Kerry: Saddam deserves special place in Hell

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

"Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator who deserves his own special place in hell..."

It appears that in order to look tough, Kerry (who claims to be a Christian) is assigning people their own special places in Hell.

First, who is Kerry to condemn Saddam before the last chapter of Saddam's life is written?

Second, what is to prove by Saddam ending up in Hell?  Did Christ come to earth to prove God's ability to send people to Hell?  Or did Christ come to earth to prove how gracious and forgiving God was IF people will simply repent and turn to him?

Does Kerry really think his arrogant and hateful rhetoric will gain him votes?

[elcorazon]

first, Kerry is a politician running for president.  
second, it proves Saddam was a "bad man" and will get his comeuppance.
Christ came to earth because his mom had sex with his dad.
No, see above.
He must, otherwise he wouldn't say it.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

first, Kerry is a politician running for president.

Your point is....?
 
---
 

second, it proves Saddam was a "bad man" and will get his comeuppance.

Eze 18:21  If a wicked man turns away from all the sins he has committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, he will surely live; he will not die. 22 None of the offenses he has committed will be remembered against him. Because of the righteous things he has done, he will live. 23 Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign LORD . Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?

---

Christ came to earth because his mom had sex with his dad.

Mat 1:18 This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit.

[elcorazon]

first, Kerry is a politician running for president.

Your point is....?
 
---
 

my point is that you asked "who is kerry?"  I answered who kerry is.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

my point is that you asked "who is kerry?"  I answered who kerry is.

Actually, I asked, "Who is Kerry to condemn Saddam [prematurely]...?"

I'm going to give Kerry the benefit of the doubt that he really doesn't hate Saddam.  But in doing so, I must conclude that Kerry is a person who will preach hatred toward others simply to gain power.

[elcorazon]

I certainly hope you don't intend to vote for Bush if you oppose candidates who "preach hatred".

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I certainly hope you don't intend to vote for Bush if you oppose candidates who "preach hatred".

Are you accusing Bush of preaching hatred?  

Please explain.

[John Dibble]

1. I think Bush would be inclined to agree with Kerry on this. Would you be criticizing Bush if he said the same thing?

2. Saddam isn't a Christian anyways, so based on previous conversations with you he'll be going to hell simply for that reason if nothing else. The chances he'll convert are slim to none, and slim has left town.

3. You'll find that most people, Christians included, would think Saddam deserves to go to hell. And most of those people will also think he deserves worse than most who go there. Heck, since I'm going to hell anyways(not being a Christian and all) do you think I deserve the same punishment in hell as someone like Saddam, or Hitler, or Stalin, ect?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

1. I think Bush would be inclined to agree with Kerry on this.

Conjecture.

---

Would you be criticizing Bush if he said the same thing?

Of course.

---

2. Saddam isn't a Christian anyways, so based on previous conversations with you he'll be going to hell simply for that reason if nothing else. The chances he'll convert are slim to none, and slim has left town.

Small chance or large–I pray God that not only Saddam but all people come to know the grace that comes only from Christ.

---

3. You'll find that most people, Christians included, would think Saddam deserves to go to hell. And most of those people will also think he deserves worse than most who go there. Heck, since I'm going to hell anyways(not being a Christian and all) do you think I deserve the same punishment in hell as someone like Saddam, or Hitler, or Stalin, ect?

So you think you are better than others?

1Tim 1:15 Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners–of whom I am the worst.

[John Dibble]

3. You'll find that most people, Christians included, would think Saddam deserves to go to hell. And most of those people will also think he deserves worse than most who go there. Heck, since I'm going to hell anyways(not being a Christian and all) do you think I deserve the same punishment in hell as someone like Saddam, or Hitler, or Stalin, ect?

So you think you are better than others?

1Tim 1:15 Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners–of whom I am the worst.

I think I'm better than Saddam and other tyrants who have no respect for other people's rights. I at least try to live my life by a moral code, giving myself restrictions and limitations on what I can do to others, even if I would like otherwise. Saddam and his ilk cared nothing for the lives of other people, doing whatever they pleased to anyone for no other reason than to serve themselves.

If that doesn't make me a better individual, then I don't know what does.

[elcorazon]

One cannot argue with someone who believes the bible to be the literal word of God.  As someone who does not believe in the bible, it is fruitless to try and argue my point.  

Bush, may or may not have used similar language about Hussein or Bin Laden, but I don't doubt he has similar feelings.  Kerry, frankly, was just making the point that he's as strongly vigilant against despots like Saddam as anyone, even if his methods would differ drastically from Bush's.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

If that doesn't make me a better individual, then I don't know what does.

You can't get a little bit pregnant.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

One cannot argue with someone who believes the bible to be the literal word of God.  As someone who does not believe in the bible, it is fruitless to try and argue my point.  

Then why did you chime in?  You and John Dibble constantly express your rejection of religion, yet you are both eager to engage in religious arguments.

---

Kerry, frankly, was just making the point that he's as strongly vigilant against despots like Saddam as anyone, even if his methods would differ drastically from Bush's.

The strongly vigilant take action.

Also, did Kerry not vote to authorize Bush to use force against Saddam?

[elcorazon]

1.  I shouldn't have chimed in.  I did so because I thought your points were meaningless unless one took the bible literally which most of us don't, but you're right, I should have ignored the post.

2. I'm sick of the anti-Kerry folks making these same tired arguments.  Bush is president, not Kerry.  Kerry will take the action he deems appropriate when he is president.  Not all action entails all out war.  Nor is war necessarily the most effective action.   As far as voting to allow war, again there is a vast difference between that up or down vote and actually making the final decision to start a war.  I disagree with Kerry's decision to vote yes, but giving the president the ability to wage war against Saddam can be defended, even if you, in the end, believe war was unnecessary as the scenario unfolded.

[John Dibble]

If that doesn't make me a better individual, then I don't know what does.

You can't get a little bit pregnant.

Alright, fine, if it'll make you happy I'll come out and say it. I AM BETTER THAN SADDAM HUSSEIN. Happy now? Does this mean I think I'm better than you? No, you are nothing like Saddam, regardless of our disagreements, so I have no reason to think I'm better than you or anyone else that has basic respect for the rights of others. Heck, there's probably someone who's better than me in this world - wouldn't suprise me in the least.

Also, I did not say that Saddam couldn't improve himself(though it is unlikely, as I did state). So long as one is alive, it's never too late to change one's philosophy. He'd have a hard time convincing me that he'd changed, but I wouldn't rule out the unlikely possibility(and of course, it's not me he'd have to convince, now is it?).

And finally, your 'little bit pregnant' really doesn't apply to this - in many areas there are degrees. There are various degrees of evil - or am I mistaken in thinking that some sins outweigh others?

[A18]

But the question was KNOWING ALL WE KNOW NOW.

If he knew there WMDs, and still voted for the authorization knowing Bush was going to go in, that means he must support war even without the WMDs.

[Mr. Fresh]

2. I'm sick of the anti-Kerry folks making these same tired arguments.

Oh, that's a rich statement!

[elcorazon]

But the question was KNOWING ALL WE KNOW NOW.

If he knew there WMDs, and still voted for the authorization knowing Bush was going to go in, that means he must support war even without the WMDs.

what question?  are you in the wrong thread? I have no idea what you're talking about.

[A18]

The question Bush asked, to which Kerry said he would still have voted for the authorization.

Sorry, it wasn't clear

[elcorazon]

I still have no idea how this relates to this thread.

[elcorazon]

2. I'm sick of the anti-Kerry folks making these same tired arguments.

Oh, that's a rich statement!

yeah, I like it myself.

[A18]

Quote:

2. I'm sick of the anti-Kerry folks making these same tired arguments.  Bush is president, not Kerry.  Kerry will take the action he deems appropriate when he is president.  Not all action entails all out war.  Nor is war necessarily the most effective action.  As far as voting to allow war, again there is a vast difference between that up or down vote and actually making the final decision to start a war.  I disagree with Kerry's decision to vote yes, but giving the president the ability to wage war against Saddam can be defended, even if you, in the end, believe war was unnecessary as the scenario unfolded.

[Mr. Fresh]

2. I'm sick of the anti-Kerry folks making these same tired arguments.

Oh, that's a rich statement!

yeah, I like it myself.

lol, I imagine you would.

[John Dibble]

You and John Dibble constantly express your rejection of religion, yet you are both eager to engage in religious arguments.

You reject agnosticism and atheism - would you not post in a post regarding it? Would you not argue your point of view, trying to convince others to believe the same or at the very least to educate those listening on an alternate viewpoint? This is a forum meant for debate, and I'm gonna debate damnit!

[elcorazon]

That's still a different point.  Kerry supported giving the president the ability to decide whether to go to war in Iraq.  (I disagreed with him, by the way)  Nevertheless, had Kerry been president, he may very well have allowed the process of inspections and coalition building to go on long enough that we either would have known the truth about WMD, etc. and avoided war or we would have had wide support across the globe.  Either result being preferable to what we now have.


By the way, I think Kerry's comment on what he would have done was a monumental gaffe.  Too bad he's not allowed to have them like our buddy Dubya.  We all just assume he doesn't mean it when he says something stupid.