Radical Homosexual Terrorism, page 5
Pages: <<  2    3    4    5    6    7    8  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 9 times


reply posted on 17-11-2008 @ 06:55 PM by Lightmare
reply to post by melatonin



You must have bumped your head or something. The story of Jesus throwing the money changers out of the temple is VASTLY different. First of all, since Jesus was Jewish, he had every right to throw the corruption out of HIS place of worship. Also, Jesus did not go there for the purpose of causing a ruckus.

Can the same be said of this "Bash Back" group? NO!!!! They showed up at that church for the very purpose of causing trouble. You're comparing two VERY different situations that have ZERO relevance to each other. Your comparison is just not applicable at all.



reply posted on 17-11-2008 @ 07:06 PM by Bigwhammy
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy



You are right. It is only a matter of time before somebody is at least hurt, possibly even killed. Their actions are unacceptable.


I respect you for saying that and not minimizing the whole thing as many others feel the need to do. And yes I concur in that my outrage is about this specific group and does not reflect on all homosexuals. However the absurd excuses for these irresponsible and dangerous actions made by many of the posters does reflect on them.


reply posted on 17-11-2008 @ 07:12 PM by Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by Bigwhammy



Sounds solid to me

I gave you a star

When I said earlier, the Churches have it coming; that was not me condoning the actions (which I had said then too), or threatening the Church, but being historical. It doesn't justify these actions...but they should be expected nonetheless. (because of the FBI reports in my prior post, as example)

[edit on 17-11-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]


reply posted on 17-11-2008 @ 07:27 PM by melatonin
Originally posted by Lightmare
You must have bumped your head or something. The story of Jesus throwing the money changers out of the temple is VASTLY different. First of all, since Jesus was Jewish, he had every right to throw the corruption out of HIS place of worship. Also, Jesus did not go there for the purpose of causing a ruckus.

Can the same be said of this "Bash Back" group? NO!!!! They showed up at that church for the very purpose of causing trouble. You're comparing two VERY different situations that have ZERO relevance to each other. Your comparison is just not applicable at all.


Yes, it is.

Someone is offended by the actions of other people...

1. Jesus and the actions of some in Herod's temple.
2. A group of gays and the actions of Xians.

The group is motivated by this offence to act to disrupt a social gathering...

1. Jesus goes to temple, causes trouble
2. A group of gays go to a church, cause trouble.

They irritate people....

1. The temple leaders and others.
2. Church leaders and their congregation.

The irritated people punish the troublemakers...

1. Jesus is arrested (one explanation).
2. Gays are arrested.

Again, definition used by wham-man...

Terrorism means activities against persons, organizations or property of any nature committed by an individual or individuals acting on behalf of any foreign person or foreign interest:

1. that involve the following or preparation for the following:
a. use or threat of force or violence; or
b. commission or threat of a dangerous act; or
c. commission or threat of an act that interferes with or disrupts an
electronic communication, information, or mechanical system; and

2. when at least one of the following applies:
a. the effect is to intimidate or coerce a government or the civilian
population or any segment thereof, or to disrupt any segment of the
economy; or
b. it appears that the intent is to intimidate or coerce a government,
or further political, ideological, religious, social or economic
objectives or to express (or express opposition to) a philosophy
or ideology.


If we ignore the foreign bit, then if we can apply to one, then also t'other. Although, I'm not sure that throwing tables or condoms is really that violent to the level of terrorism). We can argue motivations ('I'm a son of god I can do whatever I like because daddy said so' or 'I've teh gay let me live my life') all day, but I don't think that's the issue.

I know you justify Jesus' actions and deplore those of this gay group. I'm sure people in Palestine see Arafat as a freedom fighter, whereas many of you see him as a terrorist. All in the perception & biases.

[edit on 17-11-2008 by melatonin]


reply posted on 17-11-2008 @ 07:44 PM by Lightmare
reply to post by melatonin



Nope. You're still dead wrong. Two points to make.

1. Jesus had gone to the temple for reasons which had NOTHING to do with causing trouble. His encounter with the money changers was an added bonus.

2. The gay group had absolutely NO buisness being at that church other than to cause trouble. They went to the church FOR THE EXACT PURPOSE OF CAUSING TROUBLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


HELLO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!DO YOU UNDERSTAND ME NOW??????????????????????



reply posted on 17-11-2008 @ 07:46 PM by Clearskies
reply to post by melatonin


EXCEPT that in Jesus' Day, the Temple was public.
This was a private church.
Moreover, Jesus was mad about what the priests were doing to God, not what they were doing to Him. Unselfishness!
I can't believe you're taking up for this!


reply posted on 17-11-2008 @ 07:55 PM by melatonin
Originally posted by Clearskies

EXCEPT that in Jesus' Day, the Temple was public.
This was a private church.
Moreover, Jesus was mad about what the priests were doing to God, not what they were doing to Him. Unselfishness!
I can't believe you're taking up for this!


True, but I don't think terrorist acts are differentiated by whether they happen in public or not. A bomb set off inside a Jerusalem nigthclub is just as much a terrorist act as one set off in an Iraqi market.

And so if terrorists are unselfish and act on offence to others or their welfare, it becomes a justified act? You might want to think/pray that through.

I'll leave you all to dance around the issue.

Catch ya later, perhaps...

lightmare
Nope. You're still dead wrong. Two points to make.

1. Jesus had gone to the temple for reasons which had NOTHING to do with causing trouble. His encounter with the money changers was an added bonus.


If you say so. He was pretty noughty in the run up. Even the fig tree got it. Jesus was a militant. A militant hippy socialist. Hence he took it out on the bourgeoisie. It could well have been the second time he commited such terrorism.

2. The gay group had absolutely NO buisness being at that church other than to cause trouble. They went to the church FOR THE EXACT PURPOSE OF CAUSING TROUBLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


HELLO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!DO YOU UNDERSTAND ME NOW??????????????????????


so they aren't allowed to attend a church? Rhetorical. Don't bother.

They went with the purpose of causing trouble, I agree. No need to shout. Makes you look desperate.

Catch you later too, if I'm unlucky.

Originally posted by Terran Blue
Ah yes.... watch out, y'all, its...

AL GAYDA!


lol

[edit on 17-11-2008 by melatonin]


reply posted on 17-11-2008 @ 08:04 PM by Clearskies
reply to post by melatonin



Jesus HATED the fact that the Hebrew religion had become a circus, with priests confiscating 'unworthy, blemished' sacrificial lambs, bulls and mite-infested doves, and then selling them back at the entrance of the Temple FOR A PROFIT.
It was a corrupt system, far from what God had wanted and also, Jesus didn't throw condoms at children and adults.


reply posted on 17-11-2008 @ 08:28 PM by Lightmare
reply to post by melatonin


Come on now, Mel. I know you're not that freaking dense. Why then do you insist on acting like you are? Your pathetic attempt to derail this thread by injecting non-applicable relativist implications indicates intellectual ineptitude on your part. I say again...I know you're not that dense. SO STOP ACTING LIKE YOU ARE!

Not one of your POINTLESS SPECULATIONS have done anything to change the FACTS that have been presented to you on this subject.

By being purposely blind and deaf to the FACTS which have been presented quite clearly, you not only insult our intelligence, but your own as well.

[edit on 11/17/2008 by Lightmare]


reply posted on 17-11-2008 @ 08:38 PM by Clearskies
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy



The pink panther wasn't gay. He liked...... 'the ladies'!


reply posted on 17-11-2008 @ 08:40 PM by Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by Clearskies



And so did you at one point in your life.

Things can change for him too apparently

Anyways... this was just for humor. And a play on the recent buzz-phrase 'Pink Panthers', which is used synonymously with this radical homosexual agenda crap.

[edit on 17-11-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]
Pages: <<  2    3    4    5    6    7    8  >>    ^^TOP^^



"God is an Imaginary Friend" Athiest Billboards in Denver-
  Posted 18 days ago with 31 member flags
Why are these 10 figures just like Jesus Christ??
  Posted 5 days ago with 14 member flags
I am an imposter in Church
  Posted 4 days ago with 11 member flags
Christians Waking Up? Voluntary \'De-Baptism\' Rising in Europe
  Posted 19 days ago with 7 member flags
What Kind of Christianity Is This?
  Posted 16 days ago with 7 member flags
The Great Flood Was Caused By A Comet?
  Posted 11 days ago with 7 member flags
Advert claiming cure through prayer is banned
  Posted 4 days ago with 7 member flags