From: nils@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Nils Gokemeijer)
Subject: Re: Results of US Elections
Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 18:03:40 GMT

In article <92311.130213ISSCCK@BYUVM.BITNET> <ISSCCK@BYUVM.BITNET> writes:
>
>Adopted from: <LDS@Pa.dec.com> Resent-From: <ISSJEM@VM.BYU.EDU>
>
>I know a lot of conservative Christians supported George Bush in this recent
>election, and I know that some people actively claimed it would be a sin to
>vote for someone who was pro-choice on abortion.
>
[stuff deleted about imorality]
>
>200 years ago, when this nation was founded, human lives were traded as
>property.  Children were sold from their parents, people were kidnapped
>from their homes, and owners regularly had sex with female slaves, forcibly
>if need be.  Those who tried to escape this system were executed, often
>without any kind of trial. We had a big war to end it, but (surprise) the
>country is still here.
>
>If God didn't wipe us out for allowing rape, murder, child molestation,
>kidnapping, and breaking up families, I'm rather astonished that anyone
>thinks a homosexual rights bill is going too far.

If you want to be reminded of the grate humanity of humankind (NOT!) go see

	"The Last Of The Mohicans" (playing in the JNHS)

Not a great movie, but very NICE scenery (North Carolina) and lots o' Blood.

-Nils 


[stuff deleted about why bush lost]

The high corrolation between being the tallest candidate and winning 
the election was proven once again. Americans believe every word the
president says ( or every word the media says the president says),
and thus vote for the person that comes over stronger (i.e. taller)

>
>So far, the best thing posted on this election was "what about November
>4th?"  The world is still spinning, and sinners are still dying.  And it
>is up to us to do something about it.
>
>I'd like to observe to the Christians who supported Oregon's Measure 9
>about creating state opposition to homosexuals), who opposed Maryland's
>abortion rights measure, and who supported trying to make the country run
>on "Christian principles" by electing pro-life presidents, is this: it
>hasn't worked.

You must understand that these laws are not simply black/white, there is 
a lot of grey area involved. In Maryland, parents are legally completely
responsible for their children under 18. A doctor needs parental consent
for every medical treatment, except abortion! where is the logic ? 
Ofcourse people are apealing question 6, and the discussion will continue.

What about abortion after a doctor has determined it is a boy, but you 
really wanted a girl?
(that is why there is this 10 week orso ruling)

I am pro-Choice, but I think both sides should loosen up a little.

>
>Twelve years of pro-life Presidents, and abortion is still legal everywhere
>in the US.  Thousands of dollars spent in Oregon, and Measure Nine failed.
>Millions spent on Mr Bush's re-election, and he won't be around much longer.
>Maybe the lesson in here is that the government is not a proper tool, or at
>least not one that is going to work very well.  If all that money spent on
>electing pro-life presidents had been used to fund clinics to help women
>carry children to term, a lot more children might have been walking around.
>
>Casper.    isscck@byuvm.bitnet

If no money was spend on meetings and the government at all, and we would
have only one person in charge (kinda like a dictator) there would be 
billions of extra dollars that could be spend on humane things, but 
unfortunately democracy costs money. I would not want it any other way.

-Nils Gokemeijer