Skip to comments.
Stockton Police Lt. Toby Will Placed on Leave After Sending Anti-Gay Marriage Letter to Local Paper
NBC ^
| 7/17/15
| Elisha Fieldstadt
Posted on 07/18/2015 7:09:19 PM PDT by markomalley
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-107 next last
To: SaveFerris
If we OBEYED GOD, we would NOT HAVE THIS PROBLEM.
But don't forget
THIS:
God sends them a POWERFUL DELUSIONso that THEY WILL BELIEVE THE LIEand so that ALL will be condemnedwho have NOT BELIEVED the truthbut have DELIGHTED in wickedness.
TO TOLERATE HOMOSEXUALS IS EVIL.
![](http://www.sanctuarygc.org/Revelation/artwork/image25.jpg)
This is what we get when we FAIL to OBEY God.
For
it is written:
For whosoever shall commit ANY of these abominations,even the SOULS that commit themSHALL BE CUT OFF from among their people.
Those who support homosexuals are
against our Heavenly Father and His Son Jesus Christ.
These anti Christ people only bring destruction on us ALL.
I have
NO sympathy for homosexuals!
Homosexuality is a
"Mark" of disobedience.
Someone once asked"Why are they [homosexuals] all so angry?"
The answer is in the definition of "
REPROBATE".
rep·ro·bate \ˈre-prə-ˌbāt\ a. [L. reprobatus, reprobo, to disallow; re and probo, to prove.]
- 1. Not enduring proof or trial; not of standard purity or fineness; disallowed; rejected.
-
Reprobate silver shall men call them, because the Lord hath rejected them. Jer. 6.
- 2. Abandoned in sin; lost to virtue or grace.
-
They profess that they know God, but in works deny him, being abominable and disobedient, and to every good work reprobate. Titus 1.
- 3. Abandoned to error, or in apostasy. 2Tim. 3.
And the reason
"why" is
given in the Bible.
God has
a cure for homosexuals.
But will we OBEY our Heavenly Father?
"Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect
that God is just,
that his justice cannot sleep forever."
81
posted on
07/19/2015 3:41:34 AM PDT
by
Yosemitest
(It's Simple ! Fight, ... or Die !)
To: Yosemitest
The beginnings of strong delusion seem to be popping up in all kinds of places.
82
posted on
07/19/2015 3:49:08 AM PDT
by
SaveFerris
(Be a blessing to a stranger today for some have entertained angels unaware)
To: SkyPilot
Though the video seems to get some dates wrong regarding Joan Rivers I think you’ll find the early part where he reads from his own book interesting. I have only skimmed a couple pages from the book several years ago as I basically had little interest in it. But what I did skim told me all I needed to know.
83
posted on
07/19/2015 3:58:30 AM PDT
by
SaveFerris
(Be a blessing to a stranger today for some have entertained angels unaware)
To: SaveFerris
![](http://www.gospeltruth.net/finney6rf.gif)
Charles G. Finney (1792-1875) has a pretty good description of TODAY'S PROBLEMS :
Brethren, our preaching will bear its legitimate fruits.
If immorality prevails in the land,the fault is ours in a great degree.
If there is a decay of conscience,the pulpit is responsible for it.
If the public press lacks moral discrimination,the pulpit is responsible for it.
If the church is degenerate and worldly,the pulpit is responsible for it.
If the world loses its interest in religion,the pulpit is responsible for it
If Satan rules in our halls of legislation,
the pulpit is responsible for it.
If our politics become so corruptthat the very foundations of our government are ready to fall away,the pulpit is responsible for it.
Let us not ignore this fact, my dear brethren;but let us lay it to heart,and be thoroughly awake to our responsibilityin respect to the morals of this nation.
--Charles G. Finney, December 4, 1873
84
posted on
07/19/2015 4:09:59 AM PDT
by
Yosemitest
(It's Simple ! Fight, ... or Die !)
To: SaveFerris
You might agree with this video:
85
posted on
07/19/2015 4:16:08 AM PDT
by
Yosemitest
(It's Simple ! Fight, ... or Die !)
To: markomalley
the issue seems to be who’s opinion was being expressed.
the individual or the Police Department.
by signing with rank and department was he intending to speak for the department? had he signed only his name, the issue would be different
86
posted on
07/19/2015 4:21:16 AM PDT
by
bert
((K.E.; N.P.; GOPc.;+12, 73, ..... No peace? then no peace!)
To: markomalley
He signed the letter with his rank and employer and the newspaper editor says that's how he wanted it to appear in print.
That's where he went wrong.
He has every right to express his opinion (and we need more like him doing it), but once he cited his employer he implied that he was speaking for the department.
If I did that, I'd have been fired from my job outright. But I work in the real world and am not in a union. He's lucky for that.
We need to speak up. But don't hand them reasons to silence our voices.
87
posted on
07/19/2015 6:34:16 AM PDT
by
highball
("I never should have switched from scotch to martinis." -- the last words of Humphrey Bogart)
To: Alberta's Child
Admittedly, it’s a hypothetical.
I also recognize you rightly caveated with the word “respectable”.
So, given that, can you imagine Apple or Google or Mozilla actually firing an employee who, using their name, criticized Christians who were against gay “marriage”?
To: WildHighlander57
If Chief Flying Eagle smokes peyote in his tribal ceremonies over the weekend — even if he does this under the full protection of the law — he ain’t going to be operating any heavy equipment for me.
89
posted on
07/19/2015 7:41:25 AM PDT
by
Alberta's Child
("It doesn't work for me. I gotta have more cowbell!")
To: ReaganGeneration2
So, given that, can you imagine Apple or Google or Mozilla actually firing an employee who, using their name, criticized Christians who were against gay marriage? I wouldn't know about this one way or another, but I can absolutely see these companies taking a hard line against employees who publish anything like this even when the employees take positions that the company's leadership fully supports.
The dilemma a company faces is that if they allow Employee X to freely publish opinions like that, they have compromised their ability to discipline Employee Y for publishing a different opinion in a similar case.
This is why most companies don't like to get involved openly in politics on controversial matters. There's very little upside in alienating a large portion of your potential customer (and employee) base.
90
posted on
07/19/2015 7:57:04 AM PDT
by
Alberta's Child
("It doesn't work for me. I gotta have more cowbell!")
To: rikkir
The example of the letter to the editor that you gave (”sheep love”) is an extreme one.
Let’s go back to the example of the person writing about a safety issue.
In that example, he wrote to the paper, put his position and company and then was let go.
Then he spoke out some more, telling the press he was let go due to having previously written a letter to the paper about a safety issue.
So, that employee doesn’t work for the company any more- the contract, as you put it, is broken, so on what basis can the company go after him further?
That further action on the part of the company is retaliation on a whistleblower.
He was stating facts, and any retaliation for whistleblowing only makes the company look worse.
Since when is telling the truth slander?
91
posted on
07/19/2015 8:02:32 AM PDT
by
WildHighlander57
((WildHighlander57, returning after lurking since 2000)
To: ReaganGeneration2; rikkir
92
posted on
07/19/2015 8:04:50 AM PDT
by
WildHighlander57
((WildHighlander57, returning after lurking since 2000)
To: Alberta's Child
So, let’s say your company does, oh, private investigations. One of your employees writes a paper about a public hot-button issue, and their name is connected to your company.
You’ll fire her?
93
posted on
07/19/2015 8:31:52 AM PDT
by
polymuser
( Enough is enough)
To: polymuser
Is this employee’s name somehow “connected” to the company by a reader who does the research and figures out where she works, or is the paper published with the company’s name affiliated with her identity?
94
posted on
07/19/2015 8:38:17 AM PDT
by
Alberta's Child
("It doesn't work for me. I gotta have more cowbell!")
To: MeshugeMikey
that could have been construed to mean...setting an LGBTZYZ person on fire...
From Bored of the Rings...
‘Kodak Khaki No-Doz’ cried Gimlet, hurling a burning faggot at the pack of narcs.
‘Aiyee’ cried the faggot...
To: Alberta's Child
The Native American smoking peyote is another rare occasion. Give a more common example of something that is dangerous.
96
posted on
07/19/2015 10:26:42 AM PDT
by
WildHighlander57
((WildHighlander57, returning after lurking since 2000)
To: Alberta's Child; ReaganGeneration2
RG2,
I agree with you.
Those big companies involved themselves into the debate on homosexuality, and are being “in your face” to those that do not agree with their positions.
Not to mention being on the wrong side of Divine Law.
Alberta’s Child,
Now a small company doesn’t know about this in particular...
Well, they should.
The big companies opened up the can of worms and have kicked the hornets nest.
Lot of people don’t like it when they are told to ignore God’s Law.
97
posted on
07/19/2015 10:36:22 AM PDT
by
WildHighlander57
((WildHighlander57, returning after lurking since 2000)
To: SaveFerris
And it’s getting more evident every day isn’t it?
98
posted on
07/19/2015 10:48:52 AM PDT
by
CynicalBear
(For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus)
To: SaveFerris; SkyPilot
What’s the title of the book, and who is the author?
99
posted on
07/19/2015 11:20:54 AM PDT
by
WildHighlander57
((WildHighlander57, returning after lurking since 2000)
To: markomalley
...
Stockton Police Lt. Toby Will called legal same-sex marriage "blatant debauchery." The letter, titled "Marriage ruling shuns God," was posted online on July 7.I guess he missed the memo: TRUTH is the new HATE SPEECH.
100
posted on
07/19/2015 11:49:37 AM PDT
by
JimRed
(Excise the cancer before it kills us; feed & water the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS NOW & FOREVER!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-107 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson