Reply With Quote
Oh god, stop it with the "same gender" nonsense. Words have gender; people have sexes.
Hey, Crookshanks, remind me, how many people have you been married to?
Oh god, stop it with the "same gender" nonsense. Words have gender; people have sexes.
And while we're quizzing you, why have the username Crookshanks? Isn't that a character in one of those witchcraft-indoctrination Harry Potter books?
Heterosexuals can engage in deviant behavior too, yet we don't seem to be concerned about keeping them from getting married. Why is that?
Evangelicals are people who feel god wants them to preach the word.
1. You can switch gay with any word.
2. Are we talking protestants? Protestants do not go against the Lord's commandments. Protestants also do not go against the Natural law.
3. Now we are talkin real rghts. speech and assembly are god given cons utional rights. People wanting to change the definition of marriage are not cons utionally protected to do so.
It is not the ill effects I am worried about. The problem is marriage is not a right. It is not a Govt. en y that is distributed evenly. This is a religious custom. The one man, one woman marriage in our society comes from our Judeo-Christian background. Some Followers of Jesus believe that when married you are both giving your life to Abbah and becoming one. Marriage is a pact with god. This cannot be possible since a sexual couple are living in sin. Don't get me wrong - it is a sin among sins. Sorry I do not mean to get into religion. I am not telling someone how to live their life, unless it involves them forcing their beliefs on me. I hope they find something appropriate like giving the union.
No one's forcing your ing church to accept it.
Cons ution schmons ution. We don't have a cons utional form of government. We have a cobbled-together common law just like the British. Except that ours consists or two centuries of Supreme Court decisions interpreting and re-interpreting an eighteenth-century text to say whatever the contemporary intelligentsia want it to say.
Gay marriage is on the docket now because that's what the universities were debating 40 years ago. That's about how long it takes to filter down to the hoi polloi.
Want to change the government? Change the intelligentsia. Or better yet -- liquidate it.
Yes, they are. Read the 1st amendment lately?
I'm not sure what this means, but it's probably sigworthy.
I get that arguement. I truly do. However, where that arguement falls apart, at least in terms of whether or not government should be in the marriage business, is that those people who feel that way don't seem to have a problem with heterosexual couples of different religions make pacts with their own gods, or when heterosexual couples who don't believe in God make a pact strictly between themselves.
Ake Green, pastor of a Pentecostal congregation in Kalmar, Sweden, was sentenced to one month in prison on a charge of inciting hatred against sexuals. Pastor Green was prosecuted for his sermon in a January hearing, where he was found guilty of "hate speech against sexuals" for a sermon preached in 2003.
According to press reports, Pastor Green condemned sexuality as "abnormal, a horrible cancerous tumor in the body of society." His comments were delivered as part of a sermon, drawn from biblical texts, dealing with the sin of sexuality. In Sweden, biblical preaching is now a crime.
The prosecution of a Christian pastor for the crime of preaching a biblical sermon sets a new low for the culture of political correctness. Evangelical Christians--and all those who cherish civil liberties--should observe this case with great interest and concern. Those who reject biblical truth are now set on silencing Christian pulpits--all in the name of tolerance, acceptance, and diversity.
The logic of this prosecution is driven by the ardent determination of sexual activists to make all criticism of sexuality illegal. The logic of many hate crimes statutes plays right into this ideological strategy. By silencing all opposition, advocates for the normalization of sexuality have the public square entirely to themselves, with defenders of biblical sexuality and the traditional family left without a voice and risking prosecution for any language or argument deemed offensive by the guardians of political correctness.
In response to the protest by the Slovakian Interior Minister, Cecilia Julin, the Swedish ambassador to Slovakia, explained: "Swedish law states that public addresses cannot be used to instigate hatred towards a certain group." So much for free speech and religious liberty.
Sweden passed its hate speech statute in 2002, explicitly including "church sermons" as subject to the law's restrictions. As the Riksdag, Sweden's parliament, debated the legislation, the nation's chancellor of justice released a public note stating that a church sermon characterizing sexual behaviors as sinful "might" be considered a criminal offense. That "might" must now be replaced with "will," proved by Pastor Green's conviction and jail term.
Worked for Pol Pot.
start our own little cultural revolution Huh...... I dunno
In Sweden.
Once you get over the quaint notion that each individual matters, you can start to achieve great things.
His conviction was overturned and he was acquitted. So basically one district court went overboard and got overruled. Hardly a sign of some mass movement to force the Church to accept sexuality.
so having the state jail you, and being forced to fight them is what you call freedom?
Yeah well you achieve things I don' know about great.
No, it's what I call wrongful prosecution. Something which the higher court acknowledged, and something for which I hope the good Pastor received some kind of res ution.
Evangelical Christians in this country are too wedded to the established order and to the vestiges of their turn-the-other-cheek moral code. They might and moan about being oppressed and villify people, but when push comes to shove, they will neither push nor shove.
And so they will fail.
If you want to take control of a society, you must do it by force. You can do it slowly, as the liberals have, by infiltrating ins utions and gradually taking them over, or you can do it more quickly through violence.
The liberals already have the slow method 90% accomplished, and Christians won't resort to violence, so either we will have a left-wing order, or some other right-wing group not so shackled by scruples will need to assert itself.
No it wasn't some clerical error it was the bootheel of the state coming down on a guys neck.
Lenin, Stalin, Castro, Saddam, (insert Commie dictator)
Hopeless.
You like to state your opinions as facts without any citing.
No, it wasn't the bootheel of the state coming down on a guys neck. It was one court making a bad ruling and the state coming down on the court. Just like how when that judge in Louisiana decided he didn't want to marry an interracial couple it was simply one judge being a dumbass and did not mean that United States of America was trying to outlaw interracial marriage.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
