John T. Jeffery wrote:
> John-Thomas posted:  
> 
>> Speaking of having enough, I have not been subscribed to this list a
>> full year yet, and certainly not through an election.  Is this volume of
>> posts concerning politics typical?  I fear it is only going to get
>> higher as the election year progresses.  If this is the case,
>> Moderators, please unsubscribe me now.  I have no desire to discuss
>> politics or to wade through hundreds of posts concerning politics to get
>> to the posts that enticed me to subscribe.
> 
> No.  It is not typical.  But, then again, it might compare to what went on
> four years ago, or eight years ago if we went into the archives and took a
> look.
> 
> If the other Moderators agree with me, it might be wise to place politics
> off limits as a thread on this list.  I would not mind at all.  After
> growing up in the 60's in America, serving in Vietnam, and then in Iraq,
> believe me when I tell you my tolerance for what goes on in that realm is at
> a low ebb.

My intent was not to get a subject banned.  I find it rather absurd to 
ban a topic because of abuse.  If one abuses the list, banning that 
individual solves the problem.  The problem does not and cannot lie in 
the *topic*.  I bristle at the whole idea of banning topics because some 
may get heated and/or offensive.

The reason I asked the question is clearly I do not have time to follow 
this list as closely as I would like (here I am, responding to you five 
days later...).  If I have to wade through hundreds of uninteresting 
posts to get to what does interest me, this may not be the list for me.

> The exceptions I could envision to this might be where New Covenant Theology
> impinges on politics concerning the ethical or moral basis for
> political/governmental actions or decisions.  This, to my way of thinking,
> is a profitable area that needs to be explored.  I believe NCT finds itself
> in somewhat of a unique situation here as elsewhere considering the
> political implications found in the other two major schools of thought,
> i.e., Covenantism's inherent "theonomy" connection, and Dispensationalism's
> implications for "National Israel".

Now this would be an interesting and profitable discussion.  For whom to 
vote?  Not so much.  Which party?  Uh...no.  I *hate* politics.  It 
polarizes everyone involved.  Bleh.

> However, politics for politics sake, as in arguing about the candidates
> seems to have little if anything to do with NCT.  Perhaps all of those
> caught up in the "fever" of the moment would be willing to take that debate
> the private route if the Moderators concur.  
 >
> Would you reconsider unsubscribing if we could handle it that way?

If you mean banning an entire topic, see above.
--
john-thomas