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

To: Quix

“But it is ALSO a community with it’s own norms, cohesiveness, goals, boundaries (such as they are and aren’t) . . . etc.”

It is unconscionable to dignify them with the term “community.”

“And the Christians nearby smugly walk on by sanctimoniously proud that they don’t have THAT HORRID sin on their score card. While God MAY be considering their smug pride as WORSE.”

You know what sin I suspect is worse? Assuming that people who refuse to endorse sodomy are “smug” and “sanctimoniously proud.”

And worse yet would be using that tactic to try and browbeat people into silence on the issue.


103 posted on 08/13/2007 5:42:55 PM PDT by dsc (There is no safety for honest men except by believing all possible evil of evil men. Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]


To: dsc
"But it is ALSO a community with it’s own norms, cohesiveness, goals, boundaries (such as they are and aren’t) . . . etc.”

It is unconscionable to dignify them with the term “community.”

Perhaps not to a sociologist. They are, technically, factually, a community. I don't recall in Scripture where God said that all communities were sacred. Actually, IIRC, there's a Scripture that refers to a community of satan.

Methinks your seeming sanctimony is more than a little too starchy, prickly and . . . maybe even hollow.

“And the Christians nearby smugly walk on by sanctimoniously proud that they don’t have THAT HORRID sin on their score card. While God MAY be considering their smug pride as WORSE.”

You know what sin I suspect is worse? Assuming that people who refuse to endorse sodomy are “smug” and “sanctimoniously proud.”

WRONG ASSUMPTION on your part.

I merely assumed that folks who wrote with proud, sanctimonious wors and phrasings in proud and sanctimonious tones rather repeatedly, loudly, insistently, harshly . . . were probably . . . like they DEMONSTRATED . . . more than a little sanctimonious and proud. Had NOTHING to do with whether they could or couldn't tolerate homosexuals and their behaviors.

And worse yet would be using that tactic to try and browbeat people into silence on the issue.

More seemingly self-righteous, haughty,

AND WHOLESALE WRONG ASSUMPTIVE JUMPING TO CONCLUSIONS . . .

I have no need to browbeat folksinto anything, much less silence on an issue that I think needs plenty of vigorous Christian assertiveness, publicity and Biblical declarations.

TRY AGAIN . . . this time with . . . more accurate feeling and analysis.

109 posted on 08/13/2007 6:43:33 PM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies ]

To: dsc; Quix
You know what sin I suspect is worse? Assuming that people who refuse to endorse sodomy are “smug” and “sanctimoniously proud.”
Nobody here is talking about endorsing homosexuality. A few of us are talking about showing love and mercy and preaching the gospel to some who need to hear it most. Are you perhaps posting on the wrong thread?

135 posted on 08/14/2007 11:00:44 AM PDT by DallasMike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies ]

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