Giving up voting for Ipods?

[rocklobster]

I just heard something pretty disturbing. A recent survey found out that kids would rather have iPods than a right to vote. What do you folks think about this?

[Momo-P]

If it's a young kid? Not too worried about it. Young kids aren't very bright about that stuff, so no biggie.

If it's someone who should be concerned though? Ya...that's...creepy. Any kid who would basically surrender themselves over to people in order to get an Ipod needs a good talking to.

[ADXC]

Their views on life will and are going to change in the next few(Well maybe in the next decade.) years. The first time I ever wanted to vote was when I was 9, but I didn't understand that much about politics so I was naive. So its no wonder why little kids would want an Ipod more, because they are ignorant of the political world. Now not all kids are ignorant, there probably are some who know a little bit. But last time I checked Politics aren't something that would amuse a child, so its obvious why they would chose the Ipod over voting.

[PrincessZelda]

Well, I can see what they mean... Because I for one don't really know anything about politics, and really have no idea what to vote, so I kind of feel like there's no reason for me to vote, and I should leave that to the people who know what they're talking about. So, really, if someone said "You can have an iPod if you never ever vote." I might take that offer, because I'm not sure I'll ever vote anyways.

Though, I already have an iPod, sooo... I wouldn't take up that offer, but... you know.

[Raiden no Kishi]

Heh, we discussed this in my English I class yesterday. It's pretty sad . . . their parents need to have a little chat about priorites.

Well, I can see what they mean... Because I for one don't really know anything about politics, and really have no idea what to vote, so I kind of feel like there's no reason for me to vote, and I should leave that to the people who know what they're talking about. So, really, if someone said "You can have an iPod if you never ever vote." I might take that offer, because I'm not sure I'll ever vote anyways.

Though, I already have an iPod, sooo... I wouldn't take up that offer, but... you know.

I really can't find a way to justify that approach, Zelly. Especially with the Internet, gaining a working knowledge of a subject - especially one as important and public as politics - is easier than ever. It's really not that hard to look things up and figure out what's going on. It's hard for people our age, I think, to understand the importance of our voting rights, since we are somewhat insulated from the effects of government [individual mileage may vary, but I think generally this is so]. When we're out of college and out in "the real world", so to speak, it will become much more real. The people you have a right to vote for or against are the people who determine how much money the government confiscates from you in the form of taxes, what is done with that money, what our soldiers are doing and how well they're equipped to do their jobs, as well as many, many other functions that are integrated into every citizen's life.

I fully respect your right to your opinion, and I can certainly understand [being of legal voting age myself] how daunting voting can seem, considering what's at stake. However, I also believe that, especially today, there is no legitimate reason not to vote in an informed manner.

.rai//

[Nate]

I know I'd rather have an iPod than the right to vote in the 2008 Presidential election. I don't care for any of the candidates and refuse to vote for "the lesser of two evils," and I believe the political system in this country is flawed anyway.

You can't change the system by participating in the system. Thus, the only way to vote against the political climate of this country is to not vote at all.

[Raiden no Kishi]

I know I'd rather have an iPod than the right to vote in the 2008 Presidential election. I don't care for any of the candidates and refuse to vote for "the lesser of two evils," and I believe the political system in this country is flawed anyway.

You can't change the system by participating in the system. Thus, the only way to vote against the political climate of this country is to not vote at all.

I'm not sure I follow you, Nate. How does not influencing "the system" change it?

.rai//

[Nate]

I'm not sure I follow you, Nate. How does not influencing "the system" change it?

.rai//

There are third party voters, but not enough to make much of an impact. I believe the biggest impact was made by Ross Perot in the 96 election (if I'm not mistaken, it may have been 92).

By and large the country is tied into the two party system though. And as long as people vote for Republicans just because they're Republicans, or vote for Democrats just because they're Democrats, nothing's going to change. They're "good enough" for the American people.

Well, they're not good enough, NONE of them are. I know what you'll say. Vote third party. I don't like any of them either. I know there's never going to be a candidate that agrees with me 100% on everything. That's obvious. Still, I don't want to vote for a candidate because "he sucks the least." That's a horrible way to do ANYTHING, let alone choose a man who will run the most powerful country in the world.

If voter turnout is low enough, maybe finally the political parties in this country will be forced to take a look at themselves and wonder what they can do to change it. Probably not though, they'll just say "Even if voter turnout is only 5%, as long as I get those votes I'll still be in power." Still I remain hopeful that if enough people become lethargic perhaps they will actually TRY to produce good, decent candidates.

But perhaps I'm just too optimistic. Even so, I plan on voting Stewart/Colbert in 2008. The government won't take this vote seriously; they'll see me as some jerk trying to be funny. How is that any more productive than not voting at all?

[Shao Feng-Li]

There's no one I wanna vote for anyways. iPod please.

[Shao Feng-Li]

There's no one I wanna vote for anyways. iPod please.

I'll be 18 next year... I'll vote Colbert for crap's sake.

[Technomancer]

I really can't find a way to justify that approach, Zelly. Especially with the Internet, gaining a working knowledge of a subject - especially one as important and public as politics - is easier than ever.

I'm not altogether sure that I'd agree with that. As a research tool, the internet is really only useful if you already know how to do research. For many, the profusion of information has only made it harder to sort which sources are good and which aren't.

It's really not that hard to look things up and figure out what's going on. It's hard for people our age, I think, to understand the importance of our voting rights, since we are somewhat insulated from the effects of government [individual mileage may vary, but I think generally this is so].

This is true. But I think it is also true that many people don't see the political process as doing very much for their own interests. Even if you discount that fact politicians must seek to satisfy as large a constituency as possible (thus diffusing the strength of your own opinion), there is also the feeling that politics caters mostly to the monied classes. In such a situation I don't think that it's unexpected that some people would seek something more immediate and tangible in exchange for their vote.

However, I also believe that, especially today, there is no legitimate reason not to vote in an informed manner.
.rai//

This is true, but I fear it is far too common.

[Okami]

I've allready got an iPod~
But if I didn't, I would give up my voting rights, I mean, music is my LIFE. XD

[Alexander]

I personally don't believe we need a government in the first place. I believe people can run their own lives without needing a single power to tell them what to do and where to go. Maybe it comes from my own feelings, but I think the government's true purpose is to give most people a feeling of safety in the world we live in.

Sadly, my iPod is being repaired at Apple right now. Otherwise I'd take it. XD

[Radical Dreamer]

I can't give my thoughts until I know how old the kids involved in the survey were. If they were elementary or possibly even middle-school aged, then it's a non-issue. Of COURSE they're going to opt for the iPod; as far as they're concerned, the government doesn't really concern them. Unless the kids asked were older high schoolers, I really don't see a problem with it. XD

[Raiden no Kishi]

I'm not altogether sure that I'd agree with that. As a research tool, the internet is really only useful if you already know how to do research. For many, the profusion of information has only made it harder to sort which sources are good and which aren't.

Perhaps, but to at least get the news and information on a candidate is boringly easy, and basic research skills should be sought out as general life skills. As far as sorting out good and bad sources, I don't know how much the problem is exacerbated just by more information. To my mind, it's always come down to one human being taking another's word that something is true.

This is true. But I think it is also true that many people don't see the political process as doing very much for their own interests. Even if you discount that fact politicians must seek to satisfy as large a constituency as possible (thus diffusing the strength of your own opinion), there is also the feeling that politics caters mostly to the monied classes. In such a situation I don't think that it's unexpected that some people would seek something more immediate and tangible in exchange for their vote.

Oh, I certainly expect such decisions, being a firm believer in humanity's capacity to not think things through, but if you really believe in something, you are obligated to at least TRY. Get involved SOMEWHERE. One vote counts for something, so use what influence you have. Look at it this way: suppose some tough, experienced fighter is threatening someone I love. My immediate instinct is to fight, to do something. Will he kick my butt up and down the street? Oh, probably. But at least I did something and took a stand for what I believe in. If one doesn't act out a belief, I question whether one really believes it or not.

This is true, but I fear it is far too common.

Absolutely.

There are third party voters, but not enough to make much of an impact. I believe the biggest impact was made by Ross Perot in the 96 election (if I'm not mistaken, it may have been 92).

By and large the country is tied into the two party system though. And as long as people vote for Republicans just because they're Republicans, or vote for Democrats just because they're Democrats, nothing's going to change. They're "good enough" for the American people.

Well, they're not good enough, NONE of them are. I know what you'll say. Vote third party. I don't like any of them either. I know there's never going to be a candidate that agrees with me 100% on everything. That's obvious. Still, I don't want to vote for a candidate because "he sucks the least." That's a horrible way to do ANYTHING, let alone choose a man who will run the most powerful country in the world.

Then what do you suggest? Someone's got to sit in the Oval Office, and one of the candidates running will eventually do so, barring some catastrophe that wipes them all off the face of the planet. I personally have little to no faith in the party system - I don't see the point of it - but some time next year, there will be a set number of options, and I will have to pick one. I can't pick none of them ~ someone else will just pick for me.

If voter turnout is low enough, maybe finally the political parties in this country will be forced to take a look at themselves and wonder what they can do to change it. Probably not though, they'll just say "Even if voter turnout is only 5%, as long as I get those votes I'll still be in power." Still I remain hopeful that if enough people become lethargic perhaps they will actually TRY to produce good, decent candidates.

Frankly, I only see that working if no one at all votes. The only way I see non-participation in the system working to effect change is if a significant group of people pack their things and go live on another spit of land somewhere else. However, I really don't see that happening any time soon ~ stuff sucks here in the States, but we do still have plenty going for us. The way to get things done is to unite people. You could get just about anyone elected ~ shoot, you might be able to get inanimate objects elected ~ if enough of "we the people" wanted it. Like I said, it all comes down to what you believe and if you are willing to fight for it.

But perhaps I'm just too optimistic. Even so, I plan on voting Stewart/Colbert in 2008. The government won't take this vote seriously; they'll see me as some jerk trying to be funny. How is that any more productive than not voting at all?

Well, you'd at least be expressing your contempt for the current stable of candidates in a way that is quantifiable to the powers-what-is.

I'm going to be point-blank honest. One human being's vote doesn't mean a heck of a lot, OK? I know that. I am just one of some 300 million people in this country. A drop in a drop in a bucket. But if this drop moves and that drop moves and we start to get other drops to move with us, eventually we make a wave. If you get enough droplets of water moving together, we call that a tsunami. But if each little droplet says, "I'm just one droplet" and does nothing, the water never moves.

Minor note to Alexander: I think you're right that, theoretically, people could govern themselves. I believe they need Christ to do so properly, but the potential is there. I believe we should govern ourselves as much as we can. The catch is that people don't. They won't.

.rai//

[Stephen]

I know I'd rather have an iPod than the right to vote in the 2008 Presidential election. I don't care for any of the candidates and refuse to vote for "the lesser of two evils," and I believe the political system in this country is flawed anyway.

You can't change the system by participating in the system. Thus, the only way to vote against the political climate of this country is to not vote at all.

I agree with this 100%]I personally don't believe we need a government in the first place. I believe people can run their own lives without needing a single power to tell them what to do and where to go. Maybe it comes from my own feelings, but I think the government's true purpose is to give most people a feeling of safety in the world we live in.

Sadly, my iPod is being repaired at Apple right now. Otherwise I'd take it. XD[/QUOTE]

In your world, someone would kill you and take your Ipod. A person is great, people are stupid. A country without a goverment would not last a week. They would either be taken over, or kill themselves. Society needs order, and a large group (rather hippy sounding or even communist really) would simply fail. One would work, one would not...this would cause problems. The truth is, there is no Eden on this Earth. People are people, and people suck. Its why the worlds in the shape its in. And that, is probably all I am gonna add to this. I am so disgusted with the government right now, it just angers me to even talk about it I guess. I am gonna go forget I even posted here. Now where is that Goof off board...

[Dante]

I know I'd rather have an iPod than the right to vote in the 2008 Presidential election. I don't care for any of the candidates and refuse to vote for "the lesser of two evils," and I believe the political system in this country is flawed anyway.

You can't change the system by participating in the system. Thus, the only way to vote against the political climate of this country is to not vote at all.

Partially agreed... I mean, I don't think any of the politicians out there have what it takes to pull this country out of the mess we're in during their term and b) more importantly none of them have the form of true generalized American approach in order to unify the splintered American population... currently in my opinion we're devided in a form of really cold civil war. There's no threat of violence in my opinion, but no real chance of true unity either without a major change.

If I take this into consideration, and I consider that my state is a red state, and will continue to be a red state no matter which side I choose to vote for... Then I think I'll take the I-Pod too... I mean, in the electoral college system, my vote is as meaningless now, as it was during the kids vote campaign I took part in when I was younger. So really, why not take the I-Pod, I already have an MP3 Player, hey I don't even like I-Pods, but I'll take one anyways .

On that note I offer one suggestion, if you don't find anyone you like in this upcoming election... I recomend that you vote for me, Pascal for president of the United States... sure I'm not old enough to run... but hey, you know I won't get elected anyways (unless some huge internet phenomena occurs against all odds). However, if you find another candidate you like (and I'm sure you will by campaign time) vote for them... Else consider me... here's why:

My issues are um... (* Just for kidders)

1. I will forgive all college debts and make colleges free in the United States and allow all students entry banning all standardized testing, but consequently giving strong preference to American Students over foreign non-American students STRONGLY (AKA American citizens not a race thing or history thing). Anyone who wishes to continue to pursue knowledge shall not be restricted from doing so, but partying on college campuses and other non-academic activities in excess will be discouraged as students seeking purely academic purposes for college will be given preference if there is insufficient room in academia... the lack of professors will be remedied by hiring and tenuring more professors... from what I've seen there are no lack of adjunct faculty thrown around that wouldn't die to have tenureship. If more colleges are needed, we'll spend more money building them... better then giving it to the airlines if you ask me.

2. I will enact Bon Jovies plan and declare that all debts shall be forgiven in the United States if they are not paid off within 10 years and creditors shall not restrict or reduce the quality of life severely of those they have indebted through financial or other means (but they can be really picky about who they lend too and should).

3. I'll do away with the electoral college and make America a true democracy by majority rule. Every person's vote shall count... cause we have the technology to do so, and any person can support suggest an idea within the realm of the national forum and should that idea gain support of the greater populous at any time, they may over-ride the government and place it into temporary law locally and as voted for with time eventually nationally until voted away by means of experience that such action was of negative effect nationally.

4. No matter what America will always do the right thing that would make us "The Good Guys"... I'm not sure how to implement it... but I'll worry about that when I'm elected!

5. Teachers shall be outlawed in public schools accross America (Private schools can keep them if they want to). Instead all former teachers will be given the title professor, and encouraged to teach High School and Elementary School in a college like atmosphere, emphasis on learning and none of the social teasing shananigans and politics that normally goes on. Further with the title of professor, no public education system can tell their teachers what style of teaching they must use in their class or what material or textbooks should be used... textbooks aren't even mandatory. All that is necessary is that the professor work towards the best interest of performing the job of conveying knowledge of their subject matter to their students.

6. Textbook costs in college cannot exceed ten dollars per book... if no companies or authors are found willing to produce the info for the books, then graduate students can opt to work together in a Wkipedia style fashion if they are from the subjects major to produce the texts instead of creating a graduate thesis (Note these can only be produced by students majoring in this subject matter and the books will all undergo academic peer review by their colleges... whose reputation will be slightly on the line as everyone will be reading the manuscript they O'kd). No comitee shall be formed from the government to decide who shall create the texts, but rather all potential masters or doctoral students in that subject area can create these ORIGINAL texts at their choosing so that the market might have a greater abundence of texts to choose from and thus a more perfect understandable college text will be produced.

7. Independent of their work history, all people over the age 60 shall be given funding to survive comfortably for their service to the country.

8. All records of American autrocities both past and present shall be made public knowledge within easy access of all within and without and we shall apologize for these actions taking all steps necessary to ensure nothing of the sort ever occurs again.

9. US History and State history courses in High School will be removed in favor of more general history courses where students will be encouraged to discover history on their own with the guidance of their professor from any time period at any location. The state shall make no laws governing what has occured within these periods of history and as free and unbiased a view as can be presented with the intent of providing the closest approximation to truth as can be produced. The understanding of history and philosophy will be the chief foundations of our childrens youth after science and mathematics and they shall be equipped to understand their place in history today and what they believe they should do given their situation better then any prior generation.

10. The legal voting age will be reduced to 15... if people with alzheimers can still be allowed to vote... so should 15 year olds... Oh AND EVERY NEW VOTER WHO VOTES WILL RECIEVE A NEW FREE I-POD... The I-Pods will be top of the line and produced with new American jobs in the technology sector producing I-Pods... Apparently they are in high demand, and new jobs help the economy... so why not put the two together and have more people building I-Pods?

[Raiden no Kishi]

All I can say is that I'd hate to see the tax rates in your America, Pascal . . . what would the bill come to, 97 cents on the dollar? XD

.rai//

[Mr. SmartyPants]

I am gonna go forget I even posted here. Now where is that Goof off board...

You of all people. Dang. This was unexpected.

[Puguni]

I think...you guys are dragging your anti-government views into the thread too much. It's not good. Keep your government hate rants to yourselves. Also, I don't remember any mention of the 2008 election in the topic. :<

Technomancer, I'd like to point out that politicians actually appeal to the elderly, not so much the wealthy. With the aging Baby Boom group, it is and going to be a big deal. Social security, anyone?

Anyway, back to the topic. If the elementary and middle school kids are the ones that would rather have iPods, that's understandable. If it's high school students, it doesn't truly apply to them until senior year, at most.

A lot of people snub politics, so it's not really a surprise that kids don't seem to care much for it either. You can't lay all the blame on kids for being inactive; when were schools and parents active about politics, I mean, real politics? In a society where materialism is shoved into people's faces instead of citizenship, of course kids would rather have an iPod. There is already a connotation of scorn toward government, and indirectly, politics. Yeah, not helping.

No one really told me that voting was important in the first place, except in Government class.

So instead of pointing and gasping at a developed problem, why not stop it from the beginning? It's like that time in that movie, "Ever After," where Drew Barrymore berates the prince for punishing thieves that the monarchy is probably responsible for creating. Why blame kids when the government, schools and parents don't really do much to solve it anyway?

[Dante]

All I can say is that I'd hate to see the tax rates in your America, Pascal . . . what would the bill come to, 97 cents on the dollar? XD

.rai//

I'll build less bombs and more I-pods... its a trade off really, I don't think the world would mind if we bombed them a little less often. As it stands every American owes several thousand dollars for the war... what's the cost of a few Ipods (just to produce them, not their actual cost on the market... remember its alot cheaper to produce an I-Pod then it is to buy one).

[Yeshua-Knight]

perhaps the answer to this is not to vote for the candidate who claims to follow the most similar beliefs that you do, but rather to vote accordingly to how the Lord would have you to vote

[Nate]

I'll do away with the electoral college and make America a true democracy by majority rule.

I agree with this as well. The electoral college was quite important during the founding of this country, so that Virginia wouldn't run the country. Today, however, there's really no reason to not get rid of it, especially since as you mention, we have better technology to do a direct popular vote.

perhaps the answer to this is not to vote for the candidate who claims to follow the most similar beliefs that you do, but rather to vote accordingly to how the Lord would have you to vote

This is a good idea in theory, but let's look at this deeper, shall we?

We know in the last days the world's going to go to pot. To that end, we'll probably start to have inept, dysfunctional leaders in government positions, and I am trying VERY hard to not violate the politics rule on this site right now. XD

ANYWAY. We know we'll get lousy leaders who will make poor choices. That's God's will. But how many Christians do you know that would say, "Well, I'm going to vote for this candidate because he's the worst, so it'll be what God wants." I would hope none of them, though I'm sure there's a handful of extremists out there who do this. But then, if we vote for who we think is the best candidate, one of two things happens: either a) he loses, so we voted against God's will and our vote was worthless, so what's the point, or b) he wins, meaning he actually IS the worst candidate, meaning our assessment of his character was poor, in which case why bother to vote for the best candidate since he'll turn out to be so horrible?

The other problem is, God doesn't have a political affiliation. The problem with saying "God told me to vote for this candidate" is that it quickly turns into a "God supports this party more than the other." Which is what has happened with the Republican party being touted as "God's party," which it isn't at all. I'd go further, but again, I don't want to violate site political rules (not that I was going to bash Republicans, I wasn't, just would rather be safe than inadvertently start a flame war and cause the thread to be locked).

And what IF God's will is to not vote at all? God has no loyalty to any country of human invention, so it's not like He has to support any candidate at all. We don't know God's will, and we can't put Him in a box by saying that God will definitely lead us to vote for some candidate. He could just as easily lead us to not vote at all. Which I'm not saying He is, I'm just saying, it is a possibility that cannot be ignored.

[Shao Feng-Li]

But if there was a candidate who was a Christian, lived his life according to the Bible and upheld God's law over man's law(lessness) and enforced it, which means getting rid of abortion and harmful pluralism and such...

[Mr. SmartyPants]

But if there was a candidate who was a Christian, lived his life according to the Bible and upheld God's law over man's law(lessness) and enforced it, which means getting rid of abortion and harmful pluralism and such...

Doesn't mean that they have what it takes to be a leader of an entire nation. Religious ideals have nothing to do with how to run a country.

[Shao Feng-Li]

Add "Leader ship skills" and "Have what it takes to run a country" to that last post then.

Not merely "religious" ideals. Godly ideals.

[Raiden no Kishi]

I'll build less bombs and more I-pods... its a trade off really, I don't think the world would mind if we bombed them a little less often. As it stands every American owes several thousand dollars for the war... what's the cost of a few Ipods (just to produce them, not their actual cost on the market... remember its alot cheaper to produce an I-Pod then it is to buy one).

I would suggest that to pay for all this stuff you're proposing, you'd have to seriously gut the military, thus destroying jobs and crippling the national defense. Ladies and gentlemen of the military, turn in your rifles, because we can only afford these sticks ~ and not everyone gets a a stick. You must learn to share the stick.

"1. I will forgive all college debts and make colleges free in the United States and allow all students entry banning all standardized testing, but consequently giving strong preference to American Students over foreign non-American students STRONGLY (AKA American citizens not a race thing or history thing). Anyone who wishes to continue to pursue knowledge shall not be restricted from doing so. . . If more colleges are needed, we'll spend more money building them... better then giving it to the airlines if you ask me."
Do you have any idea how much money it would take to run ONE college, much less every single one in this country? Man alive! Someone's got to foot the bill, you know.

"2. I will enact Bon Jovi's plan and declare that all debts shall be forgiven in the United States if they are not paid off within 10 years and creditors shall not restrict or reduce the quality of life severely of those they have indebted through financial or other means (but they can be really picky about who they lend to and should)."
So these companies are out of millions of dollars that they are rightfully owed. What about their employees and families? Who pays them then? The money you use to pay back your loans doesn't go into some "Mercedes and Lear jets for all our bigwigs" fund, it's how those institutions continue to exist. If you take away all that revenue, a lot of people are going to be without pay. That'll go over well. Plus, then you give incentive for people to just not pay their debts for 10 years.

"3. I'll do away with the electoral college and make America a true democracy by majority rule. Every person's vote shall count... cause we have the technology to do so, and any person can support suggest an idea within the realm of the national forum and should that idea gain support of the greater populous at any time, they may over-ride the government and place it into temporary law locally and as voted for with time eventually nationally until voted away by means of experience that such action was of negative effect nationally."
It'll cost quite a bit in the short-term to reorganize the government like that.

"6. Textbook costs in college cannot exceed ten dollars per book... if no companies or authors are found willing to produce the info for the books, then graduate students can opt to work together in a Wkipedia style fashion if they are from the subjects major to produce the texts instead of creating a graduate thesis (Note these can only be produced by students majoring in this subject matter and the books will all undergo academic peer review by their colleges... whose reputation will be slightly on the line as everyone will be reading the manuscript they O'kd). No comitee shall be formed from the government to decide who shall create the texts, but rather all potential masters or doctoral students in that subject area can create these ORIGINAL texts at their choosing so that the market might have a greater abundence of texts to choose from and thus a more perfect understandable college text will be produced."
And if the books cost more than ten dollars to create, you will have to subsidize pretty heavily. Where does that money come from?

"7. Independent of their work history, all people over the age 60 shall be given funding to survive comfortably for their service to the country."
Holy pension plans ~ do you have any idea how much that would cost? Who's paying for that?

"10. The legal voting age will be reduced to 15... if people with alzheimers can still be allowed to vote... so should 15 year olds... Oh AND EVERY NEW VOTER WHO VOTES WILL RECIEVE A NEW FREE I-POD... The I-Pods will be top of the line and produced with new American jobs in the technology sector producing I-Pods... Apparently they are in high demand, and new jobs help the economy... so why not put the two together and have more people building I-Pods?"
I hope this one is a joke, yes? One, you'll have to put the old shackles on Apple's freedom to produce their iPods in the more profitable fashion. Two, do you know how much it would cost to create iPod factories ex nihilo [figuratively speaking] in the States and staff them? DANG.

.rai//

[Yeshua-Knight]

This is a good idea in theory, but let's look at this deeper, shall we?

We know in the last days the world's going to go to pot. To that end, we'll probably start to have inept, dysfunctional leaders in government positions, and I am trying VERY hard to not violate the politics rule on this site right now. XD

ANYWAY. We know we'll get lousy leaders who will make poor choices. That's God's will. But how many Christians do you know that would say, "Well, I'm going to vote for this candidate because he's the worst, so it'll be what God wants." I would hope none of them, though I'm sure there's a handful of extremists out there who do this. But then, if we vote for who we think is the best candidate, one of two things happens: either a) he loses, so we voted against God's will and our vote was worthless, so what's the point, or b) he wins, meaning he actually IS the worst candidate, meaning our assessment of his character was poor, in which case why bother to vote for the best candidate since he'll turn out to be so horrible?

The other problem is, God doesn't have a political affiliation. The problem with saying "God told me to vote for this candidate" is that it quickly turns into a "God supports this party more than the other." Which is what has happened with the Republican party being touted as "God's party," which it isn't at all. I'd go further, but again, I don't want to violate site political rules (not that I was going to bash Republicans, I wasn't, just would rather be safe than inadvertently start a flame war and cause the thread to be locked).

And what IF God's will is to not vote at all? God has no loyalty to any country of human invention, so it's not like He has to support any candidate at all. We don't know God's will, and we can't put Him in a box by saying that God will definitely lead us to vote for some candidate. He could just as easily lead us to not vote at all. Which I'm not saying He is, I'm just saying, it is a possibility that cannot be ignored.

well, considering that really no one is under any obligation to reveal who he or she voted for or is going to vote for, then following God's will in this election shouldn't be any more of an ordeal than voting in any other election, same for whether or not to vote, if it's the Lord's will (and if you seek Him he will reveal it to you) then go with it

and with that, i end my part in this thread, startin' to get a bit too close to the line of a political thread for my taste, if anyone wishes to discuss it with me further, i'm open to pm's

[blkmage]

We know in the last days the world's going to go to pot. To that end, we'll probably start to have inept, dysfunctional leaders in government positions, and I am trying VERY hard to not violate the politics rule on this site right now. XD

ANYWAY. We know we'll get lousy leaders who will make poor choices. That's God's will. But how many Christians do you know that would say, "Well, I'm going to vote for this candidate because he's the worst, so it'll be what God wants." I would hope none of them, though I'm sure there's a handful of extremists out there who do this. But then, if we vote for who we think is the best candidate, one of two things happens: either a) he loses, so we voted against God's will and our vote was worthless, so what's the point, or b) he wins, meaning he actually IS the worst candidate, meaning our assessment of his character was poor, in which case why bother to vote for the best candidate since he'll turn out to be so horrible?

I don't know, this kind of reasoning is what lead us to believe that we could go ahead and use up the Earth's resources without considering the environmental consequences of our actions. That is, it seems like this reasoning allows us to neglect our responsibilities in this world simply because we think that it might be the end times.

Personally, I've thought about voting in this way: Not every place in the world is run by a democratically elected government. Not every place in the world guarantees fundamental rights and freedoms to its people. What does this mean?

This means that of all the places in the world God could have chose for us to live, he chose for us to live in a place where the citizens had the possibility of effecting change. That is, citizenship of a country with a democratic government and rights and freedoms is a gift, and it's a gift that God intends for us to use for His kingdom. To me, squandering your rights and freedoms seems to be a poor way of using this gift.

[Nate]

But if there was a candidate who was a Christian, lived his life according to the Bible and upheld God's law over man's law(lessness) and enforced it, which means getting rid of abortion and harmful pluralism and such...

Getting rid of abortion simply isn't going to happen anytime soon. Remember there's a system of checks and balances, and there's a little Supreme Court case called Roe v. Wade that you may have heard of. The President can't just up and make a law going against the court's decision in that case. I don't like abortion any more than you do, but the President does not have the authority to violate the rulings of the court.

I don't think voting for a candidate that is Christian is a bad thing. I just think it shouldn't be the only quality people look for in a candidate. I know you aren't saying that it is, but there are people out there who vote for someone just because they're Christian. That's a terrible way of doing things.

@Rai

You DO realize all of what Pascal was saying was a joke, right? XD

That is, it seems like this reasoning allows us to neglect our responsibilities in this world simply because we think that it might be the end times.

For clarification, I do not believe we are in the end times. Well, I should expound on that a bit. Obviously the world has been in the end times ever since Christ ascended to Heaven. We've been in the end times for almost 2,000 years. However, I don't believe that this is the last generation of people that will exist, or anything like that. I don't believe the second coming of Christ will happen in my lifetime.

Now I'm not saying it won't happen, just that I don't think it will. I accept the possibility that Christ could come back at any time, but it isn't a driving force behind my beliefs or principles.

I was speaking more to my personal feelings, which are fairly fatalistic, in other words, God's will is going to happen no matter what I personally do, so I don't have a lot of business meddling in His affairs. This doesn't excuse me from personal responsibility or sin (and I don't use it as an excuse for such), but it means that big things that happen, like who gets elected, where a hurricane is going to hit land, or whether I'm going to get in my car today and get in a deadly accident, it's all in the hands of God, and I as a lowly human can't change it, so why bother trying?

To me, squandering your rights and freedoms seems to be a poor way of using this gift.

I disagree. Simply because we have the right to do something does not mean we should do it. I have the right to purchase cigarettes, but I don't. I have the right to bear arms, but I don't own a gun. I do feel privileged to live in a country where I have freedoms, but along with those freedoms is a freedom of choice, the freedom to decide whether I want to take advantage of those freedoms or not. I choose not to utilize all of my freedoms for religious, health, or ideological reasons. That is my right as an American citizen.

As to your statement about citizens being able to effect change, I won't really respond to that one, as it could get ugly. XD