More liberal censorship

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Holy war: Government tries to control church sermons

An Iowa church just wants to be free to preach the gospel, but the state’s so-called nondiscrimination requirements could block the house of worship from doing just that.

Lawyers for the church are asking a federal court to prevent Iowa from censoring what the religious group can say about homosexuality, same-sex “marriage,” transgenderism and other related topics.

To read the rest of the article click HERE.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

MrDante

New member
This isn't a case of censorship, this is a case of false witness.



“Places of worship (e.g. churches, synagogues, mosques, etc.) are generally exempt from the Iowa law’s prohibition of discrimination, unless the place of worship engages in non-religious activities which are open to the public … the law may apply to an independent day care or polling places located on the premises of the place of worship.” Iowa Civil Rights Commission


So this Iowa Church pastor is and always has been free to say what ever hateful, perverted things he wants to in his sermons.
 

Crucible

BANNED
Banned
Separation of Church and State guarantees that the state cannot get involved with what the church preaches, but still from time to ti me you get others who will talk smack anyway like they can do something.

So, much ado about nothing really :rolleyes:
 

MrDante

New member
Separation of Church and State guarantees that the state cannot get involved with what the church preaches, but still from time to ti me you get others who will talk smack anyway like they can do something.

So, much ado about nothing really :rolleyes:

The government can get involved if that preaching includes the advocating of violence against individuals, groups or property.
 

MrDante

New member
So then all muslim mosques should be shut down? Interesting position you have taken.

Can you specifically just what mosques and what religious leader you are accusing of advocating violence against specific individuals?
 

Crucible

BANNED
Banned
Using the pulpit to advocate violence isn't just a crime it is a massive liability.

Advocating violence is not a crime. Sorry to burst in on the typical atheist, fascist notion you're no doubt tapping from, but not even blacks are being arrested for calling to kill white people.

I think you are just a biased SJW, to be honest. There is no siding with you on here unless one is 100% converted to your nonsense :rolleyes:
 

MrDante

New member
Advocating violence is not a crime. Sorry to burst in on the typical atheist, fascist notion you're no doubt tapping from, but not even blacks are being arrested for calling to kill white people.

I think you are just a biased SJW, to be honest. There is no siding with you on here unless one is 100% converted to your nonsense :rolleyes:

"The government can and must regulate any speaker who would counsel or advise a man to commit an unlawful act." Masses Publishing Co. v. Patten

"The right to free speech does not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action." Brandenburg v. Ohio
 

Angel4Truth

New member
Hall of Fame
This isn't a case of censorship, this is a case of false witness.

No it isnt, they are actually trying to do this there.

The state claims churches are a”public accommodation.”

But the state’s interpretation could be used by bureaucrats to bar churches from making “unwelcome” public comments during an activity the commission deems not to have a “bona fide religious purpose.”

The state commission also claims the state law demands that people be given access to church restrooms and locker rooms according to “gender identity.”

They will most likely lose, but they are trying to censor the church anyway.
 

Angel4Truth

New member
Hall of Fame
Can you specifically just what mosques and what religious leader you are accusing of advocating violence against specific individuals?

Most U.S. Mosques Teach Violence


Researchers Mordechai Kedar and David Yerushalmi reported in the Summer 2011 issue of Middle East Quarterly about a new survey that found that “51% of mosques had texts that either advocated the use of violence in the pursuit of a Sharia-based political order or advocated violent jihad as a duty that should be of paramount importance to a Muslim.” Another 30% of mosques in the United States “had only texts that were moderately supportive of violence,” while only “19% had no violent texts at all.”

This yet again contradicts the universally held assumption that U.S. mosques are completely benign institutions, in all respects equivalent to churches and synagogues. As long ago as 1998, Sheikh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani, a Sufi leader, visited 114 mosques in the United States. Then he gave testimony before a State Department open forum in January 1999 declaring that Islamic supremacists controlled most mosques in America .

“The most dangerous thing that is going on now in these mosques,” Kabbani said, “that has been sent upon these mosques around the United States—like churches they were established by different organizations and that is okay—but the problem with our communities is the extremist ideology. Because they are very active, they took over the mosques, and we can say that they took over more than 80% of the mosques that have been established in the U.S. And there are more than 3,000 mosques in the U.S. So it means that the methodology or ideology of extremists has been spread to 80% of the Muslim population, but not all of them agree with it.”

Terrorism expert Yehudit Barsky affirmed the same thing in 2005, saying that 80% of the mosques in this country “have been radicalized by Saudi money and influence.” The Center for Religious Freedom in 2005 found a massive distribution of hateful jihadist and Islamic supremacist material in mosques in this country. The Mapping Sharia Project’s 2008 study likewise found that upwards of 80% of mosques in America were preaching hatred of Jews and Christians and the necessity ultimately to impose Islamic rule.

And in June 2008, federal investigators found that the Islamic Saudi Academy in Virginia, despite promises to stop teaching such material, was still using books that advocated that apostates from Islam be executed and that it was permissible for Muslims to kill and seize the property of “polytheists.”

What is most arresting about these studies is their unanimity. Although each was conducted independently of the others, they all came to the same conclusion: that around three-quarters of mosques in this country are teaching what amounts to sedition. And yet the mainstream media has shown about as much interest in the new survey as they did in the others—that is, none at all....
 

MrDante

New member

Um yeah.


I'd ask if you read this study but...well come on.



“51% of mosques had texts that either advocated the use of violence in the pursuit of a Sharia-based political order or advocated violent jihad as a duty that should be of paramount importance to a Muslim.” Another 30% of mosques in the United States “had only texts that were moderately supportive of violence,”

So just what qualified as texts as texts moderately supportive or advocating violence?

The single qualifier for that 30% of US masques that were rated "moderately supportive of violence." Was the presence of a copy of the Tafsir Ibn Kathir a commentary on the Qur'an written in the 13th century.
 

Nick M

Plymouth Colonist
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame

Is that anything like saying "white power", which I have never seen or heard, unless somebody is portraying the long defunct KKK.

And your video host is vulgar in his speech. So be warned if you are a white liberal. He drops F-bombs, N-bombs and he calls the gas station "*****", maybe because he didn't have a woman there to call her it.
 
Top