CPR

I disagree with Koran burning wholeheartedly, but the article is correct that anyone has the right to do it in this country. Our first amendment freedoms go both ways, and sometimes supporting freedom means supporting something that we disagree with. In fact, situations like these are the very reason that we have the first amendment. We don't need to be forced to allow things that we all support. It's these reprehensible ideas that have to be protected in order for us to all have real freedom.

Should Jones or anyone else engage in this activity? No. Should anyone rOB them of the Constitutional right to do so? Absolutely not.

NOBody will go to hell for disagreeing with Jerry. Only those who refuse to be born again in Christ and follow Him by OBeying His Word will go to hell.

Good gracious! I didn't say I had a tatoo, I was just putting forth my thoughts based on reason and scripture. The OT is useful for us, but praise God that we don't live under the law anymore! That doesn't mean that I "pick and choose" or that I'm not a true Christian, it means that true Christians can have differing opinions while we're on earth.

FWIW, I think tatoos are unsightly, but they aren't a sin.

Why do you have this urge to use hateful names and make a bad name for Christians?

Ah, I see.

Personally, I'm thinking about moving to Saudi Arabia. They have laws against such things.

Personally, I don't really like tatoos. However, that verse is in Leviticus and under the law so I don't believe that we are still bound to that anymore than we are bound to not wear clothes of 2 different fabrics or not plant two different crops side by side.

So the minority should rule over the majority then?

You know John, one day they will keep going this direction CPR speaks of, them the time will come after a president election the judges will step in and say. "No, the majority voted wrong, the wrong man has been elected president, we over rule, this time the man who lost the election for president will be our next president." Them the judges will say to those who disagree, "if you don't like it. move."

Yes, that day is coming, thanks to the thinking of people like CPR..

<br /><br /><br />

I'm making this suggestion only because of the suggestion your making, I suggest you go somewhere else, after all this is suppose to be a country with a government for the people by the people, and the majority does not it built close to ground zero. Remember, they are more than welcome to build it somewhere else, just not here.

What are "private moral issues"? Can you provide a list so we know what you are speaking of?

Perhaps "moral issue" is the wrong thing to call it. Maybe it should be called a private issue or a personal moral issue. Murder should be legislated because it directly affects a person's right to life. However, there are plenty of private issues that do not affect others that should be left to the individual. The individual can make decisions that violate God's law, but that is between them and God. If the only reason someone isn't committing adultery is because it's illegal than that doesn't change their heart. Private things are private and things that affect life, liberty and property are the only moral issues that should be legislated. Otherwise, it is between a person and God.

i don't agree, but they have a right to have the billboards. I don't really see what the big deal is. There are plenty of billboards advertising churches or advertising God. If no one makes a thing of it than it will be even less of an issue.

The President is right. We have rights a freedom in this country. If you don't like it I suggest you go elsewhere or learn how to deal with it.

Of course I do, yet God told us it would be that way, and there would be many that would call evil good, and good evil.

Many of those standing with the Muslims are some of the very ones who are trying to kick God out of our country.

Its amazing, now many professing Christians are siding with them.

2Co 6:14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

I started a new topic, "you cannot legislate morals," instead of high-jacking this one.

My feeling toward this is that you should not legislate morality outside what directly affects or infringes upon the rights of others. For example, murder, stealing and trespassing are against the law and could be considered moral issues. However, when breaking these laws you infringe upon another person's right to life, liberty and property. The government is to protect those rights. However, there are many other moral issues that are private which should be left up to the individual, regardless of how others feel about it.

I don't recall having any discussions about conservatives.

What isn't a moral issue? Murder and rape are moral issues.

Homosexuality is a biblical issue that any Christian should be quick to stand upon what Scripture says.

Marriage, for about 6,000 years has always been heterosexual. It's homosexuals who are now trying to force change upon others so their sinful abomination can be openly accepted under cover of law.

Such as?

I know of no conservatives (the few who are left) that believe they can create a perfect world.

Remember, liberals believe they can create a perfect world if everyone will just do as they say. They believe forcing folks to follow them is in everyones best interest and therefor the ends justify the means.

You're assuming that burning a wicked book in protest of the actions of a wicked and murderous religion is evil.

Probably a tie between Matthew and Luke.

What's your favorite verse?

FWIW, CPR, I agree with you wholeheartedly on this one. There is no biblical precedent for this action, which is foolish on so many fronts. Wait, there is precedent! Something about taking a dog by the ears...in Proverbs.

What makes you think they are stopping the spread of anti-Christ material? If anything, their behavior provokes interest in that very material. Betcha anything Koran sales go up as a result of the curiosity that would not have existed but for this foolish pastor's sensationalist behavior.

I wonder what biblical basis this man thinks he has for such actions? And, there is certainly no practical nor pragmatic value in them. "A tough call"? Hardly.

Why should anyone listen to a bishop in the unbiblical Episcopal church? If this man were concerned with the things of Christ he would have long ago separated himself from the Episcopal church.

Where in Scripture are Christians commanded to tolerate false religions?

Does anyone recall that Paul so strongly confronted false religions that their followers were continually trying to kill him?

The prOBlem isn't with the burning of a wicked book of the devil, it's with the media turning this into an international news event and one might argue the pastor has ill handled the spotlight (I can't say for sure because I've heard comments from him that Christian radio news has played which I've not heard on the mainstream media so I don't know how much they are censoring him).

In any event, if this bishop of a wayward church were concerned with following Scripture he would first heed the Words of Christ and remove that beam from his own eye before launching out against the Florida pastor. Christ clear called such hypocricy.