Baptist Church Excludes Democrats

[perfessor]

http://www.wlos.com/

I don't get it. Didn't Jesus ply his trade among tax collectors, prostitutes, and other "sinners"?

East Waynesville Baptist asked nine members to leave. Now 40 more have left the church in protest. Former members say Pastor Chan Chandler gave them the ultimatum, saying if they didn't support George Bush, they should resign or repent. The minister declined an interview with News 13. But he did say "the actions were not politically motivated." There are questions about whether the bi-laws were followed when the members were thrown out.

So my question for debate: Should the East Waynesville Baptist Church lose its tax-exempt status?

I say they should, since the pastor has turned the church into an arm of the Republican party.

[AlAyeti]

When there are laws denying Christians a voice in schools and a voice in public parks, that means that Christians have been outlawed.

The ACLU gets laws passed against Christians in every city and school in America.

Calling it hate crimes legislation or diversity training does not change a sows ear into a silk purse. There are people who claim the holocaust didn't happen.

There isn't much difference in people now that say that Christians are not directly being herded and attacked, by cleverly worded laws.

That it is denied by those that denigrate, discriminate and hate Christians is to be expected. Those that support anti-Christian laws even a vague tones - like the Boy Scouts being kicked out of public parks because they view Pederasty as repugnant - no one of any honesty will deny that the laws passed to harass and discriminate against the Boy Scouts have their foundation in anti-Christian hatred.

In California, Foster Parents are forbidden by law to expose their wards to traditional and honest Christianity, but sexually defined lifestyles, by the very nature of the coupling, expose foster children to a deviant lifestyle with the blessing of the state. And the state goes further by law.

David Limbaugh:

Actually AB 458 is worse than AB 2651 in that it would affirmatively require foster parents to undergo sensitivity training, whereas AB 2651 would have only encouraged counties to provide the training.

The new bill, like its predecessor, would also prohibit foster parents from discriminating against children under their care on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity. This means that foster parents could not teach their foster children that homosexual behavior is wrong, even if their religious beliefs compelled them to do so, without violating the law against discrimination. Where's the ACLU? Where is Americans United for Separation of Church and State? If their goal is to drive Christians out of foster parenting, AB 458 should go a long way toward accomplishing it.

These bills show the double standards of the homosexual lobby and the liberal groups supporting them in a number of ways. In the name of tolerance, they demonstrate intolerance toward Christians and their values. They constitute state endorsement of religious beliefs in violation of the Establishment Clause every bit as much as many activities these groups denounce on those grounds, such as voluntary school prayer. They grossly violate the religious freedom of the parents and foster parents these groups pretend to champion. And AB 458 arguably invades the so-called privacy rights of foster parents to raise foster children as they see fit in their own homes. (If they can raise the privacy flag to cover every conceivable situation, so can I.) Am I missing anything?

/ / /

This bigotry against Christians is demonstrated by laws passed to silence them. Or else.

[AlAyeti]

Steen, Again. . . I listed what Democrats and Republicans do.

Facts.

Steen: "One-sided misrepresentation, rather. No need to be dishonest about it."

I have listed things accurately, as well as honestly. No Christian should be able to walk side by side with a Democrat on anything, while they promote and legislate the wholesale destruction of our society by legalizing sexual promiscuity. I listed what they do in regards to drug addicts and the permissiveness that seems to permeate everything and every law pushed onto the American stage. Democrats seems to declare that seemingly without shame and certainly without repentance.

You cannot have abortion safe legal and "Rare," the Democrat mantra, while at the same time promoting sexual promiscuity and sexual licentiousness, which abortion as birth control promotes. Our juvenile court system and out of home placements and mental health facilities show just cause for my opinion to be not only factual but completely fair.

Republicans need to change in only some social programs, but that would mean declaring the truth, and that is not something a Democrat will allow.

The Pastor who exposed those Democrats in his church, knows as much about the hidden agenda of the Left as anyone with a healthy moral conscience. The agenda, hidden so well among the Democrats and their political socialization machine.

[steen]

When there are laws denying Christians a voice in schools and a voice in public parks, that means that Christians have been outlawed.

You can have all the voive you want as long as your voice is not exclusive. After all, it would be legal to present ALL religious views in school. You have just never had anybody agree to do so. Christians object to sharing the "stage" with other religions. and THAT is what is illegal. We are not banned, we just can't hog the stage.

The ACLU gets laws passed against Christians in every city and school in America.

Your claim is false. The ACLU, per the US Constitution get laws passed against any one single religion taking the stage in a public forum. That is right along with what the US COnstitution states, and I am baffled that you want to attack the Constitution. After all, that is what uniquely defines us as Americans.

Calling it hate crimes legislation or diversity training does not change a sows ear into a silk purse.

And claiming that hate crime legislation are dirercted at Christians STILL is the same as claiming that Christians are the ones perpetrating those hate crimes. That is still insulting and I am asking you to not make that hateful claim against Christians.

There are people who claim the holocaust didn't happen.

And people who claim that the Earth is flat, and people who claim that Homosexuality is evil, and people who claim that the fetus is a person, and people who claim that the moon landing never happened etc. That's irrelevant, of course.

There isn't much difference in people now that say that Christians are not directly being herded and attacked, by cleverly worded laws.

Sure there is. To claim that specific, documented things didn't happen is a lie. To point out that hate crime legislation is directed at hate crimes rather than at Christinas is a fact.

That it is denied by those that denigrate, discriminate and hate Christians is to be expected.

Tell it to somebody who cares. I am a Christian, and **I** say that your claim is false. What you are saying about non-Christinas is irrelevant here.

Those that support anti-Christian laws even a vague tones - like the Boy Scouts being kicked out of public parks because they view Pederasty as repugnant - no one of any honesty will deny that the laws passed to harass and discriminate against the Boy Scouts have their foundation in anti-Christian hatred.

Your claim is false. For one, anti-discrimination laws are not anti-Christians, except that you again are alleging that Christinas discriminate (That is still offensive, and I again ask you to not denigrate Christinas so). Secondly, such laws are based on basic human rights, not "anti-Christian hatred," and your claims thus remain false.

In California,....

Fascinating that you are now claiming that proposed bills are instantly the law as well. Why is that?

[steen]

Steen, Again. . . I listed what Democrats and Republicans do.

Facts.

Rather, you misrepresented by selecting biased representations designed solely to glorify one side and willify the other side. That's very dishonest. And it very clearly is against what the Bible instructs us to do in not bearing false witness. So I am beginning to be suspicious of whether you are a Christian or not. You bear False Witness, you claim that Christians are hate mongering bigots and whatnot. Your posts are not painting a flattering picture of Christians, and I must question your motive. Please cease undermining my faith.

Steen: "One-sided misrepresentation, rather. No need to be dishonest about it."

I have listed things accurately, as well as honestly.

A falsehood. Please cease bearing false witness?

No Christian should be able to walk side by side with a Democrat on anything,

Fascinating. You are finally showing your true colors. You are one of those who politicizes Christianity, who uses God's word as a political weapon. You are a pharisee.

That really says everything about you and makes any further interaction with you pointless. Since you don't care enough about God to follow God's biddings about not bearing false witness, about giving to ceasar and so on, having a discussion with you about Christianity is pointless. What you push is politics, not Christianity, so the very foundation for your debate is dishonest.

So I will leave you to your own devices and let you sail in your own sea of hate mongering blasphemy. May God have mercy on you, you will need it.

[AlAyeti]

Steen: "And claiming that hate crime legislation are dirercted at Christians STILL is the same as claiming that Christians are the ones perpetrating those hate crimes. That is still insulting and I am asking you to not make that hateful claim against Christians."

Whoa!

And then . . .

"That really says everything about you and makes any further interaction with you pointless."

And again . . .

"So I am beginning to be suspicious of whether you are a Christian or not. You bear False Witness, you claim that Christians are hate mongering bigots and whatnot. Your posts are not painting a flattering picture of Christians, and I must question your motive. Please cease undermining my faith."

So Steen,

I'm supposed to be intimidated by the use of reverse-psychology or whatever it is you are trying to do to paint me as a bad guy for challenging issues on debatingchristianty.com?

Is that like a bully telling his victim that it was the quiet child that victimized the bully for his hands being sore?

The ACLU attacks Christians and the Bible every chance they get. And they get a lot of chances.

Please, challenge my use of Biblical perspective about Democrats and Republicans straight out of the a Bible. Democrats support abortion for convenience and the redefinition of family and same-sex marriage (that means homosexual "marriage"). Please, go get your Bible!

Maybe you can pull me from the pit.

Come let us reason together.

And, by the way, "Follow God's bidding?" I don't believe in a God that forces me to "follow His bidding." I have yet to bear false witness and please go get your Bible and convict me.

Then, I will repent.

Unlike a Democrat.

[bernee51]

I'm supposed to be intimidated by the use of reverse-psychology or whatever it is you are trying to do to paint me as a bad guy for challenging issues on debatingchristianty.com?

Al - all Steen was doing was pointing out the end point of your logic. You appear to claim that the legislation you refer to is specifically targetting christians. If that is the case then it must be that christians, in general, indulge in activites that warrant such legislation. He doesn't agree that they do, do you?

He does not dispute that such legislation affects christians...he is pointing out that it is targetted at all regardless of race or creed.

The ACLU attacks Christians and the Bible every chance they get. And they get a lot of chances.

Please oh please back this with evidence.

Evidence that shows that the ACLU specifically attacks christians

Please, challenge my use of Biblical perspective about Democrats and Republicans straight out of the a Bible. Democrats support abortion for convenience and the redefinition of family and same-sex marriage (that means homosexual "marriage"). Please, go get your Bible!

Even if they do, how is this anti-christian (as opposed to non-christian)

[AlAyeti]

Bernee,

I feel I'm asking a blind man to see the colors of a sunset.

That anyone can say that the ACLU is not opposed to and indeed anti-Christian is bizarre.

In Los Angeles the ACLU demanded a miniature cross be taken off of the city flag. I lived in LA for ten years. I never noticed it.

While the cross has to be removed because it is a "religious symbol," the massive goddess Pomona takes up the central position of the flag.

The ACLU only wants one religion to be silenced.

As fundamenatalist a Christian as I am, and as a legal voter, I don't care a thing about sexual deviants wanting to "marry" as long as they call it civil union and are both adults. I don't care if they are the same sex or different species. People have the right to choose abomination. That is Biblical.

But I want is a law that protects me from the threat of lawsuit. No Christian can support same-sex marriage anymore than they can urge people to divorce, commit adultery or murder. And, notice that homosexual rights in religious circles, is always compared to what other "bad things" are allowed. Proving that in religious circles, homosexual marriage is a bad thing.

What I want is that empiricism dictate sexual orientation and how sexuality is taught to students. Scientific view 100%.

Anatomy, physiology, biology, proctology, urology, gynecology, reproductive studies, even educational evolution.

All stand in absolute opposition to homosexual sex acts as being defined as "normal."

BUT,

If a Christian dares open their mouth in any way in opposition to sexually deviant behavior, they are hounded by the law. "It is 'hate speech' to want to teach normality."

There will be no discrimination of . . . blah, blah, blah, blah, and sexual orientation . . .. Now how can what people do in the privacy of their own homes and what they do against the nature of the human body, be a protected civil right?

Sodomy is legal in the public square and the Nativity is illegal. Though it nauseates me to have to make that comparison that is where the world is at today. Very Noahic!

Democrats know that with every stroke of their sexual licentious hedonistic pens, they are outlawing Christianity.

Children are the goal of that sexual agenda.

No Christian can have anything to do with a Democrat.

That is empirical.

Steen has no biblical leg to make a stand on.

I challenged that.

[AlAyeti]

Bernee,

This just slightly "back in the day."

Posted: August 30, 2002
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2002 WorldNetDaily.com

Mainstream America is reeling with absolute shock from the politically correct decision of the University of North Carolina requiring incoming freshmen to read "Approaching the Qu-ran: The Early Revelations."

The book clearly is a defense of Islam that conveniently leaves out verses that call for the murder of infidels. UNC Chancellor James Moeser, defended his position of assigning the book saying, "It helps us from demonizing a whole group of people with being an enemy simply by practicing the same religion."

Apparently the sacred American Civil Liberties Union doctrines of the separation of church and state only apply to Christians and Jews. How else can you explain why the North Carolina ACLU went to court to support the University of North Carolina's mandatory reading assignment of the pro-Islam book for incoming freshmen?

UNC was challenged by concerned groups in the state, but the ACLU rode to the rescue and a federal appeals court sided with the university.

Try to imagine the ACLU's legal response had UNC Chancellor Moeser assigned all incoming freshmen to read the Old Testament or the Talmud before being admitted. All hell would have broken loose. Yet, there is no hesitation to demand freshmen students be indoctrinated with a theological virus that birthed the murder of almost 3,000 Americans on 9-11.

/ / /


"Those of us who venerate freedom, be we Jewish or Christian, be we religious or secularized, have no option but to pray for the health of Christianity in America. No other group possess both the faith and the numbers sufficient to hold back the ever-encroaching, sometimes sinister, power of the state." (Rabbi Lapin. Ameica's Real War. p. 246)

/ / /

Bernee,

I wish paranoia was something to be grasped. Then I would not know what is happening to my brothers and sisters in Christ . . . circa June 16th 2005.

But, reality is also my friend as I know I am no where near being ignorant or a bigot.

AA

[steen]

Al, all you are arguing are ad hominems with desperate avoidance of actually dealing with any point raised. Do you actually have intellectual honesty enough to deal with the points?

[bernee51]

I feel I'm asking a blind man to see the colors of a sunset.

{{{{Bernee restrains comment about blinded by dogma}}}}

That anyone can say that the ACLU is not opposed to and indeed anti-Christian is bizarre.

{{{{Ignore}}}}

In Los Angeles the ACLU demanded a miniature cross be taken off of the city flag. I lived in LA for ten years.

If it had have been a Star of David or an Islamic crescent it would also havbe been removed. From what i can see it was replaced by a 'mission'

While the cross has to be removed because it is a "religious symbol," the massive goddess Pomona takes up the central position of the flag.

You should research things before you make spurious claims. That is not Pomoma.

What else have you gotten wrong...

So much for you 'empiricism'.

The ACLU only wants one religion to be silenced.

You are patently wrong about this and such comment only reflect your bias

As fundamenatalist a Christian as I am, and as a legal voter, I don't care a thing about sexual deviants wanting to "marry" as long as they call it civil union and are both adults.

So your problem is only with the word marriage?

People have the right to choose abomination.

How silly me to make the prior assumption.

Sodomy is legal in the public square ....

I would think that if I was to engage in any form of sexual activity in the public square I would be breaking a law. You are wrong about this as well

Democrats know that with every stroke of their sexual licentious hedonistic pens, they are outlawing Christianity.

You cannot show one law that has outlawed christianity.

Steen has no biblical leg to make a stand on.

I challenged that.

That is between you and Steen...why don't you answer his challenge?