AU replies to the "War on Christmas"

[USIncognito]

I'm not sure if this is the correct subforum to place this in, but it seems right since the culture warriors strum und drang smells of political motivation. I'm on the Americans United for Seperation of Church and State mailing list and this open letter from Barry Lynn to Jerry Falwell was in my inbox today. I thought I'd share it, and see if there are any comments.

Dear Jerry:

Heres some news: There is no "war on Christmas!"

Ive seen you on various television news shows claiming that there is but, in fact, there simply isnt. Even as I write this, millions of Americans are erecting Christmas trees and nativity scenes at their homes, and thousands of churches are planning special Christmas services.

And, if I might say so, most of them are planning their lives without getting permission or encouragement from you.

I am deeply disappointed that you have chosen a time that Christians observe as a season of peace and good will and turned it into a time of religious divisiveness and community conflict. Your "Friend or Foe" campaign may be great for fund-raising and publicity, but it has sown discord unnecessarily.

Contrary to your wild allegations, Jerry, neither Americans United, nor any other civil liberties organization that I know of, is waging any kind of war on Christmas. The First Amendment of our Constitution ensures every Americans right to observe religious holidays or to refrain from doing so. We can wish each other a "Merry Christmas" or "Happy Holidays," and its really none of your business which term we choose. We can call our decorated tree a "Christmas tree" or a "holiday tree," and thats our right. (We can observe the holidays of other traditions as well.)

I think we all know whats really going on with your campaign. You want an America where there is no separation of church and state and where your rather narrow interpretation of Christianity is forced on everyone. If you can convince Americans that their cherished Christmas traditions are under fire, you think maybe they will join your nefarious crusade to tear down the protective church-state wall that guarantees our freedoms.

Well, it wont work, Jerry. Americans are, by and large, a tolerant lot, and they are quite unlikely to join forces with someone like you who is so far out on the political and religious fringes. Many people remember the outrageous comments you made after the 9/11 terrorist assaults, suggesting that America had it coming because of our (in your opinion) sinful ways. They also remember your dire warning that Tinky Winky, a kids TV character, was brainwashing our children into homosexuality! You cant rehabilitate an image like that by trying to depict yourself as Father Christmas.

I am particularly outraged that you are attacking our public schools as part of your misguided project. Our public schools serve children from 2,000 different faith traditions and some who follow no spiritual path at all. They generally do a tremendous job of helping each of these students without imposing any particular religious viewpoint. They steer a careful course, broadly allowing student religious _expression while trying to avoid school endorsement of specific faiths. That means there are sometimes disagreements about what songs should be sung in the winter concert or what decorations should go in the hall. We can work through those decisions by applying common sense, the Constitution and plain old civility.

Thanks to the crusade by you and your allies, however, some of these schools are being targeted for venomous attacks. After the Alliance Defense Fund unfairly maligned a public school in New York for its holiday observance policies, education officials there received hateful mail of all sorts. One e-mail said "You are either bigoted Jews who hate Christians or mindless secularists."

Since I debated you about the Christmas issue on Fox News Channels "OReilly Factor," I have received 66 nasty e-mails, including two death threats. Observed one of my correspondents, "Hope you die soon. Merry Christmas."

Jerry, this is the kind of interfaith and community hostility that you are stirring up, and I implore you to stop it now. You are polluting the public square with animosity and anger. And at Christmas, of all times!! Have you no decency?

Youve dubbed your latest round of antics a "Friend or Foe" campaign. Well, Jerry, I am a friend of the Constitution and a foe of intolerance. You should be too.

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays,

The Rev. Barry W. Lynn
Executive Director

PS: I saw on a couple of the news shows that you are again questioning my ministerial credentials. I believe the _expression that you used on Fox News Channels "The Big Story with John Gibson" is that I am "about as reverend as an oak tree" and that I never "preached in" a church. Drop me a line, Jerry, and Ill send you (again) a copy of my ministerial credentials from the United Church of Christ. And by the way, Id be happy to come to Thomas Road Baptist Church and deliver the sermon on the Sunday of your choice. Your congregation might like a change of perspective every now and then.

[1John2_26]

WHY SHOULD ANYONE LISTEN TO PEOPLE LIKE THAT??

Why should anyone have to listen to anyone in a secular Democracy?

Votes.

All the religious (Christian) stuff has already been settled in the Bible.

Lynn is just trying to deceive people the old fashion way by making them think he is a Pastor of goodness when he is just serving up evil. The words on AU's website show him without his mask.

[The Persnickety Platypus]

I am 100% in favor of a secular government BECAUSE they have no right to exercise ANY control over Christianty. I can live in a secular world that cannot tell me what to do and what to believe. That IS the First Amendment. Then and now. Yet, legislation is being passed that can tell Christians they have to alter their religious beliefs to accept anti-Christians.

Legislation is also being passed coercing anti-Christians to accept Christian doctrines. What is the difference? Point is, we are completely negating an important American principle.

Secular government also prevents unruly religious control. Do you not care about this characteristic? Perhaps you don't, since it does not benefit yourself.

Many people hold dear their right to believe what they want, but readily negate anyone else's right to do this unless they submit to their worldview. This sort of attitude is the root of most conflicts. It is a pity people are so unwilling to consider a different perspective. Only when this happens collectively will we truly progress as humans.

I also noticed you used a 21st century definition.

Where do you suggest I find 18th century definitions? If you have any pertaining to the topic, please share.

Frankly though, push comes to shove, I don't give a crap what the constitution says. Seperation of church and state is the ideal doctrine regardless.

Bunk, Christianity Today reported that 74% of Americans do not go to church.

This does not stop them from advocating Christian principles, which is the real matter at hand. A lot of the strongest voices I hear advocating the sanctimony of marriage and the immorality of athiests would not be caught dead in church.

The celebration of homosexuality came in like a virus to a sick body and was always expected to do so once some people used a Church pulpit to push its deviance as a civil right.

Deviance is a civil right, like it or not. Homosexuality as immoral is not the universal standard. It is the BIBLICAL standard, which has absolutely no base in a secular society.

Rather selfish of you. You cherish a secular society for yourself, but will deny anyone else the same right.

Now it seems that every issue has to be about homosexuality being forced on everyone, and, as can been seen, that means even in Christian Churches by law.

That's funny. No one has tried to force me to be gay.

The ONLY voice against pornographers, perverts, and deviants (which the gay lifestyle would classify as being in) ARE Bible-believing Christians (morality) and those that follow that (moral) lead like Laura Schlessinger. And, always have been. The rise of acceptance of these abominations, I believe, was preached against by just about every conservative Preacher in America until the wave of perversion swept away the western mind and with it marriage and the family.

And yet, there is no judicial Christian rise against anti-Biblical practices such as divorce, pornography, adultery, or promiscuosity. What is so special about God's decree against homosexuality that grants it all the political attention?

Discrimination is the key.

Americans United for Seperation of Church and State. Hmm, I wonder what their theology is?

Freedom, perhaps?

"Liberty and justice for all"? what a silly idea.

Americans must be free to contribute only to the religious groups of their choosing. Voucher programs violate this principle by forcing all taxpayers to underwrite religious education. Often, religious schools promote sectarian dogma and take controversial stands on issues such as gay rights, the role of women in society and reproductive freedom. Taxpayers should not be required to subsidize the spread of religious/moral opinions they may strongly disagree with. All religious projects including schooling should be funded with voluntary contributions from church members.

"Controversial stands?" Note, homosexuality and abortion. That would be filed under things preached against in Bible-believing churches. The role of women in society? That would be not wanting them to be exploited by pornographers, sexual deviants or perverts.

In other words, you think people should be forced to pay money to support ideals that they dissagree with. Theocracy is what that's called.

Any mininscule oppression Christians are said to face in our free society is but a shadow of the corruption dealt under theocratic governments of the past. Government discrimination is a vague possibility in a society such as ours. It is a GIVEN in the government you wish to impose.

[The Persnickety Platypus]

Poor Christians, Jews, Hindus, Budhists, Muslims, Mormons, etc., pay taxes and contribute to society, until, they want to put their children in private schools to get away from the secular control that so many anti-religionists want to implement on society by force and by deception.

A secular world that is seen by many as destroying their children or dangerous, but yet they cannot be given government funds (which IS their own money) to put their children in a place they choose. Even though there is no way that those funds are being used to establish any one religion over any other, as can be clearly seen.

Citizens should pay for Christians to send their children to indoctrinating schools? Okay, that's fine. Assuming, of course, YOU would be willing to pay for ME to go to an athiest school, where we learn about the different ways to slaughter a fetus or violate the rectal cavity.

But no, you probably would not go for that. It is only okay for people to financially support exclusively YOUR causes. Surely you see the hypocracy in this?

But I would like to clear one thing up. Public schools do NOT support anti-Christian activities. They remain utterly neutral in every aspect. As they should be.

My assertion here is 100% viable, you see, as I am currently enrolled in a public school. I see everything first hand, while you (I would assume) get all your facts about American education from biased tele-evangelistic theocrats.

...invented to force compliance of a secualr agenda

to get away from the secular control that so many anti-religionists want to implement

Okay, you really need to make up your mind here. Are you for or against secular society?

Realize that if you choose to support it, you must also support the governments non-intervention in worldviews OTHER than your own.

[1John2_26]

Quote:
I am 100% in favor of a secular government BECAUSE they have no right to exercise ANY control over Christianty. I can live in a secular world that cannot tell me what to do and what to believe. That IS the First Amendment. Then and now. Yet, legislation is being passed that can tell Christians they have to alter their religious beliefs to accept anti-Christians.

Legislation is also being passed coercing anti-Christians to accept Christian doctrines. What is the difference? Point is, we are completely negating an important American principle.

A Christian should see this as horrible how? There are enough denominations to show Christianty as the most open-minded ideology in recorded history. An important American principle is that all men are created equal. Pretty much negates evolutionists and atheists. But then again the Constitution is picked through quite easily by the Leftist-secular-humanist whenever they don't like something it says. Congrees shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion . . . has nothing to do with forcing a secular worldview as law on Christians or any other religious people. Exclude Christians from taxation and all will be fine politcally speaking. Then have at with abomination with tax dollars.

Sitting back and watching STD's destroy a secular world is hard to watch but a good place to find subject matter for sermons. It can save smart people that think and buy things with their brains and not genitalia.

Secular government also prevents unruly religious control. Do you not care about this characteristic? Perhaps you don't, since it does not benefit yourself.

I completely support secularism. Hate religion? Then, stay away from me, my children our fellowship of believers and my Church. That is what it means to me. Let those that worship at the alter of relatvism pay the cost of lascivious licentious sickness. Decent people should not have to pay the cost for miscreants' chosen behavior and what it reaps on them. Those that want salvation are welcome into my church anytime day or night, but not to force me to believe their evil is a civil right.

Many people hold dear their right to believe what they want, but readily negate anyone else's right to do this unless they submit to their worldview.

That would be proven everytime an atheist opens their mouth and speaks their pure intolerance towards Christians (only it seems). "Atheism" the word answers every and any question that needs an answer from those that practice that faith. Why do they proselytize so viciously? Good lookinbg young people in Churches maybe? Just a guess.

This sort of attitude is the root of most conflicts.

Evolution would do that. People are just weak and strong things. We all know what Darwinism preaches on that.

It is a pity people are so unwilling to consider a different perspective.

Selling out the Lord of Glory should be fought at every turn.

Only when this happens collectively will we truly progress as humans.

Ubermensch-style? Nietzsche ended up fully insane.

Quote:
I also noticed you used a 21st century definition.

Where do you suggest I find 18th century definitions? If you have any pertaining to the topic, please share.

Frankly though, push comes to shove, I don't give a crap what the constitution says. Seperation of church and state is the ideal doctrine regardless.

Yes we do not know what wooden teethed traitors in eighteenth century colonial England thought. I agree. I care almost nothing for the Constitution. I don't give a crap what deists thought on very much. Their work has been so raped and beaten it is unrecognizable now. Relativistic chaos will wipe away America soon I think.

Quote:
Bunk, Christianity Today reported that 74% of Americans do not go to church.

This does not stop them from advocating Christian principles, which is the real matter at hand. A lot of the strongest voices I hear advocating the sanctimony of marriage and the immorality of athiests would not be caught dead in church.

Pedophiles (gay priests) and other hypocrites (atheists in a white collar) keep them scared away. No wonder they vote the way they do.

Quote:
The celebration of homosexuality came in like a virus to a sick body and was always expected to do so once some people used a Church pulpit to push its deviance as a civil right.

Deviance is a civil right, like it or not. Homosexuality as immoral is not the universal standard. It is the BIBLICAL standard, which has absolutely no base in a secular society.

I am in complete agreement with you here. Maybe I'll use it in a sermon one day.

Rather selfish of you. You cherish a secular society for yourself, but will deny anyone else the same right.

I am a Christian and cannot be and should not be taxed or hassled for any reason by the government. I'll give my vote for this joke of a Democracy away from being free from miscreants and perverts telling me I'm a bigot for no longer wanting to be one of them.

Quote:
Now it seems that every issue has to be about homosexuality being forced on everyone, and, as can been seen, that means even in Christian Churches by law.

That's funny. No one has tried to force me to be gay.

I wish I could say the same.

Quote:
The ONLY voice against pornographers, perverts, and deviants (which the gay lifestyle would classify as being in) ARE Bible-believing Christians (morality) and those that follow that (moral) lead like Laura Schlessinger. And, always have been. The rise of acceptance of these abominations, I believe, was preached against by just about every conservative Preacher in America until the wave of perversion swept away the western mind and with it marriage and the family.

And yet, there is no legal Christian rise against anti-Biblical practices such as divorce, pornography, adultery, or promiscuosity. What is so special about God's decree against homosexuality that grants it all the political attention?

BS. Everyone of those licentious things were supported by liberalism and opposed by Preachers every step of the way. Here is your quote up above for proof.

Deviance is a civil right, like it or not. Homosexuality as immoral is not the universal standard. It is the BIBLICAL standard, which has absolutely no base in a secular society.

Discrimination is the key.

Christians are hated and they are the finest example of loving your neighbor (without the need for a condom) on earth.

Quote:
Americans United for Seperation of Church and State. Hmm, I wonder what their theology is?

Freedom, perhaps?

Unrestrained licentiousness as a civil right. You are so right on this.

"Liberty and justice for all"? what a silly idea.

After gay rights consume us the Pedophiles are next. Want to bet?

Quote:
AU
Americans must be free to contribute only to the religious groups of their choosing. Voucher programs violate this principle by forcing all taxpayers to underwrite religious education. Often, religious schools promote sectarian dogma and take controversial stands on issues such as gay rights, the role of women in society and reproductive freedom. Taxpayers should not be required to subsidize the spread of religious/moral opinions they may strongly disagree with. All religious projects including schooling should be funded with voluntary contributions from church members.

"Controversial stands?" Note, homosexuality and abortion. That would be filed under things preached against in Bible-believing churches. The role of women in society? That would be not wanting them to be exploited by pornographers, sexual deviants or perverts.

In other words, you think people should be forced to pay money to support ideals that they dissagree with. Theocracy is what that's called.

Really where and when in America has this ever been the case?

Any mininscule oppression Christians are said to face in our free society is but a shadow of the corruption dealt under theocratic governments of the past.

Soviet Russia (atheists one and all) alone dwarfed the numbers killed in religious Europe.

Government discrimination is a vague possibility in a society such as ours. It is a GIVEN in the government you wish to impose.

I want a secular government to stop oppressing Christians. Supposedly there are laws protecting religious freedom but sodomy and porno are more important, as you have so aptly pointed out.

[melikio]

I want a secular government to stop oppressing Christians. Supposedly there are laws protecting religious freedom but sodomy and porno are more important, as you have so aptly pointed out.

Religious governments are ruled by PEOPLE, and secular governments are ruled by PEOPLE.

Human beings are fallable AND corruptible period. I've read enough about history to know that religious governments in the hands of human beings, leads to crap... very MAJOR crap.

I don't have to be a scholar to know that a "Christian" government merely sounds like a better idea than it actually is. I've reviewed the historical record of many so-called "religious" nations, and they certainly aren't any better than many of the secular one's in comparison.

Even when I was much younger, I wondered why some wanted to call America a "Christian" nation, when it obviously wasn't so. It is so very similar to the reality that many people call themselves "Christian", and when you look to see the LOVE of Jesus inside of what they being to the table, there is a CARNAL shell exuding the exact same troubled (human) behaviors that have little/nothing to do with the kind of love Jesus taught and encouraged. A BUNCH of mean people, who seem to reinvent their meanness on a regular basis.

And no, this isn't ALL who call themselves Christian, some people ARE able to shun sin in their own lives, yet are kind, gentle, patient, gracious, tolerant toward others who do not believe as they clearly do. They aren't out in the "world" seeking "control", but they show the LOVE of Christ in their words/ways. They (real Christians) are "living" the Gospel, and those who are spiritual can sense that they are (even IF they do not have the "Christian" way of describing it). Some people TALK about Christianity, but I've found that love (warm, inviting hearts combined with compassionate and gentle actions) says more and is far more effectual than people who can merely wield biblical verses as laws and rules.

This so-called "War on Christmas" is more of a distraction for Christians, than a true issue to be concerned about. In (spiritual) reality, the meaning of that which Christians find in "Christmas", cannot be made null/void, if it's truly a part of their hearts. The shopping, hustle, over-commercialization and music of the season means little to me (although I enjoy some of those things). However, the parts of it that are "Christian", lives inside of me YEAR ROUND. I do not turn the significance of it on/off based upon the "season" or "holiday".

Unless someone can get into my heart and undo what Jesus means to me spritually, they can't even begin to counter the "meaning" of the "holiday". I think that more Christians need to internalize and magnify that meaning in their own hearts, and cease feeling so "oppressed". No, we can't just put up a nativity scene anytime or anywhere in America (or the world), but it can surely be erected 24/7 in the heart and mind of a true believer. And that is the most important and significant thing. Perhaps if "Christians" begin to emphasize more preeminently what I'm pointing out, even those who are of a more secular mindset will see that it more than just a seasonal "warring" that is typically forgotten by the respective "January" of the next year.

-Mel-

[The Persnickety Platypus]

Congrees shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion . . . has nothing to do with forcing a secular worldview as law on Christians or any other religious people.

You are being forced to do anti-Christian things? Do you mean to say that you are commonly coerced into being gay under penalty of law? Government officials come to your house, log on to your computer, chain you to the chair, and force you to watch porn? Is there an American law commanding its citizens to sleep with a certain number of different people in a certain period of time?

No, you are free to commit to the gospel in every way you see fit. Your problem is that you cannot stand to see other people make their own choices in worldview to follow. This is just something you will have to get over; it is a characteristic in living in a democratic country.

An important American principle is that all men are created equal. Pretty much negates evolutionists and atheists.

All men are created equal? All men are created equal? Don't you think this might include, well, everyone?

It seems you are trying to establish the idea that America was founded on Christianity. In reality, many of the founding fathers were agnostic or deist. Plain hard fact.

but not to force me to believe their evil is a civil right.

You have every right to believe what you want. Catch is, you must tolerate those who think differently.

As I said in the other thread, if civil rights and freedom of expression are values you detest, perhaps you have settled in the wrong country. Freedom is what America is about.

That would be proven everytime an atheist opens their mouth and speaks their pure intolerance towards Christians (only it seems).

This statement applies to Christians as well, obviously. I am afraid I don't see your point.

I do not pardon athiests from tolerating different perspectives. This is EVERYONES ethical duty.

Evolution would do that. People are just weak and strong things. We all know what Darwinism preaches on that.

Darwinism preaches scientific knowledge, not values.

Now I just know you will retort by decrying evolution as devoid of any accurate knowledge, so I will go ahead and address that. Natural selection (at the very least) is a fact. We can documment it as it happens. Put an animal in a different environment. It's altered survival traits can be visibly noted in as little as a single lifetime. One can sit down and watch evolution occur.

Now aside from this fact, you can argue all you want about humans sharing similar ancestors with apes. Just be aware that you must give an account for the many skeletons of different human species of the past.

Ubermensch-style?

No.

That's funny. No one has tried to force me to be gay.

I wish I could say the same.

Please share your experiences.

Deviance is a civil right, like it or not. Homosexuality as immoral is not the universal standard. It is the BIBLICAL standard, which has absolutely no base in a secular society.

I am in complete agreement with you here. Maybe I'll use it in a sermon one day.

Surely you must have misunderstood.

The Bible decrees homosexual activity as a sin. But any Biblical authority on the subject is completely irrelevant in a secular society.

I find it disheartening that you use politics in sermons. Whatever happened to the the old good old fashioned message of love and forgiveness through Jesus Christ? Christians today get well over their fill of discriminatory indoctrination.

Take a leaf from Billy Grahm's book.

BS. Everyone of those licentious things were supported by liberalism and opposed by Preachers every step of the way.

So where is the political movement against them?


Gays are singled out because they are deemed discusting. This is as deep as the marriage protection's philosophy goes.

Christians are hated and they are the finest example of loving your neighbor (without the need for a condom) on earth.

Loving your neighbor? Surely you cannot be referring to our Jerry Falwell and our Bible-thumping conservative politicians?


The hatred inherent in the fundamentalist movement is one of the many reasons I have decided to abandon my former philosophy. The Bible, despite all the good it promotes, also teaches a handful of purely evil doctrines (predominantly it's blatant sexism, as well as it's unjustified rejection of many harmless brands of people) that I can no longer yoke myself with.

However, no matter what worldview I submit to, I feel my position on this subject stems solely from Biblical doctrine. The hypocracy inherent in the conservative movement was unbearable for me to endure, especially as a Christian.

Unrestrained licentiousness as a civil right. You are so right on this.

Yes, It rather makes sense to give people control over their own penis, don't you think?

Again, you are trying to force repentance. As Melikio wisely states, coercion is quite possibly the worst way to encourage morality. The gentle and loving message of Christ was working just fine until your aggressive theocratic movement started their offensive. Now people will oppose the message out of spite.

Why do you think God gave us free will?

After gay rights consume us the Pedophiles are next. Want to bet?

You're on.

The two issues are incompatable in every feasible way.

Soviet Russia (atheists one and all) alone dwarfed the numbers killed in religious Europe.

Under athiestic principles (in the name of athiesm, that is to say)? Of course not, for sake of curtailing freedoms and individuality, precisely what you wish to do.

This is a mute point anyway. Who here is arguing for an abolishment of religion, or a solely athiestic government? Athiest controlled governments oppress citizens. Religious controlled governments oppress citizens. The obvious solution is a secular government such as our own; neutral on all belief systems.

Our inherent civil freedoms is one of the few current aspects of this country I approve of. The founding fathers sure got one thing right.

[melikio]

Our inherent civil freedoms is one of the few current aspects of this country I approve of. The founding fathers sure got one thing right.

America's founders DID indeed get that right.

IF reasonable and compassionate Christians sound-off (in protest) about the controlling attitudes which some of the more "radically-legalistic" Christians are adopting, I believe a lot more people would consider remaining or becoming followers of Jesus.

I will ALWAYS contend with "religion" which poises as the absolute BOSS of others; beliefs and practices which generally strive to strip people's moral, legal and social choices from them. I understand "controls" where those are implemented to protect the reasonable rights of ALL (i.e. making the legal distinctions between promoting or restricting religion), but to say that LAWS should be used to compel people toward a certain beliefs or moral standards is a very problematic thing.

-Mel-

[1John2_26]

Quote:
Congrees shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion . . . has nothing to do with forcing a secular worldview as law on Christians or any other religious people.

You are being forced to do anti-Christian things?

Your rebuttal post proves that I am, and my church, and every Christian that believes the Bible.

Do you mean to say that you are commonly coerced into being gay under penalty of law?

Sodomites forced their way into households. The way the men of Sodom spoke to Lot is amazingly relevant for todays world. The story is anything but myth.

Government officials come to your house, log on to your computer, chain you to the chair, and force you to watch porn?

Not yet but from what happens in public schools I am sure it will.

Is there an American law commanding its citizens to sleep with a certain number of different people in a certain period of time?

Yes, I believe now "sexual orientation" is a new protected minority. Liberals have set a promiscuos lifestyle now as a culture to be protected. How Biblical prophetic that is. I see the incessant need for the left to minimize Christianity. Eliminate it in the same way Sodom was absorb.

No, you are free to commit to the gospel in every way you see fit. Your problem is that you cannot stand to see other people make their own choices in worldview to follow.

Jesus said that people claiming to be his followers would pervert the Gospel, and I see liberal Christians yoked with anti-Christs and not the Prophets or Christ Himself. This is easier to see now.

This is just something you will have to get over; it is a characteristic in living in a democratic country.

Like Stephen or Paul? One was stoned to death by hypocrites and false religious leaders, and one was beheaded by the leader of sexually unrestrained and promiscuous people. Liberalism now offers only two choices. Apostasy/heresy or absorbtion as a citizen of Sodom/Rome.

Quote:
An important American principle is that all men are created equal. Pretty much negates evolutionists and atheists.

All men are created equal? All men are created equal? Don't you think this might include, well, everyone?

Nature and of natures God. Men are men and women are women. It adds up that logic follows sex in only one order. Paul described homosexuality perfectly both biologically and spritually. The Fifth Commandment and Jesus explaining the destruction of marriage gives no "out" for Christians to endorse abominations as acceptable. Secularly they can be forced and I will not join the side of the Anti-Christ against God.

It seems you are trying to establish the idea that America was founded on Christianity. In reality, many of the founding fathers were agnostic or deist. Plain hard fact.

I agrre with and Jesus here. As ye sow so shall ye reap. I stand with God. I am only defending against heretics that claim to be Christians, but by their actions should be opposed as being members of the body of believers.

Quote:
but not to force me to believe their evil is a civil right.

Y

ou have every right to believe what you want. Catch is, you must tolerate those who think differently.

"Tolerate?" Please talk to a gay activist if they tolerate that word being applied to their "culture?"

As I said in the other thread, if civil rights and freedom of expression are values you detest, perhaps you have settled in the wrong country. Freedom is what America is about.

Countries come and coumtries go. Usually destroyed by which Liberals want to embrace. It seems what is clearly getested is people choosing Israel's God.

Quote:
That would be proven everytime an atheist opens their mouth and speaks their pure intolerance towards Christians (only it seems).

This statement applies to Christians as well, obviously. I am afraid I don't see your point.

"Bring them out that we may know them." Christians must be secularized. The actions of th Anti-Christ seen everyday.

I do not pardon athiests from tolerating different perspectives. This is EVERYONES ethical duty.

47 + red = sand. That makes as much sense as atheists being pardoned or not pardoned by a Christian. Atheism is the most closed-minded faith in history.

Quote:
Evolution would do that. People are just weak and strong things. We all know what Darwinism preaches on that.

Darwinism preaches scientific knowledge, not values.

Where evolution goes Sodomy grows.

Now I just know you will retort by decrying evolution as devoid of any accurate knowledge, so I will go ahead and address that. Natural selection (at the very least) is a fact.

Please point out the worthlessness of homosexuality to Liberals then.

We can documment it as it happens. Put an animal in a different environment. It's altered survival traits can be visibly noted in as little as a single lifetime. One can sit down and watch evolution occur.

Darwin's Finches are still birds. Evolution is truly laughable to watch its proponents and adherents say something can come from nothing and become Jesus of Nazareth.

Except that Satan always uses evolution to promote sexual debauchery and of course now the ultimate expression of abomination same-sex unions as somehow both Biblically and Darwinistically OK.

But many that claim to be Christians are in the opposing camp with Satan and those that follow and are anti-Christians.

I have to go right now. I'll be back.

[1John2_26]

I'm back.

Now aside from this fact, you can argue all you want about humans sharing similar ancestors with apes. Just be aware that you must give an account for the many skeletons of different human species of the past.

Animal skeletons show that animals lived anbd died. How many same-sex species lasted but a split moment in tiem?

Saying that Jesus the Christ is new version ape 6.0 is Satanic.

Quote:
Ubermensch-style?

No.

Ah but, Nietzsche is the prophet of the atheist and Liberal and their causees.

Quote:

Quote:
That's funny. No one has tried to force me to be gay.

I wish I could say the same.

Please share your experiences.

No. Putting myself in the same experiences as Lot's Angel visitors makes me uncomfortable because I am but a mere man believing in Mere Christianty and Christ our Lord. Forgiveness may not have been offered to the Sodomites in Sodom City, but I follow Christ not anger.

Quote:
Deviance is a civil right, like it or not. Homosexuality as immoral is not the universal standard. It is the BIBLICAL standard, which has absolutely no base in a secular society.

I am in complete agreement with you here. Maybe I'll use it in a sermon one day.

Surely you must have misunderstood.

The Bible decrees homosexual activity as a sin. But any Biblical authority on the subject is completely irrelevant in a secular society.

Jesus and Joshua are the same name. One is a name and one is a name. I HAVE chosen Whom I will serve. The followers of God can do nothing else.

I find it disheartening that you use politics in sermons. Whatever happened to the the old good old fashioned message of love and forgiveness through Jesus Christ? Christians today get well over their fill of discriminatory indoctrination.

Politics, religion and the prophets preaching against the evils of folloowing society are connected like mother to baby. and evil?The indoctrination being witnessed today comes by the word "orientation." Something the Prophets and Christ Jesus preached against.

Take a leaf from Billy Grahm's book.

And preach conversion to Christ? How? Repentance and leaving your life of sin. I have been faithfully doing what you ask. Liberal Christians do not ever do that. They preach "come on in and do not chnage." Very un-Jesus and B. Graham.

Quote:
BS. Everyone of those licentious things were supported by liberalism and opposed by Preachers every step of the way.

So where is the political movement against them?

The GOP and every Pulpit in America where the Bible is unadulterated. Yet, now decent Churches are being observed by hate crimes legislation. Because they preach against abominations and that is simply not "liberal" or politically correct on the left.

Gays are singled out because they are deemed discusting. This is as deep as the marriage protection's philosophy goes.

We are arguing Christianty, the Bible, and if liberals are right or wrong. They are wrong. There is not one shred of documentation in the Bible to support and encourage the gay life as acceptable in the Church. God Bless Pope Benedict for his standing for God on this; and the Church leaders in decent denominations that still preach God. No one hates anyone. That is where you see the hatred frenzy of the left. Very Sodom-like I may add.

Quote:
Christians are hated and they are the finest example of loving your neighbor (without the need for a condom) on earth.

Loving your neighbor? Surely you cannot be referring to our Jerry Falwell and our Bible-thumping conservative politicians?

When they err, nail them. But please why do liberals allow major anti-Christian abominations IN their belief systems and scream about the speck in Falwell's eye? Denounce evil all Liberals everywhere after you remove the LOGS from your Churches!!

The hatred inherent in the fundamentalist movement is one of the many reasons I have decided to abandon my former philosophy.

Then Jesus and every Prophet of God is the enemy of Liberals. There is not one book of the Prophets that support joining evil. Nor can it be found in the Gospels.

The Bible, despite all the good it promotes, also teaches a handful of purely evil doctrines (predominantly it's blatant sexism, as well as it's unjustified rejection of many harmless brands of people) that I can no longer yoke myself with.

I believe that Liberal Christianity has shed the yoke of Christ for a counterfeit.

However, no matter what worldview I submit to, I feel my position on this subject stems solely from Biblical doctrine.

Which worldview and which Biblical doctrine? The Bible as you have so accurately pointed out is gruelingly easy to understand.

The hypocracy inherent in the conservative movement was unbearable for me to endure, especially as a Christian.

Go and sin no more applies to both and as we can see it is very difficult to "submit" to following Christ and sinning no more. What did Jesus say? What is impossible for men is possible for God. I am not condemning anyone, everyone has the abilty to return to God. But first you would have had to submit to God. Liberalism clearly shows that it is OK to be a reprobate and yet call yourself a member of God's here and in the future. The Bible from start to finish speaks out against that.

Quote:
Unrestrained licentiousness as a civil right. You are so right on this.

Yes, It rather makes sense to give people control over their own penis, don't you think?

"Control" is the most important aspect you have brought up. It seems clear that society can definately weigh in on what a man does with his penis. Even the church has to deal with it.

Again, you are trying to force repentance. As Melikio wisely states, coercion is quite possibly the worst way to encourage morality.

Coercion? Bunk. Liberals want repentance to be outlawed as hate speech. I am not posting from a corn field in Kansas.

The gentle and loving message of Christ was working just fine until your aggressive theocratic movement started their offensive.

Another sham of Leftists propaganda. The use of the word "your" is clearly used as propaganda to relegate me and my position is intolerant. How Goebbels-esque. The Gospel and Christ's Church is ONLY defending itself FROM attack. Christians are the ONLY voice for morality on Earth today. And in Sweden and Islamic countries and America they are paying a heavy price for preaching Christ.

Now people will oppose the message out of spite.

That is exactly what Jesus said would happen and by whom.

Why do you think God gave us free will?

To choose! As in THIS day, whom you will serve. many Liberals it seems quite evident have choseon to serve with Canaanites and serve and worship Molech and Baal. It was predicted.

Quote:
After gay rights consume us the Pedophiles are next. Want to bet?

The gay rights priests in the ACLU that represent the North American Man Boy Love Association would show that I am due a check rather soon. I'll have my attorney contact yours.

The two issues are incompatable in every feasible way.

From the view on the Left this is the only way to see this issue. From the vidtims of peophilies this is seen in a more clear light.

Quote:
Soviet Russia (atheists one and all) alone dwarfed the numbers killed in religious Europe.

Under athiestic principles (in the name of athiesm, that is to say)? Of course not, for sake of curtailing freedoms and individuality, precisely what you wish to do.

Calling truth truth is not curtailing freedoms but offering them to those that have ears and eyes to use. Again propaganda when know good rebuttal can be used.

This is a mute point anyway. Who here is arguing for an abolishment of religion, or a solely athiestic government?

Liberals.

Athiest controlled governments oppress citizens. Religious controlled governments oppress citizens. The obvious solution is a secular government such as our own; neutral on all belief systems.

The please email Liberals to stop labeling Christians that believe the Bible as bigots, homophobes and hate mongers. Thank you.

Our inherent civil freedoms is one of the few current aspects of this country I approve of. The founding fathers sure got one thing right.

The first few sentences of the First Amendment. Porno and gay marriage though. I have a good feeling, were not something they would have envisioned happening with their little freedom experiment. Especially hate crimes legislation meaning that Christians have to submit to sodomy being practiced and preaced OK in their Churches OR having to be forced on them to accept as members of a "diverse" society.

Things have proven oppresssive from what has become of the Liberal political machiine.

[1John2_26]

Have you ever noticed that one view of Christian morality that is Bible-based is railed against, attacked, and challenged by virtually 99% of those that post here at debatingchristianity.com? Liberal Christians side with all of those that oppose that one historic and Biblical voice of Christianity.

It's fascinating to observe.

How did Jesus and the writers of New Testament theology know this was going to happen?

Was Jesus a Liberal or a Conservative?

Matthew 7
Judging Others

1"Do not judge so that you will not be judged.

2"For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you.

3"Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?

4"Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' and behold, the log is in your own eye?

5"You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.

6"Do not give what is holy to dogs, and do not throw your pearls before swine, or they will trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.

Prayer and the Golden Rule
7"Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.

8"For everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened.

9"Or what man is there among you who, when his son asks for a loaf, will give him a stone?

10"Or if he asks for a fish, he will not give him a snake, will he?

11"If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give what is good to those who ask Him!

12"In everything, therefore, treat people the same way you want them to treat you, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

The Narrow and Wide Gates
13"Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it.

14"For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.

A Tree and Its Fruit
15"Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.

16"You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they?

17"So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit.

18"A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit.

19"Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.

20"So then, you will know them by their fruits.

21"Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.

22"Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?'

23"And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.'

The Two Foundations
24"Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine and acts on them, may be compared to a wise man who built his house on the rock.

25"And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and slammed against that house; and yet it did not fall, for it had been founded on the rock.

26"Everyone who hears these words of Mine and does not act on them, will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand.

27"The rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and slammed against that house; and it fell--and great was its fall."

28When Jesus had finished these words, the crowds were amazed at His teaching;

29for He was teaching them as one having authority, and not as their scribes.

Was Paul a Liberal or a Consevative believer?

From Paul:

28"Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.

29"I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock;

30and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them.[/quote]