Actually, Catholics don't use the KJV, it's not compliant with Canon law and lacks the Apocrypha.
Advertisement
by Resora » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:49 pm
by Jormengand » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:49 pm
Jormengand wrote:It would be really meta if I sigged this.
by Lithosano » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:49 pm
Pastor Visser wrote:Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by Yahweh god due to homosexuality, the same thing will happen to people today if they do not repent and stop being gay.
by Rocopurr » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:49 pm
Pastor Visser wrote:Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by Yahweh god due to homosexuality, the same thing will happen to people today if they do not repent and stop being gay.
by Liriena » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:49 pm
Pastor Visser wrote:Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by Yahweh god due to homosexuality, the same thing will happen to people today if they do not repent and stop being gay.
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Magna Libero » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:50 pm
Menassa wrote:The Tovian Way wrote:
The Jewish Sabbath was Saturday (Friday sundown to Saturday sundown) not Sunday.
And this was commanded in the societal law of the Jewish state. It is no longer operable.
The moral law is eternal, and not one word of it shall ever pass away.
The Jewish Sabbath is no longer Saturday?
by Menassa » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:52 pm
by Magna Libero » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:55 pm
Jormengand wrote:The Tovian Way wrote:
They are sinful because God, the source of all Goodness, as commanded us in His moral law, not to perform them.
Ah, but why did God command this? Also, since God is omnipotent, that means that he can command anything, and make anything good or sinful. Thus, God could make the murder of innocent children a good act, and make aiding others a sin. Surely, that cannot be so? Perhaps God would not do that, but there are terrifying implications even if He can.
by Resora » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:57 pm
Magna Libero wrote:Jormengand wrote:Ah, but why did God command this? Also, since God is omnipotent, that means that he can command anything, and make anything good or sinful. Thus, God could make the murder of innocent children a good act, and make aiding others a sin. Surely, that cannot be so? Perhaps God would not do that, but there are terrifying implications even if He can.
I think the Book of Job answers your questions.
by Jormengand » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:57 pm
Magna Libero wrote:Jormengand wrote:Ah, but why did God command this? Also, since God is omnipotent, that means that he can command anything, and make anything good or sinful. Thus, God could make the murder of innocent children a good act, and make aiding others a sin. Surely, that cannot be so? Perhaps God would not do that, but there are terrifying implications even if He can.
I think the Book of Job answers your questions.
Jormengand wrote:It would be really meta if I sigged this.
by Resora » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:05 pm
by Haflin » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:06 pm
Lithosano wrote:Haflin wrote:Sorry if I offended it was not my intention, But I would say that they are tyranny of majority (sorry if I may be using that phrase incorrectly.) I would also like to say that I never stated the majority was full of or composed of bigots. I was merely suggesting they were using the democratic process to suppress a generally unsupported group.
You didn't offend. No one is being suppressed (although in this case the minority is calling for that), they can still have their meeting but the Senate isn't going to give them a platform to espouse their bigotry.
by The Truth and Light » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:08 pm
by Lithosano » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:11 pm
Haflin wrote:Lithosano wrote:
You didn't offend. No one is being suppressed (although in this case the minority is calling for that), they can still have their meeting but the Senate isn't going to give them a platform to espouse their bigotry.
If this is a democracy a fair debate should be in place. Regardless of how you feel they act. When they are proven wrong in debate then its over. Until then they should not be denied a platform to struggle on.
by Gaelic Celtia » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:25 pm
Pastor Visser wrote:Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by Yahweh god due to homosexuality, the same thing will happen to people today if they do not repent and stop being gay.
Sibirsky wrote:You are offensive to me.
by Haflin » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:26 pm
Lithosano wrote:Haflin wrote:If this is a democracy a fair debate should be in place. Regardless of how you feel they act. When they are proven wrong in debate then its over. Until then they should not be denied a platform to struggle on.
They have more or less been proven wrong.
The right to free speech is not absolute, they cannot express their views in a place where the owner does not want them. The Supreme Court has recognized that people can be denied a platform. No one has a right to unrestricted access to Senate buildings (except maybe the senators themselves), and the person who was apparently in charge of the building decided not to allow them use of the building. No one was being suppressed.
by Menassa » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:31 pm
by Wisconsin9 » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:32 pm
Pastor Visser wrote:Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by Yahweh god due to homosexuality, the same thing will happen to people today if they do not repent and stop being gay.
by Resora » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:32 pm
Haflin wrote:Lithosano wrote:
They have more or less been proven wrong.
The right to free speech is not absolute, they cannot express their views in a place where the owner does not want them. The Supreme Court has recognized that people can be denied a platform. No one has a right to unrestricted access to Senate buildings (except maybe the senators themselves), and the person who was apparently in charge of the building decided not to allow them use of the building. No one was being suppressed.
Id disagree, suppression exists by lets say denying a platform in which to speak upon. The person in charge of the building decided to end the activity( The activity I may not support, but I will defend their ability to express it.) is a form of suppression. Even if they can go elsewhere to complain about what ever it is they want. It is still a weakening of their ability to say what they please. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
by Haflin » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:36 pm
Resora wrote:Haflin wrote:Id disagree, suppression exists by lets say denying a platform in which to speak upon. The person in charge of the building decided to end the activity( The activity I may not support, but I will defend their ability to express it.) is a form of suppression. Even if they can go elsewhere to complain about what ever it is they want. It is still a weakening of their ability to say what they please. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
I completely agree, but then, that's why societies with bourgeois concepts of property ownership are fundamentally undemocratic and cause communication distortions that give privilege to the interests of those with power. The state is not obligated to provide access to its property, and as the state was acting within its own laws to bar that group from using state property, its actions are no more or less democratic than, say, the lack of obligation of a media company to allow people to use its property to argue positions it disagrees with.
by The Scientific States » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:42 pm
by Condunum » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:43 pm
Haflin wrote:Lithosano wrote:
You didn't offend. No one is being suppressed (although in this case the minority is calling for that), they can still have their meeting but the Senate isn't going to give them a platform to espouse their bigotry.
If this is a democracy a fair debate should be in place. Regardless of how you feel they act. When they are proven wrong in debate then its over. Until then they should not be denied a platform to struggle on.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Ancientania, East Leaf Republic, Hidrandia, Infected Mushroom, Likhinia, Singaporen Empire, Stratonesia, Tungstan
Advertisement