Tea Party leader: Say no to Methodists

[dutch508]

Well, not to trash the Methodists but yeah...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024546039

jsr (6,663 posts)

Tea Party leader: Say no to Methodists
http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/02/20/5587683/in-grapevine-a-tea-party-leader.html

In Grapevine, a Tea Party leader says no to — Methodists?
Posted Friday, Feb. 21, 2014
By Bud Kennedy

Ever busy ridding Tarrant County of evil, a local Tea Party has found a new threat.

The co-founder and president of the NE Tarrant Tea Party has come out against Methodists.

Republicans should vote for a straitlaced fellow Southern Baptist instead of a Methodist for a vacant judgeship because Methodists believe “everything goes,” Tea Party co-founder and president Julie McCarty of Grapevine wrote on Facebook.

The conflict was not the first between a Tea Party leader and Methodists.

 

Where the **** is Grapevine?  Ah... Texas. I wonder if the author would agree or disagree if it wasn't Baptists but Muslims who made the statement?

Arlington lawyer Don Hase, the Methodist, replied on his page: “ God does not want politicians spinning to the public.”
Hase is one of three candidates for County Criminal Court No. 1 along with Bedford lawyer David E. Cook, a Baptist, and current state District Judge Everett Young of Fort Worth, a Lutheran.
Both Hase and Young have been recommended by other Tea Party affiliates. A local bar association poll rates both as “well-qualified,” Cook only “qualified.”
Cook, not related to the Mansfield mayor with the same name, did not return a phone message Thursday.
He has written on social media that church denomination can be a “secondary” qualification.
McCarty declined comment Thursday but posted and then deleted a Facebook comment criticizing the United Methodist Church for having women as pastors and welcoming gay worshipers.
Co-founder of the Grapevine-based NE Tarrant Tea Party in 2009 as an offshoot of the Dallas Tea Party, she is described in an online biography as a lifelong Baptist who has led mission trips.
On Facebook, she wrote earlier this month that she saw pros and cons in both candidates, but “my con with Hase was that he is a Methodist. … Methodists tend not to take a stand on issues — anything goes.”
When the Rev. Denise A. Luper of Davis Memorial United Methodist Church in nearby North Richland Hills objected, McCarty replied, “Oh, lighten up. … My preference is a straitlaced Baptist to an everything-goes Methodist.”
Luper said Thursday she didn’t want Methodists stereotyped: “I don’t care what she says or who she votes for, but the statements she made were assumptions.”
McCarty’s Tea Party group had been meeting at Concordia Lutheran Church in Bedford but no longer does so, pastor Mark Lasch said.
The conflict was not the first between a Tea Party leader and Methodists.
In 2011, a Tea Party Nation leader complained about Methodism’s support of immigration reform and the DREAM Act legalizing children brought to the U.S. illegally. Judson Phillips said: “I have a ‘dream’ — that is, no more United Methodist Church.”
In Washington, Mark Tooley of the Christian conservative Instititute on Religion and Democracy said McCarty’s comment seems unfair: “Methodism is very liberal, but most Methodists are not nearly so liberal.”
At Southern Methodist University, political science professor Matthew Wilson writes and teaches on religion in politics.
“What makes this so much worse is that she attacked the candidate in startlingly denominational terms,” Wilson said.
“She didn’t say what’s right or good about Baptists — just what was wrong with another denomination. … It’s surprising because the religious right has tried to transcend religious boundaries.”
In a final Facebook comment, McCarty wrote: “Arguing with me is a waste of time.”
That’s the gospel truth.
Bud Kennedy's column appears Sundays, Wednesdays and Fridays.

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/02/20/5587683/in-grapevine-a-tea-party-leader.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy

[JohnnyReb]

Baptist must have a lot in common with DUmmies....believe exactly as we do or else you will be thrown out.

As one Methodist country preacher said, "How do you expect to save the sinner, if you won't let him in the door?"

[MrsSmith]

Baptist must have a lot in common with DUmmies....believe exactly as we do or else you will be thrown out.

As one Methodist country preacher said, "How do you expect to save the sinner, if you won't let him in the door?"

There is a slight difference between presence at a church service and voting someone into political office...

[dutch508]

There is a slight difference between presence at a church service and voting someone into political office...

oH, mRS uNDERSTATEMENT! yOU lOOK hEAVENlY!!!

 

[FlaGator]

For the record the leaders in many of the larger sects of the Methodist denomination are pro-same sex marriage, pro-abortion and anti Israel. You would expect the libs to love them.

[I_B_Perky]

I personally do not care if an elected leader bows down and worships a grapefruit as long as they are careful with the public treasury and don't try to enact laws that limit my freedom.

[Ptarmigan]

I personally do not care if an elected leader bows down and worships a grapefruit as long as they are careful with the public treasury and don't try to enact laws that limit my freedom.

Agreed.

[RobJohnson]

For the record the leaders in many of the larger sects of the Methodist denomination are pro-same sex marriage, pro-abortion and anti Israel. You would expect the libs to love them.

Link?

[landofconfusion80]

For the record the leaders in many of the larger sects of the Methodist denomination are pro-same sex marriage, pro-abortion and anti Israel. You would expect the libs to love them.

There was some big discussion in the Ohio conference about their treasurer being gay and if he should be fired or not.  I really wouldn't care what he does on his own time as long as he's not blowing their money on trips to San Francisco and shiny pink shirts.

[Lacarnut]

Baptist must have a lot in common with DUmmies....believe exactly as we do or else you will be thrown out.

As one Methodist country preacher said, "How do you expect to save the sinner, if you won't let him in the door?"

One person's opinion does not make a consensus IMO. Many in the liberal press along with dummies are anti-religious and thrive on trying to divide religions. So, I take this article with a grain of salt. Much to do about nothing.

[Wineslob]

I saw some snooze this weekend about a Methodist (has an English accent) preacher who completely accepts gays and feels the church needs to (paraphrasing) "get into the 21st century"


Really? I'd like him to explain how he can ignore the word of God? I thought the idea of faith was to not question the word of God, but to trust it.


Sorry, no link.

[RobJohnson]

One person's opinion does not make a consensus IMO. Many in the liberal press along with dummies are anti-religious and thrive on trying to divide religions. So, I take this article with a grain of salt. Much to do about nothing.

 

[RobJohnson]

I saw some snooze this weekend about a Methodist (has an English accent) preacher who completely accepts gays and feels the church needs to (paraphrasing) "get into the 21st century"


Really? I'd like him to explain how he can ignore the word of God? I thought the idea of faith was to not question the word of God, but to trust it.


Sorry, no link.

http://www.religionnews.com/2013/10/28/methodist-court-sidesteps-changes-gay-policies/

Churches often start to preach from the balance sheet and not from the Bible.

I really don't see anything wrong with a church reaching out to gays. Just like I don't see anything wrong with them reaching out to anyone else. When it comes to church leadership I think a person needs to be pretty well grounded in Scripture (of course still human and never perfect) and being a homosexual church leader would simply not be appropriate in my opinion and I would not attend that church.

I know the Methodists have had tons of conflicts and votes on homosexual pastors at their conferences. So have other churches.

[jukin]

One person's opinion does not make a consensus IMO. Many in the liberal press along with dummies are anti-religious and thrive on trying to divide religions. So, I take this article with a grain of salt. Much to do about nothing.

It certainly does on the left. Since the left is a whole lot of projection, leftists think we do the same.

[FlaGator]

Link?

I was incorrect. It was the Presbyterians as represented by PCUSA that I was thinking of, not the Methodists.

[landofconfusion80]

I was incorrect. It was the Presbyterians as represented by PCUSA that I was thinking of, not the Methodists.

I think the Lutherans are quite fond of the pink shirt crowd as well.

[BlueStateSaint]

I think the Lutherans are quite fond of the pink shirt crowd as well.

It depends on which of the three synods one is in.  My wife's church (that she grew up in) is Missouri Synod, the conservative one (and the closest to the Roman Catholic Church).  There's a Lutheran church not far from there whose former pastor (female) wrote for the lefty rag in the area--one can infer that said female pastor was in the liberal synod.  The 'middle-of-the-road' synod is the Wisconsin Synod, according to my wife.

[Dori]

I think the Tea Party should stay away from social issues and stay focused on the constitution, economy and smaller government, the reason they grouped together in the first place.

The religious community is one of my biggest disappointments.  They are mostly conservative, yet many of them don't vote.  I don't get that. 

[Ptarmigan]

I think the Lutherans are quite fond of the pink shirt crowd as well.

It depends on which of the three synods one is in.  My wife's church (that she grew up in) is Missouri Synod, the conservative one (and the closest to the Roman Catholic Church).  There's a Lutheran church not far from there whose former pastor (female) wrote for the lefty rag in the area--one can infer that said female pastor was in the liberal synod.  The 'middle-of-the-road' synod is the Wisconsin Synod, according to my wife.

The more liberal Lutheran are Mainline Protestant. Presbyterian Church USA is the more liberal Presbyterian Church and is Mainline. Evangelical Lutheran Church in America is Mainline, while Missouri Synod is not.

Mainline Protestant
The United Methodist Church
The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
The Presbyterian Church, USA
The Episcopal Church, USA
The United Church of Christ
The American Baptist Churches, USA
The Disciples of Christ

http://followingjesus.org/seekers/mainline_christianity.html

[delilahmused]

I think the Tea Party should stay away from social issues and stay focused on the constitution, economy and smaller government, the reason they grouped together in the first place.

The religious community is one of my biggest disappointments.  They are mostly conservative, yet many of them don't vote.  I don't get that.  

It's one of mine too. Our founders were more conservative than we are. They were also much more libertarian. There were plenty of things they didn't approve of but they never dashed their asses back to the capitol to write laws regulating or banning them. You can't regulate stupidity or sinful behavior.

When the Tea Party takes on social issues they lose supporters because it's not why it was formed. It allows the left to use all their tried and true criticism against us that they've been using for decades. This deflects from the most important issues the Tea Party stands for. The conversation then becomes about social issues instead of constitutional and fiscal concerns. Every single person in this country is affected by pocketbook issues but not all feel the same about social issues. Tea Party members who feel strongly about about an issue like abortion can join a group whose focused on it.

However, in this particular situation, if it's an individual who just happens to be involved in the Tea Party movement, she should be able to state her opinion and fight for her candidate for whatever reason(s). She didn't even reference the Tea Party as far as I know, just conservatives. Since the Tea Party does care about the Constitution, even the more libertarian members should support her 1st Amendment rights while reminding the public that members have different views about social issues. If other members, even Methodists, don't stand up it's telling the public every member reflects her view.

Cindie

[BlueStateSaint]

It's one of mine too. Our founders were more conservative than we are. They were also much more libertarian. There were plenty of things they didn't approve of but they never dashed their asses back to the capitol to write laws regulating or banning them. You can't regulate stupidity or sinful behavior.

When the Tea Party takes on social issues they lose supporters because it's not why it was formed. It allows the left to use all their tried and true criticism against us that they've been using for decades. This deflects from the most important issues the Tea Party stands for. The conversation then becomes about social issues instead of constitutional and fiscal concerns. Every single person in this country is affected by pocketbook issues but not all feel the same about social issues. Tea Party members who feel strongly about about an issue like abortion can join a group whose focused on it.

However, in this particular situation, if it's an individual who just happens to be involved in the Tea Party movement, she should be able to state her opinion and fight for her candidate for whatever reason(s). She didn't even reference the Tea Party as far as I know, just conservatives. Since the Tea Party does care about the Constitution, even the more libertarian members should support her 1st Amendment rights while reminding the public that members have different views about social issues. If other members, even Methodists, don't stand up it's telling the public every member reflects her view.

Cindie

Can't argue with any of this.  H5.

[RobJohnson]

I think the Tea Party should stay away from social issues and stay focused on the constitution, economy and smaller government, the reason they grouped together in the first place.

The religious community is one of my biggest disappointments.  They are mostly conservative, yet many of them don't vote.  I don't get that. 

Some social issues cost taxpayers money. Otherwise I agree with what you are saying.