Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Change doesn't happen unless someone makes it happen, but not all, or even most, change is done at the hands of the government, and government intervention is certainly not being called for here.Public pressure. Gay church members and their families. Others working in the respective churches to make the change.Please, show us where "the writer called for government action against churches by the government."Please, show us where the writer called for government action.
What I said is that the writer called for government action against churches by the government. I did not say that a "call for government action" was sedition, you loons.
What is sedition is calling for the people to rebel against our Constitution and our government, to restrict freedom of religion.
"Mitchell Gold, a prominent furniture maker and gay philanthropist, founded an advocacy group, Faith in America, which aims to mitigate the damage done to LGBT people by what it calls “religion-based bigotry" Gold says: "..... church leaders must be made “to take homosexuality off the sin list.”
What do you suppose that means? How does one *make* church leaders take "homosexuality off the sin list"?
Frank Bruni commentary It s time to cross homosexuality off the list of sins The Columbus Dispatch
Seems pretty obvious.
They're talking about forcing the churches to alter the bible, and penalizing them if they don't. They're talking about criminalizing faith.
Even if they weren't talking about giving the state that authority (which is of course what they're talking about and what Faith in America is all about) they are still encouraging people to commit a CRIME. They are talking about forcing the church to alter their beliefs. Not asking the church. MAKING them.
Change doesn't happen unless someone makes it happen, but not all, or even most, change is done at the hands of the government, and government intervention is certainly not being called for here.Public pressure. Gay church members and their families. Others working in the respective churches to make the change.Please, show us where "the writer called for government action against churches by the government."What I said is that the writer called for government action against churches by the government. I did not say that a "call for government action" was sedition, you loons.
What is sedition is calling for the people to rebel against our Constitution and our government, to restrict freedom of religion.
"Mitchell Gold, a prominent furniture maker and gay philanthropist, founded an advocacy group, Faith in America, which aims to mitigate the damage done to LGBT people by what it calls “religion-based bigotry" Gold says: "..... church leaders must be made “to take homosexuality off the sin list.”
What do you suppose that means? How does one *make* church leaders take "homosexuality off the sin list"?
Frank Bruni commentary It s time to cross homosexuality off the list of sins The Columbus Dispatch
Seems pretty obvious.
They're talking about forcing the churches to alter the bible, and penalizing them if they don't. They're talking about criminalizing faith.
Even if they weren't talking about giving the state that authority (which is of course what they're talking about and what Faith in America is all about) they are still encouraging people to commit a CRIME. They are talking about forcing the church to alter their beliefs. Not asking the church. MAKING them.
And just so I'm clear, are you saying that if the public puts pressure on churches to accept homosexuals, by say mailing leaflets or lobbying church officials, that that would be a crime?
So are you saying it's a crime to voice a religious opinion in this country? Sure seems like it.Change doesn't happen unless someone makes it happen, but not all, or even most, change is done at the hands of the government, and government intervention is certainly not being called for here.Public pressure. Gay church members and their families. Others working in the respective churches to make the change.Please, show us where "the writer called for government action against churches by the government."
"Mitchell Gold, a prominent furniture maker and gay philanthropist, founded an advocacy group, Faith in America, which aims to mitigate the damage done to LGBT people by what it calls “religion-based bigotry" Gold says: "..... church leaders must be made “to take homosexuality off the sin list.”
What do you suppose that means? How does one *make* church leaders take "homosexuality off the sin list"?
Frank Bruni commentary It s time to cross homosexuality off the list of sins The Columbus Dispatch
Seems pretty obvious.
They're talking about forcing the churches to alter the bible, and penalizing them if they don't. They're talking about criminalizing faith.
Even if they weren't talking about giving the state that authority (which is of course what they're talking about and what Faith in America is all about) they are still encouraging people to commit a CRIME. They are talking about forcing the church to alter their beliefs. Not asking the church. MAKING them.
And just so I'm clear, are you saying that if the public puts pressure on churches to accept homosexuals, by say mailing leaflets or lobbying church officials, that that would be a crime?
It's a crime to dictate someone's faith to them in this country, it's a tenet we built the country on, and anyone who lobbies to remove that right is seditious.
So are you saying it's a crime to voice a religious opinion in this country? Sure seems like it.Change doesn't happen unless someone makes it happen, but not all, or even most, change is done at the hands of the government, and government intervention is certainly not being called for here.Public pressure. Gay church members and their families. Others working in the respective churches to make the change."Mitchell Gold, a prominent furniture maker and gay philanthropist, founded an advocacy group, Faith in America, which aims to mitigate the damage done to LGBT people by what it calls “religion-based bigotry" Gold says: "..... church leaders must be made “to take homosexuality off the sin list.”
What do you suppose that means? How does one *make* church leaders take "homosexuality off the sin list"?
Frank Bruni commentary It s time to cross homosexuality off the list of sins The Columbus Dispatch
Seems pretty obvious.
They're talking about forcing the churches to alter the bible, and penalizing them if they don't. They're talking about criminalizing faith.
Even if they weren't talking about giving the state that authority (which is of course what they're talking about and what Faith in America is all about) they are still encouraging people to commit a CRIME. They are talking about forcing the church to alter their beliefs. Not asking the church. MAKING them.
And just so I'm clear, are you saying that if the public puts pressure on churches to accept homosexuals, by say mailing leaflets or lobbying church officials, that that would be a crime?
It's a crime to dictate someone's faith to them in this country, it's a tenet we built the country on, and anyone who lobbies to remove that right is seditious.
Missionaries are seditious? Everyone in the religion forum here is seditious?
So are you saying it's a crime to voice a religious opinion in this country? Sure seems like it.Change doesn't happen unless someone makes it happen, but not all, or even most, change is done at the hands of the government, and government intervention is certainly not being called for here.Public pressure. Gay church members and their families. Others working in the respective churches to make the change."Mitchell Gold, a prominent furniture maker and gay philanthropist, founded an advocacy group, Faith in America, which aims to mitigate the damage done to LGBT people by what it calls “religion-based bigotry" Gold says: "..... church leaders must be made “to take homosexuality off the sin list.”
What do you suppose that means? How does one *make* church leaders take "homosexuality off the sin list"?
Frank Bruni commentary It s time to cross homosexuality off the list of sins The Columbus Dispatch
Seems pretty obvious.
They're talking about forcing the churches to alter the bible, and penalizing them if they don't. They're talking about criminalizing faith.
Even if they weren't talking about giving the state that authority (which is of course what they're talking about and what Faith in America is all about) they are still encouraging people to commit a CRIME. They are talking about forcing the church to alter their beliefs. Not asking the church. MAKING them.
And just so I'm clear, are you saying that if the public puts pressure on churches to accept homosexuals, by say mailing leaflets or lobbying church officials, that that would be a crime?
It's a crime to dictate someone's faith to them in this country, it's a tenet we built the country on, and anyone who lobbies to remove that right is seditious.
Missionaries are seditious? Everyone in the religion forum here is seditious?
I really don't understand what you are saying, but you specifically said that if people were not trying to give the state the power to change religious beliefs (and nobody is trying to do that) that it was still sedition.So are you saying it's a crime to voice a religious opinion in this country? Sure seems like it.Change doesn't happen unless someone makes it happen, but not all, or even most, change is done at the hands of the government, and government intervention is certainly not being called for here.Public pressure. Gay church members and their families. Others working in the respective churches to make the change.
Seems pretty obvious.
They're talking about forcing the churches to alter the bible, and penalizing them if they don't. They're talking about criminalizing faith.
Even if they weren't talking about giving the state that authority (which is of course what they're talking about and what Faith in America is all about) they are still encouraging people to commit a CRIME. They are talking about forcing the church to alter their beliefs. Not asking the church. MAKING them.
And just so I'm clear, are you saying that if the public puts pressure on churches to accept homosexuals, by say mailing leaflets or lobbying church officials, that that would be a crime?
It's a crime to dictate someone's faith to them in this country, it's a tenet we built the country on, and anyone who lobbies to remove that right is seditious.
Missionaries are seditious? Everyone in the religion forum here is seditious?
You really don't understand the language, do you?
BTW, when somebody asks "so you are saying" it is a red flag that indicates they know what you are saying, but that doesn't fit the dialogue they wish to engage in...so they are assigning you a DIFFERENT point a view, so they can argue against that..while pretending it's actually your argument.
I'm not going to argue a point I never made. So you can stop trying to pretend I'm saying things I'm not, or I'll just put you on ignore like I have put most of the other progressive, minority, extremist liars on this site..and I will encourage everybody else to do the same. You've tried to assign me three different views now, none of which I actually made. Either address yourself to what is being said in reality, or shut the fuck up, puke.
Such is not happening. You believe what you want, say want you want.No, I'm saying it's a crime to incite people to exert state control over religion and speech.
I really don't understand what you are saying, but you specifically said that if people were not trying to give the state the power to change religious beliefs (and nobody is trying to do that) that it was still sedition.So are you saying it's a crime to voice a religious opinion in this country? Sure seems like it.Change doesn't happen unless someone makes it happen, but not all, or even most, change is done at the hands of the government, and government intervention is certainly not being called for here.They're talking about forcing the churches to alter the bible, and penalizing them if they don't. They're talking about criminalizing faith.
Even if they weren't talking about giving the state that authority (which is of course what they're talking about and what Faith in America is all about) they are still encouraging people to commit a CRIME. They are talking about forcing the church to alter their beliefs. Not asking the church. MAKING them.
And just so I'm clear, are you saying that if the public puts pressure on churches to accept homosexuals, by say mailing leaflets or lobbying church officials, that that would be a crime?
It's a crime to dictate someone's faith to them in this country, it's a tenet we built the country on, and anyone who lobbies to remove that right is seditious.
Missionaries are seditious? Everyone in the religion forum here is seditious?
You really don't understand the language, do you?
BTW, when somebody asks "so you are saying" it is a red flag that indicates they know what you are saying, but that doesn't fit the dialogue they wish to engage in...so they are assigning you a DIFFERENT point a view, so they can argue against that..while pretending it's actually your argument.
I'm not going to argue a point I never made. So you can stop trying to pretend I'm saying things I'm not, or I'll just put you on ignore like I have put most of the other progressive, minority, extremist liars on this site..and I will encourage everybody else to do the same. You've tried to assign me three different views now, none of which I actually made. Either address yourself to what is being said in reality, or shut the fuck up, puke.
I'm trying to figure out how that is. Is a person applying pressure through lobbying, parishioner help, etc. Being seditious when trying to convince a church to change its views?
If they are not what actions would you considee seditious With respect to your earlier post?
I think it's also obvious that the homos are going to go to further lengths to exert control over the churches.I think it's obvious the Christians are not going to be bullied by the homos. Just a couple of weeks ago 34,000 black churches compromised of 15 denominations and over 15 million members told the Presbyterians to pound sand due their choice to allow SSM. That's a lot of members...and a ton of money
I think it's also obvious that the homos are going to go to further lengths to exert control over the churches.I think it's obvious the Christians are not going to be bullied by the homos. Just a couple of weeks ago 34,000 black churches compromised of 15 denominations and over 15 million members told the Presbyterians to pound sand due their choice to allow SSM. That's a lot of members...and a ton of money
Which is exactly what we said would happen if we created laws against speech (*hate* speech, i.e., biblical references they don't like) and if we allowed the state to define what constitutes the sacrament of *marriage*.
Stop lying, Conservatives and bigots!
And every time we said "we don't want state-sanctioned homo marriage" and "hate speech is just speech and it's dangerous to regulate speech" because we knew that this was the extremist fringe's foot in the door of the churches..the leftists jeered and dumped our threads in the *conspiracy theory* forum, and laughed and laughed and laughed...because everybody KNOWS homos aren't interested in limiting freedom of speech, or throwing people in jail for their faith..right?I think it's also obvious that the homos are going to go to further lengths to exert control over the churches.I think it's obvious the Christians are not going to be bullied by the homos. Just a couple of weeks ago 34,000 black churches compromised of 15 denominations and over 15 million members told the Presbyterians to pound sand due their choice to allow SSM. That's a lot of members...and a ton of money
Which is exactly what we said would happen if we created laws against speech (*hate* speech, i.e., biblical references they don't like) and if we allowed the state to define what constitutes the sacrament of *marriage*.
Agreed and we warned this was going to happen, just as we warned they will want the age of consent lowered and inroads are already being made in that direction.
