First Draft. NH Adv. by LLepard. Comments

[Mark]

Genesis 2:17

“In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die”

When they ate the fruit, death entered the world. However, if evolution happened before all this, it would be a contradiction of scriptures. Death would've had to have entered before they ate the fruit. If evolution is true, then my Bible is flawed, corrupt, and I should go to Vegas and get as much sin as possible in.

However, evolution is not part of God's plan, if it was, He would be a most sick and repulsive God for creating this horrible idea of millions and millions of years of death and waste before "getting it right". No, He got it right the first time.

Young-Earth Creation. There's an obvious order, no one gets up and is shocked to see gravity in effect or clouds in the sky. Creation needs a Creator.

BTW to everyone else reading: This is my humble opinion. I'm not trying to run around these forums looking for arguments. I am responding to a question. That is it, I'm not trying to start any wars. Peace.

Sorry it took a while for my answer. If you want more info just google "sin" and "death" in blueletterbible or another bible search engine.

That was Human death, not other animal death.

Do you seriously think that all animals other than Human were immortal before that?

 

[Rob]

There is such a thing as the theory of Evolutionary Creationism.

"Theistic evolution, less commonly known as evolutionary creationism,
is the general opinion that some or all classical religious teachings about God and creation are compatible
with some or all of the modern scientific understanding about biological evolution.

Theistic evolution is not a theory in the scientific sense,
but a particular view about how the science of evolution relates to some religious interpretations.

In this way, theistic evolution supporters can be seen as one of the groups who deny the conflict thesis
regarding the relationship between religion and science;
that is, they hold that religious teachings about creation and scientific theories of evolution need not be contradictory."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution

I'm very familiar with that and I know many who believe that, but that doesn't answer my question. Internet searches are yielding conflicting information.

 

[ZenX]

I made some suggestions, primarily with grammar and such, using Microsoft Word (the comment ability). Please let me know if you have trouble viewing them, or if you need me to convert to an earlier version. You can download the doc file here:
http://www.shsu.edu/~sak001/suggestions.docx

If anyone wants it or disagrees with anything I have suggested, post it in the thread I guess.

 

[Birdlady]

Those of you arguing about evolution, please take it out of this thread. We have a hot topics and general politics section.

You are taking away from getting this ad in a final draft. I don't want to have to sift through posts of a few going back and forth about evolution.

 

[firebirdnation]

I think the debating of evolution in this thread shows how divisive this issue can be, and perhaps it would be better to leave it out of the ad.

 

[Mark]

I'm very familiar with that and I know many who believe that, but that doesn't answer my question. Internet searches are yielding conflicting information.

Would you please specify exactly what your searching for?

Is your question about the first part that Linda thinks should be left out?

I believe that part is referring to Huckabee, not Dr Paul.

And yes, I agree with Linda and others, controversial and not really necessary.

No need to "go there". Without it the letter is still "gold". I don't see where it adds anything essential to convey.

Probably a mention of keeping religion out of politics would resonate with voters even more.

Probably leaving Religion out of thing like Dr Paul mentions would be wiser.

There are plenty of issues to address Huckabee with other than Religious ones.

 

[Rob]

Is your question about the first part that Linda thinks should be left out?

I believe that part is referring to Huckabee, not Dr Paul.

And yes, I agree with Linda and others, controversial and not really necessary.

No need to "go there". Without it the letter is still "gold". I don't see where it adds anything essential to convey.

Probably a mention of keeping religion out of politics would resonate with voters even more.

I would like to know whether or not Dr. Paul believes in evolution.

 

[burningfur]

That was Human death, not other animal death.

Do you seriously think that all animals other than Human were immortal before that?

You're right on that according to this...I learn something new everyday!

For more information on this.

I mean no disrespect to you, but evolution doesn't work with the God of the Bible, the two are incompatible. They can't both be right. One has to be right, one has to be wrong. You have one position and I have a different position. We don't seem to be changing our positions any time soon.

I've gotta get back to studying. Blessings.

 

[troyd1]

This is great, I can't wait for the final draft! This will help the people that do not have a computer to find out more in depth about Ron. I think you want to highlight more catch phrases than you have. That way they will catch the eye and more people will read farther.

 

[Chase]

I hope you don't take offense to this, but I used to be the editor of a computer tech portal and I have a passion for writing. I went through and typed up what you've got, making a few small edits and changes along the way. I may have dropped a few sentences here and there in trying to preserve the flow.

I think your letter is great. I took a half hour out of my day to do this because I'm hoping it might give you some ideas. Thanks for everything you have done!

On <insert date here>, I reached into my own pocket and placed a full page ad in USA Today supporting the Presidential candidacy of Congressman Ron Paul. Why did I spend my hard-earned dollars on such an ad? Because Ron Paul is profoundly different from every other politician. He is truly a public servant - a "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" type of guy. No vested interest will support him, but I will, and I hope you will join me.

We are at a critical time; we have a dire need for honest leadership in America. We need to make a decision as to what America will represent and what our nation will become. History will record the outcome of our decision. If we make the wrong choice, many more innocent people will die and history will be anything but kind. As I say to my closest friends, I do not want to have to explain to my grandchildren that I stood silent as others destroyed this country.

Let me state it clearly. The America that I grew up in believed not in the rule of man but in the rule of law. She believed in honesty and Judeo-Christian values, yet made room for those of different faiths and backgrounds. The America I grew up in had a religious flavor, but her people were wary of those who wore their religion on their sleeves. The America that I grew up in believed in the golden rule: treat people the way we would like them to treat us. The America that I grew up in believed that you did not lie, cheat or steal, and believed in the inherent goodness of men, but recognized that evil still exists. The America that I grew up in did not believe in an eye for an eye. It believed in protecting oneself from evil, but in the process of doing so we were always cautioned not to become what we were protecting against.

In short, the America that I grew up in was a place where one could be proud of one's country, and thankful to the men and women who had sacrificed so much in the past to give us this heritage. I wake up today as a 50 year old husband and father of three, and I wonder where that America has gone. I see a President who called the U.S. Constitution "just a piece of paper." He replaced President who blatantly lied to the American public. Admittedly, that lie concerned matters that were none of our business, but when our leaders have no honesty our discourse is destroyed and it makes lies seem acceptable.

Are these the best leaders our country can produce? I see that second President's wife running for President and claiming she will end the war, despite initially voting in favor of the war, and despite voting in favor of a resolution against Iran seething with the scent of a brand new war. Do Americans believe this candidate will act in our best interests given all the money she has received from lobbyists and the military industrial complex? Do Americans really believe she will end the war, as she now claims in her advertisements? Perhaps this is just a tactic to gain anti-war votes now that Obama is breathing down her neck.

I see the U.S. involved in an aggressive, undeclared war against a country that did not attack us and did not threaten us in any way. This war was bought and sold on false pretenses. The truth is, we are far less safe after Iraq than before. Our invasion has created scores of emotionally charged enemies who have more reasons to attack us than ever before. The Administration and the media conveniently assure us that the "surge" is working, which is not surprising on the eve of a new election.

Ron Paul voted against invading Iraq. Rather than attack an entire nation, he tried to convince Congress and our President to strategically target the terrorists responsible for 9/11. The current Administration has failed to capture and eliminate the criminals who perpetrated this crime against us. Those responsible are still at large, our borders are wide open, and our troops are spread thin all over the globe. We need a leader who will protect us with a strong national defense and keep us out of foreign entanglemenets that do nothing but create more American enemies.

America needs a President who will put the national security of the people and the safety of our troops before the interests of oil companies and the military industrial complex. To date, this war has cost between 100,000 and 1.0 million innocent lives. That is between 30 and 300 times the number of people murdered on 9/11. Do two wrongs make a right? The majority of 9/11 hijackers were Saudis - not Iraqis. We are allies with Saudi Arabia and yet Saudi Arabia is far from being a democracy!

The hypocrisy is staggering. The mistakes that are being made are criminal. Why anyone believes the purveyors of this war is a mystery to me. Consider their pitch: "We will be greeted as liberators." Wrong. "Oil revenues will pay the cost." Wrong. "A secular democracy will emerge and be an inspiration for other countries." Wrong. The list of misjudgements goes on and on.

Were the civilian Iraqis killed by our preemptive war "collateral damage" or is that just another euphemism for murder? Has anyone taken the time to look at their pictures on the Web? I wonder how their friends and relatives feel about the United States. Are they more or less likely to become terrorists as a result of our actions?

America violates the Geneva Conventions and violates the Christian Doctrine of Just War. She started a war that is illegal under international law. As President Eisenhower said, "Preventative war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly, I would not listen to anyone who seriously talked about such a thing." I see a flock of Presidential candidates, most of whom voted for this war and many of whom believe "all options should be on the table" in dealing with Iran. That's code for, "We should be prepared to attack Iran with conventional and/or nuclear weapons."

Think about that for a moment. Our leaders are actually talking about a preemptive nuclear strike against a country that has not attacked us. Are they insane? I hear Neocon pundits calling for the beginning of World War III. Our country suspended habeas corpus! Our country stripped its citizens of the Constitutional protections against an overreaching government. Our country sanctions "rendition": the kidnapping of anyone, anywhere, throughout the world, and taking them to a remote location where they can be subject to "enhanced interrogation techniques" we are asked to believe do not constitute torture.

One shameless Republican candidate spoke of his desire to "double Guantanamo". He thinks his sons' participation in his campaign is equivalent to military service. Is it any surprise that he got a deferment when his country called on him and asked for his service in Vietnam? Other candidates for the highest office in this land are not any better. Most have never served in any war. As for one war hero candidate, he sings "bomb Iran" to the tune of The Beach Boy's song, Barbara Ann. How dare he make light of killing people? Shame on you, Senator! Of all people, you should know better.

Our country that thinks that it owns and controls the world. I believe this is ethically wrong. Given that we cannot afford our growing emire, our attempt to run the world is also pointless. Should we have bases in the Middle East for the next fifty years? Is it okay for the dominant political party, the Neocons, to believe the world is a dark and evil place? The people who feel this way are projecting their own views onto the rest of the world. They need therapy. We have adopted the Old Testament view of an eye for an eye. As Ghandi said, if we take this approach, we will all end up blind.

Has America lost its soul? Acting on fear, ignorance, and incompetence we have implemented the wrong policies and taken the wrong course. How's that for not letting the terrorists win? God surely has a great sense of humor; irony abounds. As citizens, each and every one of us bears responsibility for the acts of our government. All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing. I think the administration and the vast majority of Congress have lost their souls, but the American people have not. Nearly 70% of the American population is against the war in Iraq. The vast majority of us want peace. People know what is right, yet the government does the wrong thing. How can this be, in a nation OF, FOR, and BY the People? Does the government really represent our interests? Must we kill innocent Iraqis and Iranians to ensure our safety? Would you advocate killing your neighbor because you think he might do you harm in the future, even if he has done nothing to you yet?

I will say it right now, clearly and loud:

The huge disconnect between what a majority of this country wants and what oru government is doing is the elephant in the room that no one will discuss. I cannot in good conscience condone or support the policies of the Neocons, the military industrial complex, or the oil industry. I don't believe in "Full Spectrum Dominance." I don't believe "We are the inispensable nation." I don't believe we are "aistory's actors." I don't believe we can "make our own reality." I don't believe we should be an Empire. I think we have great power but we should only use that power to protect ourselves.

With our power comes enormous responsibility. We are a Constitutional Republic. I believe there is a power higher than my government that the Founders drew upon in drafting the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution. "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal." Notice the words "all men" - the Constitution does not say "all Americans." The founders believes, as do I, that ALL men have God-given rights. Governments are made to protect these rights, not to take them away.

If it sounds like I am mad, you're right. I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore. I'm mad that my money becomes worth less every year because the Federal Reserve prints money out of thin air. I am mad that our inflation statistics are a lie, thanks to Clinton changing the CPI calculation. I'm mad that we're on a roller coaster of boom and bust cycles that benefit financiers at the expense of the middle class, retirees and the poor. I'm mad that Wall Street titans and speculators have been rewarded while savers and honest labor have been punished. I'm mad that honesty is considered quaint and naive by the political classes. I am mad at the arrogance of those who hold power in Washington. I am mad that our leaders sent us tumbling off our moral high ground. I'm mad that my tax dollars are used for weapons rather than peace. I don't want innocent blood on my hand. I want my country back!

The mainstream media and vested industrial and political interests would have us believe that we cannot make a difference. The only candidates they thoroughly cover are war mongers. They claim the voices that represent real change don't stand a chance. In doing so, they have gone too far.

The establishment dam has sprung a leak. The word is spreading. Candidates that represent real change are moving up. Candidates that represent the status quo are losing steam. Ron Paul's message is clear and beautiful and true. It resonates with people. When you hear it, you say, "That's right, that's what I believe." This is why his poll numbers are rising faster than any other candidate. This is why his forth quarter fundraising is over $18,000,000 at the time I'm writing this.

They say he cannot win. They say he is a fringe candidate. They say he will lose big.

I disagree. We have a great opportunity to make Ron Paul our next President. The avalanche has already begun: the Freedom message is out there and it is spreading like a virus. It cannot be stopped. The Ron Paul Freedom Movement is a seminal event in the history of US politics.

It is an honor to support this man. We should be so lucky as to have him for our President. Individually, none of us have the power of the Neocons and the political classes, but as we self-organize and unite, we have them badly outnumbered. They are terrified! The growth in this movement is amazing. We can and we WILL win this struggle. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a defeatist or is working for the other side.

I ran the USA Today advertisement because I wanted to plant a seed and make a difference. WE ALL MAKE A DIFFERENCE. Every conversation, every person converted, every e-mail and every effort; it all counts. The Internet has made it possible.

What a beautiful thing. The trend is really changing and it is fun to watch the old guard struggle as their fortress crumbles.

So what can you do? Join our effort to elect Ron Paul as the next President of the United States. Spread the word that we have an opportunity to elect an honest statesman with an impeccable record of voting in line with our Constitution. Donate to his campaign! Each contribution represents another American who has said "enough is enough."

No amount is too little. On December 16th, our collective voices were heard when grassroots supporters for Dr. Paul succeeded in organizing the largest one-day fundraiser in political history. Over 58,000 Americans spoke with their wallets by donating more than $6 million dollars to the Ron Paul campaign in a single day.

Think about it. What is freedom worth?

If you care about the future of this country, Ron Paul will not let you down. If you care about our troops, you must vote for Dr. Paul so he can bring them home to defend America instead of someone else's country. Ron Paul has received more donations from active military personnel than any other candidate. Why do you think that is?

This is it folks. A once in a lifetime opportunity. We may never see a candidate with more integrity, with a better message or a better track record. Our founding fathers pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honors in order to establish this Nation. Perhaps we have taken for granted the risks they took and the sacrifices they made. But we are being called and tested. How will we answer?

Are you going to be a Loyalist or a Patriot? Are you going to storm the ramparts or huddle with the bourgeoisie? Americans are brave people. We can set this country back on track and experience a renaissance of Peace, Freedom and Prosperity.

Vote Ron Paul for President! Please join us and vote for Ron Paul in your state's Republican Primary and encourage your friends and neighbors to do the same. You can learn more about his positions on the issues that most concern you at www.RonPaulLibrary.org.

Do not count on the media to keep you informed, but if you keep an ear to the street, you'll hear us coming.

 

[jacmicwag]

Great piece Larry but I do agree with your editor about the evolution paragraph. I just don't think it belongs in this particular ad. The point you make is valid and true and certainly can be used effectively in blogs, letters to editors and the like.

Thanks for your dedication and hard work.

 

[davidkachel]

Absolutely leave out the part about evolution and whatizname. It will not get any votes and will certainly lose some.
Besides, evolution is not "proven". It is only a theory. (One with which I happen to agree, but a theory nonetheless.)

 

[Eagle1]

The article is MUCH TOO LONG for the avg person who is addicted to sound bytes on TV. Heck, I know all this stuff and I didn't have the patience to wade thru it.

Might run several ads on different topics.

Take out the evolution part.

 

[jenninlouisiana]

I agree with Linda.

 

[Energy]

I hope and trust the publisher/designer will make this easy to skim and scan.

 

[Rob]

Absolutely leave out the part about evolution and whatizname. It will not get any votes and will certainly lose some.
Besides, evolution is not "proven". It is only a theory. (One with which I happen to agree, but a theory nonetheless.)

Scientific theories are as close as we ever get to any type of accepted "fact." The body of science does not permit something to be called "theory" unless it is overwhelmingly accepted as truth.

The "popular definition" of theory and the scientific one are very different.

You often here people who reject evolution by beginning, "I think it is a theory...."

That's like someone who wants to legalize marijuana, "I think marijuana is illegal..."

It is a very awkward way begin stating you disagree with something, and shows that you don't understand the definition of theory.

 

[Chadd Murray]

Then there is another republican candidate who doesn't believe in evolution

His name is Ron Paul.

 

[Perry]

OK, here is where we are right now.

It is long.

It will be full page.

There will be bolding, set outs and text changes.

It is kind of hard to read without all the formatting. I will try to get a pdf up later.

If you have time take a look and make suggestions.

Thanks.

Larry

In particular, do you think I should leave this part in or take it out. It is how I feel. But Linda thinks we lose voters. Thoughts?

. Then there is another republican candidate who doesn't believe in evolution, and literally believes the world was created in six days. If we are going to replay the Monkey/Scopes trial at the Presidential level, we are surely lost. Anyone who does not believe in the theory of evolution, as proven by science, is immediately disqualified by me as not being capable of critical thought. I am not saying people are not allowed to think "magically", I am just saying that I do not want one of these people running my country.[Linda comment (I’d take it all out and not even go there—assuming your goal is to help Ron get elected. Plus the copy just flows better into your next statement with it out.)

Larry

I think you are treading dangerous ground with this portion of the ad.
For the Ron Paul revolution first impressions are everything. I think the fact that Ron Paul rejects evolution is something that needs to be left on the back burner.
In running this ad you will promoting locally yet discouraging invividuals new to Pauls message nationally.
I can easily see this becoming a "hitpiece" on Ron Paul on many talk shows and unfortunately this is one of the debates that in the eyes of the American public Paul will lose. By bringing this issue to the forefront you are asking Dr Paul to respond. Do you really think this will make him look good in the national spotlight?

 

[nathanielyao]

Some minor language edits:

Or is this just a tactic to gain anti-war votes now that Obama is breathing down her neck.

Might want to change Obama to "her leading rival." The entire article shouldn't mention any other candidates by name so as not to distract people.

Definitely avoid the evolution thing.

The candidates who represent change are moving up. The candidates who represent the status quo are moving down (Rudy Guiliani and Hillary Clinton). Even Rudy is being forced to talk about what a great religion Islam is in order to soften his Norman Podhoretz inspired:” kill’em all, and let God sort them out message.”

Perhaps "Ron Paul, the candidate who represents change is moving up. The candidates who represent the status quo are moving down."

This will put a more definitive on who is representing change as people might confuse that statement with Huckabee or Obama. Not naming Rudy or Hillary will let people associate who ever they think is the status quo with moving down.

Will also lead in well into the next paragraph.

This is a great thing you are doing.

Nathaniel

 

[Rob]

Larry

I think you are treading dangerous ground with this portion of the ad.
For the Ron Paul revolution first impressions are everything. I think the fact that Ron Paul rejects evolution is something that needs to be left on the back burner.
In running this ad you will promoting locally yet discouraging invividuals new to Pauls message nationally.
I can easily see this becoming a "hitpiece" on Ron Paul on many talk shows and unfortunately this is one of the debates that in the eyes of the American public Paul will lose. By bringing this issue to the forefront you are asking Dr Paul to respond. Do you really think this will make him look good in the national spotlight?

I agree. You can look how involved I am with this campaign by looking at my signature.

IF I read that part of your ad before I knew who Ron Paul was, I doubt that I would ever support him. Thankfully I was introduced to him more slowly. Although I'm finding this very hard to swallow.