He was self-admittedly a staunch opponent of the black civil rights movement, for one thing.
Should homosexuals be given the death penalty?
- Thread starter lovemeorhateme
- Start date
He was self-admittedly a staunch opponent of the black civil rights movement, for one thing.
Refresh my memory of your next-to-the-last question. The last question is the one quoted above.
That we know of. If they could speak now they would fill our ears with good, theological reasons for their claim.
"Everyone recognizes that" they were "nut jobs"--except their followers.
I can respect Falwell's call that Christianity should be heard in the public sector, but his Moral Majority proved to be a shallow and niggardly guide to that. It would be nice to have principles instead of an ideology and be active politically rather than cruelly partisan. Now that conservative Christians are allowing poverty, AIDs, the Iraq war, and Darfur as matters of faith and morality, it would have been great to hear that Falwell had opened up to something besides abortion and homo sex. He was racist and often vindictive--as when he called 9/11 God's punishment for feminism and homos.
There certainly was no legitimate standard. The "standards" were arbitrary and relativistic. They were "all over the map" with their "standards." Remember the Crusades?
Oh for crying out loud! How can a law that is set up to kill people for transgressions of their supposedly PRIVATE lives and relationships not be an invasion of privacy??! Get a clue :doh:
You need to seriously grow up then, if you think the taking of another person's life or the violent sexual violation of another person equates as bad as having an affair then I fail to see why I should even expect any kind of logic from you, and dont even bother with any kind of tired 'condoning adultery' argument, I dont, I can just recognise it as being something that doesnt warrant death and would cause more needless distress than it would cure
Which was? That noone really had the right to cast the stone anyway because of their own hypocritical guilt?
So is torturing people in a modern society LH, it's regarded as barbaric by any civilised standards.....
I'm not calling you a liar. In fact, I was never a fan of Falwell, myself. But do you have anything to back that up?
Here is the question: "So how do you love your neighbor? Do you let them continue in self destructive behavior, and "love" them in spite of it?"Refresh my memory of your next-to-the-last question. The last question is the one quoted above.
Are any of them still alive?
I agree with most of what you're saying, because I saw it. But I never heard anything racist from him. Do you have examples? Also, the partisanship is definitely a problem. Especially since most of the laws allowing for the things railed against were passed by Republicans in the first place. Falwell, and most of the "Moral Majority" favored Republicans over God, and now abortion, and homosexuality are legal, and getting more legal as time goes by.
Examples?
Can you provide me with the statistics of adultery in countries where it's not a capital crime vs. countries where it is?:think:
That was part of it. Also that they were not following Mosaic, or Roman law.
Who said anything about torture?
Oh use your common sense LH! This has been pointed out to you time and time again, remain clueless if you will....
What difference would it make if I could? Thankfully in our advanced societies it would be moot anyway as most people with any common sense can differentiate between the private relationships of people and the violent acts of murder and rape
So then they would have been quite within their rights to throw stones if they were following either roman or mosaic law? They wouldnt have any reason to be convicted of their own sin and their self righteousness?
The spanish inquisition was used to make a point of how society for the most part has transcended barbarism and dark age mentality of the likes they employed....
Just saying something doesn't make it true. And you have nothing to back up your claims. You haven't even tried. Nobody needs to spy on anyone to report a crime. If you inadvertently catch someone, then you report it. No invasion of privacy required.
Chicken.
If they were following both laws, yes.
And? I'm not supporting doing any such thing.
You've just answered your own question, if I inadvertently stumble across two people being intimate then it's none of my business, it's their own private matter and nothing to do with the state, do you understand now?!
What are you on about?
so they would have been without sin then? Funny, i recall the words being 'let he who is without sin cast the first stone', I dont recall there being anything about 'it being ok as long as both laws are being followed'....
By supporting the DP for adultery in today's society you are doing exactly that....
Mr. 5020
New member
Do you feel this way in an absolute sense?
In other words...
Is there any situation where their "private lives" should be your business?
why should peoples private lives be my business at all? With my friends we share things that would be private to us and nobody else's business which is hardly the same thing as the direction this debate has taken, it's got nothing to do with me if two strangers are having an affair and I wouldnt be arrogant enough to make it my business and judge them on it either....
You have absolutely no compassion for the people whose lives are being destroyed by such an affair. You do not care about family.
You're a coward.
If they had been properly following the law, then they would not have been sinning in what they were doing.
How so? How am I supporting torture? How am I supporting forced conversion to a religious belief?
So John 7:24 means nothing to you? You actually found some words of Jesus that you won't follow?
You are priceless! :rotfl: You think that executing someone for a fling is somehow compassionate towards the family? Even if the damage could be repaired and the couple can reconcile and the kid might still have a parent!! Will you get this through your head LH, I do not condone adultery, it can cause a great deal of pain for all concerned, executing people for what happens in their private lives though is in no way compassionate for anyone, there will be times where an affair does split up a family and that is tragic, in your system it doesnt even matter, kill the adulterer and the remainder of the family has to suffer whether they had a say in proceedings or not......
What are you on about??!
This wasnt what Jesus said was it, didnt he say 'let he who is without sin cast the first stone'? Did none of the crowd have sin? Quit playing coy LH, I think you know you've got nothing with this argument if this is all you've got....
You're advocating returning us to a medieval state which has no place in civilised society, thats why.....
Yeh, I actually started a thread on this verse a while back inviting people to explain just why this meant standing in condemnation and surprisingly I got no responses at all
This verse doesnt say anything about standing in judgement of people......
You're looking for a verse that talks about standing in judgment?Yeh, I actually started a thread on this verse a while back inviting people to explain just why this meant standing in condemnation and surprisingly I got no responses at all
1 Corinthians 6:2-3
As for John 7:24, Jesus commanded us to judge people righteously. That means, that we should judge them according to the standard of God, and not our own standards. You are judging people according to your own standard. John 7:24 means we are to rebuke those who are unrepentant, and forgive those who repent. You want to forgive those who don't repent, and rebuke only those who rebuke the unrepentant. You make God want to spew you from His mouth.
You're an idiot, if you can't get it through your thick little skull that if someone knows they will be executed for a certain act, they are less likely to commit that act. And, in turn, the family is therefore less likely to fall apart due to adultery, in the first place. Fear of death prevents people from doing certain things. And so fewer people do them. And that leads to less people dying because of that certain thing. Do you seriously not get that? Are you really that dense?
You're spineless.
They were not without sin, in this instance, for they were breaking the Law of Moses. And transgression of the law is sin.
You do realize that OT Israel was well before medieval times, don't you? Also, why do you have such a problem with God's command? You go on and on about how it's barbaric, so are you calling God barbaric for commanding it in the first place?
Ah, the ad homs yet again....can you get it through your own skull that you would have a society based on fear instead of loving relationships? Can you imagine how the marriage rate would actually plummet because of the possible consequences if it fell apart? How would having 'less people dying' apply when adultery is presently not a capital crime anyway???!! do you seriously get that? You would sooner have a state control over peoples private lives and would sooner see people killed for infidelity than giving them any chance whatsoever to repair their relationship and family regardless.....
Right.....if this is supposed to be in conjunction with backwards states that do have the death penalty for adultery still then I dread to think what else they have it for as well - as well as barabric punishments for other offences that wouldnt be tolerated in an enlightened society....maybe you can inform me as to what you're driving at....
And that's the only sin that they would have been guilty of is it, breaking the law of Moses??????? C'mon LH!!!!
Yes I do realise that, it was a long long time ago and we've progressed from such stark times - havent we......?
Daniel50
New member
Psychologists to review stance on homosexuals
NEW YORK - The American Psychological Association is embarking on the first review of its 10-year-old policy on counseling gays and lesbians, a step that homosexual activists hope will end with a denunciation of any attempt by therapists to change sexual orientation.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/07/psychologists_to_review_stance.php
NEW YORK - The American Psychological Association is embarking on the first review of its 10-year-old policy on counseling gays and lesbians, a step that homosexual activists hope will end with a denunciation of any attempt by therapists to change sexual orientation.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/07/psychologists_to_review_stance.php
Today, even most fundamentalists have learned to ignore the barbaric passages of the Bible. Science, post-modernism and secular politics have moderated religious extremists among us, but it still seems believers like yankeedoodled are holding onto the foundation of crumbling sand on which they have built their version of religious reality.
The lion's share of the rest--in lock-step with the neoconservatives--seem remarkably indifferent to most human suffering. At the moment, opposition to stem cell study prolongs the real misery of tens of thousands of human beings.
Unassailable proof is there for the conscientious citizen to realize that the Christian Right is actively distorting the relationship of science and government.
We have a vacine for a virus that causes cervical cancer, and it can be given to girls at age 11 or 12 and is safe and effective. But political appointees ("you're doing a heckuva job, Brownie") believe that it will encourage premarital sex. Sex before marraige is apparently more frightening and threatening than death from cancerous tumors in a woman's cervix.
One politico who is an official for the Center for Disease Control confessed he "would have to think long and hard about whether to use a vaccine against HIV." Premarital sex again!
And then we have pharmacists in name only who refuse to be pharmacists.
Yankedoodled, I don't believe you are evil, but you are concerned about the wrong things and as a result you have ended up on the losing end. You have accepted these ancient and unjustifiable religious tribal taboos, regardless of the words and deeds of Jesus of Nazareth.
Jesus spoke of a Kingdom of God in which nationalism and tribalism are dangerous and divisive.
His message of love and forgiveness is our only hope today, but since he also tore into the temple practices of his day, that same love, forgiveness and effective non-violent social change is not coming from the Christian religion anymore. It is ironically coming mainly from secular countries.
That irony should be seen as a bitter one and should give us pause.
The lion's share of the rest--in lock-step with the neoconservatives--seem remarkably indifferent to most human suffering. At the moment, opposition to stem cell study prolongs the real misery of tens of thousands of human beings.
Unassailable proof is there for the conscientious citizen to realize that the Christian Right is actively distorting the relationship of science and government.
We have a vacine for a virus that causes cervical cancer, and it can be given to girls at age 11 or 12 and is safe and effective. But political appointees ("you're doing a heckuva job, Brownie") believe that it will encourage premarital sex. Sex before marraige is apparently more frightening and threatening than death from cancerous tumors in a woman's cervix.
One politico who is an official for the Center for Disease Control confessed he "would have to think long and hard about whether to use a vaccine against HIV." Premarital sex again!
And then we have pharmacists in name only who refuse to be pharmacists.
Yankedoodled, I don't believe you are evil, but you are concerned about the wrong things and as a result you have ended up on the losing end. You have accepted these ancient and unjustifiable religious tribal taboos, regardless of the words and deeds of Jesus of Nazareth.
Jesus spoke of a Kingdom of God in which nationalism and tribalism are dangerous and divisive.
His message of love and forgiveness is our only hope today, but since he also tore into the temple practices of his day, that same love, forgiveness and effective non-violent social change is not coming from the Christian religion anymore. It is ironically coming mainly from secular countries.
That irony should be seen as a bitter one and should give us pause.
