Originally posted by marg6043
Back to the issue of the law sue again,
I have read the entire link to the case and it seems that the Christian publisher Zondervan indeed targeted the word homosexual as derogatory when they started to publish their version of the scripts back in 1982 and 87.
From the link,
Fowler says Zondervan Bibles published in 1982 and 1987 use the word homosexuals among a list of those who are "wicked" or "unrighteous" and won't inherit the kingdom of heaven..
Now this was indeed an alteration of the original text, But, the publisher did this during the 80s and later bibles do not contain such change and the added homosexual word, this will make a an issue that it was targeting a part of the population the homosexual population.
Now, Fowler claims pain and suffering for the last 20 years as his pastor used the modified bible in his congregation causing stress to him.
This is kind of too late to bring a law sue and a complain, while he can have a court case on the issue of charging words in published bible for the intention of targeting a specific group of people and cause hate crimes, he waited too long
Either way after waiting 20 years the court can take it or just dismiss it depending how good Fowler's lawyer present the case.
[edit on 9-7-2008 by marg6043]
He didnt target anyone he exchanged words NOT MEANINGS and not translations. Marge if I were to go wioth your argument, you can write of all of the texts because ALL of them are not the words from the original texts but a rose is a rose by any other name and homosexual sin is sexual sin but the reason for making it more specific is the gay community DEMANDED IT by constantly but deceptively saying God is not talking about gays sex when he most certainly is.
They bring this attention upon themselves by questioning it and challenging it as if to say if my particular brand of beer isn't mentioned than he isn't talking about Coors drinking drunks because it doesn't say coors in the scripture. I mean I feel I should'nt even have to explain this to you marge,, c'mon I know you know what I am saying and I sympathize with your stand on equal rights but this guy really hasn't made the texts have any altered meaning. May have changed queer for gay is technically all he did. The problem is THIS guy thinks he has an angle for a law suit predicated on his civil rights being violated as the victim of a hate crime.
This guy that changed the word lives in a country where he can write a book saying I hate gay people and I WILL fight to the death he gets to keep that right the same as anyone saying all Christians are evil.
I may not like it and he may be acting like a jerk but Ill be damned if people's sensitivities get so asinine we relinquish our freedom of speech inlieu of hurting someones witto feewings
- Con
[edit on 9-7-2008 by Conspiriology]



