|
It Begins: Extremist Gays Attack Church (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| mindspin |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
A couple of points;
a) don't go putting something like "no offence" after using a term like "queers". The word queer means strange. Calling a group of people strange is an attempt to marginalize them. If you are trying to marganilize a person(s) what you are doing is trying to discount them, you're saying they aren't important or at least as important as the rest of society. Telling anyone that they don't count is offensive to that person so please, don't think everything is okay and no one will be upset because you make a lame assed attempt to cover your bigotry by saying "no offense". That's like hitting someone in the head with a baseball bat and saying "oh, I didn't mean to hurt you."
b) A challenge to the charitable status of churchs refusing to preform same sex marriages is not an attempt to force them to change their beliefs so much as it is a protest against the state subsidising a group that discriminates against citizens of the state. That being said, I do not believe that religious institutions that fail to preform same sex marriages should have their charitable status revoked as I believe their freedom of conscience and thought trumps the limitation this places on the homosexual couple challenging the status' freedom of expression.
I'm looking forward to this one hitting the courts. As someone who has spent significant time studying constitutional law I will be very interested to see how the court determines which freedom is paramount. |
queers was a bad word to use, and i apologize for that....i say stupid things when i'm angry....and this is definately and issue that angers me.... |
|
|
| PartyHarlequin |
| quote: | Originally posted by mindspin
this is absolutely stupid....taking away a church's charitable status because they won't adhere to the wish's of queers? (no offense to any gay ppl on this board) To me this is nothing more than gay ppl acting like grown up babies. How dare they challenge the catholic religion? Because the catholic religion is, and has always been opposed to same sex relations? For oh, 1500-2000 years now? Since the conception of the religion......So the gay ppl expect the catholic, or any other religion for that matter to change their age old policies because of a law that is going to be passed in one country? this is retarded....i'm actually angered by this! :mad: |
More correctly monotheistic religions since their inception (the jews way way way back when) denote gay acts as being perverse. Literally translated from Hebrew in the old testament "A man shall not lie with a man as he does a woman, it is an abomination" (which if we still adhered to semitic laws would carry a death penalty by burning, stoning or strangulation. Burning = having molten lead poured down your throat, Stoning = being thrown off a cliff, followed by being hit with a big boulder and if you're still alive stoned by the masses, Strangulation = 2 scarves around the neck pulled tautly extremely quickly. The idea was to keep the act as quick and painless as possible) |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by PartyHarlequin
Burning = having molten lead poured down your throat, The idea was to keep the act as quick and painless as possible) |
:conf: :wtf: :conf: Does that sound painless to you? |
|
|
| ShadoWolf |
| quote: | Originally posted by Matt
that article = June 12
if I recall, amendments were made to the bill to protect tax status of churches that refuse to perform gay marriage. |
Yes amendments were passed, although it didn't mention tax status directly. However, the amendment is inconsistent with C-250 so there will be litigation and it will be struck down by the courts.
The law doesn't apply to provinces and provincial human rights tribunals. Catholic Bishop Henry in Calgary has already been hauled in front of a Human Rights Tribunal, and with many more to come.
In the US there are already legal cases involving access to church basements by gay groups, etc.
Check out this rant against the Catholic Church by the same people pushing Bill C-38:
Spiritual Abuse by the Catholic Church
Sex-obsessed bishops of bigotry on the attack
http://www.samesexmarriage.ca/equal...lic_bishops.htm |
|
|
| Sly_Guy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
:conf: :wtf: :conf: Does that sound painless to you? |
trust me, you'd be dead before you felt the burn. |
|
|
| swilly |
| quote: | Originally posted by PartyHarlequin
More correctly monotheistic religions since their inception (the jews way way way back when) denote gay acts as being perverse. Literally translated from Hebrew in the old testament "A man shall not lie with a man as he does a woman, it is an abomination" (which if we still adhered to semitic laws would carry a death penalty by burning, stoning or strangulation. Burning = having molten lead poured down your throat, Stoning = being thrown off a cliff, followed by being hit with a big boulder and if you're still alive stoned by the masses, Strangulation = 2 scarves around the neck pulled tautly extremely quickly. The idea was to keep the act as quick and painless as possible) |
Dear Dr. Laura,
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.
I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.
a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?
c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?
e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?
f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?
g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?
h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?
i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help.
Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by swilly
Dear Dr. Laura,
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.
I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.
a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?
c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?
e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?
f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?
g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?
h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?
i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help.
Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging. |
BEST POST EVER! |
|
|
| TrueToTheCrew |
Id love to see them try to take on the church.
This is exactly what Canada needs.
Just picture it.
- Gays take on church
- Gays win because they wont stop crying
- Canadians are fed up of all this gay crap and vote in a conservative government
- Conservatives save the country.
I think this attack against the church will strike a chord with the majority of the population who wont stand for it. Quit while your ahead. |
|
|
| mindspin |
| quote: | Originally posted by swilly
Dear Dr. Laura,
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.
I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.
a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?
c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?
e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?
f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?
g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?
h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?
i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help.
Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging. |
did i miss the part on the front page where it said that the bible is to be taken litterally?? |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by TrueToTheCrew
Id love to see them try to take on the church.
This is exactly what Canada needs.
Just picture it.
- Gays take on church
- Gays win because they wont stop crying
- Canadians are fed up of all this gay crap and vote in a conservative government
- Conservatives save the country.
I think this attack against the church will strike a chord with the majority of the population who wont stand for it. Quit while your ahead. |
I'm not sure your extrapolation is based on sound logic. What you are overlooking is that it is unconstitutional to preven homosexual from being married. As the federal government cannot unilaterally change the constitution the CPC is unable to affect any change in this regard. In order to change the constitution you need 8/10 provinces representing 2/3 of the population to agree to the ammendment. Since the eight provinces including the three most populace have already sanctioned gay marriage I'm pretty sure no ammendment to the constitution banning it will ever be passed. The only recourse that the CPC could have would be to repeal the law and then invoke section 33 of the charter to overrule the Supreme Court, however, section 33 only lasts for 5 years, after that we're right back where we started.
Harper saying he will repeal this law and ban same sex marriage is rhetoric in it's truest form. He's stealing a page from the Liberal's hand book - "promise something people want but you cannot deliver then make an excuse once you're elected (please see repealing the GST for more details)." |
|
|
| ShadoWolf |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Harper saying he will repeal this law and ban same sex marriage is rhetoric in it's truest form. He's stealing a page from the Liberal's hand book - "promise something people want but you cannot deliver then make an excuse once you're elected (please see repealing the GST for more details)." |
Civil unions, with full rights and privileges equivalent to marriage, could easily be implemented. |
|
|
|
|
