That's more like it.
Posted on 12/11/2006 7:30:27 PM PST by Joseph DeMaistre
Let's keep up the good work and make sure the pressure stays on these "progressive Christians." Oops, Communists.
I'm really curious how Rush and David are brothers. Was Rush adopted?
That's funny. Non-crackpot PhD Psychologists at Columbia University have published research showing that homosexuals can, indeed, change their way of thinking, thereby being cured of homosexuality.
The IPC is another DemonRat front group.
Well, come to think of it, that language is pretty mild for a liberal.
Mulsims are progressive Christians too. They teach OF Jesus while denying His divinity, His death, and His resurrection.
Why rewrite the holy texts? "Progressive Christianity" is the word of false prophets. Homosexuality (and prostitution) is still sin.
There is no charity in lawmakers forcing citizenry to pay for a welfare state. That is paying Caesar taxes for the Empire. Our charitable obligation must be voluntary.
Every alternative weekly hippie sex paper has ads for "bi-curious" people to respond to.
Certainly all of those "curious" people aren't homosexual. But far be it from Christians to be permitted to counsel confused individuals. Better for the homosexual lobby to do that.
Certainly all of those "curious" people aren't homosexual. But far be it from Christians to be permitted to counsel confused individuals. Better for the homosexual lobby to do that.
The Gay-stapo has a name for those people now. The acronym GLBT (Gay Lesbian Bisexual Transgender) is commonly amended with a "Q" for "Questioning." And as far as the advocates of sexual anarchy are concerned, if you have to ask the question, the answer is always "YES!"
And Dobson was right!
Here's what the IPC says in a press release regarding Dobson's comment on church and state. Read it carefully.
Did you catch it? They concede that Dobson is right in saying that "the phrase separation of church and state is not found in the constitution (sic) or the first Amendment (sic)" and in the very next paragraph write "As progressive Christians, IPC is steadfastly committed to the separation of church and state as stated in the Constitution of the United States"! Can you believe it?
KING: We have a separation of church and state.DOBSON: Who says?
KING: You don't believe in separation of church and state?
DOBSON: Not the way you mean it. The separation of church and state is not in the Constitution. No, it's not. That is not in the Constitution. That was...
KING: It's in the Bill of Rights.
DOBSON: It's not in the Bill of Rights. It's not anywhere in a foundational document. The only place where the so-called "wall of separation" was mentioned was in a letter written by Jefferson to a friend. That's the only place. It has been picked up and made to be something it was never intended to be. What it has become is that the government is protected from the church, instead of the other way around, which is that church was designed to be protected from the government.
Dr. Dobson's claim that there is no such thing as separation of church and state is not supported by history. While it is true that the phrase separation of church and state is not found in the constitution or the first Amendment, the concept was well understood by the leading thinkers of the time. Thomas Jefferson's's letter to the Danbury Baptist Association, is considered by historians, legal scholars and the U.S. Supreme Court to be Jefferson's definitive statement on the meaning of the establishment clause of the First Amendment.
As progressive Christians, IPC is steadfastly committed to the separation of church and state as stated in the Constitution of the United States. We base our belief not as an expression of hostility towards religion, but as a guarantee of its free practice whereby the position of one faith is not elevated over any other. In that manner, America will protect, as FDR proclaimed, "The freedom of every person to worship God in his own way."
That was a rhetorical question. Of course you can believe they would be so disingenuous. And you know you can't believe anything they say.
IPC ideology has blinded them from seeing their own contradictions.
Yeah... and the homosexual lobby HATES the ex-gays. They prove that it is a decision.
************
Uh-oh. They're bringing out the big guns now. It's the classic "it was hurtful" attack!
The homosexual denial movement is the greatest threat to free speech and freedom of conscience that America has ever faced.
Additionally, the homos always trot out people who claim to have attempted to go through conversion therapy and failed.
If I remember correctly, research from the 1960s found it was only 30 percent effective. I analogize trying to quit homosexuality to trying to quit smoking because some find themselves able to do so while others can't.
If homosexuality has the characteristic of curability (either curable or incurable), then it sounds like a disease. Thank you to the "progressives" for acknowledging that fact.
See Post 16.
The libs are so programmed, so indoctrinated with their own dogma...that to them, it is not to be questioned; even if facts, even logic does not apply to them. To them, they are right; all else is wrong. (Yet somehow they're also supposed to believe that everything is equally right...) Pathetic existence they have, eh?
"IPC drew Limbaugh's ire by publicly challenging James Dobson's recent crackpot assertions about the curability of homosexuality; that separation of church and state is not part of the U.S. Constitution; and especially his claim that liberals do not know the difference between right and wrong."
So what? It's Dobson's opinion, it's IPC's opinion, and its Limbaugh's opinion. Right? I thought that was the way any argument could be put to rest.
(Comment: there IS no such thing as "separation of church & state" in the Constitution, and the non-establishment clause technically exists only in the Bill of Rights.)
The only thing the word "establishment" meant in the 18th century was an institutional church that everyone paid taxes to support and was required to attend, period.
The state constitutions bear this out in clearer detail than the federal constitution.
It was not intended to establish an anticlerical, atheistic state, contrary to the radical Left's claims.
Aah, it's just the squeals of some dark entity after he encountered a bit of light. He has to toss out the usual lies and get recharged for his ongoing trek in the dark.
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.