Home: No Place for Bible Study

sidhe · May 28, 2009

jmverville said:
The WMD probably found it intriguing that the Police asked questions specifically about the gathering of the people and whether or not it was of a religious nature, which should have no relevancy in an investigation concerning whether or not the place is an area where 'large gatherings' occur.

I guess it seems that, at a minimum, the police were doing something funny here.

I was unaware that they had claimed either of these...

I know if I was serious about debunking a news source I would blog these sorts of terrible articles they ran -- do you have any of these articles left somewhere, or was this hyperbole?

Aliens!

UFO scoop demanded of CIA, military

Did UFO buzz President Bush's Crawford ranch?

Shop.WND.com - A WorldNetDaily Exclusive!

God, UFOs and the Great Pyramid

SOY MAKES YOU GAY!

Soy is making kids 'gay'

...I trust WND as much as I trust AboveTopSecret. The main difference is that ATS is at least wildly entertaining.

ETA: Anyone else find it disturbing that WND gets autolinked like a frakkin' YouTube video?

Tenka · May 28, 2009

JM said:
The WMD probably found it intriguing that

Right, so nobody has confirmed the ludicrous claims of the planet's dodgiest source of current events then and all skepticism of the article thus far has been overwhelmingly generous considering the source.

brightmorningstar · May 28, 2009

If the report is true I hope the same happens to me.

I have paid taxes for 30 years and never been arrested or fined, so I am entitled to some police service. If they arrested me for holding religuous assembly in my house, which I wouldnt stop, and put me into prison for not paying any fines, I have been paying taxes for 30 years which has helped pay for prison building and mainstenance so I am entitled to use the facilities more than many.

PreachersWife2004 · May 28, 2009

VIDEO for your viewing pleasure. Note: don't watch if you're hungry and have no food.

I've watched the video and I still felt like the report is leaning bias. I didn't hear much from the county's perspective, and the lawyer is the one bringing up the charge that the homeowners will have to pay more for a religious gathering. Maybe I'm missing something.

It's still not persecution. If it's law, it's law.

LittleNipper · May 28, 2009

PreachersWife2004 said:
VIDEO for your viewing pleasure. Note: don't watch if you're hungry and have no food.

I've watched the video and I still felt like the report is leaning bias. I didn't hear much from the county's perspective, and the lawyer is the one bringing up the charge that the homeowners will have to pay more for a religious gathering. Maybe I'm missing something.

It's still not persecution. If it's law, it's law.

The government shall make no law pertaining to what, exactly?

b&wpac4 · May 28, 2009

LittleNipper said:
The government shall make no law pertaining to what, exactly?

They can make zoning laws as to where a church building can be built. Do you suppose that because you can't build a church in the middle of Interstate 95 you are being repressed?

PreachersWife2004 · May 28, 2009

LittleNipper said:
The government shall make no law pertaining to what, exactly?

If the law says you need a permit to host 15 people in your home, you need a permit. It's not rocket science and it's not persecution.

wanderingone · May 28, 2009

LittleNipper said:
The government shall make no law pertaining to what, exactly?

So these folks are prevented from being Christian and practicing their faith because the law requires that they meet specific requirements in order to use the building for gatherings larger than a specific number of people? They can't hold the study in the church, or get the permit needed? They can't split the study into a couple of smaller groups to meet in different homes or on different dates? I'm failing to see how having a law that requires a permit of some sort is a law prohibiting these folks from practicing their faith.

b&wpac4 · May 28, 2009

I bet you it will boil down to complaints from neighbors due to the 15 extra cars parked and the disruption it caused the streets. We dont' even have any evidence that they were even asked the questions they claim to be asked, as they could just be trying to pad the story in their favor.

The true headlines are one of these two:

PASTOR BELIEVES LAW DOES NOT APPLY TO HIM; DISRUPTS NEIGHBORHOOD

or

LAWS SOMETIMES HAVE UNANTICIPATED AND UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES; LEGISLATORS SHOCKED TO BE REVEALED AS HUMAN

katautumn · May 28, 2009

salida said:
San Diego is getting worse than China in this case.

That's a bit of a stretch. Have you ever known someone who has done missionary work in China? I have. He's in the printing business and helped oversee the creation of an underground printing outfit where Chinese Christians could print condensed pocket Bibles. I'm sure he could tell you that this fabled "oppression" of Christians in san Diego doesn't hold a candle to the oppression people face, in general, in China.

Home: No place for Bible study?

Awesome. The World Net Daily, which we all know is notorious for it's ability to report facts.

These cop clowns were transpassing on private property!

These cop "clowns" also keep people safe. I'm sure you'd want a few of these "clowns" around if, heaven forbid, you were being mugged in a gas station parking lot. Second, it's "trespassing". Third, it isn't trespassing when it's the police. They can come to your home and disband a gathering if it's disturbing the peace or people have cars parked in front of neighboring lots or are blocking fire hydrants.

Christians will never stop meeting - adversary doesn't stop them.

Good. No one is saying they have to stop meeting. The police would intervene if these same people were throwing large parties once a week. There are laws and permits and all sorts of issues involved. If this group wishes to meet and worship together then they need to do the "Christlike" thing and obey the laws in their city.

Don't these people know that there are organizations like the ADF that will take them to court?

Cute. So they're like that 'ol "evil" ACLU, right? Those rascals who stand up for civil liberties?

Morcova · May 28, 2009

jmverville said:
I was unaware that they had claimed either of these...

I know if I was serious about debunking a news source I would blog these sorts of terrible articles they ran -- do you have any of these articles left somewhere, or was this hyperbole?

Why make a blog? A search of the site is all you need.

Soy is making kids 'gay'

The dangerous food I'm speaking of is soy. Soybean products are feminizing, and they're all over the place. You can hardly escape them anymore.

And here from their store:
Shop.WND.com - A WorldNetDaily Exclusive!

The UFO Conspiracy: Space Travelers or Demonic Deceivers?

This might as well be the Enquirer.

Sojourner1 · May 28, 2009

PreachersWife2004 said:
If the law says you need a permit to host 15 people in your home, you need a permit. It's not rocket science and it's not persecution.

Guess this will put an end to tupperware parties and the like. That's alright with me though because I hate getting invitations to all those shop at home parties (Southern Living, Pampered Chef, Jewelry, etc.). You always feel obligated to buy something since it's usually a friend who is hosting it.

PreachersWife2004 · May 28, 2009

Sojourner1 said:
Guess this will put an end to tupperware parties and the like. That's alright with me though because I hate getting invitations to all those shop at home parties (Southern Living, Pampered Chef, Jewelry, etc.). You always feel obligated to buy something since it's usually a friend who is hosting it.

LOL, ain't that the truth.

However, we're comparing granny apples to fuji apples now. Yes, tupperware gatherings are generally larger gatherings (although every tupperware party I've been to were held in church basements. Go figure.) but they're not regular, ongoing parties. These bible classes are on-going, and, it appears they frustrate the neighbors somehow, even though the neighbors don't seem willing to be honest with the pastor. But really, who is going to say "yep, it was me, I called the authorities because I don't like your group"??

And, if the law IS that a thing like a tupperware party need a special permit, then yeah, legally they should have one.

I'll agree that the law sounds stupid on the surface - but, much like the "do not use while you're sleeping" label found on my hairdryer, there's a reason it's in place. I just don't think the reason here is for persecuting Christians.

I still maintain that there's some bad feelings between the pastor and the neighbors, even though they won't admit it.

Sojourner1 · May 28, 2009

I still don't understand though why they asked them "Do you sing? Do you say 'amen'?" the official reportedly asked. "Do you say, 'Praise the Lord'?" That's just weird. Why would it matter if they did those things? How loud can 15 people be in a home?

On a side note, what about families who have 15 or more people living in the home? This is sometimes the case for large families who cannot afford to buy homes and they all share one home (thinking of a specific place and ethnicity, but don't want to go there).

PreachersWife2004 · May 28, 2009

Sojourner1 said:
I still don't understand though why they asked them "Do you sing? Do you say 'amen'?" the official reportedly asked. "Do you say, 'Praise the Lord'?" That's just weird. Why would it matter if they did those things? How loud can 15 people be in a home?

Yeah, that I don't understand either. But, we don't hear this from the county official, we hear this from the pastor. I've got no reasons to believe he's being dishonest, though. That's why I kinda chalk it up to an overzealous county worker.

On a side note, what about families who have 15 or more people living in the home? This is sometimes the case for large families who cannot afford to buy homes and they all share one home (thinking of a specific place and ethnicity, but don't want to go there).

I know that here, they have to have a special permit to have that many people in their house. Safety regulations and whatnot require it.

Maren · May 29, 2009

Sojourner1 said:
I still don't understand though why they asked them "Do you sing? Do you say 'amen'?" the official reportedly asked. "Do you say, 'Praise the Lord'?" That's just weird. Why would it matter if they did those things? How loud can 15 people be in a home?

I'm guessing these are the phrases the neighbors are complaining about hearing and the official was asking to ensure this was the gathering the neighbors were complaining about. And fifteen people can be fairly loud, particularly if this is the type of church that yells out "praise the Lord" or "Amen" when they agree with the person speaking. Also, being in San Diego with it's temperate weather and the heat generated by having several people in a room, it is likely they have their windows open for these gatherings making the noise carry even easier.

Sojourner1 said:
On a side note, what about families who have 15 or more people living in the home? This is sometimes the case for large families who cannot afford to buy homes and they all share one home (thinking of a specific place and ethnicity, but don't want to go there).

A family with 15 people typically don't have 15 cars but likely only have two or three. Further, even if they do have more cars there are typically laws or variances that govern parking for homeowners in a neighborhood. While they would not be required to have a permit (since they are a single family), though depending on the neighborhood they may be required to have a driveway large enough to hold everyone's car in the house.

feral · May 29, 2009

jmverville said:
I foudn it interesting that the truth of the source was doubted in most of the posts in this thread.

It is odd to see this... Especially as later on it got confirmed as being a true story.

There is a large 'poisoning of the well' effect on all conservative sources, it seems.

In the six years that I've participated on this forum, I have seen a lot of stories come in from WND. Some are decidedly slanted in order to make it appear that persecution of Christians is occurring in a country with a Christian majority. I've learned that as a source they consistently slant the issue into Christians versus everyone else, rather than investigating all sides. For example, this article claimed Bible studies are being shut down, Christian religious freedoms are in jeopardy and small group worship is prohibited. They are not discussing the fact that loud noise from the home, frequent gatherings or traffic/parking issues could have prompted complaints. A reliable source doesn't draw your conclusions for you, but with WND the conclusion they want one to pick up on is always clear - Christians are being harrassed.

Your last sentence here is interesting. I'd like to poison the well on taking the word of any source that proudly proclaims any particular bias. If it's a firmly self-proclaimed conservative source, it's not going to get the whole story. If it's a firmly self-proclaimed liberal source, it's not going to get the whole story. I know there is a lot of media bias on all sides, but if something specifically sets itself apart as a conservative source, then it's telling me it's not going to be unbiased or fair.

katautumn · May 29, 2009

Sojourner1 said:
I still don't understand though why they asked them "Do you sing? Do you say 'amen'?" the official reportedly asked. "Do you say, 'Praise the Lord'?" That's just weird. Why would it matter if they did those things? How loud can 15 people be in a home?

It depends. You have more than a dozen people in your home playing instruments and singing for thirty minutes or so, or if the preaching gets really intense it can be pretty loud. Houses in San Diego are situated in close proximity to one another. What if this took place in a condo or townhome?

On a side note, what about families who have 15 or more people living in the home? This is sometimes the case for large families who cannot afford to buy homes and they all share one home (thinking of a specific place and ethnicity, but don't want to go there).

In many cities it is illegal to house more than a certain number of people under the same roof.

ETA: Is anyone aware that there have been blog entries where irate Christians have claimed they're going to stake out San Diego law enforcement officials and city workers by sniping from rooftops and city officials' homes will be vandalized? Sounds like a pretty stupid response to someone being asked for something anyone living in the city limits of a major city would be asked to do - obtain a permit.

Also, this couple has been holding large Bible studies in their home for the past five years to the point where neighbors were growing weary of the endless parking problem and noise issue.

Verv · May 30, 2009

sidhe said:
Aliens!

UFO scoop demanded of CIA, military

Did UFO buzz President Bush's Crawford ranch?

Shop.WND.com - A WorldNetDaily Exclusive!

God, UFOs and the Great Pyramid

SOY MAKES YOU GAY!

Soy is making kids 'gay'

...I trust WND as much as I trust AboveTopSecret. The main difference is that ATS is at least wildly entertaining.

ETA: Anyone else find it disturbing that WND gets autolinked like a frakkin' YouTube video?

So you posted a link to a book review, an article that claims that unidentified aircraft were near Bush's ranch mostly quoting an opposing source, and an editorial that is factually accurate: (soy does contain amounts of estrogen [that may cause breast cancer, and it could be generally unhealthy)].

I do not agree with that editorial, but whatever. It is the sort of semi-shocking thing people want to print -- like the BBC printing vaguely apologistic pieces for terrorists.

And as another note: you know every newspaper writes about UFOs from time to time, it just happens.

Tenka said:
Right, so nobody has confirmed the ludicrous claims of the planet's dodgiest source of current events then and all skepticism of the article thus far has been overwhelmingly generous considering the source.

"Dodgiest source of current events." Your quote is quite dramatic.

Of course it is a conservative news site... So what?

"Dodgiest" is not the right word to describe it.

"News that generally disagrees with my opinions" would work.

That is how I refer to Amy Goodman's Democracy Now.

Morcova said:
Why make a blog? A search of the site is all you need.

Soy is making kids 'gay'

And here from their store:
Shop.WND.com - A WorldNetDaily Exclusive!

This might as well be the Enquirer.

Poisoning the well is a 'logical fallacy' because even if you disagree with some of what the source has done the burden still exists for you to prove that the article is untrue.

In the case, everyone failed to do that.

A logical fallacy was committed -- and it was not even beneficial to the discussion because it turns out the source checks out.

feral said:
In the six years that I've participated on this forum, I have seen a lot of stories come in from WND. Some are decidedly slanted in order to make it appear that persecution of Christians is occurring in a country with a Christian majority. I've learned that as a source they consistently slant the issue into Christians versus everyone else, rather than investigating all sides. For example, this article claimed Bible studies are being shut down, Christian religious freedoms are in jeopardy and small group worship is prohibited. They are not discussing the fact that loud noise from the home, frequent gatherings or traffic/parking issues could have prompted complaints. A reliable source doesn't draw your conclusions for you, but with WND the conclusion they want one to pick up on is always clear - Christians are being harrassed.

Yeah, but why were questions pertaining to the nature of the gathering posed? It is irrelevant.

This also happened in an area of America that is known for being extraordinarily liberal.

Have atheists ever been unethically harrassed by Christian law enforcers? Probably.

Is it possible that Christians would face similar harassments? Probably.

Does my logic check out for you, sir?

Your last sentence here is interesting. I'd like to poison the well on taking the word of any source that proudly proclaims any particular bias. If it's a firmly self-proclaimed conservative source, it's not going to get the whole story. If it's a firmly self-proclaimed liberal source, it's not going to get the whole story. I know there is a lot of media bias on all sides, but if something specifically sets itself apart as a conservative source, then it's telling me it's not going to be unbiased or fair.

Most media is liberally bent if we view it from an American definition of liberal and conservative.

Would you contend this statement?

RealDealNeverstop · May 30, 2009

The problem with sites like wnd, lifesite, newsmax, and onenewsnow is how they all practice outright deception....and the loyal fan base knows this but don't care. Look at this story....they try to spin it to make it look like Christians are targeted. What's so Christian about active deception?

As for the last claim in this post, please start a thread defending that claim and post the link here. I'm really curious to see how that claim is supported.

jmverville said:
So you posted a link to a book review, an article that claims that unidentified aircraft were near Bush's ranch mostly quoting an opposing source, and an editorial that is factually accurate: (soy does contain amounts of estrogen [that may cause breast cancer, and it could be generally unhealthy)].

I do not agree with that editorial, but whatever. It is the sort of semi-shocking thing people want to print -- like the BBC printing vaguely apologistic pieces for terrorists.

And as another note: you know every newspaper writes about UFOs from time to time, it just happens.

"Dodgiest source of current events." Your quote is quite dramatic.

Of course it is a conservative news site... So what?

"Dodgiest" is not the right word to describe it.

"News that generally disagrees with my opinions" would work.

That is how I refer to Amy Goodman's Democracy Now.

Poisoning the well is a 'logical fallacy' because even if you disagree with some of what the source has done the burden still exists for you to prove that the article is untrue.

In the case, everyone failed to do that.

A logical fallacy was committed -- and it was not even beneficial to the discussion because it turns out the source checks out.

Yeah, but why were questions pertaining to the nature of the gathering posed? It is irrelevant.

This also happened in an area of America that is known for being extraordinarily liberal.

Have atheists ever been unethically harrassed by Christian law enforcers? Probably.

Is it possible that Christians would face similar harassments? Probably.

Does my logic check out for you, sir?

Most media is liberally bent if we view it from an American definition of liberal and conservative.

Would you contend this statement?

Home: No Place for Bible Study

Seemly Unseelie

Tenka

Guest

brightmorningstar

Guest

by his wounds we are healed

Contributor

Trying to stay away

by his wounds we are healed

I'm not lost I'm just wandering

Trying to stay away

Prodigal Daughter

Well-Known Member

Following my Shepherd

by his wounds we are healed

Following my Shepherd

by his wounds we are healed

Veteran

Dostoyevsky was right

Prodigal Daughter

Senior Veteran

Is Prayer Your First or Last Action?

Similar threads