Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'China-level' Christian persecution coming: court's ruling in Houston Bible case 'breath-taking'
WorldNetDaily ^ | 17 Aug 06 | WND

Posted on 08/17/2006 8:21:56 PM PDT by xzins

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-239 next last
To: MuddyWaters2006; P-Marlowe
I hadn't welcomed you to FR, MW2006. I just noticed the 2006 on your name. Welcome.

Grammatico-historic

What principle do you follow?

"Henry Abbot to James Iredell (from the N. Carolina Convention, 1788), "I am for my part against any exclusive establishment, but if there were any, I would prefer the Episcopal."[2]

201 posted on 09/02/2006 6:43:35 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and proud of it! Supporting our troops means praying for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003; P-Marlowe
"China-level" for Christian persecution, according to a leader in the midst of that battle.

If one is able to probe the sentence, one can guess which country the person is from who made the statement.

What battle is "that battle?"

What country do you think he's from?

202 posted on 09/02/2006 6:46:45 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and proud of it! Supporting our troops means praying for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: xzins
What country do you think he's from?

I assume you are going to tell me he is from China.

That doesn't exempt him from hyperbole. Unless things have gotten much, much, much bettrr for Christians in China than I have been led to believe.

203 posted on 09/02/2006 6:51:42 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (the war on poverty should include health club memberships for the morbidly poor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

It appears that you read the text the same way I do.

The man/woman speaking those words could be from that persecuted group in China.

If that's the case, then his/her opinion is based on that person's experience from within China. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.


204 posted on 09/02/2006 6:55:43 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and proud of it! Supporting our troops means praying for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: xzins
If that's the case, then his/her opinion is based on that person's experience from within China. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.

Good thing that things are going well for Christians in China.

205 posted on 09/02/2006 6:58:08 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (the war on poverty should include health club memberships for the morbidly poor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

If other evidence comes forward that this article is out of line, then I'll say so. But those in China that I have read indicate that it is not going well there.

Of course, the word "approaching" is loose, isn't it? It could be more precise.


206 posted on 09/02/2006 7:00:59 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and proud of it! Supporting our troops means praying for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: justche

For the person who has faith in Christ the comparison is real. For the person who only lives by the flesh and worldly standards, such things are foolishness because they don't have the ability to understand the things of the spirit.


207 posted on 09/02/2006 7:04:10 PM PDT by Cvengr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr

You win the most condescending post of the day - Implying that I disagree because of lack of faith in Christ is the furthest thing from the truth - but then discernment might not be your gift - which is why you fall for the "sky is falling" routine.


208 posted on 09/02/2006 8:15:36 PM PDT by justche (If you're afraid of the future, then get out of the way, stand aside. - Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: MuddyWaters2006
Please tell me how, when and where God granted the government co-equal advisory jurisdiction with him, over matters of religion?

See last sentence of post 190.

Thanks.

Marlowe

209 posted on 09/02/2006 10:35:46 PM PDT by P-Marlowe (((172 * 3.141592653589793238462) / 180) * 10 = 30.0196631)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: justche

You misread my intent.

The people who base their decisions against believers in the Fifth Court case are exercising a lack of faith in Christ, the same as those who enforce regulations against believers in China.

One can live through faith in Christ, while respecting the legitimate authority inherant in divinely established institutions, such as national governance.

The court case manifests a lack of respect for the faith in Christ in all things, as exercised by believers. In so doing IMHO, violates the Constitution by attacking the believer's worship.


210 posted on 09/03/2006 4:31:09 AM PDT by Cvengr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr

I didn't misread anything - but thanks for clarifying what you originally meant to say.


211 posted on 09/03/2006 7:56:15 AM PDT by justche (If you're afraid of the future, then get out of the way, stand aside. - Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 210 | View Replies]

To: xzins
I thank you, sir, for the warm welcome.

When interpreting the Constitution, I follow the principles set forth by Joseph Story in the chapter on "Rules of Interpretation of the Constitution" in his "Commentaries on the Constitution."
212 posted on 09/03/2006 9:58:10 AM PDT by MuddyWaters2006
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: xzins
What principle do you follow?

These are first several rules I use to construe the Constitution. They are derived from Story's Chapter on Interpreting the Constititon:

The first and fundamental rule of interpretating the U. S. Constitution is that our ultimate object is to construe it according to the meaning of the words and the intention of the bodies that gave it legal effect.

The intention of a law is to be gathered from the words, the context, the subject-matter, the effects and consequence, and the reason and spirit of the law.

Words are generally to be understood in their usual and most known signification, not so much regarding the propriety of grammar, as their general and popular use.

If the words are ambiguous, the next step is to determine if their meaning may be established by the context, or by comparing them with other words and sentences in the same instrument.

If the word(s) are still ambiguous, the next step is to examine other writings upon the subject-matter of the provision which we are trying to interpret, to see how the word(s) are used in those writings.

If the word(s) are still ambiguous, the next step is to consider the reason and spirit of the law, or the causes, which led to its enactment. These are often the best exponents of the words, and limit their application.

At this point, examine the effect and consequence of your construction. If its literal meaning involves a manifest absurdity, it ought not to be adopted

If there is still uncertainty, more interpretation is necessary. Go back to Story's chapter on Interpreting the Constitution.
213 posted on 09/03/2006 11:36:09 AM PDT by MuddyWaters2006
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: Gone GF; Jezebelle
Can you give any examples of the ACLU defending the expression of Christianity in any case in the last 10 years?

They have been overwhelmingly hostile to Christianity for as long as I can remember...

214 posted on 09/05/2006 9:34:31 AM PDT by teawithmisswilliams (Question Diversity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: xzins
All your church are belong to us!

Or something...
215 posted on 09/05/2006 9:36:44 AM PDT by LIConFem (Just opened a new seafood restaurant in Great Britain, called "Squid Pro Quid")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LIConFem

:>)


216 posted on 09/05/2006 9:41:27 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and proud of it! Supporting our troops means praying for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies]

To: teawithmisswilliams

Yes. Here are a few examples.

http://www.freedomforum.org/templates/document.asp?documentID=16471

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=548951&page=1

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2006/005/22.64.html



217 posted on 09/05/2006 9:49:28 AM PDT by linda_22003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: linda_22003

I'm glad to see the ACLU throws Christians an occasional bone. The ACLU "handles" over 6,000 cases annually, and the vast majority are overtly hostile to Christianity.
Apparently, they will defend an individual Christian's right once every few years to appease a rightly suspicious public "Discover the Network" has more:

http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6145


218 posted on 09/05/2006 1:07:07 PM PDT by teawithmisswilliams (Question Diversity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]

Comment #219 Removed by Moderator

Comment #220 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-239 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson