe, but it does for those in competing tribes. It highlights the hypocrisy that we see manifested clearly within the partisan political realm, when it comes to issues of character and integrity. If one is hypocritical with regards to character being important, than can they really say character is important? See Franklin Graham.

Again, though, this was not meant to be an Obama vs Trump, Repub vs Dem, left vs right, etc debate. The issue is the disregard, or lack of consistent concern regarding character in society that politics only seems to highlight.

Actually there's a bit that happened prior to trump. We can't act like McCain and Romney were treated well (Romney was roundly mocked for his stance on Russia as being a threat). And to the point, when regular treatment of one party's representatives is the same, eventually people stop caring about character and focus on the platform. This is the shift as I said before - it's not about integrity and character. If you're going to be called racist, misogynist, xenophobic, homophobic, islamaphobic, etc. no matter who you run eventually the only appeal is platform. Why should I care about those labels if they apply to everyone I support? Who can get things done? Who will protect my religious freedom? Speech? 2A? The idea that trump arose in some vacuum is farcical and the slander of others' character is simplistic.

Edit: Romney killed a woman with cancer. McCain/Palin are why giffords got shot. It goes on and on. Pence wants electro shock therapy for the gays.

Astro you remember O getting the same treatment right? Wait, no you don't. And it's not because of age either. It's because every R is a terrible human being.

Quote:

---

it's not about integrity and character. If you're going to be called racist, misogynist, xenophobic, homophobic, islamaphobic, etc. no matter who you run eventually the only appeal is platform

---

It is about integrity and character when one is willing to overlook one's integrity and character simply because they may be "mistreated" no matter what. Integrity and character matter regardless of how one is treated. That's what separates high character/integrity people from low. So, in the example we've latched to unfortunately, we have Christian "leaders" doing a complete 180 on the subject simply because it's their "platform".

So you end up with someone like Graham to whom, 20 years ago, the character of a husband and father was an indicator of the level of trust one could hold in them, yet now it matters not. Not to mention the damage that people like Graham do to the witness of the church when their hypocrisy is put on full display.

RetiredAg said:

---

AGC said:

---

RetiredAg said:

---

Quote:

---

it's not about integrity and character. If you're going to be called racist, misogynist, xenophobic, homophobic, islamaphobic, etc. no matter who you run eventually the only appeal is platform

---

It is about integrity and character when one is willing to overlook one's integrity and character simply because they may be "mistreated" no matter what. Integrity and character matter regardless of how one is treated. That's what separates high character/integrity people from low. So, in the example we've latched to unfortunately, we have Christian "leaders" doing a complete 180 on the subject simply because it's their "platform".

So you end up with someone like Graham to whom, 20 years ago, the character of a husband and father was an indicator of the level of trust one could hold in them, yet now it matters not. Not to mention the damage that people like Graham do to the witness of the church when their hypocrisy is put on full display.

---

You've missed the point and I'm not sure how. We get that you don't like Graham, baptists, MQB, and the politics board. The point is that when more principled people are treated the same way, why should you believe the criticisms? You're read the fable about the boy who cries wolf, right? That's the press. And you to a certain extent.

---

And you talk of me missing the point? This has nothing to do w/ "not liking" Graham, Baptists, MQB or the politics board. Nice strawmen though (odd too, given that nobody mentioned Baptists or MQB). This isn't about Trump, no matter how much you may try to make it so. This is about how we seem to have a decline in the emphasis on character and integrity in our society. Trump, Graham, etc are merely examples of this. Since this is somehow stuck on the political aspect, this is something that we see in both sides. Tribalism tends to be blinding though.

What am I crying wolf about? What criticisms am I believing that I shouldn't?

---

Now re-read my posts together and see if you can understand. Your questions aren't pertinent.

AGC said:

---

Part of what you're feeling is maturity and experience. We are taught basic truths at home and in history classes when we grow up that we believe without questioning. As we age we start to realize that people's motivations are complex and that what we were taught is less factual than we thought.

---

Quote:

---

Humanity has always had a mix of exceptional people and dewshes, with all falling somewhere on that spectrum.

---

I agree w/ both of these. I"m not convinced that there were more people of character in 'the old days'.

I do think social media has allowed people to show their darkside without consequence, but that doesn't mean that darkside wasn't there before.

Macarthur said:

---

I"m so worn out on the pathetic 'it's the media bull****'.

---

Riveting. Five stars. Would read again.

AGC said:

---

RetiredAg said:

---

AGC said:

---

RetiredAg said:

---

Quote:

---

it's not about integrity and character. If you're going to be called racist, misogynist, xenophobic, homophobic, islamaphobic, etc. no matter who you run eventually the only appeal is platform

---

It is about integrity and character when one is willing to overlook one's integrity and character simply because they may be "mistreated" no matter what. Integrity and character matter regardless of how one is treated. That's what separates high character/integrity people from low. So, in the example we've latched to unfortunately, we have Christian "leaders" doing a complete 180 on the subject simply because it's their "platform".

So you end up with someone like Graham to whom, 20 years ago, the character of a husband and father was an indicator of the level of trust one could hold in them, yet now it matters not. Not to mention the damage that people like Graham do to the witness of the church when their hypocrisy is put on full display.

---

You've missed the point and I'm not sure how. We get that you don't like Graham, baptists, MQB, and the politics board. The point is that when more principled people are treated the same way, why should you believe the criticisms? You're read the fable about the boy who cries wolf, right? That's the press. And you to a certain extent.

---

And you talk of me missing the point? This has nothing to do w/ "not liking" Graham, Baptists, MQB or the politics board. Nice strawmen though (odd too, given that nobody mentioned Baptists or MQB). This isn't about Trump, no matter how much you may try to make it so. This is about how we seem to have a decline in the emphasis on character and integrity in our society. Trump, Graham, etc are merely examples of this. Since this is somehow stuck on the political aspect, this is something that we see in both sides. Tribalism tends to be blinding though.

What am I crying wolf about? What criticisms am I believing that I shouldn't?

---

Now re-read my posts together and see if you can understand. Your questions aren't pertinent.

---

How about you try to discuss things without the condescension? That will be much more fruitful. Please explain to me, without the strawmen and falsehoods, what I'm missing. You said that I am "to a certain extent" crying wolf. Please explain.

Quote:

---

I do think social media has allowed people to show their darkside without consequence, but that doesn't mean that darkside wasn't there before.

---

That very well may be true. The internet and social media has allowed people to show their true selves, and perhaps that's what so alarming. It's a matter of comparing the fronts people would present in the past versus the anonymous exposure of their true person now.

AGC said:

---

Macarthur said:

---

I"m so worn out on the pathetic 'it's the media bull****'.

---

Riveting. Five stars. Would read again.

---

Martin Q. Blank said:

---

RetiredAg doesn't like me?

---

Don't believe others when they bear false witness. No matter our past encounters, I have no dislike for you at all. You're a brother in Christ and I love you.

RetiredAg said:

---

AGC said:

---

RetiredAg said:

---

AGC said:

---

RetiredAg said:

---

Quote:

---

it's not about integrity and character. If you're going to be called racist, misogynist, xenophobic, homophobic, islamaphobic, etc. no matter who you run eventually the only appeal is platform

---

It is about integrity and character when one is willing to overlook one's integrity and character simply because they may be "mistreated" no matter what. Integrity and character matter regardless of how one is treated. That's what separates high character/integrity people from low. So, in the example we've latched to unfortunately, we have Christian "leaders" doing a complete 180 on the subject simply because it's their "platform".

So you end up with someone like Graham to whom, 20 years ago, the character of a husband and father was an indicator of the level of trust one could hold in them, yet now it matters not. Not to mention the damage that people like Graham do to the witness of the church when their hypocrisy is put on full display.

---

You've missed the point and I'm not sure how. We get that you don't like Graham, baptists, MQB, and the politics board. The point is that when more principled people are treated the same way, why should you believe the criticisms? You're read the fable about the boy who cries wolf, right? That's the press. And you to a certain extent.

---

And you talk of me missing the point? This has nothing to do w/ "not liking" Graham, Baptists, MQB or the politics board. Nice strawmen though (odd too, given that nobody mentioned Baptists or MQB). This isn't about Trump, no matter how much you may try to make it so. This is about how we seem to have a decline in the emphasis on character and integrity in our society. Trump, Graham, etc are merely examples of this. Since this is somehow stuck on the political aspect, this is something that we see in both sides. Tribalism tends to be blinding though.

What am I crying wolf about? What criticisms am I believing that I shouldn't?

---

Now re-read my posts together and see if you can understand. Your questions aren't pertinent.

---

How about you try to discuss things without the condescension? That will be much more fruitful. Please explain to me, without the strawmen and falsehoods, what I'm missing. You said that I am "to a certain extent" crying wolf. Please explain.

---

It's not condescension. It's frustration. I've explained my stance quite a bit and you don't seem to put my responses together. When every candidate is treated the same regardless of actual character and integrity, the criticism is eventually disregarded. Hence the Romney and McCain references. Both were immintently better people derided as murderers and a great many other things. Look at how Pence has been treated for going out of his way to be above reproach in his marriage. Quite simply, it doesn't matter who has an R next to their name. They'll be slimed and mistreated. So why should people pay attention to it? Further the malfeasance and criminal behavior of those currently in power resisting and attacking trump from the DoJ and FBI undermine such character claims.

Beyond that you fundamentally disagree with the idea of voting for the lesser of two evils. How could you ever accept what is viewed as a reasonable explanation by most, including a great many Christians? How will you ever be satisfied by the answer if you reject the basic premise?

Quote:

---

Quite simply, it doesn't matter who has an R next to their name. They'll be slimed and mistreated. So why should people pay attention to it?

---

Oh, it most certainly is condescension. It may be rooted in your frustration, but that frustration manifests itself with condescension.

As to the above quoted section, first that cuts both ways. Both tribes are guilty of it. It's the byproduct of tribalism. And people should pay attention AND be discerning with what they hear. That Pence was wrongly demonized for his stance on one-on-one meetings with other women doesn't make information about Trump, or anyone else, automatically worthy to be dismissed. We've got to be better than mindlessly dismissing something simply because you think others are treated unfairly. Criticism of Pence is independent of criticism of Trump cheating on another wife w/ a porn star then paying her off. Should we believe all criticism blindly? Of course not. Should we dismiss it blindly? Of course not. Both are equally careless. Mindlessly dismissing information simply because others are wrongly smeared is to reject discernment.

So, going back to Graham's comments. 20 years ago, he believed that a man who would cheat on his wife, mislead her and his daughter, was unfit to be trusted by the population. There was no stipulation that it occur while president. Now, a person can repent and rebuild that trust, but we will typically be able to see the fruits of repentance. But Graham did a complete 180 in 20 years on the subject. 20 years ago, private character mattered. Now, it appears that it does not. Given that we've seen nothing from either person (Clinton or Trump) that would indicate repentance, I'm not sure how he's coming to radically different conclusions. Either character matters or it doesn't.

Woody2006 said:

---

OP knows better than to go to forum 16 looking for integrity and character.

---

It was really one particular comment, or actually a general sentiment I've seen growing, that prompted the OP. I'm starting to see more and more people say things like "I don't care how often (insert face of my tribe) lies to me. I just care about results." To me, that is telling. To me, that's saying character does not matter. Results trump character, which as a Christian, I find abhorrent no matter what tribe spews it.

Quote:

---

I find abhorrent no matter what tribe spews it.

---

I don't come here often, but I can tell which tribe you are apart of. Or at least which one you "abhor" more. Even though you say "both tribes do it". It seems you only bring attention to one.

RetiredAg said:

---

I'm starting to see more and more people say things like "I don't care how often (insert face of my tribe) lies to me. I just care about results my team winning."

---

fify