Chat or Talk in the INReview Discussion Forum Chat or Talk in the INReview Discussion Forum
 
register chat members links refer search home
INReview INReview > The Scuttlebutt Lounge > Politics & Government > Law > lawsuit
Search this Thread:
  Print Version | Email Page | Bookmark | Subscribe to Thread
Author
Thread Post New Thread   
Gold Member
mystic
Evil Queen

offline
Registered: Apr 2003
Local time: 06:31 PM
Location: In my castle
Posts: 13357

lawsuit post #1  quote:



Ala. Monument Supporters File Lawsuit
1 hour, 32 minutes ago

By KYLE WINGFIELD, Associated Press Writer

MONTGOMERY, Ala. - Supporters of a Ten Commandments monument have filed a last-ditch lawsuit to prevent its apparently imminent removal from the Alabama Judicial Building.


While the judge who put the monument there said he's up against those who "are offended at looking at God's words," his supporters asked a federal court Monday to block the removal of the 5,300-pound granite marker.


The lawsuit to block the monument's removal was filed in federal court in Mobile on behalf of a Christian radio talk show host and a pastor. It says a forced removal would violate the constitutional guarantee of freedom of religion.


U.S. District Judge William Steele set a hearing for Wednesday.


Chief Justice Roy Moore installed the monument in the building's rotunda two years ago, and was suspended by a state judicial ethics panel last week for disobeying a federal court order to remove it.


In a brief speech Monday, Moore told a cheering crowd he would fight to return to his elected position and said the case against him is based not on something he did wrong but because "I've kept my oath."


At least 300 protesters were there to hear Moore speak publicly for the first time since his suspension. The crowd grew even larger Monday evening as supporters rallied for the seventh straight night, though the monument was still expected to be removed at any moment.


The federal courts have held that the monument violates the Constitution's ban on government promotion of a religious doctrine.


Patrick Mahoney, director of the Christian Defense Coalition, disputed that.


"We see the First Amendment to protect religious liberty, not crush religious liberty," he told protesters.


Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said the lawsuit filed in Mobile is without merit.


"Over and over again Moore's supporters have offered up outlandish legal arguments to defend the justice's blatant promotion of religion in the state's judicial building," said Lynn, whose group has sought to remove the monument.


Minutes after the lawsuit was announced, police blocked off the front of the building with metal barricades. Building superintendent Graham George said they were erected to prevent protesters from leaning dangerously against the large windows and glass doors, where they have gathered for the last week.


The monument is expected to be removed this week, though at least one company refused the job. Clark Memorial, a Birmingham company that built and moved the monument into the building, declined for business and personal reasons, vice president Charles Tourney said


Old Post 08-26-2003 05:11 PM
Click here to Send mystic a Private Message Find more posts by mystic Add mystic to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore mystic REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

Gold Member
mystic
Evil Queen

offline
Registered: Apr 2003
Local time: 06:31 PM
Location: In my castle
Posts: 13357

post #2  quote:

Hearing Set for Ten Commandments Suit
1 hour, 29 minutes ago

By KYLE WINGFIELD, Associated Press Writer

MONTGOMERY, Ala. - A judge set a hearing for Wednesday in a lawsuit filed by supporters fighting to prevent the removal of a Ten Commandments monument from the Alabama Judicial Building.


The lawsuit was filed Tuesday in federal court in Mobile on behalf of a Christian radio talk show host and a pastor. It says a forced removal would violate the constitutional guarantee of freedom of religion. U.S. District Judge William Steele will preside over the Wednesday hearing.


Chief Justice Roy Moore installed the 5,300-pound granite monument in the building's rotunda two years ago, and was suspended by a state judicial ethics panel last week for disobeying a federal court order to remove it.


In a brief speech Monday, Moore told a cheering crowd he would fight to return to his elected position and said the case against him is based not on something he did wrong but because "I've kept my oath." He also said he's up against those who "are offended at looking at God's words."


At least 300 protesters were there to hear Moore speak publicly for the first time since his suspension. The crowd grew even larger Monday evening as supporters rallied for the seventh straight night, though the monument was still expected to be removed at any moment.


The federal courts have held that the monument violates the Constitution's ban on government promotion of a religious doctrine.


Patrick Mahoney, director of the Christian Defense Coalition, disputed that.


"We see the First Amendment to protect religious liberty, not crush religious liberty," he told protesters.


Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said the lawsuit filed in Mobile is without merit.


"Over and over again Moore's supporters have offered up outlandish legal arguments to defend the justice's blatant promotion of religion in the state's judicial building," said Lynn, whose group has sought to remove the monument.


Minutes after the lawsuit was announced, police blocked off the front of the building with metal barricades. Building superintendent Graham George said they were erected to prevent protesters from leaning dangerously against the large windows and glass doors, where they have gathered for the last week.


The monument is expected to be removed this week, though at least one company refused the job. Clark Memorial, a Birmingham company that built and moved the monument into the building, declined for business and personal reasons, vice president Charles Tourney said.


Old Post 08-26-2003 05:15 PM
Click here to Send mystic a Private Message Find more posts by mystic Add mystic to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore mystic REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

Gold Member
Dreamzwalker
Agent

offline
Registered: Feb 2003
Local time: 06:31 PM
Location: Out there Somewhere
Posts: 2428

post #3  quote:

Go judge! I'm all for that man.. if he runs for office - he has my vote

Old Post 08-26-2003 07:23 PM
Click here to Send Dreamzwalker a Private Message View Dreamzwalker's Journal Find more posts by Dreamzwalker Add Dreamzwalker to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore Dreamzwalker REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

Kookaburra
In the Now Guru

offline
Registered: Jun 2003
Local time: 07:31 PM
Location:
Posts: 2411

post #4  quote:

Moore for President!

Old Post 08-26-2003 07:51 PM
Find more posts by Kookaburra Add Kookaburra to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore Kookaburra REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

FiLLiFe
Rookie

offline
Registered: Sep 2003
Local time: 07:31 PM
Location:
Posts: 6

post #5  quote:

sad...the right wings are alive & about...

Old Post 09-04-2003 09:31 AM
Click here to Send FiLLiFe a Private Message Find more posts by FiLLiFe Add FiLLiFe to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore FiLLiFe REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

cancunbum
Crackerjack

offline
Registered: Apr 2003
Local time: 06:31 PM
Location: Houston
Posts: 133

post #6  quote:

quote:
Originally posted by FiLLiFe
sad...the right wings are alive & about...


People, people, people....

You may not like the Constitution. However, as long as it is the law of the land you must obey it.

You can have your little monument to commandments that most people, I am willing to bet, do not obey anyway. However, as long as that monument is located in a building that is built FOR THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE'S MONEY...YOU HAD DAMN WELL BETTER RESPECT ALL PEOPLE AND THAT INCLUDEDS THOSE WHO DO NOT WANT TO BE SUBJECTED TO DAILY REMINDERS OF CHRISTIANITY.

And for those pathetic, misguided people who say that this country was founded upon Christianity...think again. Our founding fathers were not Christian. They were either masons or deists. Furthermore, those that claimed to be Christian certainly were not. A Christian is forbidden from owning slaves. Don't give me that lame argument that it was legal at the time. What is right in the eyes of God never changes and all one has to do is pick up the bible to know that owning a slave is against the law of God.

So before you start putting this lawbreaker on a pedestal, think about what he is doing. Instead of using legitimate means to change the law that he disagrees with, he operates outside the law. Nice role model.


Old Post 09-04-2003 02:32 PM
Click here to Send cancunbum a Private Message Find more posts by cancunbum Add cancunbum to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore cancunbum REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

jrkiv
Veteran

offline
Registered: Jun 2003
Local time: 12:31 AM
Location:
Posts: 308

post #7  quote:

Cancunbum, the constitution never says anybody has the right to never see anything they don't agree with, and it is impossible to respect the rights of everybody at the same time. Removing the monument does not respect the rights of its supporters. What do you think is more offensive, glancing at a monument that you don't necessarily like as you walk through the courthouse, or seeing an icon of your personal faith upon which the morality of this country is based being forcibly removed from everyone's sight. Removing the monument is not inclusive of the people who wanted it there, and whether you want to believe it or not, they are part of THE PEOPLE and part of THE PEOPLE'S MONEY is theirs.
And whether or not the founding fathers were actually born-again christians doesn't matter, you are missing the point. The morality on which they based the law WAS a christian morality ... and believe it or not, most of your values come from that as well. For example, how do you feel bout incest? You probably think it's disgusting and immoral, but why? Deep rooted christian values that you don't even know are imbedded.
The bottom line is this, secularists, like yourself, are imposing your beliefs on those with traditional faith and are making it so that everybody else is unable to express their beliefs in public. THAT'S NOT CONSTITUTIONAL. Here you are preaching about staying true to the constitution and then you agree with the federal government RESTRICTING any public expression of faith. "as long as it is the law of the land, you must obey it," right cancumbum?
As for moore, i'm not gonna stick my neck out for him, he should have resigned the second he didn't comply with the ruling, but i'll say this. YOU NEED TO READ YOUR HISTORY. Almost all of today's role models DID operate at one time or another outside of the law because they viewed the law as wrong. Keep in mind, at one point in time it was 'against the law' for black people to sit at the front of the bus, so you see my point. Your passionate opinion about this matter has made you lose some objectivity, so i'll recap.
1. You don't see christians as citizens who should be included
2. You see protests based on ideals that peacefully break the law as 'wrong,' a little too black-and-white don't you think?
3. You ignore the constitutional guarantee to free expression of religion, because you think a person's right "not to be offended," (which is mentioned NOWHERE in the constitution) should supercede any religious expression just because you yourself have no faith.
I've got a novel idea for you, one you've probably preached before, how about you accept and tolerate the beliefs of others and their public expressions instead of hating and tearing down. How about some tolerance of christians, they deserve it just like everyone else.


Old Post 09-04-2003 03:49 PM
Click here to Send jrkiv a Private Message Find more posts by jrkiv Add jrkiv to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore jrkiv REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

cancunbum
Crackerjack

offline
Registered: Apr 2003
Local time: 06:31 PM
Location: Houston
Posts: 133

post #8  quote:

quote:
Originally posted by jrkiv
Cancunbum, the constitution never says anybody has the right to never see anything they don't agree with, and it is impossible to respect the rights of everybody at the same time. Removing the monument does not respect the rights of its supporters. What do you think is more offensive, glancing at a monument that you don't necessarily like as you walk through the courthouse, or seeing an icon of your personal faith upon which the morality of this country is based being forcibly removed from everyone's sight. Removing the monument is not inclusive of the people who wanted it there, and whether you want to believe it or not, they are part of THE PEOPLE and part of THE PEOPLE'S MONEY is theirs.
And whether or not the founding fathers were actually born-again christians doesn't matter, you are missing the point. The morality on which they based the law WAS a christian morality ... and believe it or not, most of your values come from that as well. For example, how do you feel bout incest? You probably think it's disgusting and immoral, but why? Deep rooted christian values that you don't even know are imbedded.
The bottom line is this, secularists, like yourself, are imposing your beliefs on those with traditional faith and are making it so that everybody else is unable to express their beliefs in public. THAT'S NOT CONSTITUTIONAL. Here you are preaching about staying true to the constitution and then you agree with the federal government RESTRICTING any public expression of faith. "as long as it is the law of the land, you must obey it," right cancumbum?
As for moore, i'm not gonna stick my neck out for him, he should have resigned the second he didn't comply with the ruling, but i'll say this. YOU NEED TO READ YOUR HISTORY. Almost all of today's role models DID operate at one time or another outside of the law because they viewed the law as wrong. Keep in mind, at one point in time it was 'against the law' for black people to sit at the front of the bus, so you see my point. Your passionate opinion about this matter has made you lose some objectivity, so i'll recap.
1. You don't see christians as citizens who should be included
2. You see protests based on ideals that peacefully break the law as 'wrong,' a little too black-and-white don't you think?
3. You ignore the constitutional guarantee to free expression of religion, because you think a person's right "not to be offended," (which is mentioned NOWHERE in the constitution) should supercede any religious expression just because you yourself have no faith.
I've got a novel idea for you, one you've probably preached before, how about you accept and tolerate the beliefs of others and their public expressions instead of hating and tearing down. How about some tolerance of christians, they deserve it just like everyone else.


Tell you what, buddy...how about YOU practicing what you preach. Ironic, and a bit hypocritical, that you blast me for stating my beliefs and in the same breath you preach acceptance and tolerance! Hello, pot? This is kettle...you're black.

Speaking of history, why don't YOU go back and see why our founding fathers said there would be no state sponsored religion. It goes way beyond the feelings of any group of people. If you want to put up your monument...fine. NOBODY IS SAYING YOU CANNOT. However, when it comes to mixing religion and state you simply cannot. We are NOT imposing our beliefs on everyone. We ARE ensuring that NOBODY'S RELIGIOUS BELIEFS are seen as the beliefs of our government. A government for ALL PEOPLE...not just CHRISTIANS. You would have a stroke if you saw a monument to the Koran or the Torah in front of a courthouse.

Now, now...before you go on preaching about how this country is founded in Christian principles...think again. Actually, just do some basic research. Our founding fathers were self-proclaimed Deists and Masons. Not Christian. Our founding fathers owned slaves. Legal or not, a CHRISTIAN would know that it is against God's law to have a slave. Since they CHOSE to have slaves and break GOD'S law, I would believe any logical person could draw the conclusion that they were not Christian.
Finally, you are simply wrong. Our founding fathers came here to get away from the crown telling everyone that you were either Protestant or nothing. Not a Protestant? No court access. Not a Protestant? Shunned by society.

THIS COUNTRY IS BUILT ON THE PRINCIPLE OF FREEDOM. YES, THAT DOES INCLUDE (TAKE A POLI SCI COURSE) THE FREEDOM TO BE FREE FROM STATE SPONSORED RELIGION. THERE ARE PLENTY OF HOUSES OF WORSHIP FOR CHRISTIANITY SO THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO NEED TO MAKE THOSE WHO ARE NOT CHRISTIANS FEEL AS IF THEY WILL NOT GET A FAIR TRIAL AT A COURTHOUSE BECAUSE THAT COURTHOUSE ENDORSES CHRISTIANITY!

Why can't you simply keep religion where it belongs...in the family and in your church/synagogue/mosque? You preach that Christians pay their taxes and, as such, they are entitled to have the monument. DOES THEIR BELIEFS OVERRIDE THE NON-CHRISTIANS? Your simple majority argument does not apply. Even if there is one Muslim/Buddhist/whatever and 99 Christians, the one must be shown respect for his beliefs.

If you want to change the law, vote. Otherwise...obey.


Old Post 09-04-2003 04:34 PM
Click here to Send cancunbum a Private Message Find more posts by cancunbum Add cancunbum to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore cancunbum REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

Kookaburra
In the Now Guru

offline
Registered: Jun 2003
Local time: 07:31 PM
Location:
Posts: 2411

post #9  quote:

quote:
Originally posted by cancunbum


Now, now...before you go on preaching about how this country is founded in Christian principles...think again. Actually, just do some basic research. Our founding fathers were self-proclaimed Deists and Masons. Not Christian. Our founding fathers owned slaves. Legal or not, a CHRISTIAN would know that it is against God's law to have a slave.

Oh really? Are you familiar with specific instructions to slaves and masters alike... that God gave us? Apparently you didn't see that part in the Bible.


Since they CHOSE to have slaves and break GOD'S law, I would believe any logical person could draw the conclusion that they were not Christian.

Where did God give us a law that it was illegal to have slaves? I don't agree with having slaves just because it's not right to force a person against their will to work for you. Some times people becames slaves because they couldn't pay their debt. Also, God told slaves if they wanted to remain with their masters, they peirce their ear to show that are permanent members of their master's family. So please tell me where God forbid slaves. If He forbid slaves, then why did He give so much instruction on how to treat them, and how they should behave?


<snip>

Why can't you simply keep religion where it belongs...in the family and in your church/synagogue/mosque? You preach that Christians pay their taxes and, as such, they are entitled to have the monument. DOES THEIR BELIEFS OVERRIDE THE NON-CHRISTIANS? Your simple majority argument does not apply. Even if there is one Muslim/Buddhist/whatever and 99 Christians, the one must be shown respect for his beliefs.

Not according to our laws given to us by God. We are commanded to reject other gods, and any ways contrary to God's ways. We are not obligated by God to accept anything that He despises. America can make it a man-made law that we have to accept other people's beliefs, gods, and lifestyles (speaking of homosexuality, socery, witchcraft, etc etc) but if we accept those ways, we are disobeying God. I would rather disobey man's laws than God's laws. Who is man to create laws contrary to God and expect God's children to obey? God says if we reject Him, He'll reject us. I'm not about to join the popularity crowd screaming for equality amonst the people if it means I have to violate God's ways to do it. I would rather go to jail for violating man's laws if America sets up laws to include other gods and other beliefs that violate God's laws.

I would also rather die if it ever comes down to that. People are already being murdered for accepting God and rejecting their culture's god. I wouldn't put it past Americans to start doing the same thing some day. That is, passing laws that forbid God, and punishing those that disobey, or worse, violence on those that stand firm in their obedience to God instead of man.

If our country passes any laws that make it illegal for me to NOT accept anything contrary to God, then I guess I will have become a lawbreaker. I'll take whatever consequences, including execution if it ever comes to that in this world. I will not accept any other religion that has any god before the God of Abraham. I will not accept any other religion that says you don't have to go through Christ to be saved, or there was no Son of God. Does this make me close-minded? Yes it does, but then so what! I accept the Bible as my highest athority of what is right and wrong, and any man-made laws contrary to God's ways will be rejected by me.

This includes closing my doors to a privately owned B&B that gay couples want to rent. I own it, it's my home, and I reject those ways. I will not violate God's ways for the sake of equality. God never made man's ways equal. He made us, as humans equal. You can take equality any direction you want, but if it means God's children have to disobey Him in order to accept your ways, it won't happen. I don't have to show anyone respect for what they believe. They get respect from me as a fellow human being, but not because of what they believe. Each person can believe whatever they want, but I do not have to accept it as my own, nor do I have to follow any man-made laws that are contrary to God's laws.

Does this make me intolerable of people? No, it does not. Does it make me intolerable of anything against God? Yes, very much so.


If you want to change the law, vote. Otherwise...obey. [/B]


Old Post 09-04-2003 04:55 PM
Find more posts by Kookaburra Add Kookaburra to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore Kookaburra REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

cancunbum
Crackerjack

offline
Registered: Apr 2003
Local time: 06:31 PM
Location: Houston
Posts: 133

post #10  quote:

quote:
Originally posted by Kukabeara



You poor, poor misguided fool.

"Oh really? Are you familiar with specific instructions to slaves and masters alike... that God gave us? Apparently you didn't see that part in the Bible"

Yes, I did. I do believe it was Jesus himself who said to love one another as he loves us. Plain and simple, little one.

Or perhaps you are referring to Old Testament? Well, my witless chum, if you are going to obey one of the OT laws, you are going to obey all of them, right? Well...let me direct your attention to Deuteronomy 22:23. "If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;
22:24
Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city"
So, if you are going to obey the OT when it comes to master and slaves, you had damn well better the OT laws of killing a woman who was raped but did not cry out.

Hypocrites such as yourself are laughable. You claim to be holy and follow the bible when you do not even know what the bible commands.

"We are commanded to reject other gods, and any ways contrary to God's ways. "
Pray tell...how is separating church and state accepting other gods?? Your logic is so flawed that one can only conclude that your educational experience was cut tragically short.

"This includes closing my doors to a privately owned B&B that gay couples want to rent."
So, you're a homophobe as well? Not very Christ-like. Christ told us, as I believe I mentioned earlier, that we are to love one another as he loves us. He didn't exclude homosexuals. In fact, He had dinner with a whore. A WHORE! God's love knows no limits but I guess your's can, right?

"I don't have to show anyone respect for what they believe."
VERY mature! I am sure your Father (not the one on earth, sweetie) is SO PROUD of you for that comment! I mean, forget that little tolerance thing that Jesus preached about and died for, huh?

Grow up.


Old Post 09-04-2003 06:03 PM
Click here to Send cancunbum a Private Message Find more posts by cancunbum Add cancunbum to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore cancunbum REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

Kookaburra
In the Now Guru

offline
Registered: Jun 2003
Local time: 07:31 PM
Location:
Posts: 2411

post #11  quote:

quote:
Originally posted by cancunbum



"This includes closing my doors to a privately owned B&B that gay couples want to rent."
So, you're a homophobe as well? Not very Christ-like. Christ told us, as I believe I mentioned earlier, that we are to love one another as he loves us. He didn't exclude homosexuals. In fact, He had dinner with a whore. A WHORE! God's love knows no limits but I guess your's can, right?

There's a big difference between having dinner with someone, and allowing them to have sex in one of your bedrooms!



Old Post 09-04-2003 06:16 PM
Find more posts by Kookaburra Add Kookaburra to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore Kookaburra REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

Diamond Member
Lawless
All About Brad!

offline
Registered: Jun 2003
Local time: 04:31 PM
Location: Freezing in Colorado
Posts: 27144

post #12  quote:

And just because a couple spends the night somewhere, that means that they WILL have sex? Wow... I didn't know that. I better change the way I'm living!

Old Post 09-04-2003 06:30 PM
Click here to Send Lawless a Private Message View Lawless's Journal Visit Lawless's homepage! Find more posts by Lawless Add Lawless to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore Lawless REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

Kookaburra
In the Now Guru

offline
Registered: Jun 2003
Local time: 07:31 PM
Location:
Posts: 2411

post #13  quote:

quote:
Originally posted by cancunbum

"I don't have to show anyone respect for what they believe."
VERY mature! I am sure your Father (not the one on earth, sweetie) is SO PROUD of you for that comment! I mean, forget that little tolerance thing that Jesus preached about and died for, huh?



If you're going to quote me, get it right. Don't separate the paragraph to isolate the meaning you want to point out. I said I respect people because they are fellow human beings.

Jesus didn't tolerate anything contrary to God's ways. You can attack us all you want but you aren't going to be able to change what the Bible teaches us. How can God tell us to tolerate everything, and yet reject what is not of Him? You have to choose one or the other. You're angry because we reject something you think Jesus wants us to accept. The truth is, Jesus taught us to turn away from anything not of God. He taught us to be very careful about what we participated in, so don't try to say Jesus accepted what people did. He didn't. He accepted the person, but not their ways.

Big difference.


Old Post 09-04-2003 06:34 PM
Find more posts by Kookaburra Add Kookaburra to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore Kookaburra REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

Diamond Member
Lawless
All About Brad!

offline
Registered: Jun 2003
Local time: 04:31 PM
Location: Freezing in Colorado
Posts: 27144

post #14  quote:

Hmmmm... and the bible tells that women are to not wear makeup, and that divorce, unless there is adultry, is against HIS law. But yet... it's everywhere, isn't it?

Old Post 09-04-2003 06:40 PM
Click here to Send Lawless a Private Message View Lawless's Journal Visit Lawless's homepage! Find more posts by Lawless Add Lawless to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore Lawless REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

Kookaburra
In the Now Guru

offline
Registered: Jun 2003
Local time: 07:31 PM
Location:
Posts: 2411

post #15  quote:

quote:
Originally posted by KJPotter
And just because a couple spends the night somewhere, that means that they WILL have sex? Wow... I didn't know that. I better change the way I'm living!


Until laws are passed where we are forced to accept this lifestyle, I will not allow gay couples to rent my bedrooms. Nor can they marry in the chapel. To do so would mean I support this, and I don't.

If laws are passed prohibiting me from being careful of whom I let in my house, then I will close my doors and not run a B&B. As long it's my roof, my table, my home, my bedrooms, and my personal life I'm sharing, they will abide the rules of my home (WHICH BY THE WAY ARE FOUNDED ON BIBLICAL PRINCIPLES). If a person cannot accept the rules of my personal home, they can go sleep somewhere else. Unless someone else pays the taxes on my home, and maintains it, I set the rules for my property, as I'm sure you have rules for your home too.

It has nothing to do with the way you are living.. unless of course you enter my home, then while there, you follow the rules of the house. That is, no smoking inside, no alcoholic parties, no loud music, no unmarried couples, (same sex or otherwise). My home is set up to be pleasing to God and if someone can't accept that, then they need to go some place else.

You can run your household however you see fit.

Now, if laws are created that say I can not be in control of my own home, and how I run it, then we have a whole lot more to worry about than one B&B breaking the laws or shutting down. Our country will be mass caos and probably will cause a civil war if our rights are taken away from within our own homes too, let alone public.


Last edited by Kookaburra on 09-04-2003 at 06:50 PM |
Old Post 09-04-2003 06:43 PM
Find more posts by Kookaburra Add Kookaburra to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore Kookaburra REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

Kookaburra
In the Now Guru

offline
Registered: Jun 2003
Local time: 07:31 PM
Location:
Posts: 2411

post #16  quote:

quote:
Originally posted by KJPotter
Hmmmm... and the bible tells that women are to not wear makeup, and that divorce, unless there is adultry, is against HIS law. But yet... it's everywhere, isn't it?


Yup, it's everywhere. So what, it doesn't have to be in my home.

Just because everyone else is doing it, doesn't make it right. You going to follow the crowd even if the crowd goes over a cliff, or are you going to get off the path if it's leading you to disaster?

I don't know about the makeup part. You'll have to point that out to me because I'm not familiar with God forbidding makeup. Where is that?


Old Post 09-04-2003 06:48 PM
Find more posts by Kookaburra Add Kookaburra to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore Kookaburra REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

Diamond Member
Lawless
All About Brad!

offline
Registered: Jun 2003
Local time: 04:31 PM
Location: Freezing in Colorado
Posts: 27144

post #17  quote:

I don't know the exact scripture, kuko...
I'm at work... don't have my bible sitting next to me. But, I've read it. You know... talking about women putting color on their face and wearing jewelry.
Okay... so gayness isn't in your house either. But, you don't go around talking about anything else. Why pick that and harp and harp and harp??? Or what about the divorce rates all over the world? I don't hear you talking about ANYTHING really other than homosexuality. That seems to be your "target" in everything. If you're going to preach about sin, talk about it all.


Old Post 09-04-2003 06:53 PM
Click here to Send Lawless a Private Message View Lawless's Journal Visit Lawless's homepage! Find more posts by Lawless Add Lawless to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore Lawless REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

Kookaburra
In the Now Guru

offline
Registered: Jun 2003
Local time: 07:31 PM
Location:
Posts: 2411

post #18  quote:

quote:
Originally posted by KJPotter
I don't know the exact scripture, kuko...
I'm at work... don't have my bible sitting next to me. But, I've read it. You know... talking about women putting color on their face and wearing jewelry.
Okay... so gayness isn't in your house either. But, you don't go around talking about anything else. Why pick that and harp and harp and harp??? Or what about the divorce rates all over the world? I don't hear you talking about ANYTHING really other than homosexuality. That seems to be your "target" in everything. If you're going to preach about sin, talk about it all.


Start a thread of all the things you want me to talk about KJP, if it bothers you that bad that I'm only responding to certain topics right now (that seem to offend you by the way). Otherwise, don't worry about what I'm talking about or not talking about. You don't see me visiting every single thread in every single forum either. You apparently are very upset over certain posts of mine, as I see by the responses you leave behind. I specifically point certain things out based on the topics of threads, such as the other ones I'm also involved in, and based on what time I have to post. I can't hit every topic, nor should I be required to. I pick and choose the topics that are personally effecting my life right now. Divorce is not one of them, and neither are the other things you pointed out. If other topics come up and I want to comment, I will.

If you are for the things that are against God, so be it, for you. If you want to defend the things that are against God, so be it for you too. It's your choice. It's also my choice to stand against the things that are against God, even it bothers you and anyone else that thinks it's being closed-minded.

If you think that's closed-minded, then you must think the same thing of God, because He rejects things He doesn't like either.


Old Post 09-04-2003 07:05 PM
Find more posts by Kookaburra Add Kookaburra to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore Kookaburra REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

cancunbum
Crackerjack

offline
Registered: Apr 2003
Local time: 06:31 PM
Location: Houston
Posts: 133

post #19  quote:

quote:
Originally posted by Kukabeara


If you're going to quote me, get it right. Don't separate the paragraph to isolate the meaning you want to point out. I said I respect people because they are fellow human beings.

Jesus didn't tolerate anything contrary to God's ways. You can attack us all you want but you aren't going to be able to change what the Bible teaches us. How can God tell us to tolerate everything, and yet reject what is not of Him? You have to choose one or the other. You're angry because we reject something you think Jesus wants us to accept. The truth is, Jesus taught us to turn away from anything not of God. He taught us to be very careful about what we participated in, so don't try to say Jesus accepted what people did. He didn't. He accepted the person, but not their ways.

Big difference.


You are a liar. Lie about a human being...fine. Just makes you morally bankrupt. But when you lie about Jesus, you have gone way beyond decency.

"Jesus didn't tolerate anything contrary to God's ways. " That is your DIRECT quote.

Being a whore is contrary to God's ways. Jesus not only tolerated her in his presence, he had dinner with her and protected her.


Old Post 09-04-2003 08:05 PM
Click here to Send cancunbum a Private Message Find more posts by cancunbum Add cancunbum to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore cancunbum REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

Diamond Member
Lawless
All About Brad!

offline
Registered: Jun 2003
Local time: 04:31 PM
Location: Freezing in Colorado
Posts: 27144

post #20  quote:

cancunbum, there might be a lot of things that I don't see eye-to-eye on with Kuka, but I don't think that she is a liar. I think that the statement posted is being misinterpreted.

Old Post 09-04-2003 08:16 PM
Click here to Send Lawless a Private Message View Lawless's Journal Visit Lawless's homepage! Find more posts by Lawless Add Lawless to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore Lawless REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

Kookaburra
In the Now Guru

offline
Registered: Jun 2003
Local time: 07:31 PM
Location:
Posts: 2411

post #21  quote:

quote:
Originally posted by cancunbum


You are a liar. Lie about a human being...fine. Just makes you morally bankrupt. But when you lie about Jesus, you have gone way beyond decency.

I admire you defending Jesus, but I'm not lying about Him at all.

"Jesus didn't tolerate anything contrary to God's ways. " That is your DIRECT quote.

Being a whore is contrary to God's ways. Jesus not only tolerated her in his presence, he had dinner with her and protected her.

He did tolerate HER (the person) in His presence. I'm not disputing that at all. What He didn't tolerate is the act of adultry. He told her to go and sin no more. He didn't tell her to go and live the life she had been living. There is a difference between tolerating someone and tolerating something. The someone was the woman. The something was the sin of adultry. If Jesus tolerated sin, then there was no reason for Him to die in the first place. If sin was ok for us, then why does God demand we repent from it and turn away from it, and not do it anymore? Why send Jesus to die for us if God tolerates what we do contrary to His ways? His death would have been in vain.

Just because Jesus died and covered all of our sins, doesn't mean we have free reign to sin. God still calls us to repent from our sins and stop doing them. Therefore, He Himself rejects the very things some people here want us to be open-minded about.

Again, I stand by what I posted before. Jesus rejects everything contrary to God's ways. The only way He rejects us as a person is if we reject Him. He said if we deny Him before the Father, He will deny us. So you see, even though Jesus associated with everyone, He still taught them to change. If they rejected them, He dusted off His sandals and went to the next. I find no where in the Bible where Jesus tells us to tolerate or be open-minded about anything contrary to God's ways. That movement came from man wanting equal rights and treatment regardless of what they do. That certainly didn't come from God.



Last edited by Kookaburra on 09-04-2003 at 09:02 PM |
Old Post 09-04-2003 08:59 PM
Find more posts by Kookaburra Add Kookaburra to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore Kookaburra REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

cancunbum
Crackerjack

offline
Registered: Apr 2003
Local time: 06:31 PM
Location: Houston
Posts: 133

post #22  quote:

quote:
Originally posted by KJPotter
cancunbum, there might be a lot of things that I don't see eye-to-eye on with Kuka, but I don't think that she is a liar. I think that the statement posted is being misinterpreted.


Are you denying that she said "Jesus didn't tolerate anything contrary to God's ways"?

It is a very objective sentence. It doesn't have but one interpretation.

Therefore, it is a lie seeing as how Jesus did tolerate those who did not follow God's way.


Old Post 09-04-2003 09:03 PM
Click here to Send cancunbum a Private Message Find more posts by cancunbum Add cancunbum to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore cancunbum REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

mysteriarche
Qualified Rookie

offline
Registered: Jun 2003
Local time: 12:31 AM
Location:
Posts: 12

post #23  quote:

[QUOTE]Originally posted by cancunbum
[B]

Tell you what, buddy...how about YOU practicing what you preach. Ironic, and a bit hypocritical, that you blast me for stating my beliefs and in the same breath you preach acceptance and tolerance! Hello, pot? This is kettle...you're black .

First of all, moron, i didn't blast you for voicing your beliefs, i just stated my own. I encourage everyone to voice their opinions, that's why i come to inreview. Gee man, take some prozac or something.

Speaking of history, why don't YOU go back and see why our founding fathers said there would be no state sponsored religion.

First of all, the only thing our founding fathers said about religion is that it cannot be restricted by the government. And it was done so for the protection of the religions, not the government so you are a little backwards.

Now, now...before you go on preaching about how this country is founded in Christian principles...think again. Actually, just do some basic research. Our founding fathers were self-proclaimed Deists and Masons. Not Christian. Our founding fathers owned slaves. Legal or not, a CHRISTIAN would know that it is against God's law to have a slave. Since they CHOSE to have slaves and break GOD'S law, I would believe any logical person could draw the conclusion that they were not Christian .

If you will read my last post, i told you that you are missing the point, that is obviously still the case. It doesn't matter what specific faith the founding fathers were, their moral foundations, just like yours, are based on christian ideology.

Finally, you are simply wrong. Our founding fathers came here to get away from the crown telling everyone that you were either Protestant or nothing. Not a Protestant? No court access. Not a Protestant? Shunned by society .

No joke sherlock. They came from oppressors who didn't allow them to publically express their beliefs, and now that is what their country is turning in to.

THIS COUNTRY IS BUILT ON THE PRINCIPLE OF FREEDOM. YES, THAT DOES INCLUDE (TAKE A POLI SCI COURSE) THE FREEDOM TO BE FREE FROM STATE SPONSORED RELIGION. THERE ARE PLENTY OF HOUSES OF WORSHIP FOR CHRISTIANITY SO THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO NEED TO MAKE THOSE WHO ARE NOT CHRISTIANS FEEL AS IF THEY WILL NOT GET A FAIR TRIAL AT A COURTHOUSE BECAUSE THAT COURTHOUSE ENDORSES CHRISTIANITY !

Not get a fair trial because of their religion? Man you are way out in left field, can you say slippey slope? (take a class in formal logic and that will tell you what a slippey slope is). And once again, if you'll read my last post, nobody in america has the freedom to not be offended, and even if some will infer that freedom, it should not override those that are spelled out in the constitution ie. freedom to express religion. As for an endorsement of christianity, that argument is absurd. If that is the case, then we will ask the federal government whether or not the monument is an endorsement of christianity and after they say no, then we can leave it up.

Why can't you simply keep religion where it belongs...in the family and in your church/synagogue/mosque? You preach that Christians pay their taxes and, as such, they are entitled to have the monument. DOES THEIR BELIEFS OVERRIDE THE NON-CHRISTIANS? Your simple majority argument does not apply. Even if there is one Muslim/Buddhist/whatever and 99 Christians, the one must be shown respect for his beliefs .

No, the beliefs of christians do not override the beliefs of others, but apparently the beliefs of others override those of christians. It seems as though i am not coming from a majority position here doesn't it? As for respecting everyone's beliefs, i can see no greater disrespect to those of faith than to have a symbol of their faith being torn down in front of the world. Talk about a lack of respect. But you have already shown your inability to see the other side, so this argument is already lost on you. And if the monument were a buddhist or muslim one and it had historical significance to the law, i would argue just as vehemently that it should stay up. I am not so insecure, or tyrannical, that i demand everything i disagree with to be torn down. Perhaps a little introspection, and a little review of your poli sci class you're so proud of, is what you need.


Old Post 09-04-2003 10:17 PM
Click here to Send mysteriarche a Private Message Find more posts by mysteriarche Add mysteriarche to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore mysteriarche REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

mysteriarche
Qualified Rookie

offline
Registered: Jun 2003
Local time: 12:31 AM
Location:
Posts: 12

post #24  quote:

oops, didn't realize i was under a different name, this is jrkiv for any who are confused=)

Old Post 09-04-2003 10:18 PM
Click here to Send mysteriarche a Private Message Find more posts by mysteriarche Add mysteriarche to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore mysteriarche REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

Diamond Member
Lawless
All About Brad!

offline
Registered: Jun 2003
Local time: 04:31 PM
Location: Freezing in Colorado
Posts: 27144

post #25  quote:

Why are you posting under a 2nd name? You are to only have one sign on name for the boards!!!

Old Post 09-04-2003 10:21 PM
Click here to Send Lawless a Private Message View Lawless's Journal Visit Lawless's homepage! Find more posts by Lawless Add Lawless to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore Lawless REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

mysteriarche
Qualified Rookie

offline
Registered: Jun 2003
Local time: 12:31 AM
Location:
Posts: 12

post #26  quote:

This is my brother's name, i didn't realize he was signed in and i was not.

Old Post 09-05-2003 06:32 PM
Click here to Send mysteriarche a Private Message Find more posts by mysteriarche Add mysteriarche to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore mysteriarche REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote

Kookaburra
In the Now Guru

offline
Registered: Jun 2003
Local time: 07:31 PM
Location:
Posts: 2411

post #27  quote:

quote:
Originally posted by KJ
Why are you posting under a 2nd name? You are to only have one sign on name for the boards!!!


I take it this only applies to us but not moderators? KJPotter aka KJ? Just wondering.


Old Post 09-05-2003 06:37 PM
Find more posts by Kookaburra Add Kookaburra to your buddy list Click Here to Ignore Kookaburra REPORT this Post to a ModeratorNOMINATE this Post for Reward Points Reply w/Quote
Time: 12:31 AM Post New Thread   
  Print Version | Email Page | Bookmark | Subscribe to Thread
INReview INReview > The Scuttlebutt Lounge > Politics & Government > Law > lawsuit
Search this Thread:
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
Forum Policies Explained
 
Rate This Thread:

< >

Copyright ?2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
Page generated in 0.09451389 seconds (92.47% PHP - 7.53% MySQL) with 39 queries.

ADS

© 2018, INReview.com.   Popular Forums  All Forums   Web Hosting by Psyphire.
INReview.com: Back to Home