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.

 

Congress to Revive Hate Crime Bill to Censor Christians

page: 21
16
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 01:46 PM
link   
"a perpetrator targets a victim because of his or her membership in a certain social group, usually defined by racial group, religion," is part of the given definition of hate crime. Sounds exactly like passing legislation to stop certain religions from discussing issues. Isn't the act of creating the legislation (1) a hate crime and (2) a violation of our basic rights under the Constitution?

Also, if they are so darn good at passing legislation about this, where were they when it came time to beat up the freedom of speech concerning pornography? I don't see these corrupt legislators stopping pornography, just Christians.

What world am I living in? Does anyone else see the disparity?




posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by SemperParatusRJCC
Originally posted by jfj123
Originally posted by Aermacchi


Many claim that being gay is a choice and is not genetic. Here is the problem with that mentality.
If you or anyone else believe that being gay is a CHOICE, then you and every other person saying this must also be physically attracted to the same sex and the only reason you don't act on your sexual attraction is that you CHOOSE not to. This also means that you and everyone else is partially gay and thus an afront to god

Which means that Aermacch is gay but chooses not to act on his "gayness"


When I was young and found out a co-worker was gay, the first thing that entered my mind is, "I don't get, why would one guy want to have sex with another". It just didn't make sense to me as I am not attracted to men. I couldn't wrap my brain around it.
The second thought I had was, I guess that's the exact same way they feel about my heterosexual lifestyle.
My third thought was, live and let live. It's not for me to judge them.

When Aermacch becomes an adult, he will hopefully mature and gain some wisdom and realize that there are many, many different types of people, with many, many different beliefs. Also hopefully, he'll realize that his HATE SPEECH was the product of youth and a lack of wisdom, understanding and tolerance.



Aermacci will never know of his hatefulness because that would go against his paradigm. Outside his very small world in which he himself is the center of. he is the very spawn of that which he preaches and wishes he could be rid of.


Hopefully this is not the case as he will only condemn himself to an eternity in his own personal hell.


[edit on 11-4-2009 by jfj123]



posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 


If thats what he wants then so be it. Who are we to try and change his perception. I'm giving up on him or her. If they want to be closed minded then thats their opinion as well. though I myself will not shove my own views down their throats, because I know in my heart that Im the better human being.



posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jim Scott
"a perpetrator targets a victim because of his or her membership in a certain social group, usually defined by racial group, religion," is part of the given definition of hate crime. Sounds exactly like passing legislation to stop certain religions from discussing issues. Isn't the act of creating the legislation (1) a hate crime and (2) a violation of our basic rights under the Constitution?

Also, if they are so darn good at passing legislation about this, where were they when it came time to beat up the freedom of speech concerning pornography? I don't see these corrupt legislators stopping pornography, just Christians.

What world am I living in? Does anyone else see the disparity?


The legislation in no way censors christianity.
christians will continue to enjoy all the rights they are currently afforded under the CONSTITUTION.

Why do people keep saying this without even reading the bill?

Just to be clear, the OP has mislead you into believing this bill is an attack on the christian church and it is NOT.

The links the OP posted directly contradict his claims.



posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 



jfj123,

You are stretching this out here ..doing the long reach. This makes good rational sense to the non believer..and it is also textbook of today's logic and reason attempting to pass for excellence. It also happens to be a misquote and misdirection.

What you are doing here is not different than the technique of the body politic to mislead and misdirect.

Observe... how you so often only tell part of the story ..the part which fits your biases and beliefs based on human logic and reason..


(Genesis 19:33-36)
Most of us would say that incest is against the interests of the family. Yet Lot, whom the Bible considers to be a very good man, had sex with his two daughters ; and there was no punishment for either Lot or the daughters.


Here we have on your part and whomever you are quoting the epitome of human logic and reason. What you did not tell..nor the author of your quote..was that Lot's daughters conspired to get him drunk and take advantage so that they could foster children by him and the line of their family not be broken.

Also what you left out was the further statement in the passages quoted..down the line.. Genesis 19: 36-37 which is the very end of this chapter. Here it states that the offspring of this union of drunkeness was the children of Aamon and the children of the Moabites.
Both of these nations went on to be sources of abominations as taught to the Children of Israel.
You left this out...why?? This means that this union was not approved by God. This would be obvious to a believer and those who understand what is written. Yet for some reason you choose to limit what is said in the text to make your points.

Those nations surrounding Ancient Israel ..were not approved of by God.

Yet you seem wont to put this off on God and the Bible ..even those who read the Bible. Why?? No where in any of those passages did it say God approved of this.


In order to gain favor with a king, Abraham said that his wife was his sister, and offered her to the king for sex. This happened twice (Genesis 12:11 and Genesis 20:2). Isaac did a similar thing (Genesis 26:6). And Lot (Genesis 19:8) once offered his virgin daughters to be used by a mob at Sodom. (St. Peter called Lot a "righteous man", 2 Peter 2:8)


Once again here you misquote and misdirect for some other purpose.
Abraham did not offer his wife Sarah to the Pharaoh..the princes of Pharaoh called/commanded her to him thinking that she was his (Abraham's ) sister.

Abraham's problem was a lack of courage..not that he offered his wife to Pharaoh. It was not uncommon that when a man with a fair wife left onto the road in travel that he would be killed and his wife taken as she was now considered single and available. It was the same with Issac.

As to Lot..you misquote and misdirect once again. The custom in those days was that when someone was a guest in your house ...you and your name were responsible for the safety of your guests. It was a blight on your name if someone caused injury to someone visiting your house.
You were responsible for the safety of your guests. Once they left your house ...it was not so ..but when they were under your roof...it was so.
This is seldom told to peoples about the customs of those areas.
This was Lots reasoning for offering his daughters. Nonetheless ..the situation was taken care of ..not by human reasoning...


Jesus promised his followers great rewards if they would desert their wives and children (Matt. 19:29). And in the old testament
too, it was good for men to "put away their wives" (Ezra 10:19).


jfj123, you mislead and misdirect again here and for what purpose?

You use the term "great rewards" The passage speaks of everlasting life...and regeneration...not rewards here as you are wont to use, misuse, and misdirect. Not here in this world but in His Kingdom.

You constantly sell the readers on this thread short for your perception of what these passages say. All one has to do is to read the passages before the ones you quote and any after the ones you quote to get the full context. What you do is textbook of what a politician does and also textbook of what I am describing this legislation is for...for votes to fool and deceive people.
The method you use here is exactly textbook politics and also how people are hijacked, misdirected, their very souls stolen and mislead.


And the god loved Jacob and hated Esau, the victim


Ahh..of course..how could I have missed it? The "Victim Dictum" so popular today to keep others silent and unheard while others play through unfettered...unquestioned and unchallenged.

"Victimization" is textbook in public education and politics today. After all..does not the body politic pay for and finance public education. Why would they ever pay for the ability to have anyone think outside the default settings they desire to be taught. I see this cheap technique used or misused all the time to shut up other peoples. How can we argue with someone who is a "Victim?" All victims must be allowed to play through at public expense..no matter how ridiculous the position is. Always.
"Victimization" ALWAYS guarantees the moral ethical high ground ..right!!??

No..jfj123, For God hated Esau and Loved Jacob...even before they were born...neither having done any good or evil. That the purposes of God might stand. We learn this in the New Testament.

Esau's name was not in the Book of Life and Jacob's name was in the Book of Life. It is that simple.

But like many peoples of logic and reason....Victimization has a very strong appeal to your sense of Fairness. Its not Fair. Our reasoning is what is always happening. Not God's reasons.

Believers understand this..non believers do not.

Non believers always say..I will be like the most High...My will be done. Which is all of your points here.

You would make the Children of the Bond woman ..Heir with the children of the Free woman. jfj123. It is the best you will ever be able to do.

This is also precisely the purpose of legislation like this being debated on this thread....by US Congressman John Conyers. They intend to make the children of the bond woman heir with the children of the free woman.

THey intend to take the nation and the world back to pre flood systems of government.

I've had a lot of experience dealing with Atheists and non believers..without exception it always gels down to what I have stated..to make the children of the bond woman ...heir with the children of the free woman. This statement comes from the book of Galatians chapter 4 verses 21 to the end of this chapter.

BIG MOONIE FRESH,


We are not here to judge,


I totally disagree here. We are indeed here to judge. We are to judge Rightious Judgement. This means we are to judge not based on human reasoning and judgement but what we are taught in the Word.

If we do not judge...how will we ever know when and where to separate leven from unleaven..new wine from olde...corruption from uncorrupted. How will we know when or why to put another out of the church??
All these things require knowledge, wisdom, and judgement. Not on human terms..or glory but on Godly terms and to His Glory. Not ours.

For if we constantly push human glory, values and thinking...we will in process of time wind up making the children of the bond woman heir with the children of the free woman. THe Word says this is not going to happen. If we have not enough Godly Wisdom we will never know when someone is trying to misdirect, misquote, and or deceive us about this trend or fingerprint.

This means as a Christian you are to judge certain things as to their conformity to the Word. If they do not conform ..you are to separate from this corruption/abomination. Christians are to be Salty..the Salt of the Earth..not the sugar.

I hope this helps you ..on the matter of Judging. So many unbelievers are in the business of fooling and deceiving Believers about the matter of Judging. The sad truth of it is that many Believers have fallen for this line and placebo about Judging. Even many Preachers and men of the Cloth.

Once again..I hope and pray this helps you.

Thanks to all for their posts,
Orangetom








[edit on 11-4-2009 by orangetom1999]



posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999
reply to post by jfj123
 



jfj123,

You are stretching this out here ..doing the long reach. This makes good rational sense to the non believer..and it is also textbook of today's logic and reason attempting to pass for excellence. It also happens to be a misquote and misdirection.

What you are doing here is not different than the technique of the body politic to mislead and misdirect.

Observe... how you so often only tell part of the story ..the part which fits your biases and beliefs based on human logic and reason..



(Genesis 19:33-36)
Most of us would say that incest is against the interests of the family. Yet Lot, whom the Bible considers to be a very good man, had sex with his two daughters ; and there was no punishment for either Lot or the daughters.



Here we have on your part and whomever you are quoting the epitome of human logic and reason. What you did not tell..nor the author of your quote..was that Lot's daughters conspired to get him drunk and take advantage so that they could foster children by him and the line of their family not be broken.

So you're saying that incest is ok if you're drunk?


Also what you left out was the further statement in the passages quoted..down the line.. Genesis 19: 36-37 which is the very end of this chapter. Here it states that the offspring of this union of drunkeness was the children of Aamon and the children of the Moabites.
Both of these nations went on to be sources of abominations as taught to the Children of Israel.
You left this out...why??

I can't quote the whole bible



Those nations surrounding Ancient Israel ..were not approved of by God.

ah, entire nations of people were not approved by god. Even new born children in those nations? How could a god disapprove of an innocent newborn?


In order to gain favor with a king, Abraham said that his wife was his sister, and offered her to the king for sex. This happened twice (Genesis 12:11 and Genesis 20:2). Isaac did a similar thing (Genesis 26:6). And Lot (Genesis 19:8) once offered his virgin daughters to be used by a mob at Sodom. (St. Peter called Lot a "righteous man", 2 Peter 2:8)



Once again here you misquote and misdirect for some other purpose.
Abraham did not offer his wife Sarah to the Pharaoh..the princes of Pharaoh called/commanded her to him thinking that she was his (Abraham's ) sister.

Abraham's problem was a lack of courage..not that he offered his wife to Pharaoh.

So he was just a coward that was OK with his wife being taken by another man? That's much better. You're right. My bad



It was not uncommon that when a man with a fair wife left onto the road in travel that he would be killed and his wife taken as she was now considered single and available. It was the same with Issac.

But both he and his wife KNEW she was not available.


As to Lot..you misquote and misdirect once again. The custom in those days was that when someone was a guest in your house ...you and your name were responsible for the safety of your guests. It was a blight on your name if someone caused injury to someone visiting your house.
You were responsible for the safety of your guests.

Yeah, that's the same custom we have now.


Once they left your house ...it was not so ..but when they were under your roof...it was so.
This is seldom told to peoples about the customs of those areas.
This was Lots reasoning for offering his daughters. Nonetheless ..the situation was taken care of ..not by human reasoning...

So that excuses it HOW ?????


Jesus promised his followers great rewards if they would desert their wives and children (Matt. 19:29). And in the old testament
too, it was good for men to "put away their wives" (Ezra 10:19).



jfj123, you mislead and misdirect again here and for what purpose?

You use the term "great rewards" The passage speaks of everlasting life...and regeneration...not rewards

So you don't consider everlasting life and regeneration a GREAT REWARD??
I wouldn't leave my family for anything. How about you?


You constantly sell the readers on this thread short for your perception of what these passages say. All one has to do is to read the passages before the ones you quote and any after the ones you quote to get the full context. What you do is textbook of what a politician does and also textbook of what I am describing this legislation is for...for votes to fool and deceive people.


Sorry, you can't make the legislation into something it's not, no matter how much you want to.


The method you use here is exactly textbook politics and also how people are hijacked, misdirected, their very souls stolen and mislead.

drama queen.


And the god loved Jacob and hated Esau, the victim



Ahh..of course..how could I have missed it? The "Victim Dictum" so popular today to keep others silent and unheard while others play through unfettered...unquestioned and unchallenged.

Nice way of redirecting instead of trying to discredit the post.


"Victimization" is textbook in public education and politics today. After all..does not the body politic pay for and finance public education.

I've noticed you've used the phrase "body politic" several times. Interesting phrase to glom on to. Almost as if it were planted into your mind over and over



Why would they ever pay for the ability to have anyone think outside the default settings they desire to be taught. I see this cheap technique used or misused all the time to shut up other peoples.

Very interesting point you've just made. If you read my posts, you would have noticed over and over that I support both the Constitution in whole, including freedom of speech. I can't count how many times I've said in this thread alone that no matter how much I might disagree with someones views, I support their right to voice them. This means I am in no way, trying to shut anyone up as you so pointedly put it.


How can we argue with someone who is a "Victim?"

Sorry, how did we get from a bible verse to arguing with victims? Are you having an ADD moment?


All victims must be allowed to play through at public expense..no matter how ridiculous the position is. Always.
"Victimization" ALWAYS guarantees the moral ethical high ground ..right!!??

Well if a person is categorized as a victim, they usually are not the bad guy but instead victimized by the bad guy. You understand what a victim is right?


Believers understand this..non believers do not.

Non believers always say..I will be like the most High...My will be done. Which is all of your points here.

FYI, I'm Catholic



This is also precisely the purpose of legislation like this being debated on this thread....by US Congressman John Conyers. They intend to make the children of the bond woman heir with the children of the free woman.

Actually the legislation is intended to punish hate crimes. Have you read it yet or are you too busy preaching ?


THey intend to take the nation and the world back to pre flood systems of government.

What pre-flood system of government? What flood are you referring to? FYI, there has never been a worldwide flood.


I've had a lot of experience dealing with Atheists and non believers..without exception it always gels down to what I have stated..to make the children of the bond woman ...heir with the children of the free woman. This statement comes from the book of Galatians chapter 4 verses 21 to the end of this chapter.

Good for you
Since I am neither a non-believer nor an athiest, why are you telling me this?



I hope this helps you ..on the matter of Judging. So many unbelievers are in the business of fooling and deceiving Believers about the matter of Judging.

I like the way you've grouped everyone who doesn't think like you into the non-believer category, thus elevating yourself to a higher level. This allows you to look down on us as less then human so you can judge us



The sad truth of it is that many Believers have fallen for this line and placebo about Judging. Even many Preachers and men of the Cloth.

oh but not you. You know better then all those preachers, priests, biblical scholars, etc...
Heck, you might even be the right hand of god ! You were brought here for a greater destiny which mortal man cannot fathom. Your incite into gods true plan is only shadowed by god alone.


[edit on 11-4-2009 by jfj123]



posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123

I've noticed you've used the phrase "body politic" several times. Interesting phrase to glom on to. Almost as if it were planted into your mind over and over




Yes, very interesting now ye mention it bruv.
en.wikipedia.org...
Suggests a certain something doesn't it, hmmmm, i don't know, **ponders**.



Well countered man!




[edit on 11-4-2009 by DeltaPan]



posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeltaPan

Originally posted by jfj123

I've noticed you've used the phrase "body politic" several times. Interesting phrase to glom on to. Almost as if it were planted into your mind over and over




Yes, very interesting now ye mention it bruv.
en.wikipedia.org...
Suggests a certain something doesn't it, hmmmm, i don't know, **ponders**.



Well countered man!




[edit on 11-4-2009 by DeltaPan]


Thanks.
I'll be honest, this thread is a bit refreshing. Not because of the haters but because of people such as yourself who are open minded and reasonable people.


Although this thread opened under the guise of deception, I've seen a lot of quality posts and friendly correspondence.

Keep up the good posts



posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 



LOL LOL LOL...


So you're saying that incest is ok if you're drunk?


I said no such thing. I also did not use drama techniques in misdirection. This is typical of today's political indoctrination techniques.

I said God did not approve of this and these two daughters bore children who became the children of Aamon and Moabites. Both heathen pagan nation of whom God did not approve of what they were doing.

You need some practice jfj123. This type of drama technique works well on most believers. They will easily back up several paces and let you play through on it. But to me and those who can see it for what it is....placebo misdirection techniques..it doesn't make good nonsense.


I can't quote the whole bible


Could have fooled me. You are quoting enough of it in misdirection and misquoting. Try two more sentences.


ah, entire nations of people were not approved by god. Even new born children in those nations? How could a god disapprove of an innocent newborn?


Ahh...the olde...children..children..anything for the children. I suggest you learn what the Moabites...remember the children of the daughters of Lot??

I suggest you learn what the Moabite religion was doing to their children under their god Kemish.
Once again ,jfj123 , I strongly suggest you try some more practice before you come at me with such drama techniques as is the body politic wont to use in misdirection and misrepresentation.
I am not such a drama queen who can easily be put on such an emotional string to get me to back up and let you play through unquestioned or by default.
This is called being of the Salt of the Earth ..not the sugar.


So he was just a coward that was OK with his wife being taken by another man? That's much better. You're right. My bad


Thank you for letting me play through unquestioned and unchallanged. It is indeed your bad. I never said any such thing as you posted in the quote above. Your entitlement beliefs make you do and speak of what you think is looking good or the moral high ground but it is not. It is not even good nonsense on your part in what you try to impune and imply about others beliefs and poorly try in sarcasm to belittle them. You look silly to those of us who know how the default setting is attempted to be worked.
Please practice more.


But both he and his wife KNEW she was not available.


Yes they did. I agree with what you state here. Abraham was not particularly a courageous man. That is obvious. WHat is also obvious is that she was willing to take as much risk here in protecting him. Brave woman.


Yeah, that's the same custom we have now.


I don't think so. I doubt that many even know of this custom either here in the USA or in many other countries. If this were so people would not let other people get drunk under their roof and then get behind the wheel of their cars.


o that excuses it HOW ?????


You are looking at it with today's 20/20 hindsight and also through the prism of today's logic and reason. This is textbook of today's logical, reasonable, gnostic mindset. Neither of these things took place. Whats your problem?? Do you need to judge others?? While telling others not to judge?? Is there tolerance going on here?? LOL LOL!!
I do know that was the custom of those people in those days. I make no excuses for it. I also know that your fear and insecurities here ..nor drama in this instance are well founded. But if you like and need such drama to support your insecurities ..go ahead. Some on this thread will eventually see you for what you are. That's all that I am interested in ..that some see you for what you are promoting here..nonsense.
I am not interested in your insecurities here. Nor your rampant wild speculations.


So you don't consider everlasting life and regeneration a GREAT REWARD??
I wouldn't leave my family for anything. How about you?


You have great difficulty in thinking outside of the flesh. All your posts indicate so to those who know what it is.

What I know as a Believer in Him is that I deserve hell and damnation. I deserve nothing more. The God I know would be perfectly right and just in sending me to Hell and to be Damned. Furthermore if he chose to do so there is nothing I can do about it ...Period.

I am going to be leaving my family at some point..in the flesh. My family will also be leaving me at some point.
I am trusting also that you know and understand the concept of being around dead people. I had dinner with one like this tonight. It did not take me long to know and understand that this was a dead person. Believers know this. So when I am a believer..I am also dead to them as are you and I here to each other. I know with surety that when I speak to you I am speaking to and with a dead person.. No problem with this. In this manner I leave them..mother and father...brothers, sisters, sons and daughters and even you. We have been removed from them. bought and paid for by Him and for His purposes. The Word goes on to illustrate this concept in other ways...particularly in the New Testament.
You are going to be leaving your family at some time ..not a time of your choosing. All you can do is prepare them for the day.

I told you that you need more practice.


Nice way of redirecting instead of trying to discredit the post


It is you who used first the word "victim" not me. However ...in your wont to make Esau..the "victim" you do exactly what I stated in my previous post. You are wont to make the children of the bond woman ..heir with the children of the free woman. A Believer well versed in the Word of God will know and see this around them over and over and over. Even often here on ATS/BTS. It is textbook of the body politic to do exactly this very thing. Make the children of the bondwoman heir with the children of the free woman. THe classic textbook version of this is something called Utopia. Lots of people/politicians have tried it. The problem is that they historically come into conflict with another system trying the same thing. This is called War.


I've noticed you've used the phrase "body politic" several times. Interesting phrase to glom on to. Almost as if it were planted into your mind over and over


Glom!!?? Goodness me...are you getting desperate here?? All I have to do to make the association is turn on a radio..turn on a television. ...it is all over the place. The real problem is trying to find a place where the "body politic " is not spreading pablum for votes. One does not have to glom anything. It is being spoon fed to us daily under the guise of..

Making the children of the bondwoman ...heir with the children of the free woman.



Very interesting point you've just made. If you read my posts, you would have noticed over and over that I support both the Constitution in whole, including freedom of speech. I can't count how many times I've said in this thread alone that no matter how much I might disagree with someones views, I support their right to voice them. This means I am in no way, trying to shut anyone up as you so pointedly put it.


Im very glad to see you make this statement because I too support the Constitution of the United States...including and especially the first Ten Amendments in particular. I think the best government we can have is a government which is broke...barely financially solvent. That way they cannot interfere in our buisness. They are to broke to do this.

However ..this type of bill has the ability to conflict heavily with Amendment One of the Constitution of the United States and instead insert the changing winds of whatever the "body politic" can insert for votes and control of the vote. It will be used and misused to censor the public across the board. It is being used as such in the UK, Australia and other countries...in the name of "tolerance." Taking the Liberties of people away for tolerance and eventually votes/power.


Sorry, how did we get from a bible verse to arguing with victims? Are you having an ADD moment?


You brough up the victim dictum..I merely elaborated on the use/misuse of it by people ..and especially people brought up in public education thinking...ie...a television education..paid for by the body politic. Drama!!

I think you should answer that question for yourself.

Watch this carefully jfj123..please try thinking...musing..not Amusing with me.

A -without

Muse..thinking

Without thinking Amusement...Amuse.


Well if a person is categorized as a victim, they usually are not the bad guy but instead victimized by the bad guy. You understand what a victim is right?


Yes I understand what is a victim. I am also well aware that a whole genre of television prime time programs built heavily on this type of easily drama subjects for ratings. The numbers game..just like politicians for votes. This "victim dictum" did not escape the body politic and its students as a tool to get easily seduced and emoting people on the puppet strings for votes. The key is constantly feeding them drama and hence keeping them from thinking for themselves ..thereby controlling them..particularly at election time.
Since the body politic also finances public education ..it is not difficult to see that they are spoonfeeding our children in this same template so as to turn out easily emoted/controllable voters. Not voters capable of thinking for themselves..but on a string. Drama techniques are the most common fingerprint seen once one awakens from their slumber.

Continued on the next post



[edit on 11-4-2009 by orangetom1999]



posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 07:25 PM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 



jfj123,

Continued from the last post.

concerning the constant use of the "Victim Dictum" ..I am not so easily put on the string that I am automatically going to operate on the assumption that anyone who uses the term "Victim" is in fact a victim. I will decide for myself thank you. In the case of Esau as you are wont to decry...I dont think Esau was the "Victim." I can do this same template when examining alot of what we see out here as "Victimization." I will not automatically buy into the concept or let it play through unchallanged by default as you seem wont to do and expect..even unto entitlement.


FYI, I'm Catholic


I am not particulary interested in what you claim you are. I am interested in the fruit you produce. I am a fruit inspector.
I can do this with those who claim to be Christians as well. It does not take long to figure it out.


Actually the legislation is intended to punish hate crimes. Have you read it yet or are you too busy preaching ?


Hate crimes are a placebo..either a thing is a crime or it is not. Making a special category for thought or speech is not in accordance with Amendment 1. All of these types of things gel down to even where expressing ones opinions is now a crime. This is what the direction is tending in the UK, Australia, New Zealand and other nations which have been dumb enough to try this.


What pre-flood system of government? What flood are you referring to? FYI, there has never been a worldwide flood.


LOL LOL LOL..Im sorry but I cant help it. You are telling me here that you are not Catholic. I told you that you need practice.


Good for you Since I am neither a non-believer nor an athiest, why are you telling me this?


LOL LOL LOL..see above statement of mine..I can do this with Believers as well. I told you that you need practice.


I like the way you've grouped everyone who doesn't think like you into the non-believer category, thus elevating yourself to a higher level. This allows you to look down on us as less then human so you can judge us


I also told you that I am not interested in your insecurities or those of others. You can do much better than this if you are so sure of your positions. I suggest you learn what it is to be Salty ..not sugary.
Also try a bit of the World's "Tolerance." Tolerance is always a good one to win over people and default through...to make them feel guilty so that they will step aside so you can play through....


oh but not you. You know better then all those preachers, priests, biblical scholars, etc...
Heck, you might even be the right hand of god ! You were brought here for a greater destiny which mortal man cannot fathom. Your incite into gods true plan is only shadowed by god alone.


This too is not worthy of you for the reasons stated above. Such techniques show the weakness and insecurity of your position. I told you that you need practice. This stuff works on and impresses others but it shows weakeness to those who can see it for what it is.

I dont think you are accustomed to dealing with people who dont let you default through or back up so many paces for you. Most of them are impressed with your methods. If so than good for you. It just does not work on me. Hopefully others on here will see it for what it is.

Thanks to all on here for their posts,
Orangetom



posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123

Many claim that being gay is a choice and is not genetic. Here is the problem with that mentality.
If you or anyone else believe that being gay is a CHOICE, then you and every other person saying this must also be physically attracted to the same sex and the only reason you don't act on your sexual attraction is that you CHOOSE not to. This also means that you and everyone else is partially gay and thus an afront to god

Which means that Aermacch is gay but chooses not to act on his "gayness"



[edit on 11-4-2009 by jfj123]


So you admit then that you know it is NOT genetic.

Oh BTW, If I was gay, I wouldn't be in here talking like an imbecile trying to challenge someones masculinity in some ad-hoc attempt in emotional extortion where he either agrees with you silly argument or he must face the fact that he is gay also.

If I was gay, I would choose NOT to be just like your argument says i can do and just like Gays can do if they weren't to wrapped up in depravity and sin



posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Aermacchi
 


that is the most ignorant thing i have ever heard from you
and you say some pretty dumb things.
if you were gay you would decide to be straight.. what proof of this do you have?.. and even if that was the case. you'd be very unhappy, living in denial. and that whole. ex-gay thing is nothing but brain washing.. and is psycologicaly and emotionally harmful..



posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by scorand
reply to post by Aermacchi
 


that is the most ignorant thing i have ever heard from you
and you say some pretty dumb things.
if you were gay you would decide to be straight.. what proof of this do you have?.. and even if that was the case. you'd be very unhappy, living in denial. and that whole. ex-gay thing is nothing but brain washing.. and is psycologicaly and emotionally harmful..


Hey scorenone, I don't give a rats ass what you think is pretty dumb but I would suggest that you follow the thread and see the sarcasm in mine for the REALLY dumb idea was the one mine was responding too. It was his arbitrary rule that if being gay wasn't genetic than everyone would in essence choose who they would be attracted to making me in his opinion "partly gay" AND an affront to God. It that wer the case and I could be attracted to whom ever I chose, conventional wisdom would dictate I could just as easily choose the opposite sex.

Oh and by the way, YOU don't speak for all gays YOU think would be in denial. If YOU got issues being gay TOO BAD!

That doesn't mean i don't know of 200 people that used to be gay and they aint no more!



posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 09:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999

This too is not worthy of you for the reasons stated above. Such techniques show the weakness and insecurity of your position. I told you that you need practice. This stuff works on and impresses others but it shows weakeness to those who can see it for what it is.

I dont think you are accustomed to dealing with people who dont let you default through or back up so many paces for you. Most of them are impressed with your methods. If so than good for you. It just does not work on me. Hopefully others on here will see it for what it is.

Thanks to all on here for their posts,
Orangetom



I see it for what it is and I have been quite entertained by his sophistry and his friends from the peanut gallery tag teaming high fiving eachother and generally swinging from each others vas defrens getting all impressed with their favorite loved ones,

Themselves



posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Aermacchi
 


Aermacchi,

The gay argument is just as downright ignorant as the straight argument.

Once again drama and emotions wins out over real thinking values.

What a Believer knows is that it is downright dumb to define ones self by their sexuality or sexual orientation. People left to thier natural thinking abilities are smarter than this.

One does not define themselves by thier sexuality or sexual orientation..gay or straight. This is just plain stupid.

I say this because people are so much more than mere sexuality.

This phenomonon is not limited to the gay community...for it is also heavily merchandized to the straight community as well.

This phenomonon does however get people emotional and enthusiastic enough to steer their votes. Are you getting the point yet?

This too is about votes...just like this hate speech legislation. Once you understand that high electorical vote states have large homosexual populations who are also voters..it becomes clear what is happening.

Notice that so few ever present this view to people..even many preachers or men of the cloth do not do this. Yet when one thinks it through it is simple common sense.

I am not speaking against sexuality here. People have sexuality..it is just not the total of who and what they are. People, once again, are so much more than their sexuality or sexual orientation.

Once you understand this concept ...it becomes clear what some are trying to do to force acceptance or at least silence onto others.

Remember too what I keep emphasising to jfj123 and others...the body politic finances public education. Do you now understand why they want to promote this as acceptable in the public schools. It helps to groom the next generation of voters on the emotional puppet strings without them even knowing how to think for themselves...only how to emote their way through life.

The Hate Crime bill is to support this other acceptance..by silencing one section of the population from teaching others how to think for themselves or put light on nonsense...and or the concept that the real motive is votes and power....and particularly in high electorial vote states which are needed in presidential elections.

Thanks for your last post and support.

Thanks,
Orangetom



[edit on 11-4-2009 by orangetom1999]



posted on Apr, 12 2009 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aermacchi

Originally posted by scorand
reply to post by Aermacchi
 


that is the most ignorant thing i have ever heard from you
and you say some pretty dumb things.
if you were gay you would decide to be straight.. what proof of this do you have?.. and even if that was the case. you'd be very unhappy, living in denial. and that whole. ex-gay thing is nothing but brain washing.. and is psycologicaly and emotionally harmful..


Hey scorenone, I don't give a rats ass what you think is pretty dumb but I would suggest that you follow the thread and see the sarcasm in mine for the REALLY dumb idea was the one mine was responding too. It was his arbitrary rule that if being gay wasn't genetic than everyone would in essence choose who they would be attracted to making me in his opinion "partly gay" AND an affront to God. It that wer the case and I could be attracted to whom ever I chose, conventional wisdom would dictate I could just as easily choose the opposite sex.

Oh and by the way, YOU don't speak for all gays YOU think would be in denial. If YOU got issues being gay TOO BAD!

That doesn't mean i don't know of 200 people that used to be gay and they aint no more!

actually i dont have an issue with being gay i have an issue with stupidity and ignorance.. then trying to hide it behind relligion.. i dont give a rats ass what you think is dumb.. , and wernt you saying earlier that you chose to be straight.. its your contradictory comments that are dumb..
and as i stated earlier ex-gays were either bi to begin with or were brainwashed by some of the most disgusting tricks in the book.. they promote self loathing and then guilt and peer pressure to get them to talk themselves into believing this crap..

[edit on 12-4-2009 by scorand]



posted on Apr, 12 2009 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by orangetom1999
 


the gay argument is just as ignorant as the straight?? well the gays arent lying to push an agenda.. prop 8 in cali was based on lies. the idea that gay marriage is gonna take away religous rights is a lie.

the only reason why the gay community is so over active about being gay, and celibrating it is because of the opression placed on us, as far as public schools get a clue you seem to have an elitist holier than thou attitude,the only freedom that was taken away is ours.. and its done by bigotted christian groups who will sit there and lie live in denial..and twiste scripture to sell it.. and at the same time hypocriticly ignore scripture that argues against it..

[edit on 12-4-2009 by scorand]



posted on Apr, 12 2009 @ 02:06 AM
link   
To think all of the uproar over separation of Church and State. To keep religion out of a government that was founded with documents using religious language and specifically referring to God. NOW these same people want the government to ban religion even further. You do realize that no belief at all is also a religion of sorts AND that statements against Christians will also fall into the "hate speech" bs.

The loss of the 1st Amendment isn't something to be joyful about, no matter what your beliefs are.

If you truly believe in the STFU bill then maybe you should do so...just STFU. Not saying that to be rude, but to prove the point, if you want to be heard you NEED freedom of speech.

Hate crimes, actual physical violations, are one thing, speech is not the same. Sticks and stones, man, sticks and stones.

adding: Telling truths, no matter who says them, should NEVER be silenced. If you don't have the proof of what you say, then it's just your personal opinion, but that's something everyone is entitled to have, voiced or not.

[edit on 12-4-2009 by deelushian]



posted on Apr, 12 2009 @ 02:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by scorand
reply to post by orange tom 1999
 


the gay argument is just as ignorant as the straight?? well the gays arent lying to push an agenda.. prop 8 in cali was based on lies. the idea that gay marriage is gonna take away religious rights is a lie.

the only reason why the gay community is so over active about being gay, and celebrating it is because of the oppression placed on us, as far as public schools get a clue you seem to have an elitist holier than thou attitude,the only freedom that was taken away is ours.. and its done by bigoted christian groups who will sit there and lie live in denial..and twisted scripture to sell it.. and at the same time hypocritically ignore scripture that argues against it..

[edit on 12-4-2009 by scorned]



scorand,

You may be losing me here. Is this more of the "Victim Dictum " at work??

I don't approve of much of the Christian position on this as well. I am often prone to stating that there is a lot of ignorance on the part of Christians concerning everything and anything including the Bible..or what I call the Word.


well the gays arent lying to push an agenda..


Disagree totally ..they are indeed trying to push an agenda as well as is the government on this. If what you are saying is not true than why the vitriol in your post?? Particularly against Believers and Christianity?? It is standard M1A issue tactics and strategy on posts like this. It is entirely predictable.

I think like jfj123 you need more practice.

I'm going to try this again..and see if it takes root among some out here.

You have to go to school to get stupid enough to identify yourself as to whom and what you are by sexual orientation. This applies to straights as well as gays.

People left to their own devices are smarter than this institutional/political dumbness.

Here we have a group of people who's sole claim to fame is their sexual orientation or their sexuality?? And no one thinks this is very strange??
I most certainly do think it is strange behavior. I find it equally repugnant straight as well as gay.

Once again..people are so much more than sexuality. Yet we have college educated preachers out here who cannot put this together for their congregations. What school of stupidity did they go to as well??
No where in the Bible or Word to you see any instructions to bring glory to ones self by their sexuality...ever. For all that matter..no where in the Bible/Word do you see any instruction to celebrate a birthday..and bring glory on ones self for such a "special day."
Understand now what I mean and to what I am stating??
For those who know the history ...you do see birthdays and sexuality used or misused to self glorify in the Pagan nations and pagan histories. You do have to dig to find this history but it can be done. One must particularly be aware of Occult histories to understand this. And politics is a devout and very zealous religion which is very Occult.

I still stand by what I stated in earlier posts. This issue like many before it is about Votes...and particularly in high electorial vote states like
California. The government cares not one whit about the public or any cause...they will play anyone for votes. The term for this kind of selling, bartering, and trading of peoples souls for votes ...is Whoredom. Always has been and always will be.

If necessary ..for power and control..they are willing to make the children of the bond woman..heir with the children of the free woman.

It is indeed an agenda.

Thanks for your post,
Orangetom


[edit on 12-4-2009 by orangetom1999]



posted on Apr, 12 2009 @ 02:20 AM
link   
reply to post by deelushian
 


deelushian,

What I have learned by careful reading of the Word against the written histories of men ..is that Politics is a religion..a very devout and zealous religion. One in which its inner workings are hidden and concealed from those it intends to affect or rule.

The term for this kind of religion which is hidden, concealed, and even esoteric from those it intends to rule..even by deception...is Occult. Hidden. Concealed. Covert verses Overt.

When one reads real genuine Occult books..not the stuff from Barnes and Noble...one learns that much of the Occult religions are not only hidden from the general public..but also that they will even deceive their members and participants. This is also a definition of Politics.

'And as I am often prone to state..the body politic pays for and finances public education. What religion do you think they are teaching in public schools?? It is not difficult to figure this one out....or connect the dots.

Hope this helps,
Thanks,
Orangetom



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join