They just put it up on Fox
http://snurl.com/3jrwe

The reason why Cameron was asked is that he champions a group of young post-modernist Christians who are all over the map politically. Although most are pro-life, it isn't the "hot-button" issue that the Christians in the Republican Party look at when we vote monolithically (pretty much) for the pro-life candidate.

Many of them are anti-Iraq War, they believe in global warming, socialistic solutions to poverty, affirmative action as a solution to race issues, etc.

The Democrats invited Strang because they know that he is known among this group which is a post-modern mixture of liberalism and conservatism. They know that his mere presence will allow them to begin to pick off younger Christian voters.

It's good that Cameron refused to pray -- although he did it for the wrong reason -- so he wouldn't be preceived as endorsing Obama.

I'd like to see Cameron endorse someone pro-life. No candidate out there fits his schizophrenic views so he is sadly an opportunity for pro-abortion Democrats to manipulate young Christian voters.

I do appaud him for his decision though no matter how he came to it.

I think he should have prayed for guidance for us all. As a Democrat who does not like abortion, I am saddened by the fact that abortions actually increased during the Bush administration. Even James Dobson recently said that Americans are just not ready politically to support a totally anti abortion position. If those of the religious right manage to put another Republican administration into office, they will have on their consciences the pro-war, pro-corruption, NON compassionate conservativism the GOP seems now to foster. We would probably manage to have less abortions if we would all commit ourselves to encouraging less unwanted pregnancies by emphasizing sex education, including not only the teaching of birth control techniques, but an emphasis on morality, chastity, and abstention. Obama will definitely have my vote.

Seeing Cameron speak here and having just watched Don Miller give the DNC prayer, I think that Cameron made the right choice. Don said Cameron could have said and better. Don's a speaker; Cameron's not. The bottom line is that Strang had to follow his conscience, and we should be able to respect that. If he had spiritualized it and said "God told me not to do it," would we be criticizing him?

Republicans pro-war? No. Pro-defending America? Yes
Republicans pro-corruption? No. The democrats have far more corruption in their history.
Democrats more compassionate? You mean like destroying Black America with "Welfare" in the 60's, 70's and 80's?
Not helpful.
Today? Obama is a complete empty suit, owned radicals who hate Christ, and finally America is waking up. Thank God!

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-unitedstates.html

Check out this web site and see that during the last eight years abortions have gone down, not up. Obama is the great discommunicator.

Surgical abortions have gone down. But if you count those that are from RU-486, then abortions have gone up. Either RU-486 is an abortion or it isn't. Either Obama and James Dobson agree on what constitutes an abortion or Abortions have gone down under the great leadership of President Bush.

Very uplifting! I'm a senior who commends Cameron's decision all the way. We already have too many sell-out Christians. I'm encouraged by the youth who have such hard choices today with all of the trash thrown at them by a world that worships celebrities and sports stars hungry for more and more power and money.

I fully support Cameron's decision and I understand why he did it.

I also don't think he will ever endorse a candidate, nor should he. Cameron represents a variety of different Christians with different, legitimate political views. In a sense, his endorsement would close the door on some needed dialogue within the church.

And there's already plenty of endorsement by Christian leaders going around - frighteningly so, if one is concerned by the possibility that a political party, when so closely aligned with certain brands of faith, may constitute something close to idolatry.

And what exactly would his place be to endorse a candidate (unless the other was, say, Hitler)? Does he endorse one simply as Cameron, or will others see him as a figurehead of the church? The latter is unfair and the perception could be dangerous.