Posted on 06/23/2010 8:37:50 AM PDT by Zakeet
The Texas Republican Party gives a whole new meaning to the word conservative.
The GOP there has voted on a platform that would ban oral and anal sex. It also would give jail sentences to anyone who issues a marriage license to a same-sex couple (even though such licenses are already invalid in the state).
“We oppose the legalization of sodomy,” the platform says. “We demand that Congress exercise its authority granted by the U.S. Constitution to withhold jurisdiction from the federal courts from cases involving sodomy.”
[Snip]
In addition, the platform says that homosexuality “tears at the fabric of society, contributes to the breakdown of the family unit and leads to the spread of dangerous communicable diseases.”
It also states that homosexuality must not be presented as an acceptable “alternative” lifestyle in public schools and “family” should not be redefined to include homosexual couples.
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
What chapter and verse in the new testament specifically covers this drivel you preach?
See #201
I view all people who belive in One God (apart from Muslims) as brothers and sisters. I may think than many of them have erroneous doctrine or beliefs in many ways, but if they are sincere and trying to follow the basic moral absolutes that are the same in every monotheist religion, then I am happy.
Calling Jews blasphemers is offensive in the extreme. Jesus himself was born in a Jewish family and practiced Judaism. He didn’t call himself a “Christian” - the term hadn’t been invented yet!
People view the divinity of Jesus in different ways and AFAIAC if they try to follow his INSTRUCTIONS and especially the one about loving God with all their heart and mind and actions, and loving their neighbors as themselves, I don’t want to poke my nose into their sectarian differences and point fingers of blame and criticism.
If there is a disucssion about religious beliefs, practices etc in particular, well and good - as long as it stay civil.
And calling all Jews blasphemers crosses the line into deep Uncivility.
Nobody who knows my persona, online or offline, would ever mistake me for a liberal.
The teachings of Judaism are not IN the New Testament, brain surgeon. It's kinda the defining trait of the religion.
But they DO deny that Christ is God. Look it up in the Talmud.
It's Blasphemy.
My wife is one-quarter Jewish, jeremiah (half of the Mexican side of her family descends directly from Spanish Conversos/Sephardim heritage).
I'm certainly not calling HER a blasphemer! She's a good Presbyterian Christian, after all.
So, please do not accuse me of "calling all Jews blasphemers", you LIAR. My WIFE is sufficiently Jewish to be Halakhically considered a Jew, and I'm not calling her a blasphemer!!
Please show us where Christ himself or any of his disciples or the new testament saints said specifically that its “blasphemy” for Jews to deny the divinity of Christ.
Sheesh, talk about splitting hairs. It was clear that you meant Jews who keep the Jewish faith are blasphemers by doing so.
You obviously were not talking about Jewish ethnicity.
Sheesh.
Okay, Weird, not a liberal. A wingnut leftist liberaltarian!
You’re a One Note Johnny and impossible to converse with.
Have a nice day/life etc.
If you do so deny this fact, then you're not a Christian -- and therefore not someone whose theological opinions I care about much.
Additionally, you place them in the same box as sodomites who have public displays with the theme of sodomizing Jesus... What justifies that?
Here, you should take your own advise...
There is little more intellectually pathetic than someone who won't answer a question, because he knows that by doing so, he'll lose the argument. It means that he already knows he's lost, he's just too ashamed of his own failure to admit it.
I can understand why communicable diseases can be spread easiliy between homosexual men, but I defy anybody to show me a heterosexual family that broke up because gay marriage was legalized in their state.
As far as homosexuality itself destroying the family unit, if a heterosexual family broke up, because, for example, one of the children turned out to be gay, then perhaps that Mommy and that Daddy weren’t meant to be together in the first place.
As far as the pic goes, those two are too old and ugly to be barechested. No dignity, whatsoever.
God Bless Democrat Texas, after their next election.
Christians in Hell: In the above passage punished by "boiling hot excrement" which is the punishment for all who mock "at the words of the sages." (Talmud)
Jesus: "Committed bestiality," "corrupted the people," is "turned into hell." (Sanhedrin 105a)
These are the views Talmudic Judaism regarding Christ, who is God.
Do you deny that these are "impious utterances" concerning Christ, who is God?
As I said, it's Blasphemy.
Here, you should take your own advise... There is little more intellectually pathetic than someone who won't answer a question, because he knows that by doing so, he'll lose the argument. It means that he already knows he's lost, he's just too ashamed of his own failure to admit it.
You're the one who won't acknowledge that the idea of Jesus being boiled in Hell for all Eternity in hot semen is blasphemy, genius.
Another one bites the dust.
(Blows smoke from barrel of his six-gun)...
Oh, so internet pornography, adult movies and pornographic magazines viewed inside the home AREN'T a problem?
With 50% of Christian men ADDICTED to pornography, I'd say you minimize the word "problem" (I wonder what percentage of those men identify themselves as "Christian libertarians"?).
Link to Pastorblog
I don't think you understand Roman's 13, as well as other verses where God commands the civil magistrate to enforce His laws:
Paul desired Christians to reign over Yahweh’s enemies rather than be servants of Yahweh’s enemies. What righteous man doesn’t desire the same? 1 Corinthians 6:1-6 establishes Paul’s expectation for Christians to set up their own courts of law. (See Chapter 6, “Article 3: Judicial Usurpation.”) By whose laws these courts are to be run, and whose judgments are to be administered?
Romans 13:1-7 establishes Paul’s anticipation of the day when righteous ministers of God would carry out judgment upon the wicked. Judgments, based upon whose standard?
Timothy 1:8-11 declares that Yahweh’s “law is good” and that “the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine; according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God….” The only aspect of the law that applies to such non-repentant criminals is Yahweh’s judgments. When Christians rule, Yahweh expects them to execute His judgments upon criminals.
2 Corinthians 10:4-6 establishes that Paul expected Christians to take dominion of every aspect of society, including the punishment of the wicked:
For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; and having in a readiness to revenge [punish, NASB] all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled. (2 Corinthians 10:4-6)
Think about verse 6 in particular. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever if Paul is only talking about punishing disobedience in the church. Why would he wait until their obedience was complete to finally punish their disobedience?There is no precedent for Paul doing this in other instances. Instead, Paul was looking forward to the time when the ecclesia had matured, grown, and become powerful enough to control the civil body politic and thereby carry out Yahweh’s judgments upon the wicked, including what the Constitutional framers and the Constitutional Republic’s justices would consider cruel and unusual.
If Christians ever hope to regain dominion from the non-Christians, they must be prepared to not only implement Yahweh’s commandments and statutes, but also enforce His judgments – or otherwise continue to face the consequences:
[You have] … changed my judgments into wickedness … for they have refused my judgments and my statutes, they have not walked in them. Therefore thus saith the Lord YHWH; Because ye … have not walked in my statutes, neither have kept my judgments … behold, I, even I, am against thee, and will execute judgments in the midst of thee in the sight of the nations. (Ezekiel 5:6-8)
Link to Biblical Law vs Constitutionalism
Of course. Rape is Biblically regarded as a Capital Crime. And it should be.
So if the Kent WA couple had not raped their 4 year old daughter, and instead only posed her nude in provovative positions in front of the webcam (done in the PRIVACY of their own home of course) it would have been justifiable in your opinion? What if she were 18 years of age, would that be LESS sinful in the eyes of God?
Well, answer the question, bucko: If you want to enforce all the Old Testament Moral Laws which Saint Paul does NOT specify as Civil Crimes under the New Testamental grant of Government Authority, howzabout this one: Blasphemy.
"bucko" finally answers (Christian Capitalist's "anal" obsession with Blasphemy laws).
You never gave me your input into the video showing your brethren at San Francisco's Folsom Street Fair SODOMIZING Jesus Christ. Should that be illegal, or should it be "celebrated", but ONLY if it is done on PRIVATE property? How do you think God will view a nation that allows that sort of BLASPHEMY to go on?
When it comes to enforcement of laws, the civil magistrate is allowed to use discretion in enforcing them. Sodomy laws for instance: "Even though many of these laws target both heterosexual and homosexual acts, they are more often selectively enforced only against homosexuals. Henceforth, it is a common misunderstanding that sodomy laws are laws against homosexuality because the laws have been used so extensively in the prosecution of homosexual acts, when many of them prohibit some heterosexual acts as well." Link to Sodomy Laws
The same thing goes with blasphemy laws: the civil magistrate would no more have to prosecute a man that used the Lord's name in vain after hitting his thumb with a hammer, than would a police officer have to prosecute somone going 26 MPH in a 25 MPH speed zone.
Your brethren over at the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence might not be so lucky though.
Dictionary.com... Is that your bible? LOL
I’ll ask you again..
What chapter and verse in the new testament specifically covers this drivel you preach?
Please show us where Christ himself or any of his disciples or the new testament saints said specifically that its “blasphemy” for Jews to deny the divinity of Christ.
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.