It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

View homosexually tolerant film, or school faces lawsuit

page: 13
0
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 30 2004 @ 12:56 PM
link   
Well, the end result of this, is that the ACLU has no right to force (nor does the school have the right to mandate) social "training" without consent from the respective parents.

Period.

We can go round and round about this, but public schools (federally funded at the very least) should NOT be in existence.

As for Christians, there is no way to NOT be a Christian hypocrite when looking at it from the outside. We all sin and there is no way around it.

I believe the problem lies with the emphasis placed on homosexuality and abortion, that they somehow are more important than other things. This is untrue, and I think a great deal of people know it.

Honestly, I think homosexuality is more, often than not, more of a defensive sin rather than some evil plot. But it's difficult, or impossible, to know the truth.

Religion or not (and it should not even be in this discussion, so deny ignorance and remove it) this is about America and the rights that come with it.

They are supposed to be irremovable, by anyone, so I think there is a serious problem here.

They can not legislate private schools, nor could the ACLU touch them (and rightfully so) should they decide to have homosexual groups or not. Hell, homosexuals could have their own schools if they wanted.




posted on Nov, 30 2004 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by ubermunche
Judging by the amount of abuse/discrimination and general bad behavior perhaps the law is in need of a good rehash and by the way it's not indulging my comfort (as much as I'm sure you'd love too) it's about treating me with the same respect I manage to treat those around me with, I don't find it that difficult why should others.


You are honestly "due" nothing. Not respect, love, hate, distaste, tolerance, etc.

You are only to be provided the opportunity to succeed should you work, and the protection of law against theft or violence.

Creating a uniform idea of tolerance and understanding will never happen outside of brute force, so why even try to push it?



posted on Nov, 30 2004 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
Well, the end result of this, is that the ACLU has no right to force (nor does the school have the right to mandate) social "training" without consent from the respective parents.

Actually they can, because the school acts as parents, literally their 'en loco parentis' or somesuch, and the school agreed to these conditions.


public schools should NOT be in existence.

What? How the heck are people supposed to get a proper education then?


nor could the ACLU touch them (and rightfully so) should they decide to have homosexual groups or not.

Public schools cannot kick out gay students, its discriminitory and repugnant. If a private school wants to kick out homosexuals or blacks or whoever they don't like, fine, but they can't get public/federal funding. The ACLU has nothing to do with this, they are just organizing the legal aspects for these students and groups.



Hell, homosexuals could have their own schools if they wanted.

Actually, in NYC there is a public school that is made up almost entirely of gay students.

Funny that the Civil Liberties Union is pushing, what?, a removal of rights?

What rights? The school wasn't allowign a gay student group to go to the school. Those kids said 'this isn't fair' and contacted the ACLU which negotiated with the school on the students who were discriminated against's behalf. The school agreed that everyone would take a course in tolerance and now they are backing out of that deal.



posted on Nov, 30 2004 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
What rights? The school wasn't allowign a gay student group to go to the school. Those kids said 'this isn't fair' and contacted the ACLU which negotiated with the school on the students who were discriminated against's behalf. The school agreed that everyone would take a course in tolerance and now they are backing out of that deal.


Okay, here we go with the twisting of facts. Gay students were not being prevented from attending school. The school originally did not want to allow an extra-curricular organization, which for some reason had sexual orientation as its binding factor, to meet on school grounds in school facilities. They were sued and lost.

Now, they may have agreed to offer said course at the school or even mandate their employees take it but you cannot, by law suit settlement or any other means, force students to sit through it.

You can not force students to sit through math class. They do it because its required for graduation and these requirments have to be changed on a state level..and as a resident of KY, I can go ahead and tell ya that no way in hell will this state add sexual orientation tolerance training to that requirement..nor should it.

Look, no one said these students could not congregate but what the hell does the school have to do with anal sex? Why should we and should we be encouraging highschool age kids to experiment with sex? What the hell happened to desease prevention and the threat of aids. Does anyone else see the problem here. What if we had group who used heterosexuallity as their guiding and binding factor and wanted to use the school to meet and have a support group for discussing sexual techniques they use?

No, people. you all are way off the mark on this one. No one is saying outlaw homosexuality but to force a school to teach it to a group of minors is way way way off course work. Who's backing this? NAMBLA?



posted on Nov, 30 2004 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

Actually they can, because the school acts as parents, literally their 'en loco parentis' or somesuch, and the school agreed to these conditions.


Oh, the government funded schools are now allowed to make judgements in lieu of the parents? And they have no say? Well, isn't this the new America everyone is afraid of. Oddly, it's on the other side.



What? How the heck are people supposed to get a proper education then?


Two words - Private Schooling


Public schools cannot kick out gay students, its discriminitory and repugnant. If a private school wants to kick out homosexuals or blacks or whoever they don't like, fine, but they can't get public/federal funding. The ACLU has nothing to do with this, they are just organizing the legal aspects for these students and groups.


Obviously, this is one main reason for non-government schools. I agree, homosexuals should not be kept from public schools, but the system needs to be eliminated. This would solve more problems than it would raise.


Actually, in NYC there is a public school that is made up almost entirely of gay students.


Of course, and it was discussed on ATS as well. Personally, I think it's rediculous to make a school with tax dollars aimed at sexual practice.


What rights? The school wasn't allowign a gay student group to go to the school. Those kids said 'this isn't fair' and contacted the ACLU which negotiated with the school on the students who were discriminated against's behalf. The school agreed that everyone would take a course in tolerance and now they are backing out of that deal.


The idea is that the school had no authority to say that all students MUST watch this video since it would release the parent of rights with respect to freedom of religion, speech, and though. Since kids are required to go to school, and it is provided by the government (~shutters~), then they have no right to mandate social training in lieu of the parents.

Hate to break it to you, but I have the right to censure anything I deem inappropriate for my kids.

These are the rights of which I speak.



posted on Nov, 30 2004 @ 02:13 PM
link   
I don't get it. Since when were schools designed to teach morality? Parents, the two of OPPOSITE sex that hopefully enjoyed a union at some time in the past, should be the ones that teach morality.

The ACLU should be sued for threatening legal action- nothing short of blackmail.

Does it ever end? What next is on the ACLU agenda?

Or, is this just a red herring that the ACLU threw out like the Nazi/Skoie, Ill. march just to keep themselves on the front page?

Forcing people to view/witness something sure doesn't seem to me to be indicative of civil liberty. Are the schools next to be forced to show “The Making of a Nation” or “Reefer madness?”

How about “Clockwork Orange” and “Brave New World?” Let the school children see what happens when organizations (like the ACLU) desensitize every human disagreement with others.



posted on Nov, 30 2004 @ 07:16 PM
link   
It seems to me, that there are a lot of people around here talking about something they haven't even bothered to research for themselves.

Have you bothered to read the settlement agreement or find out anything at all about the anti-harrassment training involved? The entire "Making Safe Schools" manual is available from the ACLU's website, if you care to read what it says. If you don't want to read the full thing here is an overview of what it's about:

What this program can offer to schools is simple: a workshop that should be mandatory for all teachers and administrators, to talk about how to create a safe and open environment for lesbian and gay students. The workshop is not about sex, it is not about morality, and it is not "Gay 101." Instead, it is about safety, equal access and equal protection. It is about making sure that every student feels that they can achieve their best in school in an environment free of hostility. And it is about taking pro-active steps to prevent the anti-gay attitudes that may exist in a school from turning into harassment and escalating into violence. archive.aclu.org...
Notice that the last sentence does not say the program intends to prevent "anti-gay" attidtudes, but that it aims to prevent them from turning into harassment and violence.

They are not attempting to promote homosexuality, or usurp the parents' rights to instill their moral values in their children. They don't declare to young people that gay sex is right or wrong, since they don't broach the subject of sex. (Discussing harassment of homosexuals, or those percieved to be, doesn't automatically require a discussion about sex.)

The ACLU's concern in this, is that in a public school ALL students have the right to be treated equally and to be protected from continuous and/or injurious harassment from their peers, and most definitely from their teachers, while they are in their charge. The anti-harassment class that they are required to take, teaches faculty and kids what types of behavior is and is not acceptable on school property.
Nobody is trying to prevent students from engaging in civil and respectful debates about homosexuality or other moral issues, they are merely trying to stop kids from making personal, hateful attacks against their fellow students. That is not teaching morality, it is teaching respect for others, and if kids are not being taught that respect by their parents, it will have to be taught by someone else, because respecting the rights and beliefs of others is what our entire nation was founded on.

These kids, who sought to form a GSA club, had every bit as much of a right to do so, as say, the Bible Club (which was approved by the Council). The stated goal of the club was "to provide a safe haven for students to discuss anti-gay harassment, and to work together to promote tolerance, understanding, and acceptance of one another regardless of sexual orientation." www.aclu.org...
Obviously, they were needed!

Nobody was going to be forced into attending, and the students weren't seeking to indoctrinate or ensnare "unsuspecting heterosexual kids", yet it was ok to deny them the same rights as everyone else because their values were different than the other kids in the school? Freedom doesn't work that way! If a person wants the freedom to live his life as he sees fit, he has to be willing to let others do the same. As I said before, if a parent is not able or willing to teach their children this, it will have to be up to the teachers to do so.

BTW, for those of you who think that the ACLU is anti-Christians or whatever, here are some cases the ACLU has won that you may not find in your local "anti-ACLU" newsletters:


ACLU of Oklahoma Files Federal Lawsuit on Behalf of Student Accused of "Hexing" a Teacher

October 26, 2000

TULSA, OK--In a case reminiscent of the Salem Witch trials, the American Civil Liberties Union of Oklahoma today filed a federal lawsuit charging that school officials violated 15-year-old Brandi Blackbear's rights when they accused her of casting a hex that resulted in a teacher's illness.
www.aclu.org...

After ACLU Intervention on Behalf of Christian Valedictorian, Michigan High School Agrees to Stop Censoring Religious Yearbook Entries

May 11, 2004

DETROIT – The American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan today announced an out-of-court settlement between the Utica Community School District and a local student over the censorship of her 2001 yearbook entry. The student’s entry had been deleted from the yearbook because it contained a passage from the Bible.

“While it is true that the Constitution forbids public schools to promote religion, schools must be careful not to suppress the private religious expression of students,” said ACLU of Michigan Legal Director Michael J. Steinberg, who represented the student. “In this case, a high school purported to create an open forum for student expression, yet censored a student’s speech because it was religious in nature.”
www.aclu.org...

Following Threat of ACLU of Virginia Lawsuit, Officials to Agree Not to Ban Baptisms in Public Parks

June 3, 2004

RICHMOND, VA -- Under pressure from the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia, Falmouth Waterside Park Manager Brian Robinson has agreed not to prohibit baptisms in Stafford County, the ACLU announced today.

Robinson also told the ACLU that the Fredericksburg-Stafford Park Authority, which controls access to the public park, expects to issue written policies making it clear that religious groups have the same right to use the park as all other groups.
www.aclu.org...

ACLU of Nebraska Defends Church Facing Eviction by the City of Lincoln

August 11, 2004

LINCOLN --The American Civil Liberties Union of Nebraska today announced that it would defend a Presbyterian church from a forced eviction by the city.

"There's no reason for the city to force the Church of the Awesome God from its home, and the city is violating both the First Amendment and federal law in doing so," said Tim Butz, Executive Director of the ACLU of Nebraska.
www.aclu.org...



posted on Nov, 30 2004 @ 07:54 PM
link   
I don't care one way or the other what it's about.

If the kids can see it, great, if they choose not to, great (including the parents), we have no problems.

Aside from public schools in general. I think they are just an accident waiting to happen.



posted on Nov, 30 2004 @ 10:26 PM
link   
Hey... I know the ACLU doesn't screw up all the time... but they've screwed up more than not in my opinion... I'm just waiting for them to ban all books in public libraries that make any reference to a higher being.

Apparently that "higher being" (God, Allah, Nature, etc.) was enough to merit not allowing the boy scouts to be sponsered by the military anymore.


Maybe they could just start a book burning...



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 12:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Verdis Quo
*buzz* Wrong.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10:

9 Do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor cowards (incorrectly translated as "effeminate;" The Greek word means "soft" or "pliable"), nor abusers of themselves with men (The Greek word is used only here and in 1 Timothy 1:10 in lists. The word literally means "male bed" and is not found in contemporary Greek until many years after the time of Paul. To translate it "homosexuals" or other similar words is abusive and incorrect.),



Need I say that what I quoted was from the NIV? Cut and Psted actually and that is one of the most moderntranslations but not my favorite.




Lets see KJV

1 Cor 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,


NRSV
1 Cor 6:9 Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites,


ASV
1 Cor 6:9 Or know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with men,


NIV
1 Cor 6:9 Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders



Judge for thyself.......





Originally posted by Verdis QuoAs a christian, I cannot tolerate hatred and deception, much like you cannot tolerate gays. I still can't seem to grasp why God would hate people that he created.


[edit on 11/30/2004 by Verdis Quo]


Oh God doesn't hate them, he hates the sin in which there really is no debate. He calls them to repentance. They can not repent when they say they have no sin and deceive themselves. He did not create them gay, it is a behavior and a choice, A Bisexual only has half the gay gene?



[edit on 1-12-2004 by edsinger]



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 12:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Otts
Jethro - I think we agree on this. At the very least, Christians (and non-Christians too) should practice what Christ instructed us to do: "love one another".

I just deplore that some use their religion to claim the moral high ground, accuse and condemn others while conveniently drawing attention away from their own shortcomings.

And yes, homosexuality set aside, this is about TOLERANCE. And I agree with what some posters said - parents aren't doing such a good job at it.



Look I agree we are to love them, include them and help them. Christ did hang out with sinners.


Cast the first stone was asked of me.....ANd that was not necessarily fair without the whole story. When Christ did that to save the woman prostitutes (sexual immorality by the way)life, we he had done so, he told her your sins are forgiven, go and sin NO more. He never said what she did was right, he just forgave her for them.


Who has condemned anyone here? Us Christians keep getting accused of this and yet we don't condem but we don't condone either.




Originally posted by KrazyJethro


What? How the heck are people supposed to get a proper education then?


Two words - Private Schooling



I agree and pay dearly for it. The teachers unions have screwed up education bad.

[edit on 1-12-2004 by edsinger]



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 01:59 AM
link   
Great thread by the way-
jezebel makes some outstanding counter-arguments!

The 'thing' that bothers me the most (maybe only) about forcing any type of 'our view of acceptance' propaganda is that is exactly what it is, propaganda.

Schools take student safety seriously.

In this instance a group (happens to be gay) wants to form a club promoting a form of sexism and the school said no. I can't see a public school allowing something like this anymore than I can see a school allowing a club to form that promotes 'date-sex,' or 'how to get laid.'

When the sole focus or main focus of a group revolves around sexual life style then by their own nature they have placed themselves in a position to be denied equal access. Just like anti-government T-shirts in public schools, sometimes school is not the place to make life statements.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 02:13 AM
link   
Can't say as I agree with after school gay clubs much either but Jezebels post was illuminating as to what the mandate actually stood for rather than the knee kerk assumption that's been apparent. This is not about promoting homosexuality it's about protecting children from harrassment and abuse.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 02:25 AM
link   


Creating a uniform idea of tolerance and understanding will never happen outside of brute force, so why even try to push it?


Who is? And how boring that would be.

Again it seems more like a means of letting people know that certain expressions of intolerance will not be condoned, and dealt with if/when they occur.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 03:25 AM
link   
WARNING>>>>RANT COMMING>>>>CANT HELP MYSELF!!!!!!
(ohh will i risk a warning with this one)
This will deal with the line of discussion here, and then (hopefully) get back on topic.

Lecky responds to my point about the CA gay marriage fiasco,


Not aware of that story...doesn't change my views
Ignorance is not a defense.
Perhaps you should become aware of it, and what went on out there...it might open your eyes to the kind of selfish, devicive and subversive tactics being used to prop up the "gay agenda". (for lack of better term)

Howlrunner says,


I was a scout. My parents were both scout leaders. The Boy Scouts of America made me ashamed of my past association with scouting worldwide by their bigoted actions.
Suck it up dude, your shame is misplaced, youve been duped into it!!! Look back to your experiance there (scouting), were you taught to be a bigot? Are your parents Bigots? WHEN during your time as a Scout was sexuality an issue? Were you ever doing "bigoted" things as a scout that the scouting handbook taught or was expoused by a leader? Dont sell out your positive experiances as a scout, or any of the good things you did or learned because someone else wants to GUILT you into seemingly like a bad guy. Your not and neither are the Scouts.

BOTH of these examples of the pro gay agenda are PRIME examples of the devicive, demonizing, selfish, and subversive tactics that are being shoved down everyones necks to force a special interest minority group agenda.
They are the TOP 2 reasons that i have been turned AWAY from tolorance of the "gay agenda" (this includes adoption, marriage, and now schools being forced to teach gay tolorance)

As a PROUD former Scout myself, a Star working on Eagle, and SPL of my troop, I was SICKENED by the gay attack on this institution. They picked on a group they thought they could get the most millage from as it dealt with children, and a group they thought would cave in rather than suffer the DEMONIZATION they inflicted on the Scouts. This attack was devicive, it was SELFISH, it was mean, and it caused HARM to the Scouts...and until the gay community finds a way to "forgive" or somehow extend a branch of peace to the Scouts, whos reputation and standing in the community was irreperably dammaged, AND the people of CA that they tried to steal away the votes and basically DEMOCRACY from....They will NEVER get me to sympathise with their agendas again...(this does NOT mean i hate gays or advocate harming them in ANY way, but i wont support further acceptance of their issues, including this "back door" way to sensatize school kids to them thru sensativity training) I USED to have MORE tolorance for gays than i do now because of the tactics i see exhibited by pro gay supporters...not because they are gay.

The Scouts have a long history of volunteerism, community service to ALL, and of helping young men grow into more responsible citizens. They have been a PROUD part of Americanna for over a century. They have a LONG held and generally KNOWN ideology and action base.
Yet now soo many are being turned away from supporting them because they exercised their PROTECTED 1rst amendment RIGHTS to not be inflicted with members that do not expouse their core values. (Freedom of association)

Do you support persecuting someone for using their 1rst amendment rights of association?
Are you for removal of this right in order to support a special interest minority group agenda?
Which other Special interest minority group agendas should adopt these same devious tactics? (id say mabey NAMBLA, but dont want a riot to break out...THIS DOES NOT SAY NAMBLA = GAYS...Its mearly a gennerally disliked special interest minority group that is an Example of the next group to try stunts)

Well here is another example...i want to sue a gay rights organization because they wont let edsinger become the head of their local organization, citing discrimination against him for being a str8 christian.
NO court in the land would support this because he does NOT expouse the gay groups values, and they cant be FORCED to accept him.

Im trying HARD NOT to call Howl a traitor (to Scouting)....i dont want to demonize him like those im spewing against have the scouts and anyone that disagrees, but damn man, how can you look from both experiance and objectivity and say the Scouts are bad and deserve to be DISCRIMINATED against for being who they are....Isnt this what the gays ask for too....being who they are without persecution?

I hope the United Way dries up and wastes away, they will never get ANY money from me (or my family or heirs) as they are 2 faced because they are full of special programs based off of sex, age, etc, yet they yanked longtime support for the Scouts because they too are a "criteria" based organization.
Hypocrits to the MAX.

If school kids must see a sensitivity video "legitimizing" homosexuality, then the Scouts should be able to meet in a room after school, and use other PUBLIC property like the gays can.

Astrocreep says,


Its illegal to assualt anyone in public schools. We do not need training courses to implant ideology in place of personal opinion.
If i could,
id vote his post for a "way above top secret award".

Sorry to rant, but i had to clear my chest of the SLANDEROUS, and vicious attack against the Scouts, all in the name of promoting a questionable agenda.

Trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courtious, kind, obediant, cheerful, thrifty, clean, brave and reverent FOREVER!
How many kids these days could use to learn something about these ideals? How often can you see them in youth today?
Yet they are the bad guys?


[edit on 1-12-2004 by CazMedia]



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 03:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by ubermunche
This is not about promoting homosexuality it's about protecting children from harrassment and abuse.

What about the harassment to those who are forced to watch this?
What about protecting the rights of those who dont want to be part of this tolerance training?

The ACLU is just using this whole situation to gain public attention and to create sensationalism because they have no idea on how to find real solutions to real problems !
After having supported a neo-nazi group what more can we expect from such a group?
Next they will say "Tolerance training" on cannibals ! Doesn't he ACLU operate on a set of basic morals, just because the law doesn't stipulate that you can't do something doesn't mean that you should do it!
Does the ACLU really believe that by encouraging the school to have a "Gay-Straight club" will make homosexual kids happy or represented! They will just emphasize the division of kids based on their sexual orientation, more homosexual kids will be harassed and the situation will be worse off then that they were in before! We don't find "straight clubs" in school do we?
By this division the courts themselves have inadvertently divided the student community into two groups in that school and this will only lead to greater animosity and violence.
Such decisions should be put to vote in the local PTA meetings instead of dragging the school to court, this just shows how desperate the ACLU is to promote itself as a sort of messiah for the so-called "oppressed".


[edit on 1-12-2004 by IAF101]



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 07:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by jezebel


What this program can offer to schools is simple: a workshop that should be mandatory for all teachers and administrators, to talk about how to create a safe and open environment for lesbian and gay students. The workshop is not about sex, it is not about morality, and it is not "Gay 101." Instead, it is about safety, equal access and equal protection. It is about making sure that every student feels that they can achieve their best in school in an environment free of hostility. And it is about taking pro-active steps to prevent the anti-gay attitudes that may exist in a school from turning into harassment and escalating into violence. archive.aclu.org...



Okay then. It was put forth that students were going to be required to take this course and it was misrepresented. Seeing what the actual course is and that it is training only for faculty and staff about safety and controlling violence, I have no problem with it whatsoever.

Violence has no place in public schools no matter what the reason. I do however think a student has every right to disasociate with another for any reason they see fit. Like I have said all along, the zero tolerance for violence in schools is a good thing and should be followed to the letter. You all know that violence can also go the other way too?

I do, however , think this course should be expanded to train teachers to control violence coming from not only anti-gay sentiment but also racial,gender related and social class sentiments as well. If this course is about safety and controlling physical violence and not about forced acceptance of the gay agenda, then I can see where it is a good thing. An employer has every right to mandate staff have the proper training for their job especially when dealing with our most valuable natural resource. Our Kids. I cannot help but think this kind of training is or should be already a requirement for school faculty members.

Thanks for the correct information, Jezebel.




posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger

Originally posted by Verdis Quo
*buzz* Wrong.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10:

9 Do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor cowards (incorrectly translated as "effeminate;" The Greek word means "soft" or "pliable"), nor abusers of themselves with men (The Greek word is used only here and in 1 Timothy 1:10 in lists. The word literally means "male bed" and is not found in contemporary Greek until many years after the time of Paul. To translate it "homosexuals" or other similar words is abusive and incorrect.),



Need I say that what I quoted was from the NIV? Cut and Psted actually and that is one of the most moderntranslations but not my favorite.




Lets see KJV


Ah, yes, the primary blasphemy, the source of endless mistranslations of God's word by sinning men.



Originally posted by edsinger
NRSV

ASV

NIV


So, a bunch of people have condemned themselves to the burning pits of hell for deliberately mistranslating the word of GOD. I fail to see how their heresy proves your own to be correct. You will still burn in Hell for all eternity if you don't repent and stop preaching your blasphemies as GOd's Word. I do not hate you-the sinner, just your blasphemy-the sin. I am not attacking you just telling you this in hopes of saving your soul from the fires of hell. Hopefully you'll come back to GOD and move away from sin.



Originally posted by edsinger



Originally posted by Verdis QuoAs a christian, I cannot tolerate hatred and deception, much like you cannot tolerate gays. I still can't seem to grasp why God would hate people that he created.


Oh God doesn't hate them, he hates the sin in which there really is no debate. He calls them to repentance. They can not repent when they say they have no sin and deceive themselves. He did not create them gay, it is a behavior and a choice,


By that reasoning then you aren't born straight. So, when did you choose to be straight Ed. Seriously, exactly when did you decide to be straight?

ANd none of that"when i noticed girls were hot"crud, either. I want to know when you decided to feel that girls were hot looking.

GOD is calling you to repentance ED, please stop your blaspheming and return to HIM. I'd hate to see you burn in Hell for all eternity...


[edit on 1-12-2004 by I_AM_that_I_AM]



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 08:55 AM
link   
Okay people, there is no reason to make this lesson in religion. Try the forum for BTS for that. Lest discuss the topic and not worry about whos going to hell and for what. I agree that religion does have a hand in this topic but I think the topic at hand is the forced acceptance of anything..to which we can see the agreement really doesn't do. I'm no big fan of the ACLU for their PC run amuk ideology but this training for staff violates no rights that I can see.

So long as this doesn't force socialization and merely trains staff to control violence, I think its beneficial. You may have the right to dissaprove of gays but you have no right to physically attack someone based on anything other than self-defense.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by I_AM_that_I_AM
By that reasoning then you aren't born straight. So, when did you choose to be straight Ed. Seriously, exactly when did you decide to be straight?

ANd none of that"when i noticed girls were hot"crud, either. I want to know when you decided to feel that girls were hot looking.


You are aware that almost everything happens under your conscious brain? For most people, stealing is wrong. Maybe they were taught that, or maybe they came to that on their own. But if you are not a thief (and I am not equating homosexuality with thievery), then you must have chosen, right?

I mean come on, you mean to tell me that with the complexity of the human brain, that it is not possibly a learned or chosen (even subconsciously)?

There is more than one use of the word choice. We aren't being quite as starkly literal.


GOD is calling you to repentance ED, please stop your blaspheming and return to HIM. I'd hate to see you burn in Hell for all eternity...


So tell me what version of the bible that is not blasphemy? Also, I was under the impression that they were getting closer to translating it properly.




top topics



 
0
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join