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.

 

Zondervan faces $60M federal lawsuit over Bible, homosexuality

page: 4
3
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by Pellevoisin
 


Actually while I think the case is silly so late after the bible content was altered 20 years ago, if he gets a good lawyer that specializes on hate crime he may have a chance.

[edit on 10-7-2008 by marg6043]


I agree he would be able to muster a case if he could point to a hate crime committed against him directly tied to the Zondervan bible translation.




posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by Pellevoisin
 


Actually while I think the case is silly so late after the bible content was altered 20 years ago, if he gets a good lawyer that specializes on hate crime he may have a chance.

But he is claiming personal and emotional distress and this types of cases base on feelings alone do not do well.

[edit on 10-7-2008 by marg6043]


I expect , if the case makes it to court, that there will a parade of shrinks and docs testifying for both sides of the issue....I have a feeling the plaintiff has a long history of psycho-therapy he can pull from to bolster his lawyer's arguments...a thorough lawyer never goes to court based only the feelings of his client.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 05:18 PM
link   
I agree that is why first they have the court to agree that a possible hate crime was committed or at least instigated when the publisher added the word homosexual to the bible.

The problem will be to prove that he was a victim as the result and that the intentions of the publisher was of causing a hate crime.

But like I poster before, freedom of speech does not fall under hate crime.

Kind of tricky.

[edit on 10-7-2008 by marg6043]



posted on Jul, 11 2008 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rook1545

It does not matter to God whether you did it for your country or not, you killed people, bottom line.

This does matter to the entire conversation. You are a hypocrite. You cannot sit and profess to know what constitutes a sin when you cherry pick what those actually are.


Oh I admit to being a hipocrite but not about this. The scriptures support it also and if YOU are going to be telling me what does and doesn't matter to god Than will you ask him for me? I mean since you seem to know him well enough to know when he talks about an eye for an eye and all that, he meant everyone but conspiriology

Thanks

- Con



posted on Jul, 11 2008 @ 02:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
I agree that is why first they have the court to agree that a possible hate crime was committed or at least instigated when the publisher added the word homosexual to the bible.

The problem will be to prove that he was a victim as the result and that the intentions of the publisher was of causing a hate crime.

But like I poster before, freedom of speech does not fall under hate crime.

Kind of tricky.

[edit on 10-7-2008 by marg6043]


When you put it that way - I don't see how they have any kind of a case at all...sounds as if they would have to do some fancy spin to prove the publisher 'intended' to cause a hate crime....that sounds like a stretch under the best of circumstances....
tricky indeed, I have to agree....



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by realshanti


When you put it that way - I don't see how they have any kind of a case at all...sounds as if they would have to do some fancy spin to prove the publisher 'intended' to cause a hate crime....that sounds like a stretch under the best of circumstances....
tricky indeed, I have to agree....


Yeah, marge is right, but especially difficult will be the part where it can be proven it was drected at him. It's not like you can tell someones gay just by looking at them. I don't see this as a motive for that however. I see this a part of a larger agenda and that would be to have the entire offensive verse removed from the Bible and that will take some doing also. They have removed things like "so help me God" from historical presidential speeches so it isn't far fetched.

It's just plane

wrong


- Con



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 06:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Conspiriology
 


Agreed - glad I have several copies around the house - we may have to preserve those in the coming days....sheesh..



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 07:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Conspiriology
 


That is another issue, see if you read the link in the OP, the so call offending bibles were published in the 80s after that none of the bibles published had the word anymore.



posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 01:51 PM
link   



posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 03:46 PM
link   
Whatever. Religion will always be used as a way to divide the people into groups and cause conflicts.

Yes, this guy is suing because he wants money... but the bible producer kind of set himself up for it.


When it comes to law suits, it's a game of chess. If you can't play it, you shouldn't be in the states. Capitalism never had a safety net... if you can crush someone for money, capitalism expects you to do so.

I suspect religion will forever be under fire from the law. Sometimes it's morally warranted, sometimes it's not... but that has nothing to do with whether or not it will continue, it's all about money.

You live in a capitalist world, you might as well get used to it.



posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by louieMcQ
 


What you fail to realize is that the word homosexual was ADDED incorrectly to the bible. Homosexuality was not considered a sin in the Bible before the 20th Century because it wasn't there. The bible has been falsely amended from its original version and that is wrong.

In 1970, I Corinthians 6:9 read as followed-
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulteres, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effiminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind.

In 1982 ,the same scripture read like this-

Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived, neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodimites.

In 2001 the same scripture reads like this-

Surely you know that the people who do wrong will not inherit God’s kingdom. Do not be fooled, those who sin sexually, worship idols, take part in adultery, those who are male prostitutes, or men who have sexual relations with other men, those who steal, are greedy, get drunk, lie about others, or rob thses people will not inherit God’s kingdom.



posted on Dec, 4 2008 @ 11:47 AM
link   
Homosexuality is absolute against nature.
It is a laugh that they would want the same rights.
They can not reproduce!!!!!!!
It is against everything nature is.
Sin means: Missing the goal! Not using as it was meant to be!
sin 1 |sin|
noun
an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law : a sin in the eyes of God | the human capacity for sin.
• an act regarded as a serious or regrettable fault, offense, or omission : he committed the unforgivable sin of refusing to give interviews | humorous with air like this, it's a sin not to go out.
verb ( sinned |sɪnd|, sinning |sɪnɪŋ|) [ intrans. ]
commit a sin : I sinned and brought shame down on us.
• ( sin against) offend against (God, a person, or a principle) : I had sinned against my master.




top topics



 
3
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join