I can rant about how fucked up the modern protest movement is because I am a protestant. Though it really doesn't matter. Any person of any creed is justified in criticizing the protestant movement, any religion really, but particularly the protestants.

How can the protestants justify their vote for the republicans with issues like strong national defense and family responsiblity? I can come up with no sufficient answer, and I've wasted the last 5 days trying to come up with one.

I think we can safely define 'strong national defense' and 'family responsibility' as BIG FUCKING EUPHONISMs. Strong national defense equates to a very agressive and often unilatteral approach to foreign policy. Diplomacy is not a part of 'strong' national defense. Third party countries are ignored unless they are directly involved in our pursuit of righteousness. (Note: I realize North Korea is an exception to this, but it is not because S.Korea, China, Japan, Russia are apart of the discussion with N.Korea.) 'Strong' national defense means, to repubs, preemption where ever Bush decides is necessary. This type of defense means no, or little, intervention. This means that Iraq will get bombed back to Hammurabi but the Sudanese chrisitians will continue to die...Family responsibility means no welfare for just about anyone. It means social darwinism. The poor are the poor; the rich are the rich. That is so because God made it so. The government is under no obligation to cure social ills according to protestant thinking. Protestant thinking has someone completely turned around the teachings of Christ to their greedy and aggressive view of governing.

READ THE FUCKING NEW TESTAMENT YOU EVIL, HYPOCRITICAL BIBLE THUMPERS>>> GOD DID NOT ORDAIN YOU AS THE ULTIMATE ARBITERS>>> WHO WERE GOD'S PEOPLE??? the poor, the meek, the understated: the people who put others' interests ahead of their own>>>NEWSFLASH: THE ZEALOUS, THE PROUD, THE GREEDY ARE NOT CHRIST'S PEOPLE

Stop calling yourselves christians.