Thumper Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 3 hours ago, iantjambo said: He’s pretty much spot on though to be fair. I'm not saying he is, or isn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iantjambo Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 1 hour ago, Thumper said: I'm not saying he is, or isn't. Yeah I know mate?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharky999 Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 So his Go fund-me page has been withdrawn, due to it violating the terms and conditions of its use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpruceBringsteen Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 2 hours ago, Sharky999 said: So his Go fund-me page has been withdrawn, due to it violating the terms and conditions of its use. That's a shame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovecraft Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 Was just coming on to post the same thing. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-48740811 Poor guy. Thoughts are with him. Dick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sidelight Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 (edited) On 23/06/2019 at 10:45, Normthebarman said: As I understand it, not every Christian believes the Bible is the literal word of God, just as not every Christian believes the pope is God's PR guy. Therefore, it's all open to interpretation. Put it this way, it'd be really weird for them to have gay ministers and clergy, which they do, if they all believe they go to hell. I eagerly await the upcoming barney between 2 of our members over this. And for them to explain it better. I'm not a religious person, I just know a few that are. With regard to the historical accounts of Jesus’ life it is clear that he welcomed the marginalised, abused and put-upon people in society. He ate and drank with them all. Jesus welcomed people as they were, however he didn’t always say that that their life style choices were wise and life affirming. The bible commands all Christians to love their neighbour. Without exception christians should welcome all people. However, Jesus was very clear in his teaching that marriage is between a man and a woman. Other relationships are not marriage. Today this message is counter cultural. Having said that, there are many other life style choices affirmed within biblical text also described as sinful, not one certain sin is exclusive. When biblical Christians suggest that gay marriage is wrong - a sinful rebellion against God and His Word, they are very often referred to as: evil bigots /unloving / how can they sleep at night and on etc – you see it here in its totality. The motivation for this stance is somewhat different, Christians who read the bible and believe it as the Word of God would never encourage a person into what the bible describes as a sinful relationship. Rather, real concern and love for another promotes the opposite reaction. To stand up and say that this is wrong and contrary to the Word and teaching of Christ. Edited June 24, 2019 by alfajambo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maple Leaf Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 10 minutes ago, alfajambo said: With regard to the historical accounts of Jesus’ life it is clear that he welcomed the marginalised, abused and put-upon people in society. He ate and drank with them all. Jesus welcomed people as they were, however he didn’t always say that that their life style choices were wise and life affirming. The bible commands all Christians to love their neighbour. Without exception christians should welcome all people. However, Jesus was very clear in his teaching that marriage is between a man and a woman. Other relationships are not marriage. Today this message is counter cultural. Having said that, there are many other life style choices affirmed within biblical text also described as sinful, not one certain sin is exclusive. When biblical Christians suggest that gay marriage is wrong - a sinful rebellion against God and His Word, they are very often referred to as: evil bigots /unloving / how can they sleep at night and on etc – you see it here in its totality. The motivation for this stance is somewhat different, Christians who read the bible and believe it as the Word of God would never encourage a person into what the bible describes as a sinful relationship. Rather, real concern and love for another promotes the opposite reaction. To stand up and say that this is wrong and contrary to the Word and teaching of Christ. It's not a choice, any more than the colour of their eyes is a choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sidelight Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 1 minute ago, Maple Leaf said: It's not a choice, any more than the colour of their eyes is a choice. Action, rather than motivation is a choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sidelight Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Maple Leaf said: It's not a choice, any more than the colour of their eyes is a choice. The bible does not teach that being gay is a sin. However, action based on this motivation is undeniably counter to biblical teaching. That said as previously stated not one certain sin is exclusive. All sin falls into the same category. The bible is clear and Christians believe that Gods’ Word is unchanging. But the crowd says follow me and do your own thing. Where the cross says follow Jesus. Sections of the world church its people and clergy are given over to the crowd. Edited June 24, 2019 by alfajambo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Z Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 (edited) Anti-LGBT hate preacher James David Manning faces abuse allegations Oh what a shock this man has been accused of abusing children Edited June 24, 2019 by Justin Z Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpruceBringsteen Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 I see this helmet is back at it, suing the RA for $10 million. Hope it ruins him, tbh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxteth O'Grady Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 On 21/06/2019 at 12:16, i8hibsh said: Religion Indeed - it is utter madness Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sidelight Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 (edited) On 23/06/2019 at 14:23, Maple Leaf said: Correct. Such as Christian bakers refusing to sell a wedding cake for a gay marriage..... Those are worse than quoting the Bible. They are small incidents to be sure, but indicative of an attitude that says that discrimination against gays, for religious reasons, is acceptable. Edited August 1, 2019 by alfajambo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maple Leaf Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 5 hours ago, alfajambo said: After watching that, I'm glad to be living in a progressive country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sidelight Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 4 hours ago, Maple Leaf said: After watching that, I'm glad to be living in a progressive country. Equality law does not, and should never compel people to promote a cause with which they profoundly disagree. The progressive or otherwise label is surely not relevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack D and coke Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 (edited) 5 hours ago, Maple Leaf said: After watching that, I'm glad to be living in a progressive country. Trudeau is an tube let’s not kiddy on Canada doesn’t have an absolute sap as their leader. That guy makes me cringe every time I hear him open his mouth. Edited August 2, 2019 by jack D and coke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maple Leaf Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 5 hours ago, alfajambo said: Equality law does not, and should never compel people to promote a cause with which they profoundly disagree. The progressive or otherwise label is surely not relevant. Refusing to provide a service to someone because of their religion/skin colour/sexual orientation is bigotry. They weren't asked to 'promote a cause', they were asked to bake a cake. They're bakers. By refusing to bake the cake for gay men, they are bigots. I'm surprised the courts let them away with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maple Leaf Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 4 hours ago, jack D and coke said: Trudeau is an tube let’s not kiddy on Canada doesn’t have an absolute sap as their leader. That guy makes me cringe every time I hear him open his mouth. You'll get no argument from me on any of that. There will be an election in October, and it would be good to see him lose. The trouble is, his main opponent is a mini-Trump, so Trudeau might well win re-election on that basis alone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sidelight Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 39 minutes ago, Maple Leaf said: Refusing to provide a service to someone because of their religion/skin colour/sexual orientation is bigotry. They weren't asked to 'promote a cause', they were asked to bake a cake. They're bakers. By refusing to bake the cake for gay men, they are bigots. I'm surprised the courts let them away with it. I agree with the premise you highlight. However, in the situation described that was not the case. They were asked to bake a cake promoting a message that they fervently disagreed with. And were not discriminating against an individual on grounds of bigotry. Therefore, the supreme court decision was fully justified in every way. They didn’t refuse to bake the cake, but rather they declined the order to decorate the cake for said reasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 1 hour ago, Maple Leaf said: Refusing to provide a service to someone because of their religion/skin colour/sexual orientation is bigotry. They weren't asked to 'promote a cause', they were asked to bake a cake. They're bakers. By refusing to bake the cake for gay men, they are bigots. I'm surprised the courts let them away with it. They weren't denied a cake because they were gay. The company refused to decorate the cake with a political message they disagreed with. I'm with the bakers on this one. I agree with gay marriage but I respect a person's choice to disagree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpruceBringsteen Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 Kind of think the cake thing isn't particularly relevant here. He said gay people are going to hell, not "I don't agree with a particular message". If for instance one of our players tweeted "All catholics should hang", just what would the expected reaction be? Spoiler Pro-tip: they (correctly) wouldn't be a Hearts player past that evening Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maple Leaf Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 1 hour ago, alfajambo said: I agree with the premise you highlight. However, in the situation described that was not the case. They were asked to bake a cake promoting a message that they fervently disagreed with. And were not discriminating against an individual on grounds of bigotry. Therefore, the supreme court decision was fully justified in every way. They didn’t refuse to bake the cake, but rather they declined the order to decorate the cake for said reasons. 1 hour ago, Normthebarman said: They weren't denied a cake because they were gay. The company refused to decorate the cake with a political message they disagreed with. I'm with the bakers on this one. I agree with gay marriage but I respect a person's choice to disagree. The bakers were asked to bake a cake and decorate it with the words, "Support Gay Marriage". The cake was intended for the guests at the wedding. That's hardly a political message. Anyway, the court agreed with the bakers so that is that. However, imho, the ruling opens the door to others who might not be so benign. For example, if a bigoted baker is asked to decorate a cake for a Black wedding with the words, "Black Lives Matter', does he have the right to refuse? Just asking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack D and coke Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 3 hours ago, Maple Leaf said: You'll get no argument from me on any of that. There will be an election in October, and it would be good to see him lose. The trouble is, his main opponent is a mini-Trump, so Trudeau might well win re-election on that basis alone. Trudeau is a culturally programmed goon. An embarrassment of a man. A mini Trump in Canada too?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.