[Omahahonors]

Originally Posted by Gunluvver2

Playing Hardball on Softball - Page 1 - Brent Bozell - Townhall Conservative

And your article demonstrates the reverse negative. People who demand silence through law are wrong. It doesn't matter if they speak of intolerance. Even the Westboro Baptists have the right to say as they think, but Americam constitution protects the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness no matter how some people think it shouldn't.

Speak loud and speak clear my fellow anti-*****, but do not promote anti-freedom for groups of people and groups of religious sects (including christianity).

[Senrab+Omaha=MissingChica]

Originally Posted by Calvinist

That sounds an awful lot like "do unto others". But what makes those right or wrong?

As for the "magic" in the Bible? No. There really isn't. God did some miracles---but not by "magic". There is mention of sorcers or divination, but it's condemned.

As a non believer, what makes the Bible right or wrong? This is your opinion.

The miracles in the Bible could be considered magic to a non-believer. They are magic to me. Jesus made water into wine? If not magic, then what is it?


And as an black male, I must agree with Omahahonors 100%. Beliefs like yours have caused oppression, and division between people.

FYI Calvinist - I have no issues with your beliefs as they are your own, but when your opinion effects laws of others who do not share your views with no basis outside of an opinion, then I have issue with it. Views like this in some churches still forbid interracial marriage, though I could find nothing scripture wise to back this up.

[Omahahonors]

Originally Posted by Senrab+Omaha=MissingChica

As a non believer, what makes the Bible right or wrong? This is your opinion.

The miracles in the Bible could be considered magic to a non-believer. They are magic to me. Jesus made water into wine? If not magic, then what is it?


And as an black male, I must agree with Omahahonors 100%. Beliefs like yours have caused oppression, and division between people.

FYI Calvinist - I have no issues with your beliefs as they are your own, but when your opinion effects laws of others who do not share your views with no basis outside of an opinion, then I have issue with it. Views like this in some churches still forbid interracial marriage, though I could find nothing scripture wise to back this up.

It's called tyranny. Tyranny exists in many forms. We live in a society of tyranny when a person's life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, despite it's harmlessness, is impeded by somebody else's moral beliefs. That's why Madison believed that everybody's state of nature must be protected and nurtured unless it impeded on somebody else's.

Tyranny of the majority is the same thing as a tyranny of a monarchy or socialist scheme.

[McBain II]

Originally Posted by Gunluvver2

Playing Hardball on Softball - Page 1 - Brent Bozell - Townhall Conservative

This article is the poster child for agenda driven spin.

In other words, the gay left now can have it both ways. They can force "anti-discrimination" rules on everybody else, but they don't have to follow them.

This is patently false. Boy Scouts of America v. Dale ruled that as a private organization, BSA could exclude gay members under Freedom of Association, the same principle the softball league used to exclude straight members. If anything, it is the writer who is trying to have it both ways.

Edit: Just double checked the article and the softball league does NOT exclude non-gays, it simply places a cap on two non-gays per team.

The writer's position becomes even more laughable.

[Calvinist]

Originally Posted by Senrab+Omaha=MissingChica

As a non believer, what makes the Bible right or wrong? This is your opinion.

It is either right or wrong...believer or not is irrelevant.

In any event, I don't really care if you believe it or not.

The miracles in the Bible could be considered magic to a non-believer. They are magic to me. Jesus made water into wine? If not magic, then what is it?

He is God. He didn't need to do a little incantation or use a magic wand.

And as an black male, I must agree with Omahahonors 100%. Beliefs like yours have caused oppression, and division between people.

FYI Calvinist - I have no issues with your beliefs as they are your own, but when your opinion effects laws of others who do not share your views with no basis outside of an opinion, then I have issue with it. Views like this in some churches still forbid interracial marriage, though I could find nothing scripture wise to back this up.

Thank you for recognizing that I have a right to my beliefs. You also have a right to your beliefs.

Having said that, no--views like this are not why interracial marriages are still forbidden. Skin color is not the same as sexual choices. That's a horrible analogy.

If a church doesn't allow interracial marriage they are either stupid or racist. Probably both.

[Omahahonors]

Originally Posted by Calvinist

It is either right or wrong...believer or not is irrelevant.

In any event, I don't really care if you believe it or not.
He is God. He didn't need to do a little incantation or use a magic wand.

Thank you for recognizing that I have a right to my beliefs. You also have a right to your beliefs.

Having said that, no--views like this are not why interracial marriages are still forbidden. Skin color is not the same as sexual choices. That's a horrible analogy.

If a church doesn't allow interracial marriage they are either stupid or racist. Probably both.

You either are misguided or have a bad attitude, Calvinist. You recognize everybody's right to believe, but you are recognizing a belief that we all should live under the tyranny of what you believe. That is anti-american and against the spirit of Madison, the author of the america's federalist philosophy. You can wish for America to be a tyrannical monarchy, or tyrannical marxist or a even worse is really what you are looking for is a version of: a Plutocracy.

As for me, I will continue to preach the rights for all individuals towards life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness in the form of a Madison style federalism (american republic).

[Calvinist]

Originally Posted by Omahahonors

You either are misguided or have a bad attitude, Calvinist. You recognize everybody's right to believe, but you are recognizing a belief that we all should live under the tyranny of what you believe.

And you are doing what? Recognizing that I have a right to live under my own rules or trying to argue for your own form of tyranny? We all have our definition of what society should look like. The fact that I believe what I believe as a result of Biblical values is irrelevant. Someone is going to get their way, and someone won't. You can pretend you're not a tyrant...but you getting your way means someone else doesn't.

That is anti-american and against the spirit of Madison, the author of the america's federalist philosophy. You can wish for America to be a tyrannical monarchy, or tyrannical marxist or a even worse is really what you are looking for is a version of: a Plutocracy.

As for me, I will continue to preach the rights for all individuals towards life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness in the form of a Madison style federalism (american republic).

pot...meet the tyranical kettle. Just don't you dare suggest he's wrong.

[Omahahonors]

Originally Posted by Calvinist

And you are doing what? Recognizing that I have a right to live under my own rules or trying to argue for your own form of tyranny? We all have our definition of what society should look like. The fact that I believe what I believe as a result of Biblical values is irrelevant. Someone is going to get their way, and someone won't. You can pretend you're not a tyrant...but you getting your way means someone else doesn't.

pot...meet the tyranical kettle. Just don't you dare suggest he's wrong.

You see, you are suggesting that either one or the other will get what they want. There is a conflict, but the conflict is from one (you and your church) wanting to prevent another person (gay people and their supporting christian and non-christian churches) from a obtaining a pursuit of happiness (marriage/civil union) despite the fact that you are not forced to recognize it.

Calvinist, you do want America to be a tyrannical country. You would back out of other people's path to freedom if you didn't.

[Calvinist]

Originally Posted by Omahahonors

You see, you are suggesting that either one or the other will get what they want. There is a conflict, but the conflict is from one (you and your church) wanting to prevent another person (gay people and their supporting christian and non-christian churches) from a obtaining a pursuit of happiness (marriage/civil union) despite the fact that you are not forced to recognize it.

Calvinist, you do want America to be a tyrannical country. You would back out of other people's path to freedom if you didn't.

When have I suggested my church was behind this?

You are the one suggesting we change the definition of "marriage" to include same-gender couples.

Omahahonors, you do want America to be a tyrannical country, as long as it agrees with you.

[Omahahonors]

Originally Posted by Calvinist

When have I suggested my church was behind this?

You are the one suggesting we change the definition of "marriage" to include same-gender couples.

Omahahonors, you do want America to be a tyrannical country, as long as it agrees with you.

I am suggesting to include same-sex couples either in definition of marriage or civil unions as to promote safe-unions and fundamental rights to hospital visitations and better common laws.

You realize that if one person dies in a 20 year gay relationship that the their property automatically belongs to their immediate family. Every item in the household is up to litigiation whether or not the items were purchased by that individual. The state of Nebraska is one of the more extreme examples.

Nobody is telling you to recognize homosexuals or believe it is not a sinful relationship, but to demand that all of america to follow rules you deem to be correct is tyrannical. Yes the original definition says between one man and woman, but the founders did the same thing for slavery in the hopes that one day a correction can be made through an amendment. Most founders abhorred the idea of slavery, but had not choice but to have it in order to have any chance of hanving a union.

Calvinist. I understand what it is that you are doing. You want to be sure that your actions do not put you to hell by allowing behavior you view to be wrong. That is fine and you have your opionion, but it is really sad to believe that a person would force their religious practice on unwilling people.