Skip to comments.
Pennsylvania Bill Could Silence Churches on Homosexuality
CENTER FOR RECLAIMING AMERICA. ^
| 11/27/02
| Greg Hoadley
Posted on 11/27/2002 6:02:07 AM PST by apackof2
Pennsylvania Bill Could Silence Churches on Homosexuality
A bill that could make pastors open to lawsuits for teaching the biblical truth of homosexuality could soon become law.
House Bill 1493 has already passed the Pennsylvania state, and could pass the House as soon as Wednesday, November 27.
"If pastors from pulpits speak either of the supremacy of biblical traditional marriage or speak of sexually
alternative lifestyles in an unfavorable way, under this amendment they could be open to litigation," William Devlin, president of
the Pennsylvania-based Urban Family Council, told Cybercast News Service.
"Basically," he continued, "it's saying if you're sitting and you're hearing and you feel intimidated, you can sue."
The bill would include provisions for sexual and gender minoritiesgay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender,
transsexual, transvestite, polyamorous, pan-sexual, and transvestites.
The bill provides no exemptions for religious institutions or clergy, according to Devlin.
"It is difficult for me to fathom that such a bill could become law in Pennsylvania," said Dr. D. James Kennedy,
founder and president of the CENTER FOR RECLAIMING AMERICA.
"Please, take a moment to call Governor Mark Schweiker, at (717) 787-2500, and tell him to veto House Bill 1493."
TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: bill; catholiclist; churches; homosexuality; pennsylvania
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-56 next last
Pray and Action bump
1
posted on
11/27/2002 6:02:07 AM PST
by
apackof2
To: apackof2
First Amendment bump!
Remember, this, not the Patriot Act, is how fascism begins.
Be Seeing You,
Chris
2
posted on
11/27/2002 6:03:24 AM PST
by
section9
To: apackof2
Freedom of religion. This will never fly.
3
posted on
11/27/2002 6:03:58 AM PST
by
randita
To: apackof2
If this becomes law then I see no reason why adultery shouldn't be added, or for that matter murder.
4
posted on
11/27/2002 6:04:20 AM PST
by
ladtx
To: NEPA; Jaxter; Antoninus; Ciexyz; calvin sun
Calling Pennsylvania Freepers
5
posted on
11/27/2002 6:06:31 AM PST
by
apackof2
To: apackof2
This is clearly and unambiguously unconstitutional. If it stands, the next step could be to outlaw the teaching of a three-in-one God in Christian churches. Or perhaps outlawing the teaching of the Ten commandments because someone doesn't want to hear condemnations of, say, adultery or covetousness.
To: apackof2
Hmm, is this a classic example of what is meant by the "separation of church & State?"
I suggest that if this bill passes that the LEADERS of the Christian community take this to court for violating their constitutional rights for Freedom of Religion!!!!!!!!!!!!!
To: apackof2
I'm not surprised -- Bill Devlin speaks at our church (near Philly) quite often -- this is a test-case which could lead to the destruction of non-PC churches (First Amendment and separation of church and state be damned)
8
posted on
11/27/2002 6:09:34 AM PST
by
twyn1
To: ladtx
I see no reason why adultery shouldn't be added It might be added here. Does anybody have the definition of "polyamorous."
If I can remember my early grammar, it seems that 'poly' means many. And 'amor' means love. So I would think that a word meaning 'many loves' probably means adultry.
To: 17th Miss Regt
I didn't know what "polyamorous" was, so I did a google and found this "defintion"
Means "many loves." Briefly, a polyamorous person is one who feels it is natural to romantically love more than just one person at a time. A polyamorous person may have more than one person that s/he considers to be a "spouse," for example. Polyamory is about love, without constraint by the dictates of society, defined only by the parameters that we, as individuals, impose upon it.
In other words, anything goes!
10
posted on
11/27/2002 6:11:14 AM PST
by
apackof2
To: 11th Earl of Mar
See post #9
11
posted on
11/27/2002 6:12:04 AM PST
by
apackof2
To: 11th Earl of Mar
Sorry I mean see post # 10
12
posted on
11/27/2002 6:12:34 AM PST
by
apackof2
To: 11th Earl of Mar
You may be right about the "poly" thing. Regardless, it is the height of hubris for the legislature of PA to essentially say the Bible has it all wrong.
13
posted on
11/27/2002 6:17:23 AM PST
by
ladtx
To: section9
14
posted on
11/27/2002 6:20:26 AM PST
by
apackof2
To: apackof2
"Basically," he continued, "it's saying if you're sitting and you're hearing and you feel intimidated, you can sue." If they don't like hearing the truth, let them find a watered-down church where they will feel welcome.
The bill would include provisions for sexual and gender minoritiesgay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, transsexual, transvestite, polyamorous, pan-sexual, and transvestites.
Well that just about covers every perversion.
The bill provides no exemptions for religious institutions or clergy, according to Devlin.
So much for freedom of religion. I am amazed and shocked that this is happening in America.
To: apackof2
So, freedom for homosexuals and deviants take precedence over "freedom of religion". If perverted persons do not want to hear the truth, then stay out of these churches.
16
posted on
11/27/2002 6:21:42 AM PST
by
maeng
To: newgeezer
This bill hasn't got a change. Even in our decadent society it hasn't got a chance.
To: ladtx
If this becomes law then I see no reason why adultery shouldn't be added, or for that matter murder. They could speed things up if they just ban Proverbs 6:16-19. I'm sure the multiculturalists wouldn't oppose it.
18
posted on
11/27/2002 6:24:29 AM PST
by
BraveMan
To: maeng
So, freedom for homosexuals and deviants take precedence over "freedom of religion". It's even worse than that. This bill states that the right of these groups to not be offended supercedes the right to freedom of religion.
19
posted on
11/27/2002 6:24:51 AM PST
by
Skooz
To: section9
The First Amendment was destroyed in 1953 when the Congress decided it could prevent political speech from the pulpit.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-56 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