The Totalitarian Leftist Tactics against the Right

The whole point of the First Amendment was based on that fact. It was created to limit Christian sects ability to force their beliefs on others. No one wanted to see the crazy Puritans have the right or ability to impose their nonsense on the other states.Edited by jar, : appalin spallin of ---> onEdited by jar, : want ---> wantedEdited by jar, : fix attribution

Percy it's not necessary to explain every little thing to us; we are at least supposedly adults. We know what nihilists are

Correct. Maryland was a Roman Catholic refuge, Pennsylvania a Quaker refuge, Virginia (the first to include religious freedom as a constitutional right) was primarily Methodist and Presbyterian with an overlay of Church of England, New England mostly Puritan. The one thing all agreed was that each must be protected from the other.

Again Faith, that is simply not true. Every Christian denomination is based on the Bible so gay marriage does not conflict with Biblical Christianity, only with some chapters of Club Christians interpretations of what is Biblical Christianity. The position you market is exactly the reason we need the protections of the First Amendment; so that "YOUR Christianity" cannot be imposed on anyone not a member of your cult.

The kids would finally learn that their belief system was just another creation of human beings and not anything special. It would be wonderful.Edited by jar, : fix attribution

Again Faith, while it is true that all religions, including Christianity are man made and the Bible provides ample evidence that that is true, there is certainly nothing in the Bible that suggests it actually follows human history since creation. In fact the Bible itself includes two mutually exclusive and contradictory creation myths that include two entire different god characters. Actually in many if not most Christian schools that are run by recognized chapters of Club Christian they would have learned that the Bible itself is another human creation filled with factual errors, contradictions and folktales as well as writings that show the beliefs of a peoples in a given era and society.

Again Faith, reality says your guess is once again wrong. Here is a section from the 1981 Pastoral letter from Bishop Sims opposing Creationism being taught as science in ANY school.

quote:

---

In the Bible the intermingling of why and how is evident, especially in the opening chapters of Genesis. There the majestic statements of God's action, its value and the place of humanity in it, use an orderly and sequential statement of method. The why of the divine work is carried in a primitive description of how the work was done.

​

But even here the distinction between religion and science is clear. In Genesis there is not one creation statement but two. They agree as to why and who, but are quite different as to how and when. The statements are set forth in tandem, chapter one of Genesis using one description of method and chapter two another. According to the first, humanity was created, male and female, after the creation of plants and animals. According to the second, man was created first, then the trees, the animals and finally the woman and not from the earth as in the first account, but from the rib of the man. Textual research shows that these two accounts are from two distinct eras, the first later in history, the second earlier.

---

He goes on to say:

quote:

---

Insistence upon dated and partially contradictory statements of how as conditions for true belief in the why of creation cannot qualify either as faithful religion or as intelligent science. Neither evolution over an immensity of time nor the work done in a six-day week are articles of the creeds. It is a symptom of fearful and unsound religion to contend with one another as if they were.

---

Just as there are two mutually exclusive and contradictory flood myths in the Bible, there are two contradictory creation myths.Nothing you have presented so far Faith has shown even the smallest evidence that there are any Totalitarian Leftist Tactics against the Right.

Yes, the source is called "The Bible". You may have heard of it. But there is nothing deceptive or deceived about the position I present, rather it is Biblically based.But the topic is your claim that there is some Totalitarian Leftist Tactics against the Right and so far you have not presented any evidence that might support such a conclusion or even such a hypothesis.

What is frightening or should be frightening is that once again the Republicans are using headlines to hide their real motives and actions. This is "ProLife" dishonesty all over again. The key component in both bills is not the bathroom just as "ProLife" has nothing to do with being prolife; but is the inclusion of "employment". That strips away the right of any municipality to enact laws protecting LBGT people from discrimination.

Utter nonsense Faith. The law suits were brought ONLY because the so called Christians were doing things that were illegal.

That is simply a matter of either your ignorance or purposeful dishonesty. Christian teachings have been used as the excuse for discrimination and laws that prevented such discrimination have been opposed based on Christian teachings almost since Paul started marketing his new religion. The law allowing blacks to be citizens was opposed as being against God's law, the same goes for interracial marriage, being considered a Native American, Jews holding office, Roman Catholics holding office, Italians and Irish even getting jobs.Christianity has been extremely successful at genocide, bigotry and discrimination including bigotry towards other chapters of Club Christian.But again, where is there any evidence of the existence of any Totalitarian Leftist Tactics against the Right?

But that again is simply not rue Faith. The whole purpose of the First Amendment was to limit discrimination from some of the Protestant sects, specifically the crazy as bedbugs Puritans.Pennsylvania was not a Protestant colony.Virginia was not a Protestant colony.Georgia was not a Protestant colony.Maryland was not a Protestant colony.The First Amendment was created to try to make sure that the Protestants could not pass laws limiting the power of other religions, Thank God.

Actually no Faith. Virginia was a secular commercial venture, the Virginia Company.Maryland was a Roman Catholic refuge.Pennsylvania was a Quaker colony.Georgia was a prison colony.Yet yes, the goal of the First Amendment was to protect all religions including Jews and Muslims and Hindus and other Christians against discrimination by any Christian sect.But you still have not presented any evidence that there is any "Totalitarian Leftist Tactics against the Right" or shown that I have any anti-Protestant/ anti-Christian bias. Since I happen to be a Protestant Christian the latter is a particularly silly assertion on your part.

Or that the folk living along the border want the stupid wall or that it would do anything worthwhile.

Door locks cost less than the stupid wall and I don't have to help pay for your door locks.