CANADIAN court agrees that BIBLE is HATE LITERATURE

CWNews.com ^ | 2-11-2003 | staff

[yendu bwam]

Now, a true Christian (which is what you claim to be) would either show my defense of alternative lifestyles on this thread, or apologize.

I do apologize for having given you (or others) the impression that I think you support homosexual acts. I have no idea what you believe on that score.

[yendu bwam]

The issue is not the part of the ad which quoted the Bible, the issue was the very human commentary attached to it.

"From the article: The purpose of the ad was to indicate that the Bible says no to homosexual behavior. The advertisement displayed references to four Bible passages: Romans 1, Leviticus 18:22, Leviticus 20:13, and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, on the left side. An equal sign (=) was situated in the middle, with a symbol on the right side. The symbol was comprised of two males holding hands with the universal symbol of a red circle with a diagonal bar superimposed over top." Hey Luis - I don't know about you, but a slash across a circle with two males holding hands seems to sum up very well the meaning of Romans, Leviticus, Corinthians... But again, that's beside the point (which, I believe, you miss)! In a free society, there's no reason why a man should not have the right to express his opposition (Biblically-based, in this case) to homosexuality. In PC liberal fascist Canada, people have lost their rights to free speech and the freedom of religion (and other freedoms as well). That is tyrannical.

[yendu bwam]

No one should have to live their lives by what some people wrote over thousand years ago.

But they don't. Homosexuals in Canada are free (as they are in the US) to live their lives as they see fit. They can have as many sexual partners as they want (anonymous ones also); they can have anal intercourse anytime they want - with any consenting adult. In fact, no one is constrained to live their lives by what God says, or by what the Bible says. No one in Canada is forced to either! However, that of course is not the issue at all. The issue is whether a man may express his opposition to homosexuality (just the way a man might want to express his opposition to bestiality, or incest, or bad language, or whatever...). In the US, we are given the right to express our beliefs freely (including, of course, religious belief) - to associate with whom we want - to assemble and try to convince others of our beliefs (as I am doing now). That right has been forgone in Canada. In Canada, the liberal fascist thugocracy wants to take away the right to say what one believes; in fact, they already have.

[Snowyman]

If you go back to the original ruling. And understand what was printed. Not the words of Romans 1, Leviticus 18:22, Leviticus 20:13, and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 rather something more when combined with the graphics. The question was whether or not it incited hate. It was interpreted by the court as intending to. That was the why of the fine. The intention. Not the words of God . There are those who prefer to say G-d , rather than God, fearing His printed name be perverted. As far as I'm concerned that's what the ad purchaser was doing. Perverting the words of God for his own ends.

[yendu bwam]

and using religous material to give legitimacy to their bigotry

Thinking and believing (as many, including myself) that homosexual acts are contrary to the will of God is not bigotry, contradictor. I think bestiality is contrary to the will of God as well - and that also does not make me a bigot. I think selfishness is contrary to the will of God - but that doesn't make me a bigot against selfish people!!! C'mon - calling people bigots for believing homosexual acts are wrong is intolerance. You and I probably have different beliefs about homosexuality. I tolerate yours just fine. But I have the right to state and defend mine as well. Hope you can tolerate that!

[Thorondir]

It is admirable to take FR posters on with crude profanity and threats from the safety of a far off keyboard?

Whatever.

[Thorondir]

No need for the OT. There are clear enough condemnations of Sodomy in the NT.

[yendu bwam]

Perverting the words of God for his own ends.

No, Snowyman, it's just the opposite. The liberal thugocratic government of Canada was seeking to suppress God's words for its (the government's) own ends. That's tyranny.

[Thorondir]

It isn't for man to judge repentance because we are not privy to what is in a person's heart.

Courts examine a defendant's repentence or lack thereof as a prime consideration in sentencing. A person may try to hide their unrepentant attidude, but their actions bear out the truth and may be judged without much difficulty.

We pay judges in America to do judge this very thing.

[yendu bwam]

Courts examine a defendant's repentence or lack thereof as a prime consideration in sentencing. A person may try to hide their unrepentant attidude, but their actions bear out the truth and may be judged without much difficulty.

Both of you are right. Courts are charged with, and try to do this. But they cannot look into a person's heart to know truly whether someone is repentant or not. Repentance can be, and often is, feigned. Only God can know the truth of it.

[Thorondir]

I tried to find your saying that about him and coundn't find anything of the sort either.

Good job keeping your cool, my friend. I admire that. I wish I were beter at it.

[Gophack]

While I agree that no one should attack other human beings out of hate, I disagree on your assertion that the Bible is not binding on how we live. As a Christian, it is my moral duty and obligation to follow Jesus Christ as best I can. Inasmuch, if I see my neighbor sinning, I need to rebuke him of the sin in a loving way. The newspaper article wasn't loving, and while quoting the Bible certainly didn't have a Christian tone.

You say we shouldn't "attack" a group for how they live. I disagree. If a group of people choose to torture animals in some ritual, should we not stop them? If a group of people decides that cannabalism is acceptable, should we not stop them?

The OT is thousands of years old; the NT is 2,000 years old. Yes, the Bible is old. So is the U.S. Constitution, which as Americans we still uphold (unless the liberal Supreme Court throws something out or makes something up). But the age of the Bible in no way relevant ... the Word of God is as valid today as it was 2,000 years ago.

Jesus Christ died for you, he suffered for your sins, so that you might have the chance for eternal life. We are simply called to believe and live as Jesus asks: by keeping the commandments and loving our neighbor as ourself.

Some people didn't write the Bible. The Bible is the inspired Word of God. You may not believe this now, but I hope you'll think about it: God so loved the world (and you) that He gave His only begotten Son.

God bless you.

[yendu bwam]

Have they proved themselves to be anything but?

It's wrong and intolerant to call people 'bigots' who believe homosexual acts are wrong and immoral and against the will of God. I believe adultery is wrong (though a great many these days do not) - that doesn't make me a bigot either.

[Thorondir]

Yeah, but people make their natures known even though they try to hide it. Any street cop who cannot read the basic good or rotten nature of the people he meets is a worthless cop and likely to die while on duty.

It is true that we are not to judge the final disposition of a man's soul, but Jesus never said we are not to judge a person's actions or try to discern their intentions by their words, actions, movements and prior history.

This common-sense (but much misunderstood) truth has kept me alive while on duty for 20 years. That people throw out the "You are not to judge" quote as a blanket cover-all defense for the indefensible is a pet peeve of mine. It may take good common-sense discernment to survive in law enforcement, but it also takes wise discernment to be a good Christian. There are so many wack-jobs out there.

[Snowyman]

Well so far , according to you, the people of Canada have lost their Freedom of Speech , Freedom of Association, Freedom of Assembly and Freedom of Religion. We must, given that this article was printed, still have Freedom of the Press. As for the other freedoms we've apparently lost, something this important should be reported. You do it. If nothing else you will learn that Canadians do have a sense of humour. And they love a good joke.

[yendu bwam]

"You are not to judge" quote as a blanket cover-all defense for the indefensible is a pet peeve of mine.

It's hard to take, but as a Christian, I believe it. We don't know what, on the insides of a man, compels him to commit evil acts. Many such men have much more to struggle with than we. But evil acts should be judged as such (the sin, not the sinner), and should be punished accordingly. We should leave the ultimate judgment of a man's worth to God and Christ.

[yendu bwam]

We must, given that this article was printed, still have Freedom of the Press. As for the other freedoms we've apparently lost, something this important should be reported. You do it. If nothing else you will learn that Canadians do have a sense of humour. And they love a good joke.

You are losing freedom of the press right now - as this becomes a precedent. And you're right, this should be reported. Canadians should wake up, IMHO. But of course, the tyranny of your government is ultimately your business. Hope Canadians will find the cojones to fight it. BTW, have known many Canadians with a wonderful sense of humor. But that won't save their freedoms.