The Attack on Christianity

Status
Not open for further replies.

Shane Roach

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2002
14,546
1,328
56
✟23,036.00
Faith
Christian
I'm sorry, but the whole permit for home Bible study crap could have been easily remedied if the friends of the neighbors were capable of talking to one another without having to refer to the police...

That's not some kind of attack on Christianity. Yes, the whole permit thing is just dumb...but it could have been easily avoided with human interaction.

So, this gross violation of civil rights is, to you, the fault of the people in the community.

"If there were any real violation of Christian civil rights, we would be right there with you, defending you against such attacks."

Never. The whole point of the gay "rights" movement is to attack Christianity. That's the only point of it. There is no other explanation for taking an aberrant sexual behavior and trying to lift it up to the level of a civil right.

You know what right IS in the Constitution? It is the right to have the Constitution remain unchanged unless you go through the process required to amend it, so that every little social agenda that comes down the pike doesn't cause massive repercussions across the entire society the way abortion laws, school prayer laws, and now gay "marriage" arguments have done.

THAT'S the civil right leftists continually violate.
 
Upvote 0

b&wpac4

Trying to stay away
Sep 21, 2008
7,690
478
✟25,295.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Engaged
So, this gross violation of civil rights is, to you, the fault of the people in the community.

"If there were any real violation of Christian civil rights, we would be right there with you, defending you against such attacks."

Never. The whole point of the gay "rights" movement is to attack Christianity. That's the only point of it. There is no other explanation for taking an aberrant sexual behavior and trying to lift it up to the level of a civil right.

You know what right IS in the Constitution? It is the right to have the Constitution remain unchanged unless you go through the process required to amend it, so that every little social agenda that comes down the pike doesn't cause massive repercussions across the entire society the way abortion laws, school prayer laws, and now gay "marriage" arguments have done.

THAT'S the civil right leftists continually violate.

I would like to see the law that they are supposed to be violating before I say their civil rights were violated.
 
Upvote 0

Shane Roach

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2002
14,546
1,328
56
✟23,036.00
Faith
Christian
I would like to see the law that they are supposed to be violating before I say their civil rights were violated.

They had a Bible study in their own HOUSE.

I just went to a party with 20 people last weekend. We didn't need a permit, ok? This is America, not China.

They had a Bible study IN THEIR OWN HOUSE. Discussion over. If they had 100 people I still think it was an over-reaction AT BEST. IF the police had a complaint about too many cars, the first solution should have been about letting them know they needed to have their friends use vans and carpool or something. In any event, the questions regarding prayer etc were grossly out of line. If it was causing a neighborhood problem, it should not have suddenly been ok if the cars were there but no one is praying.

There is no excuse for the tepid response to this story. It is precisely because of the hatred many on the E&M forums bear Christianity that so many here seem to find absolutely no problem with this gross violation of civil rights.
 
Upvote 0

b&wpac4

Trying to stay away
Sep 21, 2008
7,690
478
✟25,295.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Engaged
There is no excuse for the tepid response to this story. It is precisely because of the hatred many on the E&M forums bear Christianity that so many here seem to find absolutely no problem with this gross violation of civil rights.

There's no excuse for reporting a story without getting a hold of a county official to get the official response to what was happening. If the story was reported 100% accurate, then there was a violation. However, without seeing the law or having an official response, it is hard to know what the nature of the disturbance was.

Also, you MAY have needed a permit to hold the party. Just because you didn't get caught doesn't mean it wasn't required.
 
Upvote 0

Shane Roach

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2002
14,546
1,328
56
✟23,036.00
Faith
Christian
Also, Shane, I am suspect of any news site that has the following:

Shop.WND.com - A WorldNetDaily Exclusive!

That's a BOOK in their STORE.

Planning on banning anything anyone finds printed on AMAZON.COM as well? They do provide reviews and press releases after all...

For what, the fourth time now? Everything has been backed up by other sources anyhow, so whatever paranoia you have about WND is moot.
 
Upvote 0

trunks2k

Contributor
Jan 26, 2004
11,369
3,520
41
✟270,241.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Also, you MAY have needed a permit to hold the party. Just because you didn't get caught doesn't mean it wasn't required.

Or more probably more accurately, nobody has any problem with the occasional large(ish) event in a given neighborhood. That's just the normal course of life. However, when you have a regular event happening once or more a week then there are zoning concerns, as well as building code concerns.
 
Upvote 0

Mercy Medical

Newbie
May 1, 2009
398
28
✟15,701.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
You people find yourselves "victimized" by "Christians" even when the vast majority of all Americans disagree with you.

The science is against you. The facts are against you. All of history is against you. Tolerance of sexual perversions is an achieved goal. If that's all gays wanted, they had it. Now they and their Socialist allies are taking it to the next level, cramming their anti-religious and anti-family doctrine down the throats of a nation that demonstrably wants nothing to do with it, and all on the backs of false arguments that our liberal media spout over and over again, violating every conceivable ethical standard of news reporting.

Shall we go over the studies yet again? The last time I tried people here supported things posted by an individual that I found to be outright untrue, and when I pointed it out I somehow got in trouble for it. Magic, or open and flagrant abuse of Christians on a Christian website?

That's right, in our churches and on nominally Christian web sites, we are harassed and belittled for our faith, or for simply holding to the truth and pointing out who is bearing a false witness and when, and how. I was accused falsely in the Methodist church of harassing a woman at her motel who came to speak at the Wesley Foundation where I worked, and only the timely intervention of knowledgeable associates of mine kept me from being outright railroaded by this outright liar. I never even knew where this woman's motel was after her speech.

Yes, yes and yes, socialists and atheists, anti-Christian activists and a plethora of other related people ARE attacking Christians even in this nation that nominally has a vast majority of Christian citizens. That is the demonstrable FACT.
For one, what does socialism have to do with anything? I am gay, but I am not a socialist. Actually, I'm probably more of a libertarian then anything...so that's a completely unwarranted label. History is also against women's rights and african american rights. Actually, history is sort of against traditional marriage in the sense that in medieval times it was merely a business arrangement, nothing like marriage as we see it today. So I really don't think I'm going to use history as a judge on this one.

And how is being for gay rights anti-family and anti-religion? I am a lesbian and I believe in waiting until you are married to establish any sort of family. In fact, if I were straight I would also believe in saving myself until marriage. I agree with most of the "traditional" aspects of marriage and family in the sense that one should wait until marriage and children should be "had" within a marriage. Now, those are my own personal beliefs and I would not go out of my way to enforce them on others as everyone has different views of what works best for them and makes them happiest. Actually, if I were to ever have a child (and my gf and I have talked about this) I would raise that child with Christian views. Obviously, my views on Christianity differ a bit then others here, but I would want, in the least, for my child to have a belief in God as I feel that is a very important aspect of my life and I would want to share that with them. You are making all these broad generalizations, which is entirely unfair and merely assumption on your part. Those same broad generalizations should not be made for all Christians either as it is entirely unfair. Everyone has their own personal beliefs and everybody is different. You can't just easily slap a label on someone and expect it to be true.

And I agree that Christians shouldn't be attacked or persecuted for their beliefs, but I do feel that some Christians bring it upon themselves and I think I pointed that idea out in my previous posts. Many Christians (and I have witnessed it here, by users on this website) want to force their "Biblical" values on the rest of this country. They do not believe in free will. They do not believe in live and let live and when you come out that aggressively about things, don't be surprised when people start to bite back as you are essentially asking for it. People do not tend to take kindly to being forced to doing or believing in something they do not believe or do not agree with.

You are granted religious freedom by our Constitution, but you are not granted the right to force those beliefs on others who do not agree or believe.

The whole point of the gay rights movement is NOT to attack Christianity, but considering the fact that Christians tend to be the largest group of people against gay marriage that is going to end up being their "rival" in a sense and their main target. It's not as if the gay rights movement is going out of their way to attack Christians (well, that is a generalization and as I've stated in previous posts in other threads...everyone has their fringe organizations that do not represent the movement as a whole).

And the gay marriage issue is NOT about sex. Yes, that is the obvious defining factor between heterosexuality and homosexuality, but gay marriage is not about granting people the right to have sex with someone of the same sex. It is about granting people the right to have their relationship legally recognized by the government, which has absolutely nothing to do with religion. Regardless if you oppose gay marriage or not, those sex acts will still occur. You will never prevent that. People opposed to same sex marriage need to stop focus on the SEX part of it as that is not the issue at hand.

You know what other right is in the Constitution. The right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. There is also the 14th Amendment...
 
Upvote 0

b&wpac4

Trying to stay away
Sep 21, 2008
7,690
478
✟25,295.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Engaged
Planning on banning anything anyone finds printed on AMAZON.COM as well? They do provide reviews and press releases after all...

Amazon isn't a news source that reports almost exclusively on "Christian Oppression" either. Think I could sell an anti-Christian book at WND's store? Now, think I could see one on Amazon.com?

Regardless, as I have said MULTIPLE TIMES MYSELF, we don't have enough information to know if this was a violation of rights or not. We DON'T know the law, we DON'T know the details, we only have statements by a lawyer for the pastor.
 
Upvote 0

feral

Dostoyevsky was right
Jan 8, 2003
3,368
344
✟12,716.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Shane Roach said:
Much of your post is aimed at trying to cast sexual perversion as perfecly healthy and normal. It is not backed with any facts. I have posted a plethora of studies and a review of an entire book that describes how the psychiatric community has, with eyes wide open and with full malice of intent, created this issue out of thin air for political and professional gain.

If by "sexual perversion" you refer to homosexuality, then yes, I do consider that perfectly healthy and normal. I don't happen to engage in it myself, but I do not believe consensual sex to be perverse. The APA does not consider it a perversion or mental disorder - what is your basis for doing so?

As for Gay marriage, the points against it have been repeated again and again. The typical response is to disagree or feign confusion. Marriage is what it is because of literally thousands of years of social evolution, all focused on how to deal with the issues that arise between men and women, their families, and the children they bear. Gays, whatever you think of the acceptability of their behavior, simply do not have these same issues, and should not be treated as if they do.

I'm not sure why you're addressing this, as my post did not mention gay marriage. But if that's what you want to discuss, fine. Yes, those points have been reiterated many times, and shot down. The way you define marriage, what you consider it to mean, is not the same as I define it or give meaning to it. Marriage in modern Western society specifically seems wrapped up mainly in the emotional feeling of love - a far cry from the historical meaning of marriage, or what marriage means today in other cultures. Thus, when you talk about marriage in modern Western world, you're talking about two people who are in love and want their togetherness sanctified, acknowledged, validated and/or documented. Furthermore, you're talking about a secular legal issue, not a religious one. Legally, we can't discriminate based on people's naughty bits. If a person with a penis wants to legally marry someone else with a penis because the two are in love, it seems archaic, even laughable, to insist said person must select a marriage partner with a vagina. If that is what you want to do in your church, freedom of religion plays a part. You can say no. You can also refuse to marry couples that don't share your religion. But legally, there is no basis.

And yes "gays" do have those issues. Homosexual people have families, want to form families and some want to have and raise children.

Shane Roach said:
As to your last couple of paragraphs, the distinction being made here is that the Christians get the hate crime and the civil rights rap used against them, whereas gays don't, even when invading a church. The double standard is obvious. In the meantime, "freedom of speech" is used to defend such filth as animated kiddy inappropriate content.

I see what you're saying, but I don't believe a double standard exists. I don't believe that when a "Christian" group is repeatedly arrested at numerous events, it's all a mistake or an anti-Christian conspiracy. I don't believe that people who quietly and sweetly attend with good intentions would repeatedly, at more than one event, be slapped with charges such as rioting, conspiracy, obstructing highways and reckless endangerment. Now, if that is what is really happening, then it is a disgrace and our legal system needs to be revamped. I just have not seen evidence that such things are actually happening. WND says so, but WND says so about everything, all the time, while reporting from a nation with a vast Christian majority.

I'm not sure how the topic of gay people in church came up. Can you explain?

We are in agreement that child inappropriate contentography does not count as authentic free speech.

Every criminal, every vagrant, every thief, every vandal, every single person who does something illegal, whether the worst violent felon or the lightest traffic violation, all of these people have family and friends who love and care for them. They all have lives that are plunged into disorder of some sort when they break the law. The point here is that the laws are being specifically fashioned to shape society by singling out the majority for harassment, and protecting minorities, in some cases even demonstrably criminal minorities (drug dealers and the like) from the legal sanctions that the people of this nation have expressed their desire to have placed into law.

Okay, I see what you're saying. You're saying that different laws such as the newer hate crimes laws are changing the way people in society are allowed to communicate and are limiting freedoms? I've heard a lot of complaints about the fairness act (I believe that's what it's called) but I haven't read it and really can't comment on it yet. But you're saying that laws are prohibiting Christians from speaking their minds on things identified Biblically as sins...while allowing those who practice the sins who have free speech and act out the sins publically? Am I understanding that right?

I agree with you that protecting drug dealers and bringing down laws to prevent crime are dangerous things. I don't agree that drug dealers should be protected from legal sanctions.
 
Upvote 0

Shane Roach

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2002
14,546
1,328
56
✟23,036.00
Faith
Christian
There's no excuse for reporting a story without getting a hold of a county official to get the official response to what was happening. If the story was reported 100% accurate, then there was a violation. However, without seeing the law or having an official response, it is hard to know what the nature of the disturbance was.

Also, you MAY have needed a permit to hold the party. Just because you didn't get caught doesn't mean it wasn't required.

The story you are referencing now came from the local news channel. What's your major problem with THEM then?

There are multitudes of these sorts of stories. It is not some sort of once in a while occurrence. Kids are harassed for mentioning God in their valedictory speeches. Counts of words done by computers now concerning print, radio, and video media have measured objectively the slant of the media towards the left. This is in actuality a done deal for anyone who is actually paying attention to the facts. Christians are being persecuted in what is essentially a Christian homeland. Fleeing the nationalistic churches of Europe, many of us are here precisely because of a desire for a more open and harassment free environment to practice our faith, and we are allowing ourselves to be robbed of that by false arguments and just repeated, stubbornly adhered to doctrines that we have no right to have our values reflected in our country that we live in and form the majority of the citizenry in.

We have every bit as much right to have OUR values represented as atheists and anti-Christians have to have THEIRS represented. That's what a representative democracy is about. That's what the Constitution is about. We are standing by and allowing ourselves to be cornered when what we need to do is take a stand for honesty, if nothing else, and not allow filthy policy after filthy policy to destroy this nation from the inside out due to the simple, natural consequences of massive numbers of people being encouraged to behave irresponsibly.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

b&wpac4

Trying to stay away
Sep 21, 2008
7,690
478
✟25,295.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Engaged
The story you are referencing now came from the local news channel. What's your major problem with THEM then?

There are multitudes of these sorts of stories. It is not some sort of once in a while occurrence. Kids are harassed for mentioning God in their valedictory speeches. Counts of words done by computers now concerning print, radio, and video media have measured objectively the slant of the media towards the left. This is in actuality a done deal for anyone who is actually paying attention to the facts. Christians are being persecuted in what is essentially a Christian homeland. Fleeing the nationalistic churches of Europe, many of us are here precisely because of a desire for a more open and harassment free environment to practice our faith, and we are allowing ourselves to be robbed of that by false arguments and just repeated, stubbornly adhered to doctrines that we have no right to have our values reflected in our country that we live in and form the majority of the citizenry in.

We have every bit as much right to have OUR values represented as atheists and anti-Christians have to have THEIRS represented. That's what a representative democracy is about. That's what the Constitution is about. We are standing by and allowing ourselves to be cornered when what we need to do is take a stand for honesty, if nothing else, and not allow filthy policy after filthy policy to destroy this nation from the inside out due to the simple, natural consequences of massive numbers of people being encouraged to behave irresponsibly.

Yes, I have a major problem with them breaking a story without getting an official response. It is shoddy journalism and should be avoided. The only time it is acceptable to break a story without getting the other side of hte story is when the other side refused to comment. I doubt the county refused to comment.

As to your other comments, I'm tired of being called an anti-Christian. Let me explain this once and for all: I don't care what you all do. Go to church, don't go to church, put on a funny hat, dance around, whatever. I am very happy that you have the freedoms to do all those things. I am unhappy that other people do not have the freedom to live their life the way they choose because certain people think they know better.

I wake up, I go to work, I come home, and visit my fiance on the weekends. That's my life. I post here for the enjoyment of it. Yes, I don't agree with you all the time, and yes I would vote to give people the freedom to decide how to live their own life because I feel that I would want that courtesy myself.

Which part of my life makes me the anti-Christian? the part where I really don't care what you do? the part where I sometimes disagree with Christians on a message board that has no real effect on the world?
 
Upvote 0

Shane Roach

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2002
14,546
1,328
56
✟23,036.00
Faith
Christian
If by "sexual perversion" you refer to homosexuality, then yes, I do consider that perfectly healthy and normal. I don't happen to engage in it myself, but I do not believe consensual sex to be perverse. The APA does not consider it a perversion or mental disorder - what is your basis for doing so?

It wasn't Christians who claimed it was an illness to begin with. The APA is not in charge of the word "perverse". I use it because it is the word that reflects the nature of homosexual sex. Whether it is an illness or not is irrelevant.

I'm not sure why you're addressing this, as my post did not mention gay marriage. But if that's what you want to discuss, fine. Yes, those points have been reiterated many times, and shot down.

No, they have not been shot down. They have been ignored. This is just like the whole abortion debate. It was all about words. People were pro choice when they thought pro life meant outright bans on all abortion. Now pro choice has come to mean pro partial birth abortion, so the perception of which is the extreme has shifted.

People are tolerant of the concept of gay marriage because they have been told repeatedly and dishonestly that there was some scientific breakthrough concerning homosexuality. There has been none. If you can provide one, feel free, but I have been through well over a dozen studies now, and a book about how violent political demonstration by socialist gays caused the change in the DSM II to begin with, and I do not buy the assertion.

There may well be such studies, but months now of dealing with folks such as yourself who make these bold claims have shown me that if they exist, they are not well known or publicized. What is well known and publicized is this --

http://www.christianforums.com/t7361628-6/#post51654558



I see what you're saying, but I don't believe a double standard exists. I don't believe that when a "Christian" group is repeatedly arrested at numerous events, it's all a mistake or an anti-Christian conspiracy. I don't believe that people who quietly and sweetly attend with good intentions would repeatedly, at more than one event, be slapped with charges such as rioting, conspiracy, obstructing highways and reckless endangerment. Now, if that is what is really happening, then it is a disgrace and our legal system needs to be revamped. I just have not seen evidence that such things are actually happening. WND says so, but WND says so about everything, all the time, while reporting from a nation with a vast Christian majority.

I'm not sure how the topic of gay people in church came up. Can you explain?

In this thread, more than one single example has been used. At one point I gathered them all together, but that post too has been burried in denials. I'll try to get another one together, or you could just look through the rest of the thread, either way.

It sort of depends on my whimsy, to be brutally honest. If another thread takes hold of my attention, I may never get back to creating another collective post of what has been offered so far. I don't blame you for not knowing, just to be clear, but it does begin to create a large amount of work for me to be the only one who keeps up with the whole thread.

Okay, I see what you're saying. You're saying that different laws such as the newer hate crimes laws are changing the way people in society are allowed to communicate and are limiting freedoms? I've heard a lot of complaints about the fairness act (I believe that's what it's called) but I haven't read it and really can't comment on it yet. But you're saying that laws are prohibiting Christians from speaking their minds on things identified Biblically as sins...while allowing those who practice the sins who have free speech and act out the sins publicly? Am I understanding that right?

All the examples here are fairly straight forward, and have little to do with "sins". They are freedom of speech issues. For better or worse, civil disobedience has become part of the political landscape of the modern world, and laws are systematically being put in place to make it more dangerous for Christians to participate in it than anti-Christians, socialists, leftists of various other stripes, and even anarchists and utter flagrant vandals.
 
Upvote 0

Shane Roach

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2002
14,546
1,328
56
✟23,036.00
Faith
Christian
Which part of my life makes me the anti-Christian? the part where I really don't care what you do? the part where I sometimes disagree with Christians on a message board that has no real effect on the world?

The part where every time Christians try to have any say in their own government, you demonize them. The way you accept anything anti-Christians say at face value, then demand people go and dig up stuff behind the stories any time something is shown to you that is unacceptable on its face.

I made the point, which you ignored, that ultimately it is not relevant whether or not they were praying. If they were causing any sort of disturbance at all, and it was not covered under the law, then that is that. That it should make any difference at all whether or not they were praying IS THE VIOLATION. There's nothing else to get straight.

There's nothing else of value left to discuss, but as long as there's the faintest whiff of a possibility, you back anti-Christians, deny Christians their rights, lend the weight of your arguments and personal habits to those who demonize us, and in general make it clear that you do not like Christians or Christianity.
 
Upvote 0

Mercy Medical

Newbie
May 1, 2009
398
28
✟15,701.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
The part where every time Christians try to have any say in their own government, you demonize them. The way you accept anything anti-Christians say at face value, then demand people go and dig up stuff behind the stories any time something is shown to you that is unacceptable on its face.

I made the point, which you ignored, that ultimately it is not relevant whether or not they were praying. If they were causing any sort of disturbance at all, and it was not covered under the law, then that is that. That it should make any difference at all whether or not they were praying IS THE VIOLATION. There's nothing else to get straight.

There's nothing else of value left to discuss, but as long as there's the faintest whiff of a possibility, you back anti-Christians, deny Christians their rights, lend the weight of your arguments and personal habits to those who demonize us, and in general make it clear that you do not like Christians or Christianity.
I think the main issue that people have with some Christians having a say in their own government is the fact that most of the time some Christians want to force legislation on people that would require them to adhere to "Christian" standards. It's not the fact that you are Christian that gets you demonized, it's the fact that you want to force others to live by your values and your standards. That has nothing to do with your faith and everything to do with telling people how to live.

So, as I have said many times...some Christians make themselves a target for attacks because of the force they want to put on other people. If they lived by a live and let live attitude, I doubt many people would have issue with it.
 
Upvote 0

b&wpac4

Trying to stay away
Sep 21, 2008
7,690
478
✟25,295.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Engaged
The part where every time Christians try to have any say in their own government, you demonize them. The way you accept anything anti-Christians say at face value, then demand people go and dig up stuff behind the stories any time something is shown to you that is unacceptable on its face.

I made the point, which you ignored, that ultimately it is not relevant whether or not they were praying. If they were causing any sort of disturbance at all, and it was not covered under the law, then that is that. That it should make any difference at all whether or not they were praying IS THE VIOLATION. There's nothing else to get straight.

There's nothing else of value left to discuss, but as long as there's the faintest whiff of a possibility, you back anti-Christians, deny Christians their rights, lend the weight of your arguments and personal habits to those who demonize us, and in general make it clear that you do not like Christians or Christianity.

So I hate my parents? My family? I don't like them, that is your case? Hardly.

If praying was the violation then the county is in error and needs to stop harassing them. I don't back anybody until I know the full story. I don't at this point.

The rest of your post is simply a direct attack at me. Should I go make a post called "The Attack on b&wpac4" and link these posts?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

jpcedotal

Old School from the Backwoods - Christian Style
May 26, 2009
4,243
239
In between Deliverance and Brother, Where Art Thou
✟13,293.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
So you firmly believe that Christians have a right to push their agenda and other people who push their agendas do not?

No, I just believe the Christian agenda is th only correct one. Push away, the Bible says the world is going to get worse before it gets better, so push away....I am ready for the worse (every non-Christian view).
 
Upvote 0

b&wpac4

Trying to stay away
Sep 21, 2008
7,690
478
✟25,295.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Engaged
No, I just believe the Christian agenda is th only correct one. Push away, the Bible says the world is going to get worse before it gets better, so push away....I am ready for the worse (every non-Christian view).

I have no problem with your view. You push your agenda and other people push theirs.
 
Upvote 0

Shane Roach

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2002
14,546
1,328
56
✟23,036.00
Faith
Christian
So I hate my parents? My family? I don't like them, that is your case? Hardly.

If praying was the violation then the county is in error and needs to stop harassing them. I don't back anybody until I know the full story. I don't at this point.

The rest of your post is simply a direct attack at me. Should I go make a post called "The Attack on b&wpac4" and link these posts?

You've had every opportunity to look into this yourself. you ASKED ME how I felt you were anti-Christian. I told you. If you do not want to hear it, don't ask.

Above is a link to the video. If you find another straw to grasp at for this sort of harassment let me know, but yes, I find your stubborn refusal to capitulate to the obvious indicative of an underlying hatred of Christianity.

Whether you hate your parents or not I can't imagine how I could know. It is entirely possible to hate something someone does, but overlook it and still love them. You are asking me for my specific opinion about you and then turning it into an opportunity to take offense. If this continues, I can simply stop giving you opinions you ask for, but you can take it to the bank that it was not my intention to offend you.

What I will not do is stop talking about anti-Christian hate just because you don't like to hear about it. I've suffered it myself, I have seen others suffer it, I see it being enshrined in law and I am angry about it. I want something done about it. That's my position, and I feel no need to apologize for it.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Status
Not open for further replies.