Pew report shows American Christian numbers in decline

[A New Dawn]

If it was an actual Methodist church, they could have refused. The for profit chapel that advertised on a website to the public, was not a Methodist church.

Deal with it, it is reality, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.

I am pretty sure you are talking about a different case, maybe the other article I linked, which I am not talking about. DEAL WITH IT.

 

[bhsmte]

I am pretty sure you are talking about a different case, maybe the other article I linked, which I am not talking about. DEAL WITH IT.

Nope same case, as it was hashed out on this site some time ago.

 

[A New Dawn]

Nope same case, as it was hashed out on this site some time ago.

Cool.

 

[smaneck]

Sharia courts have been set up in several states, most of them they try to keep in secret, but one showed up in Texas to deal with issues in which they disagreed with the government about the law being broken and how to fix it. They were attempting to take it out of the courts hand and deal with it under sharia law. Also in Texas, just last weekend, a Muslim bounty (I forget the name they gave it) was put on the head of the woman who organized the cartoon drawing contest. That is sharia law overspilling into real life outside of Islam.

There is nothing in the shariah that calls for putting bounties on people's head. As for your assertions about shariah courts, you provide no evidence that this is anything more than what Orthodox Jews have to settle some of their own disputes. D

Doesn't your Bible say that Christians should not take one another to secular court? Why then would you criticize Muslims for handling their own internal disputes?

 

[smaneck]

Yes, I realize that there are church closures and falling attendance.. but the issue that should be looked at is why. Rather than it being apostasy, it more likely is contributed to the social and economical concerns of the day. In the light of that, economy has not been a strong point among the Christians who've been taught that being rich is a sin.
People are losing their jobs so money is tight, buying gas to go to church is reduced, money is clung to for feeding one's own family, not for providing money for keeping a church open.

There are so many holes in this argument, I could drive a truck through it. First off, church attendance is decreasing among the Middle Class and college educated, not so much the poor. The poor are not only more likely to go to church, they are more likely to tithe. Second, there is a church practically on every corner. No one has to drive any distance unless they are hung up on going to one particular church.

 

[smaneck]

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/j...y-cannot-ban-same-sex-civil-union-ceremony-on

The Methodists were not being compelled to perform gay marriages, they were told that since the facilities were rented to non-Christians they could not discriminate in leasing the facility to gays. I'm not sure this decision wouldn't be overturned on appeal given the Tabor ruling, but since the claimants weren't awarded any monetary damages, I doubt if the church will bother. The United Methodists, in any case, are pretty divided on the issue of gay marriages.

 

[Gracchus]

Studies have found that societies which are the most corrupt, the most unfair, the most ignorant, the most impoverished and wretched, are the most religious, and the most conservative. If you live without hope of justice or advancement, it is comforting to believe in pie-in-th-sky-by-and-by-when-you-die. The US has a high standard of living overall, but there is a great gap between the rich and the poor that is almost impossible to cross. The rich are getting richer, which means the poor must be getting poorer. It is a very evil country, founded on greed, slavery, genocide and imperialism, almost constantly at war, even when the war is undeclared. We have two main parties, one that is corrupt because of moral failure and the other corrupt as a matter of principle. And the worst of the bad guys are convinced they are the good guys. Note that I am not pointing fingers, because truth is no defense if you offend power.

 

[GrimKingGrim]

Rise of the Information age.

 

[Eudaimonist]

The rich are getting richer, which means the poor must be getting poorer.

The rich might be getting relatively richer, but that doesn't mean that the poor must be getting poorer in absolute terms.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Theway]

Apparently a return to religious wars lasting hundreds of years and burning heretics at the stake as well as expelling Jews and confiscating their property is a good thing. A return to Christianity’s highpoint in Europe.

That's not saying much, because that could be applied to Athiest governments or any other type of group as well.... remember communism, tens of millions died under that rule. Likewise the burning at the stake, stoning, beheadings, and throwing into the arena of Christians by other religions and non religious groups which is still being carried out today. Am I now to fault all nonChristians for these atrocities?

 

[Aryeh Jay]

That's not saying much, because that could be applied to Athiest governments or any other type of group as well.... remember communism, tens of millions died under that rule. Likewise the burning at the stake, stoning, beheadings, and throwing into the arena of Christians by other religions and non religious groups which is still being carried out today. Am I now to fault all nonChristians for these atrocities?

No, it is not saying much. But is anyone in Cambodia, Russia or Germany currently saying that things today are going downhill and I wish Pol Pot, Stalin and Hitler were back in charge cause those were the good old days.

 

[Theway]

No, what I'm saying is that if you offer public accommodations, you have to follow the law. What if someone held to the morals and values that black people were inferior and shouldn't be served? Should those morals and values trump the law?

I'm afraid you are preaching to the wrong choir here... I'm all for the rights of private citizens to act on their beliefs (within reason) the problem is that the government has gone too far; for the road to hell is paved on good intentions.
While I absolutely agree that the government can not discriminate in any way, shape, or form, private citizens should be able to if that is what they want to do. However, while I believe government can make laws to see that rights are protected, they have now gone way outside of their scope.
In so doing they have created contradictory laws and hypocrisies. For instant, most people are unaware that the first thing government does when they write these kind of laws is exempt themselves from that law. Because even they realize the contradictions that exist within them...
When their is contradiction in law, I will always err on the side of personal freedom.... When there is a contradiction between obeying the laws of men or the laws of God, i and my house will obey God.

My solution to this whole mess is surprising to most. I agree that homosexuals such be able to get married. However I believe that the government should have no part in any wedding. Leave that to private citizens and their individual mores. Government can therefore require everyone to fill out partnership agreements, therefore making everyone equal under the law.
If a gay couple can find a Christian Church to perform the wedding... Go for it.
On the same note, if a citizen desires to have a specific business which is advertised as a Christain wedding service, then who are you to say they have to go beyond their expertise and beliefs?

We are already seeing the freedom limiting effects of this new law before it even takes effect.
There are Christian dating websites being sued because they don't have a gay section.
There are wedding chapels who advertise traditional Christian wedding services which are being sued because they are being told they have to offer non traditional wedding services as well.

There is nothing new under the sun however.... The scriptures tell us that in the last days, wrong will be made to look right, and right will be made to look like it is wrong.... People not founded in Christian values will be unable to tell the difference anymore.
I told my son before he left on his mission a few months ago, that his duty is now no longer be to add onto the truth they have, But you will now have to start by explaining what are basic rights and wrongs.

 

[Theway]

No, it is not saying much. But is anyone in Cambodia, Russia or Germany currently saying that things today are going downhill and I wish Pol Pot, Stalin and Hitler were back in charge cause those were the good old days.

Actually yes... ISIS.

I forgot to add Russia as well.

 

[LoAmmi]

I'm afraid you are preaching to the wrong choir here... I'm all for the rights of private citizens to act on their beliefs (within reason) the problem is that the government has gone too far; for the road to hell is paved on good intentions.
While I absolutely agree that the government can not discriminate in any way, shape, or form, private citizens should be able to if that is what they want to do. However, while I believe government can make laws to see that rights are protected, they have now gone way outside of their scope.
In so doing they have created contradictory laws and hypocrisies. For instant, most people are unaware that the first thing government does when they write these kind of laws is exempt themselves from that law. Because even they realize the contradictions that exist within them...
When their is contradiction in law, I will always err on the side of personal freedom.... When there is a contradiction between obeying the laws of men or the laws of God, i and my house will obey God.

My solution to this whole mess is surprising to most. I agree that homosexuals such be able to get married. However I believe that the government should have no part in any wedding. Leave that to private citizens and their individual mores. Government can therefore require everyone to fill out partnership agreements, therefore making everyone equal under the law.
If a gay couple can find a Christian Church to perform the wedding... Go for it.
On the same note, if a citizen desires to have a specific business which is advertised as a Christain wedding service, then who are you to say they have to go beyond their expertise and beliefs?

We are already seeing the freedom limiting effects of this new law before it even takes effect.
There are Christian dating websites being sued because they don't have a gay section.
There are wedding chapels who advertise traditional Christian wedding services which are being sued because they are being told they have to offer non traditional wedding services as well.

There is nothing new under the sun however.... The scriptures tell us that in the last days, wrong will be made to look right, and right will be made to look like it is wrong.... People not founded in Christian values will be unable to tell the difference anymore.
I told my son before he left on his mission a few months ago, that his duty is now no longer be to add onto the truth they have, But you will now have to start by explaining what are basic rights and wrongs.

I don't believe a minister should be required to marry anybody they choose not to, but if you rent public space you cannot discriminate against a protected class. It would be unacceptable for a space to put up a sign that says "No Irish". It just would. I see these as fundamentally different services being offered. I also view businesses as different than private citizens, although I'm losing that battle since the Supreme Court seems to want to grant them full citizenship.

As far as the government being out of marriage, that's fine with me but the genie is out of the bottle. Your solution is basically unworkable.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Dan Dennett recently wrote a piece for the WSJ that is relevant to this topic.

 

[Theway]

I don't believe a minister should be required to marry anybody they choose not to, but if you rent public space you cannot discriminate against a protected class.

Define "public space"? Is this space owned and controled by the Government or by Private Citizens? So many people nowadays do not know the difference.

It would be unacceptable for a space to put up a sign that says "No Irish". It just would.

Why? Because you say so? This Forum puts up signs all over the place telling people who can belong and where they can go... I'm OK with that, even if they kick me out. I'll just go somewhere where I am welcome. That's the way it should be...

I see these as fundamentally different services being offered. I also view businesses as different than private citizens, although I'm losing that battle since the Supreme Court seems to want to grant them full citizenship.

This Forum not only puts up signs, but they accept money in terms of selling on line classes, advertising, books, donations etc... We are therefore back to my first observation, you are saying that's OK, you just can't make a profit at it. That seems unfair and unconstitutional to me.

As far as the government being out of marriage, that's fine with me but the genie is out of the bottle. Your solution is basically unworkable.

You are proving my point... It is unworkable because government got involve in the first place and made it so by creating laws that contradicted itself. There is a reason the federal government for the most part has stayed out of ruling on issues of marriage, and that is because marriage has always been a State's issue. However States are the ones who caused the problem by getting involved. I remember the days when people would run to Vegas to get married... Not because it was spontaneous, but because Nevada laws were lax and didn't require blood tests. But before that States found that their different laws on marrage contradicted each other so they all agreed that a marriage is one state will be held to be legal in another state. This has now come to a head as one state has ruled gay marrage to be unconstitutional while another had ruled it legal. This caused the States themselves to go against their own agreement in recognizing marrage from one state to the next. The federal courts have likewise ruled both ways. This has forced the federal supreme court to have to rule on an issue it did not want to rule on.
However, the only clear outcome is that the government will only make things worse by creating more untenable and contradictory laws.
The government, (local, State, and Federal, needs to step back and absolve themselves of being in the marrage business altogether.
I'm not naive enough to believe this will happen, so I see nothing but more of a downward spiral from here on, with a loss of more personal freedom.

 

[LoAmmi]

Define "public space"? Is this space owned and controled by the Government or by Private Citizens? So many people nowadays do not know the difference.

They are businesses which are licensed by the state in order to run. Often, they have registered in a way that gives them limited liability if something happens in the business; their personal fortunes are not at stake if they are sued. It is my opinion that the limited liability protection offered by the government means they have to follow the laws the government passes.

If they want to be sole proprietorships that offer no liability protection, I'd be more inclined to say they can do what they want.

 

[HonestTruth]

Studies have found that societies which are the most corrupt, the most unfair, the most ignorant, the most impoverished and wretched, are the most religious, and the most conservative. If you live without hope of justice or advancement, it is comforting to believe in pie-in-th-sky-by-and-by-when-you-die. The US has a high standard of living overall, but there is a great gap between the rich and the poor that is almost impossible to cross. The rich are getting richer, which means the poor must be getting poorer. It is a very evil country, founded on greed, slavery, genocide and imperialism, almost constantly at war, even when the war is undeclared. We have two main parties, one that is corrupt because of moral failure and the other corrupt as a matter of principle. And the worst of the bad guys are convinced they are the good guys. Note that I am not pointing fingers, because truth is no defense if you offend power.

This has gotten worse since Reaganomics became fashionable and politically correct. This even though David Stockman (the architect of Reaganomics) admitted this is nothing more than welfare for the rich. People who call themselves Christian but who vote Republican should read the Book of Amos to learn what God does to a society that enriches the wealthy at the expense of the poor.

 

[Kalevalatar]

There are cases in Europe, especially Denmark where churches are being compelled by the State to perform gay marriages. The reason this is possible is that there is no separation of church and state in most European countries.

Actually, the vast majority of European countries do have a separation of church and state. The state churches are found in the European monarchies, the UK, Norway, Denmark, Liechtenstein and Monaco, and Vatican, of course. The only European republics with established state churches and exceptions to the rule are formerly Danish Iceland and Finland, where the minority church of 58,000 members, the Finnish Orthodox Church, remains the state church.

As to the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Denmark's "being compelled by the state to perform gay marriages", the actual civil legislation of 2012 came after the Lutheran bishops amongst themselves, in 2005, after 6-year discussion following Denmark 1989 same-sex registered civil partnership law, 8-4 decided to start conduct blessings of a civil weddings and same-sex marriage ceremonies at individual pastors own discretion. The law of 2012 simply replaced the registered civil partnership with gender-neutral marriage.

 

[A New Dawn]

There is nothing in the shariah that calls for putting bounties on people's head. As for your assertions about shariah courts, you provide no evidence that this is anything more than what Orthodox Jews have to settle some of their own disputes. D

Doesn't your Bible say that Christians should not take one another to secular court? Why then would you criticize Muslims for handling their own internal disputes?

The Orthodox Jews kill people for what they consider crimes within their faith? I think not.

TBH, I am not going to spend my time searching for newspaper articles that are several years old just to satisfy your lack of being UTD on what is happening in the world. There have been several killings in NYC that were sharia in nature.

When legalities have been violated, it no longer is a place for civil court action. If someone has harmed someone else in a non-legal way, then they should totally try to fix it the way their religion dictates, as long as those reparations are within the law, but many of these cases (child custody, etc.) are based on state and local laws, that is not for sharia courts to handle.