| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Jd" |
| Date: |
19 Aug 2003 06:07:55 PM |
| Object: |
Moore ignites new multicultural vision |
This will come as quite a shock to leftists everywhere. Over 1000
Orthodox Rabbis, as well as representatives from the black
community such as Alan Keyes and T.D. Jakes, voiced support along
with an estimated 10,000 folks who showed up at the Ten
Commandments Rally in Montgomery Alabama.... for Judge Roy Moore
and his stand on the Ten Commandments. Interestingly, 35
atheists also showed up to protest.
At any rate, leftists everywhere will only be making fools of
themselves as they try to portray God-fearin' American Christians
(especially Alabamians) as racists, or neo-nazis, white
supremists or something even worse.
Yeah, they may whine, moan, and sling vile accusations, mock etc.
.... but it's all a hoax on their part. Especially now that their
absolute hypocrisy has been revealed. Think of it... blacks, Jews
and whites standing together in unity. Wasn't their dream a
"multicultural" America? Yes, but it was a hoax. A hoax to
pander support from all the various minorities merely for the
purpose of enslaving them by encouraging "sin".
Perhaps Jews and Blacks from across the nation and portions of
Canada joining in with us Alabamians was just the thing needed to
reveal their devious plots to undermine Americas moral foundation
and their actual hatred for true multicultural unity (especially
the "One nation, under God" type of multicultural).
Honestly, I'm not noted for being a "multicultural" type guy as a
few here can attest. Have I changed? Of course not. If the
fruit's good, the tree is also.
"Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." - Jesus
A spokesman (Rabbi Yehuda Levin) for one of the two major
Rabbinical organizations which support Judge Moore, joined in an
Alabama talk radio show today and further explained how
conservative Jews have found themselves in a similar position as
that of conservative Christians WRT the leftists agenda for an
immoral America. He was the same Rabbi that went to Montgomery
(from New York) to show support for Judge Moore. He actually
made alot of sense. I even e-mailed him a thank-you note for
his efforts.
Here's the release which voices the support of over 1000 Jewish
Rabbis.... for Judge Moore's cause:
THE UNION OF ORTHODOX RABBIS
OF THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA
and
THE RABBINICAL ALLIANCE OF AMERICA
August 15, 2003 / for immediate release
CONTACT: RABBI YEHUDA LEVIN 718-469-6999
TWO MAJOR RABBINICAL GROUPS SUPPORT
"TEN COMMANDMENTS" JUDGE ROY MOORE
Two major Rabbinical organizations, representing over 1000
Orthodox Rabbis, today declared their support for Alabama Chief
Judge Roy Moore in his battle to keep the Ten Commandments on
display in the Supreme Court building in Montgomery, Alabama.
Lawyer groups, led by the ACLU, have demanded that Judge Moore
remove the display, citing church-state concerns; and Federal
Judge Myron Thompson has given Judge Moore a deadline of August
20 to remove the display. But Judge Moore is refusing to be
intimidated.
Rabbi Hirsch Ginsberg of the Union of Orthodox Rabbis said: "The
Ten Commandments are the basis of civilized society and the rule
of law. It is no accident that legal testimony begins with
swearing to tell the whole truth, while holding a Bible. Here, in
New York City, many courtrooms have a plaque on the wall, right
above the judge's head, proclaiming 'In G-D we trust'."
Rabbi Abraham Hecht of the Rabbinical Alliance added: "It's no
surprise that the ACLU, a radical left-wing organization of
ambulance-chasing rip-off artists, should object to the Ten
Commandments. The Biblical injunctions against lying, stealing,
and adultery must make them feel terribly uncomfortable."
Rabbi Yehuda Levin who is representing the two Rabbinical groups
in Montgomery, Alabama this week, commented on a nasty New York
Times editorial that referred to Judge Moore as a demagogue:
"This is the worst kind of savage yellow journalism. The New York
Times has lately been rocked by scandals, in which it has been
revealed that senior reporters and editorial staff have knowingly
fabricated stories and distorted the news. They have some nerve
criticizing a moral, intelligent, and courageous man like Chief
Judge Moore."
Rabbi Levin will hold a press conference on the steps of the
Alabama Statehouse in Montgomery on
Friday, August 15, 2003, at 10:00 a.m.
After the press conference, Rabbi Levin is to meet with Chief
Judge Moore to make a presentation to him on behalf of the Union
of Orthodox Rabbis and the Rabbinical Alliance.
http://www.jewsformorality.org/aaaw090.htm
-----------------EOF-----------------
"Police would not estimate the size of the crowd, which appeared
to be several thousand people, possibly as many as 10,000.
Falwell said Moore is right to defy Thompson's order if he
believes he is obeying God. "Civil disobedience is the right of
all men when we believe breaking man's law is needed to preserve
God's law," Falwell said.
Evelyn Bradley of Norwalk, California, said she made the trip
because "the Ten Commandments is the most precious and most
important thing in my life right now." "No judge has the right to
tell us we can't post them," said Bradley, 73.
After the rally hundreds of people walked several blocks to the
judicial building, where they lined up to view the monument
inside. Some debated with about 35 atheists holding a counter
protest across the street.
"Personally I believe in science and reason and the only way you
can have freedom of religion is to have separation of church and
state," said Todd Kinley, a research scientist from Huntsville
participating in the counter protest."
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/08/16/ten.commandments.ap/index.html
-------------------EOF-------------------
Jewish Leaders Rally Around Chief Justice
Ten Commandments Fight Heads To U.S. Supreme Court
POSTED: 4:49 p.m. CDT August 15, 2003
BIRMINGHAM, Ala. -- The fight to keep a Ten Commandments monument
in the Alabama's Judicial Building is winning wider support as
religious leaders rallied with Chief Justice Roy Moore Friday.
"Moore appeared with orthodox Jewish rabbis in Montgomery who
support efforts to keep the monument in the state Supreme Court
building. "If our country does not return to the Biblical values
and standards on which it was founded, who knows what could
happen to us?" Rabbi Yehuda Levin said.
Also backing Moore's monument fight, nationally recognized Bishop
T.D. Jakes, who was in Birmingham Friday. "Well, I think that the
Ten Commandments transcends beliefs and theology and goes down to
core values and morality that every American should want to
embrace," Jakes said."
http://www.nbc13.com/news/2409426/detail.html
"Buses and vans from as far away as California brought Moore
supporters to Montgomery for an enthusiastic rally on a hot and
muggy morning. Evangelist Jerry Falwell and former presidential
candidate Dr. Alan Keyes were among a half-dozen speakers urging
the crowd to take back America from what Keyes described as the
"unruly courts."
"We stand here today in a great tradition," Keyes said. "Not as
our lying critics would have it in the tradition of those who
defied courts in order to oppress and destroy fellow human
beings, but those who stood against unjust laws in order to stand
for rights of all people. This is where we stand."
http://www.nbc13.com/news/2409426/detail.html
-------------------EOF-------------------
"We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of
America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme
Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in
the name, and by authority of the good People of these Colonies,
solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and
of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are
Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all
political connection between them and the State of Great Britain,
is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and
Independent States, they have full power to levy War, conclude
Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all
other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do.
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on
the Protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each
other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."
(Declaration of Independence)
"We, the people of the State of Alabama, in order to establish
justice, insure domestic tranquillity, and secure the blessings
of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, invoking the favor and
guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish the following
Constitution and form of government for the State of Alabama"
Constitution Of Alabama 1901
Jd
"Is not my word like as a fire? saith the Lord; and like a hammer
that breaketh the rock in pieces?" (Jeremiah 23:29)
.
|
|
| User: "M. Clark" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
31 Aug 2003 01:06:37 PM |
|
|
Bill Hudson <hudsonwj@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 14:16:08 +0000, (M. Clark)
wrote:
[snipped prior conversation]
A week ago I would have reluctantly agreed that "separation of church
and state" applies to Judge Moore's case.
For some strange reason, I doubt this.
... But I came across some Jefferson
writings that indicate that we have misunderstood what Jefferson really
thought about church/state separation in the first place.
I think it is far more likely that you have misunderstood the writings you
came across, as I show below.
... Jefferson
reflected on the 1st and 10th Amendment in these writings and evidently
recognized that the Constitution does indeed endow the states with the
power to address religious issues as opposed to forbidding the federal
government from having anything to do with religious issues.
This statement indicates a profound ignorance of what the constitution
does, especially what it did in Jefferson's time. Until the 14th
amendment, the constitution applied *only* to the Federal Government (or
'General Government' as Jefferson phrases it) and had no power to 'endow'
anything to the states. The constitution was set up as a restriction on
the Federal Government: Any power not specifically delegated to the
Federal Government was denied to it. Any power not specifically delegated
to the Federal Government in the constitution was retained by the various
state governments, and ultimately, the people. In this sense, the Federal
Government was a tool of and slave to the various state governments.
You evidently cannot objectively read the 14th Amendment with respect to
your assertion that the constitution applied *only* to the federal
government. Indeed the 10th amendment clearly shows that the
Constitution gives powers to the states. The 14th Amendment is a
reasonably precaution to prevent the states from using their unique
power to abridge the federal rights of their citizens.
... But don't
believe me;
Don't worry about that.
... see for yourself:
(Note that the key wording is towards the lower parts of these
extracts.)
-----
"I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the
Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions, their
doctrines, discipline, or exercises. This results not only from the
provision that no law shall be made respecting the establishment or free
exercise of religion, but from that also which reserves to the states
the powers not delegated to the United States. Certainly, no power to
prescribe any religious exercise or to assume authority in religious
discipline has been delegated to the General Government. It must then
rest with the states, as far as it can be in any human authority."
--Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller, 1808. ME 11:428
"In matters of religion, I have considered that its free exercise is
placed by the Constitution independent of the powers of the general
government. I have therefore undertaken on no occasion to prescribe the
religious exercises suited to it; but have left them as the Constitution
found them, under the direction and discipline of State or Church
authorities acknowledged by the several religious societies." --Thomas
Jefferson: 2nd Inaugural Address, 1805. ME 3:378 -----
Base on Jefferson's perspective of church/state separation as indicated
by his above writings, the federal court was wrong for interefering with
Judge Moore's display.
Total BS.
The above 'extracts' do not reflect Jefferson's opinion on what *should
be* the case, but rather reflect the then current state of what *was* the
power of the federal government. His *opinion* is more clearly reflected
in his other writings, e.g. his letter to the Danbury Baptists.
Are you brainwashed so badly that you cannot objectively read anything
put in front of you? If Jefferson meant his church/state separation
writing to be understood in the absolute sense, he should NEVER have
written what he did.
The Danbury Baptist Association had written to Jefferson complaining
about their status as a minority religion in the state of Connecticut,
stating "... what religious privileges we enjoy (as a minor part of the
state) we enjoy as favors granted, and not as inalienable rights; and
these favors we receive at the expense of such degrading acknowledgements
as are inconsistent with the rights of freemen." They go on to say
"...but our hopes are strong that the sentiments of our beloved president,
which have had such genial effect already, like the radiant beams of the
sun, will shine and prevail through all these states and all the world,
till hierarchy and tyranny be destroyed from the earth."
Clearly they wished Jefferson to use whatever influence he had to change
their circumstance. This places in context Jefferson's reply:
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between
man and his God, that he owes account to none other for is faith or his
worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and
not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole
American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law
respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise
thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.
Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of
the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the
progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural
rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social
duties."
Also clearly, Jefferson looked forward to the day when the guranatees of
the First amendment were extended to the 'whole American people',
including Baptists in Connecticut.
Mr. Clark, you are just plainly, simply, wrong. Your 'analysis' of
Jefferson's writings is wrong. Your opinion on his position is wrong.
Your opinion on the constitutionality of "Moore's rock" is wrong. You
have pulled a couple of quotes of Jefferson, and implied that they say
something that they do not. You apparently have no sense of the history
of your own government, which is very, very sad.
Again, we have evidently misunderstood Jefferson's use of the word
"state" in his church/state separation writing because his other
relevant writings shouldn't even exist.
M. Clark
... Whether such things are displayed in public in a
state building is up to the people of a given state.
M. Clark
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
31 Aug 2003 02:37:25 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 18:06:37 +0000, M. Clark wrote:
You evidently cannot objectively read the 14th Amendment
You obviously are only slightly less intelligent than a box of rocks...
--
Mark K. Bilbo
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Hudson" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
31 Aug 2003 07:24:49 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 19:37:25 +0000, "Mark K. Bilbo" <iskanipa-y@hoo.com>
wrote:
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 18:06:37 +0000, M. Clark wrote:
You evidently cannot objectively read the 14th Amendment
You obviously are only slightly less intelligent than a box of rocks...
In Clark's world, he's right, and 140 years of history, judicial opinion,
and legislation are wrong. At this point, I realize he's too immersed in
his own worldview to see the facts: (1) detached memoranda, no matter
*who* wrote them do not have the weight of law. (2) The consitution,
especially the 1st, 10th, and 14th amendments have been interpreted *by
the courts* to mean that Moore's Rock has to go. Whether or not Clark
agrees or not is irrelevant. Even when faced with direct citations, his
only response is vague handwaving ('Jefferson didn't mean that in the
absolute sense', etc)
I'm done with him.
--
Bill Hudson
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
31 Aug 2003 08:28:26 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 00:24:49 +0000, Bill Hudson wrote:
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 19:37:25 +0000, "Mark K. Bilbo" <iskanipa-y@hoo.com>
wrote:
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 18:06:37 +0000, M. Clark wrote:
You evidently cannot objectively read the 14th Amendment
You obviously are only slightly less intelligent than a box of rocks...
In Clark's world, he's right, and 140 years of history, judicial opinion,
and legislation are wrong. At this point, I realize he's too immersed in
his own worldview to see the facts: (1) detached memoranda, no matter
*who* wrote them do not have the weight of law. (2) The consitution,
especially the 1st, 10th, and 14th amendments have been interpreted *by
the courts* to mean that Moore's Rock has to go. Whether or not Clark
agrees or not is irrelevant. Even when faced with direct citations, his
only response is vague handwaving ('Jefferson didn't mean that in the
absolute sense', etc)
I'm done with him.
Clark is just a bleater. A mildly interesting one if you're bored (I am, I
admit it <g>). Doesn't matter *what is presented to him, he'll just keep
bleating ignorantly along...
--
Mark K. Bilbo
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Carol Lee Smith" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
30 Aug 2003 06:51:35 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Brian Westley wrote:
idontreply@toemail.com (M. Clark) writes:
A week ago I would have reluctantly agreed that "separation of church
and state" applies to Judge Moore's case. But I came across some
Jefferson writings that indicate that we have misunderstood what
Jefferson really thought about church/state separation in the first
place. ...
The 14the admendment applies the 1st to the states. In Jefferson's
time, states could have official religions, but not now.
Thanks, Merlyn.
.
|
|
|
| User: "M. Clark" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
30 Aug 2003 08:17:16 PM |
|
|
Carol Lee Smith <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Brian Westley wrote:
idontreply@toemail.com (M. Clark) writes:
A week ago I would have reluctantly agreed that "separation of church
and state" applies to Judge Moore's case. But I came across some
Jefferson writings that indicate that we have misunderstood what
Jefferson really thought about church/state separation in the first
place. ...
The 14the admendment applies the 1st to the states. In Jefferson's
time, states could have official religions, but not now.
The People, you and I included, will decide this issue.
M. Clark
Thanks, Merlyn.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lord Calvert" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
30 Aug 2003 08:38:28 PM |
|
|
The 14the admendment applies the 1st to the states. In Jefferson's
time, states could have official religions, but not now.
The People, you and I included, will decide this issue.
"The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the
vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of
majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be
applied by the courts. One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free
speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental
rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no
elections." - US Supreme Court, West Virginia v. Barnette (1943), the decision
which affirmed compulsory recitation of the Pledge was not only
unconstitutional but anti-American.
Rich Goranson, Amherst, NY, USA (aa#MCMXCIX, a-vet#1)
EAC Ill-Legal Dept. "Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter Here"
"My country, right or wrong; to be defended when right and righted when wrong."
- Thomas Jefferson
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "AC" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
31 Aug 2003 12:31:34 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 01:17:16 +0000 (UTC),
M. Clark <idontreply@toemail.com> wrote:
Carol Lee Smith <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Brian Westley wrote:
idontreply@toemail.com (M. Clark) writes:
A week ago I would have reluctantly agreed that "separation of church
and state" applies to Judge Moore's case. But I came across some
Jefferson writings that indicate that we have misunderstood what
Jefferson really thought about church/state separation in the first
place. ...
The 14the admendment applies the 1st to the states. In Jefferson's
time, states could have official religions, but not now.
The People, you and I included, will decide this issue.
The courts have decided. You lost. End of story. I highly recommend that
you either push for an amendment to the Constitution (have fun) or becoming
a Supreme Court justice (have almost as much fun).
Your views are meaningless. The interpretations that exist go counter to
them, and as it is in the SC's power to interpret the Constitution, you're
out of luck.
It really doesn't matter what delusions you hold, or how you try to imagine
that Jefferson's views of an amendment passed long after his death would
have been. Jefferson's views are of only historical interest now.
--
Aaron Clausen
taocow@alberni.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
30 Aug 2003 10:20:25 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 01:17:16 +0000, M. Clark wrote:
Carol Lee Smith <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Brian Westley wrote:
idontreply@toemail.com (M. Clark) writes:
A week ago I would have reluctantly agreed that "separation of church
and state" applies to Judge Moore's case. But I came across some
Jefferson writings that indicate that we have misunderstood what
Jefferson really thought about church/state separation in the first
place. ...
The 14the admendment applies the 1st to the states. In Jefferson's
time, states could have official religions, but not now.
The People, you and I included, will decide this issue.
We already did. We even had a civil war over it.
The 14th was *meant to extend protections such as the 1st to cover the
states so they could *not violate basic rights as they did during the
slavery period.
Get it yet idiot? We had a *WAR* over this issue.
Your side lost.
--
Mark K. Bilbo
.
|
|
|
| User: "M. Clark" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
31 Aug 2003 01:06:01 PM |
|
|
Mark K. Bilbo <iskanipa-y@hoo.com> wrote:
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 01:17:16 +0000, M. Clark wrote:
Carol Lee Smith <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Brian Westley wrote:
idontreply@toemail.com (M. Clark) writes:
A week ago I would have reluctantly agreed that "separation of church
and state" applies to Judge Moore's case. But I came across some
Jefferson writings that indicate that we have misunderstood what
Jefferson really thought about church/state separation in the first
place. ...
The 14the admendment applies the 1st to the states. In Jefferson's
time, states could have official religions, but not now.
The People, you and I included, will decide this issue.
We already did. We even had a civil war over it.
The 14th was *meant to extend protections such as the 1st to cover the
???????
states so they could *not violate basic rights as they did during the
slavery period.
Define "meant to" in legal terms.
Indeed, they should have worded the 14th more clearly instead of relying
on word-of-mouth meanings. Indeed, the word extend doesn't even appear
in the 14th amendment. How careless of those people.
M. Clark
Get it yet idiot? We had a *WAR* over this issue.
Your side lost.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
31 Aug 2003 02:24:26 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 18:06:01 +0000, M. Clark wrote:
Mark K. Bilbo <iskanipa-y@hoo.com> wrote:
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 01:17:16 +0000, M. Clark wrote:
Carol Lee Smith <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Brian Westley wrote:
idontreply@toemail.com (M. Clark) writes:
A week ago I would have reluctantly agreed that "separation of
church and state" applies to Judge Moore's case. But I came
across some Jefferson writings that indicate that we have
misunderstood what Jefferson really thought about church/state
separation in the first place. ...
The 14the admendment applies the 1st to the states. In Jefferson's
time, states could have official religions, but not now.
The People, you and I included, will decide this issue.
We already did. We even had a civil war over it.
The 14th was *meant to extend protections such as the 1st to cover the
???????
states so they could *not violate basic rights as they did during the
slavery period.
Define "meant to" in legal terms.
Indeed, they should have worded the 14th more clearly instead of relying
on word-of-mouth meanings. Indeed, the word extend doesn't even appear in
the 14th amendment. How careless of those people.
They DID word it clearly you dumbfuck. Just because YOU are stupid doesn't
mean the people who crafted the amendment were.
--
Mark K. Bilbo
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Old Noah" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
25 Aug 2003 06:28:58 PM |
|
|
raven1 wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 11:22:13 GMT, "John P. Boatwright"
<name@For-God.net> wrote:
CB wrote:
The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause:
They should vote out all the crummy judges.
Feel free to start with Moore, who has made it clear that his respect
for the law of the land is nil. You can blabber all you want about how
his respect for "divine law" supercedes it, but whether you like it or
not, he was elected to uphold the Constitution, not the Bible, and his
clear contempt for the Constitution automatically renders him unfit to
serve in the office to which he was elected.
They'll put statues up proclaiming evolution is the
source of it all...
What judge has ever done this?
put a cross in urine and claim
it's art...
Last I checked, that was done by an artist, not a judge.
A religious artist, no less. Serrano is known for his strong religious
belief. The point of the "***** christ" is that what appears to be
religion can in fact be a crude copy of the "true" meaning of christ.
For those who have never seen the ***** christ, it is a beautiful
photograph, which any christian would be happy to display in their home,
if they didn't know how it had been made.
Glenn Arnold
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Seamus Ma Cleriec" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
03 Sep 2003 12:40:49 PM |
|
|
I'll let a Christian website do the "talking" for me ...
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2003/135/31.0.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Carol Lee Smith" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
03 Sep 2003 12:58:06 PM |
|
|
On 3 Sep 2003, Seamus Ma' Cleriec wrote:
I'll let a Christian website do the "talking" for me ...
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2003/135/31.0.html
He makes some interesting points.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
03 Sep 2003 01:58:00 PM |
|
|
In article <Pine.OSF.3.96.1030903125755.170W-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu> Carol Lee Smith <human@csd.uwm.edu> writes:
<
<On 3 Sep 2003, Seamus Ma' Cleriec wrote:
<
<> I'll let a Christian website do the "talking" for me ...
<> http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2003/135/31.0.html
<
<He makes some interesting points.
I was interested in this:
The evangelical left is equally skilled at reimagining
the church's borders; it just uses a different set of
signposts. Boycotts against gas-guzzling SUVs, complaints
over "patriarchal" translations of the Bible, support for
welfare spending, peace rallies to denounce American
"imperialism"-these are the causes that distinguish the
insiders from the outsiders. For several months I
attended an evangelical church with a warm heart for
social action. Shortly after I arrived, however, conflict
broke out between church leadership and the congregation
over the issue of race. Their longtime goal of "racial
reconciliation" was being thwarted. To the leaders, the
mostly white church simply did not look black enough. The
reason given was that we (the whites) supported the
institutions of racial injustice that pervade American
life. How exactly we did this, or what we should do about
it, was never made clear.
What is "the evangelical left"? Oh, I'm prefectly aware of
too-earnest liberals who are every but as US/Them, more-liberal-
than-thou True Believers in leftist causes. And I'm also aware
of social-activist churches. But is there an "evangelical left"
in the religious technical sense of the term "evangelical"?
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
03 Sep 2003 03:14:22 PM |
|
|
(Cary Kittrell) wrote:
<> http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2003/135/31.0.html
I was interested in this:
The evangelical left is equally skilled at reimagining
the church's borders;
What is "the evangelical left"?
http://hallreligion.com/protestantism/518.shtml
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=%22evangelical+left%22
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/8t9/8t9058.html
But is there an "evangelical left"
in the religious technical sense of the term "evangelical"?
Apparently so.
Remembers that "evangelical" is not synonymous with "fundamentalist".
There are people evangelizing the gay community who are most certainly
NOT fundies.
lojbab
--
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
03 Sep 2003 06:12:04 PM |
|
|
In article <0iiclvkpnl0njj4im3cagaqrk2u1ibsb4q@4ax.com> Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org> writes:
<cary@afone.as.arizona.edu (Cary Kittrell) wrote:
<><> http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2003/135/31.0.html
<>I was interested in this:
<> The evangelical left is equally skilled at reimagining
<> the church's borders;
<
<>
<>What is "the evangelical left"?
<
<http://hallreligion.com/protestantism/518.shtml
<http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=%22evangelical+left%22
<http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/8t9/8t9058.html
Uh oh. Postmodernism encounters the religious right. I'm tempted to
say they deserve one another.
It all sounds pretty academic so far.
<
<>But is there an "evangelical left"
<>in the religious technical sense of the term "evangelical"?
<
<Apparently so.
<
<Remembers that "evangelical" is not synonymous with "fundamentalist".
<There are people evangelizing the gay community who are most certainly
<NOT fundies.
Well, assuming they're not trying to "cure" them.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gray Shockley" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
03 Sep 2003 03:28:30 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 3 Sep 2003 15:14:22 -0500, Bob LeChevalier wrote
(in message <0iiclvkpnl0njj4im3cagaqrk2u1ibsb4q@4ax.com>):
Remembers that "evangelical" is not synonymous with "fundamentalist".
There are people evangelizing the gay community who are most certainly
NOT fundies.
Yah; like Tammy Faye Bakker (this is /not/ a joke).
Fer instance:
<http://www.watchmanmag.com/0508/050807.htm>
Gray Shockley
-------------------------------------------------
Pain is evitable but suffering is optional.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
03 Sep 2003 06:13:48 PM |
|
|
In article <0001HW.BB7BB91E000604271327B8F0@news-south.giganews.com> Gray Shockley <gray-11@cybercoffee.org> writes:
<On Wed, 3 Sep 2003 15:14:22 -0500, Bob LeChevalier wrote
<(in message <0iiclvkpnl0njj4im3cagaqrk2u1ibsb4q@4ax.com>):
<
<> Remembers that "evangelical" is not synonymous with "fundamentalist".
<> There are people evangelizing the gay community who are most certainly
<> NOT fundies.
<
<
<Yah; like Tammy Faye Bakker (this is /not/ a joke).
<
<
<Fer instance:
<
<<http://www.watchmanmag.com/0508/050807.htm>
<
I remember seeing this before. Well, of COURSE Tamy Faye is
a gay icon. I mean, how could she not be?
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
21 Aug 2003 06:56:39 PM |
|
|
In article <5591d176.0308211418.16715e18@posting.google.com> (Dave) writes:
<"CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote in message news:<bi2g2q$kq3$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com>...
<> [...]
<> The Ten Commandments has no purpose to effect advancement of religion.
<> [...]
<
<As you certainly know the first several of the Ten Commandments are
<rather obnoxious promotions of one religion above all others. Judge
<Roy is in the wrong and so are you.
Oh, I've attempted twice now to discuss with CB, in some detail, the
fact taht six of these Ten which "form the basis of our judicial system"
are actually nowhere to be found in our laws, and how the remaining four --
which are certainly to be found in our system of laws -- are pretty much
universal taboos, common to Christian and non-Christian cultures alike.
For some odd reason, CB doesn't want to talk about it.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
21 Aug 2003 11:54:41 PM |
|
|
In article <bi2g2q$kq3$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com>,
"CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote:
"johac" <jhachm@remove.ixpres.com> wrote in message
news:jhachm-CDD73B.22283020082003@central.giganews.com...
In article <f947kv05tdll4i05169dnbl8fqlkqsthcv@4ax.com>,
Jd <jday123@bellsouth.net> wrote:
johac wrote:
In article <94b5kvsovgut7rsfrotvun4glkfn6ij71j@4ax.com>,
Jd <jday123@bellsouth.net> wrote:
This will come as quite a shock to leftists everywhere. Over 1000
Orthodox Rabbis, as well as representatives from the black
community such as Alan Keyes and T.D. Jakes, voiced support along
with an estimated 10,000 folks who showed up at the Ten
Commandments Rally in Montgomery Alabama.... for Judge Roy Moore
and his stand on the Ten Commandments. Interestingly, 35
atheists also showed up to protest.
It's not a numbers game. Display of overt religious symbols in a
public building clearly violates the establishment clause of the First
Amendment. The Federals Courts found it so, and the Supreme Court will
uphold the decision. Moore can take his sculpture home and make a bird
bath out of it for his back yard.
Says who? You?
Some guys named Jefferson, Madison, and a few others said it first.
Oh, and a few judges, superior to Moore agreed too.
--
Judge Moore's motives are to uphold Alabama's state Constitution, nothing
else. The Ten Commandments monument is a testament to the state Constitution
and to state laws Justice Moore is sworn to uphold.
The Constitution of the United States of America outranks both Moore
and the Alabama Constitution.
--
John Hachmann, aa #1782
"In those parts of the world where learning and science has prevailed,
miracles ceased; but in those parts that are barbarous and ignorant,
miracles are still in vogue." -Letters of Ethan Allen to Thomas Jefferson
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jd" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
22 Aug 2003 09:49:56 PM |
|
|
johac wrote:
In article <bi2g2q$kq3$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com>,
"CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote:
"johac" <jhachm@remove.ixpres.com> wrote in message
news:jhachm-CDD73B.22283020082003@central.giganews.com...
In article <f947kv05tdll4i05169dnbl8fqlkqsthcv@4ax.com>,
Jd <jday123@bellsouth.net> wrote:
johac wrote:
In article <94b5kvsovgut7rsfrotvun4glkfn6ij71j@4ax.com>,
Jd <jday123@bellsouth.net> wrote:
This will come as quite a shock to leftists everywhere. Over 1000
Orthodox Rabbis, as well as representatives from the black
community such as Alan Keyes and T.D. Jakes, voiced support along
with an estimated 10,000 folks who showed up at the Ten
Commandments Rally in Montgomery Alabama.... for Judge Roy Moore
and his stand on the Ten Commandments. Interestingly, 35
atheists also showed up to protest.
It's not a numbers game. Display of overt religious symbols in a
public building clearly violates the establishment clause of the First
Amendment. The Federals Courts found it so, and the Supreme Court will
uphold the decision. Moore can take his sculpture home and make a bird
bath out of it for his back yard.
Says who? You?
Some guys named Jefferson, Madison, and a few others said it first.
Oh, and a few judges, superior to Moore agreed too.
--
Judge Moore's motives are to uphold Alabama's state Constitution, nothing
else. The Ten Commandments monument is a testament to the state Constitution
and to state laws Justice Moore is sworn to uphold.
The Constitution of the United States of America outranks both Moore
and the Alabama Constitution.
God outranks everything.
Psalms 2:1-3 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a
vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers
take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his
anointed, saying, "Let us break their bands asunder, and cast
away their cords from us".
Psalms 2:4-6 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord
shall have them in derision. Then shall he speak unto them in
his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure. "Yet have I set
my king upon my holy hill of Zion".
Jd
"Is not my word like as a fire? saith the Lord; and like a hammer
that breaketh the rock in pieces?" (Jeremiah 23:29)
.
|
|
|
| User: "James Powell" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
23 Aug 2003 07:59:39 AM |
|
|
"Jd" <jday123@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:rvkdkv08l97jojplsha7vkf9ao7hd9mmdt@4ax.com...
johac wrote:
In article <bi2g2q$kq3$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com>,
"CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote:
"johac" <jhachm@remove.ixpres.com> wrote in message
news:jhachm-CDD73B.22283020082003@central.giganews.com...
In article <f947kv05tdll4i05169dnbl8fqlkqsthcv@4ax.com>,
Jd <jday123@bellsouth.net> wrote:
johac wrote:
In article <94b5kvsovgut7rsfrotvun4glkfn6ij71j@4ax.com>,
Jd <jday123@bellsouth.net> wrote:
This will come as quite a shock to leftists everywhere. Over
1000
Orthodox Rabbis, as well as representatives from the black
community such as Alan Keyes and T.D. Jakes, voiced support
along
with an estimated 10,000 folks who showed up at the Ten
Commandments Rally in Montgomery Alabama.... for Judge Roy Moore
and his stand on the Ten Commandments. Interestingly, 35
atheists also showed up to protest.
It's not a numbers game. Display of overt religious symbols in a
public building clearly violates the establishment clause of the
First
Amendment. The Federals Courts found it so, and the Supreme Court
will
uphold the decision. Moore can take his sculpture home and make a
bird
bath out of it for his back yard.
Says who? You?
Some guys named Jefferson, Madison, and a few others said it first.
Oh, and a few judges, superior to Moore agreed too.
--
Judge Moore's motives are to uphold Alabama's state Constitution,
nothing
else. The Ten Commandments monument is a testament to the state
Constitution
and to state laws Justice Moore is sworn to uphold.
The Constitution of the United States of America outranks both Moore
and the Alabama Constitution.
God outranks everything.
My god can beat up your god.
James Powell
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roger" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
23 Aug 2003 01:35:39 AM |
|
|
"Jd" <jday123@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:rvkdkv08l97jojplsha7vkf9ao7hd9mmdt@4ax.com...
johac wrote:
In article <bi2g2q$kq3$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com>,
"CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote:
"johac" <jhachm@remove.ixpres.com> wrote in message
news:jhachm-CDD73B.22283020082003@central.giganews.com...
In article <f947kv05tdll4i05169dnbl8fqlkqsthcv@4ax.com>,
Jd <jday123@bellsouth.net> wrote:
johac wrote:
In article <94b5kvsovgut7rsfrotvun4glkfn6ij71j@4ax.com>,
Jd <jday123@bellsouth.net> wrote:
This will come as quite a shock to leftists everywhere. Over
1000
Orthodox Rabbis, as well as representatives from the black
community such as Alan Keyes and T.D. Jakes, voiced support
along
with an estimated 10,000 folks who showed up at the Ten
Commandments Rally in Montgomery Alabama.... for Judge Roy Moore
and his stand on the Ten Commandments. Interestingly, 35
atheists also showed up to protest.
It's not a numbers game. Display of overt religious symbols in a
public building clearly violates the establishment clause of the
First
Amendment. The Federals Courts found it so, and the Supreme Court
will
uphold the decision. Moore can take his sculpture home and make a
bird
bath out of it for his back yard.
Says who? You?
Some guys named Jefferson, Madison, and a few others said it first.
Oh, and a few judges, superior to Moore agreed too.
--
Judge Moore's motives are to uphold Alabama's state Constitution,
nothing
else. The Ten Commandments monument is a testament to the state
Constitution
and to state laws Justice Moore is sworn to uphold.
The Constitution of the United States of America outranks both Moore
and the Alabama Constitution.
God outranks everything.
Psalms 2:1-3 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a
vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers
take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his
anointed, saying, "Let us break their bands asunder, and cast
away their cords from us".
And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be
Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's.
I'm sure you know where to find it.
Psalms 2:4-6 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord
shall have them in derision. Then shall he speak unto them in
his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure. "Yet have I set
my king upon my holy hill of Zion".
Jd
"Is not my word like as a fire? saith the Lord; and like a hammer
that breaketh the rock in pieces?" (Jeremiah 23:29)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
23 Aug 2003 01:45:08 AM |
|
|
In article <rvkdkv08l97jojplsha7vkf9ao7hd9mmdt@4ax.com>,
Jd <jday123@bellsouth.net> wrote:
johac wrote:
In article <bi2g2q$kq3$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com>,
"CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote:
"johac" <jhachm@remove.ixpres.com> wrote in message
news:jhachm-CDD73B.22283020082003@central.giganews.com...
In article <f947kv05tdll4i05169dnbl8fqlkqsthcv@4ax.com>,
Jd <jday123@bellsouth.net> wrote:
johac wrote:
In article <94b5kvsovgut7rsfrotvun4glkfn6ij71j@4ax.com>,
Jd <jday123@bellsouth.net> wrote:
This will come as quite a shock to leftists everywhere. Over 1000
Orthodox Rabbis, as well as representatives from the black
community such as Alan Keyes and T.D. Jakes, voiced support along
with an estimated 10,000 folks who showed up at the Ten
Commandments Rally in Montgomery Alabama.... for Judge Roy Moore
and his stand on the Ten Commandments. Interestingly, 35
atheists also showed up to protest.
It's not a numbers game. Display of overt religious symbols in a
public building clearly violates the establishment clause of the
First
Amendment. The Federals Courts found it so, and the Supreme Court
will
uphold the decision. Moore can take his sculpture home and make a
bird
bath out of it for his back yard.
Says who? You?
Some guys named Jefferson, Madison, and a few others said it first.
Oh, and a few judges, superior to Moore agreed too.
--
Judge Moore's motives are to uphold Alabama's state Constitution, nothing
else. The Ten Commandments monument is a testament to the state
Constitution
and to state laws Justice Moore is sworn to uphold.
The Constitution of the United States of America outranks both Moore
and the Alabama Constitution.
God outranks everything.
Now which god are you talking about and what evidence do you have for
he/she/it?
--
John Hachmann, aa #1782
"In those parts of the world where learning and science has prevailed,
miracles ceased; but in those parts that are barbarous and ignorant,
miracles are still in vogue." -Letters of Ethan Allen to Thomas Jefferson
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
23 Aug 2003 06:28:04 AM |
|
|
Jd <jday123@bellsouth.net> wrote:
Judge Moore's motives are to uphold Alabama's state Constitution, nothing
else. The Ten Commandments monument is a testament to the state Constitution
and to state laws Justice Moore is sworn to uphold.
The Constitution of the United States of America outranks both Moore
and the Alabama Constitution.
God outranks everything.
Not in our courts.
lojbab
--
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
23 Aug 2003 01:43:05 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 21:49:56 -0500, Jd <jday123@bellsouth.net> wrote:
johac wrote:
In article <bi2g2q$kq3$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com>,
"CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote:
"johac" <jhachm@remove.ixpres.com> wrote in message
news:jhachm-CDD73B.22283020082003@central.giganews.com...
In article <f947kv05tdll4i05169dnbl8fqlkqsthcv@4ax.com>,
Jd <jday123@bellsouth.net> wrote:
johac wrote:
In article <94b5kvsovgut7rsfrotvun4glkfn6ij71j@4ax.com>,
Jd <jday123@bellsouth.net> wrote:
This will come as quite a shock to leftists everywhere. Over 1000
Orthodox Rabbis, as well as representatives from the black
community such as Alan Keyes and T.D. Jakes, voiced support along
with an estimated 10,000 folks who showed up at the Ten
Commandments Rally in Montgomery Alabama.... for Judge Roy Moore
and his stand on the Ten Commandments. Interestingly, 35
atheists also showed up to protest.
It's not a numbers game. Display of overt religious symbols in a
public building clearly violates the establishment clause of the First
Amendment. The Federals Courts found it so, and the Supreme Court will
uphold the decision. Moore can take his sculpture home and make a bird
bath out of it for his back yard.
Says who? You?
Some guys named Jefferson, Madison, and a few others said it first.
Oh, and a few judges, superior to Moore agreed too.
--
Judge Moore's motives are to uphold Alabama's state Constitution, nothing
else. The Ten Commandments monument is a testament to the state Constitution
and to state laws Justice Moore is sworn to uphold.
The Constitution of the United States of America outranks both Moore
and the Alabama Constitution.
God outranks everything.
Which God?
Psalms 2:1-3 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a
vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers
take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his
anointed, saying, "Let us break their bands asunder, and cast
away their cords from us".
Psalms 2:4-6 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord
shall have them in derision. Then shall he speak unto them in
his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure. "Yet have I set
my king upon my holy hill of Zion".
That's nice. Now would you please explain why the *Protestant*
Christian version of the Commandments should be promoted by the State
in violation of the establishment clause? It would seem that Roman
Catholics (by far the largest Christian denomination in the US, and
who disagree significantly with Protestants on the wording of the "Ten
Commandments") have every reason to be just as pissed with Judge Moore
as any atheists are...
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of CBLOON'S Silliness Clause |
21 Aug 2003 11:21:09 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 09:07:32 -0400, "CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote:
Judge Moore's motives are to uphold Alabama's state Constitution, nothing
else.
Alabama's state constitution governs citizens of America. When it runs counter
to ALL American's rights, it MUST comply with Federal law.
PERIOD.
---------------------------------------------------
ladies use my tongue for your pleasure
</groups?q=author:danaraffaniello%40worldnet.
att.net&start=210&hl=en&lr=&ie=UT>F-8&selm=
63j187%24nji%40bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net&rnum=226>
swm very oral will orally worship any female that wishes to be worshipped.
will kiss and lick your feet and butt .
might be wiling to be your toilet paper if you
are that aggressive
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: The Alabama federal court is in violation of the Establishment Clause |
21 Aug 2003 04:27:41 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 09:07:32 -0400, CB wrote:
Judge Moore's motives are to uphold Alabama's state Constitution, nothing
else.
Which constitution is subordinated to the US Constitution.
Remember, we had a war to settle this issue...
--
Mark K. Bilbo
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ninure Saunders" |
|
| Title: Re: Moore ignites new multicultural vision |
20 Aug 2003 10:50:17 AM |
|
|
In article <f947kv05tdll4i05169dnbl8fqlkqsthcv@4ax.com>, Jd
<jday123@bellsouth.net> wrote:
-johac wrote:
-
->In article <94b5kvsovgut7rsfrotvun4glkfn6ij71j@4ax.com>,
-> Jd <jday123@bellsouth.net> wrote:
->
->> This will come as quite a shock to leftists everywhere. Over 1000
->> Orthodox Rabbis, as well as representatives from the black
->> community such as Alan Keyes and T.D. Jakes, voiced support along
->> with an estimated 10,000 folks who showed up at the Ten
->> Commandments Rally in Montgomery Alabama.... for Judge Roy Moore
->> and his stand on the Ten Commandments. Interestingly, 35
->> atheists also showed up to protest.
->>
->
->It's not a numbers game. Display of overt religious symbols in a
->public building clearly violates the establishment clause of the First
->Amendment. The Federals Courts found it so, and the Supreme Court will
->uphold the decision. Moore can take his sculpture home and make a bird
->bath out of it for his back yard.
-
-Says who? You?
-
-ROFLmao
-
-Jd
-
-"Is not my word like as a fire? saith the Lord; and like a hammer
-that breaketh the rock in pieces?" (Jeremiah 23:29)
Proverbs 3: 3 Don't let kindness and truth forsake you. Bind them around
your neck. Write them on the tablet of your heart.
Hebrews 8: 8b "Behold, the days come," says the Lord, "That I will make
a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah;
9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers, In the day
that I took them by the hand to lead them forth out of the land of Egypt;
For they didn't continue in my covenant, And I disregarded them," says the
Lord.
10 "For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel.
After those days," says the Lord; "I will put my laws into their mind, I
will also write them on their heart. I will be to them a God, And they
will be to me a people.
11 They will not teach every man his fellow citizen, Every man his
brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' For all will know me, From the least of
them to the greatest of them.
12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness. I will remember their
sins and lawless deeds no more
If "YOU" and Moore are part of the New Covenant, why do you need to make
God a liar by putting up the Old Covenant in stone (or signs on the
wall, or whatever"?
Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
http://Rainbow-Christian.tk
The Lord is my Shepherd and He knows I'm Gay
http://Ninure-Saunders.tk
My Yahoo Group
http://Ninure.tk
My Online Diary
http://www.ninure.deardiary.net
-
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
http://www.MCCchurch.org
To send e-mail, remove nohate from address
.
|
|
|
|
