Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
All these years since 1954. It's one of those things that Ricard Dawkins complains about -- where some religions claim and are too often granted a special exemption from due and customary criticism and scrutiny. Eventually, we'll succeed in getting rid of that...
This may sound cliche, but a comedian once said, "You know, the church is the only establishment that could get away with such mass accusations of child abuse and still stay in business."
you know, a red dot does not make me upset. it just goes to show that you cannot take my opinion, but you want to stuff your own opinion down my throat and make me like it.
People, listen to how heated you are defeaning your rights. I am defending my rights as well, but not so heated.
I understand that this country will become secular at some future point. You will have thought you have won. But these things must come to pass for end times to happen. There is nothing you or I can do to stop our destiny.
And I am really sorry that you guys got so upset with my post above. Usually when one feels such emotion, it is because they are a bit unsure.
Childish displays of temper always determine the maturity of the owner of such displays. Red dot me if you will, it will change nothing.
Just leave people alone to live their lives without getting the law or politics involved when the behavior in question has to do with people's private lives and not your own.
You can believe whatever you want to believe about gay people. That's fine.
You can share it.
But it's anti American, anti individual, anti freedom when you codify your beliefs into law when it's none of your business.
The Bible says 'A day is as a thousand years.', meaning that no one knows what God's clock is set on. I believe that the Earth is chronologically 4+ billion years old. That belief in no way lessens my faith in Him.
I also believe what aiangel_writer said, that "these things must come to pass for end times to happen."
Revelations 13 is my guess, with the "Mark of the Beast" coming in the form of our new, biometric, tamper-proof, national ID card.
I couldn't care less who's gay or straight, I hate the sin but love the sinner. That's how I overcame my childhood abuse at the hands of a homosexual, and that's the way I'll live out my days.
And by the way, Lindsay59, there is nothing anywhere in the Constitution that says anything about the 'separation of Church and State'. What it does say is "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...
I guess the following article does not have any basis of truth?
Well, let's see. It starts out by claiming that the answer to the question of whether America is a Christian nation is yes and no. It then goes to some lengths to note that many of the people who founded and have since served the nation were Christians. Then it stops. I guess I'd have been more impressed by the truthiness content had some of the actual foundations of the country been examined and had lines been drawn to show how any of them emanated from Judeo-Christian theology. The article seems to prefer to answer the question of whether a lot of Americans have been Christian over the years, but that isn't the question that was asked.
And where exactly on the currency does it specify just which God that statement refers to ?
There is only one religion that names its deity God and spells it that way. It is an overtly Christian symbolization, one that in a free country has no business being where it is. It amounts to free public advertising space for corporate Christianity, and nothing more.
And by the way, Lindsay59, there is nothing anywhere in the Constitution that says anything about the 'separation of Church and State'. What it does say is "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof... First Amendment, first sentence.
Given all that bold that you've added to it, one might presume your understanding that the Free Exercise clause would endorse each individual's right to act entirely outside the moral code of one religion so as to adhere to the moral code of another religion or of no religion at all. But instead many will seek a direct violation of the Establishment Clause in order to prevent the freedom protected by the Free Exercise clause from actually being acted upon. The side that wishes that is oh-for-two. It is afoul of the First Amendment on two counts...
Please explain your logic. Because I provide facts which basically discredit the notion of a 6,000 year old Earth? Because I provide facts which discredit the notion of Adam & Eve? Because I discredit the notion of choice of human sexuality?
Explain to me how any of those FACTS is in any way, shape, or form "less tolerant" of Christian people?
The difference from me and Christians that like to call homosexuality a choice and sin, is that I actually provide evidence to back up my claims. That's all I've been doing...but they don't seem to provide evidence to the contrary.
Instead, the argument of choice is that "it's in the Bible...so it must be true!".
You lump everyone who expresses Christian beliefs into one small category, which enables you to slander the entire group and disregard those who don't fall into your narrow stereotype.
I don't disagree with the earth being millions of years old. I do believe in Adam and Eve, although I have more opinions on the topics than the word for word text in the Bible. You cannot provide FACTS on that topic anyway, only evidence that points to different things, which don't have to always contradict faith. I don't disagree with the choice of human sexuality, we just disagree on how someone should deal with it. I would never tell a person how I think they should deal with it unless they specifically asked me to do exactly that. I believe in trying to remove the log from my own eye before removing the spec from my brother's eye.
BTW, Wiki is not a great source for facts. Also, providing one legitimate study (non-Wiki) does not make something a fact. Notice how evolution is still referred to as the THEORY of evolution? When something in science is beyond dispute, it is called a LAW, not a theory. Even at that, I don't disagree with evolution taking place on this planet. I find a lot of the studies interesting and intriguing.
People with faith don't always seperate themselves from science. And scientist don't always seperate themselves from faith. They can exist together, as hard as that seems to be for some people to believe.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
