Indiana's Religious Freedom Law

[Tee]

Jesus went among them to teach them that they needed to repent and cease their sins.....NOT to accept and tolerate the sins.......
The man who has assumed unscriptural authority is a pinko commie.....all you have to do is look at his political positions......

That's purty good right there!

To make sure I am correct, to whom are you referring to as "The man"?

[RETIREDFAN1]

That's purty good right there!

To make sure I am correct, to whom are you referring to as "The man"?

 

Jorge Mario Bergoglio.......

[Tee]

Jorge Mario Bergoglio.......

Pope Francis in your quote is a pinko commie?

How can you condem a Religious person, the Cathoilic faith.

If you are serious, you have insulted all Cathoilics.

No way you can 1. Be a Christian and 2. Are you serious????

As a life long Catholic I have NEVER known anyone to call our Pope a pinko commie

Speechless

[RETIREDFAN1]

Pope Francis in your quote is a pinko commie?

How can you condem a Religious person, the Cathoilic faith.

If you are serious, you have insulted all Cathoilics.

No way you can 1. Be a Christian and 2. Are you serious????

As a life long Catholic I have NEVER known anyone to call our Pope a pinko commie

Speechless

 

 

There is nothing Scriptural in the way the catholic church is organized, or is ran.......I am a NEW TESTAMENT Christian, following the NEW TESTAMENT pattern....Christ is the head of the Universal Church, not some human usurper of His Power.......try actually reading and studying The New Testament instead of dending on someone else to tell you what it says and teaches and you, too, may become a true Christian.......

 

FYI: CHRIST condemned religions people.....read up on it.......

[Tee]

Ok your reference "Christ condemned religious people" referring to Condeming Pope Francis BLOWS ME AWAY.

Stay up n tha country woods, condem othersthen see what God asks you when you try to , never mind.

What's that sayn bout takin the boy out tha .......

Last response

God bless you, you

[Mr. Buddy Garrity]

There is nothing Scriptural in the way the catholic church is organized, or is ran.......I am a NEW TESTAMENT Christian, following the NEW TESTAMENT pattern....Christ is the head of the Universal Church, not some human usurper of His Power.......try actually reading and studying The New Testament instead of dending on someone else to tell you what it says and teaches and you, too, may become a true Christian.......

 

FYI: CHRIST condemned religions people.....read up on it.......

You sure you're not from Zavalla, Tx or Fishers, Indiana? 

[RETIREDFAN1]

You sure you're not from Zavalla, Tx or Fishers, Indiana? 

:P

 

Anyway, GOD'S Pattern is clearly spelled out in the New Testament......anyone not following THAT pattern cannot honestly claim to be a part of His Church.....

[RETIREDFAN1]

Ok your reference "Christ condemned religious people" referring to Condeming Pope Francis BLOWS ME AWAY.

Stay up n tha country woods, condem othersthen see what God asks you when you try to , never mind.

What's that sayn bout takin the boy out tha .......

Last response

God bless you, you

 

 

Christ condemned the pharisees (good, religious, pious people in those days) because they were NOT following God's Law but had perverted it to fit their own feelings and needs.....try reading it, it's good and you might actually learn a little TRUTH........

 

Anyway, I see you are unable to provide any Scripture to defend Jorge or the catholic church.......I'd rather insult catholics and be right with God than vice versa.....have a nice day.......and if you want to learn God's Word instead of what some men tell you, Colmesneil church of Christ meets at 9AM for Bible Class on Sunday Morning...10AM to Worship God in the way HE showed us He wishes to be worshipped....and a Bible Class on Wednesday at 4:45.....all are welcome to come study with us with an open Bible and an open heart to what HE said........

[smitty]

You misread alot, thats nothing new here. Also you forgot to quote the whole post, may have been why you misread. ;)

Hum, let's see:  This law was to protect against religious discrimination.  (TRUE)   The is the same law clinton signed 22 years ago on the Federal level.  (TRUE)   This is also the same law obama voted for in Illinois.  (TRUE)  The gay mafia  was trying to project another lie to, again, show THEIR intolerance.  (TRUE)    And it has nothing to do with them.  (TRUE)    But the lap-dog media went right along.  (TRUE)     So, which do you disagree with?

[Mr. Buddy Garrity]

Hum, let's see:  This law was to protect against religious discrimination.  (TRUE)   The is the same law clinton signed 22 years ago on the Federal level.  (TRUE)   This is also the same law obama voted for in Illinois.  (TRUE)  The gay mafia  was trying to project another lie to, again, show THEIR intolerance.  (TRUE)    And it has nothing to do with them.  (TRUE)    But the lap-dog media went right along.  (TRUE)     So, which do you disagree with?

Who said I disagreed?  Lol

[Tee]

Christ condemned the pharisees (good, religious, pious people in those days) because they were NOT following God's Law but had perverted it to fit their own feelings and needs.....try reading it, it's good and you might actually learn a little TRUTH........

 

Anyway, I see you are unable to provide any Scripture to defend Jorge or the catholic church.......I'd rather insult catholics and be right with God than vice versa.....have a nice day.......and if you want to learn God's Word instead of what some men tell you, Colmesneil church of Christ meets at 9AM for Bible Class on Sunday Morning...10AM to Worship God in the way HE showed us He wishes to be worshipped....and a Bible Class on Wednesday at 4:45.....all are welcome to come study with us with an open Bible and an open heart to what HE said........y

 

 

thanks for the invitation.

 

I know a little about Alex Campbell and the Restoration movement.

 

Also know a church of Christ minister the works for American National Insurance Company.   Up near your place.

 

I respect your view but must also state your contention that the Pope, all no New Testament believers, and anyone that plays a devil musical interment is wrong and going to Hell ~~~~ well--sorry Mother Theresa, Pope Francis, Rodger Brothers, Fr. Jamail, Bishop Curtis, all Nun's, Jews,  and all the Saints and Religious are going to HELL

 

What a Christian!!

 

 

[RETIREDFAN1]

 

Christ condemned the pharisees (good, religious, pious people in those days) because they were NOT following God's Law but had perverted it to fit their own feelings and needs.....try reading it, it's good and you might actually learn a little TRUTH........

 

Anyway, I see you are unable to provide any Scripture to defend Jorge or the catholic church.......I'd rather insult catholics and be right with God than vice versa.....have a nice day.......and if you want to learn God's Word instead of what some men tell you, Colmesneil church of Christ meets at 9AM for Bible Class on Sunday Morning...10AM to Worship God in the way HE showed us He wishes to be worshipped....and a Bible Class on Wednesday at 4:45.....all are welcome to come study with us with an open Bible and an open heart to what HE said........y

 

 

thanks for the invitation.

 

I know a little about Alex Campbell and the Restoration movement.

 

Also know a church of Christ minister the works for American National Insurance Company.   Up near your place.

 

I respect your view but must also state your contention that the Pope, all no New Testament believers, and anyone that plays a devil musical interment is wrong and going to Hell ~~~~ well--sorry Mother Theresa, Pope Francis, Rodger Brothers, Fr. Jamail, Bishop Curtis, all Nun's, Jews,  and all the Saints and Religious are going to HELL

 

What a Christian!!

 

 

 

Alexander Campbell and the "restoration movement" have no connection to New Testament Christianity......as for the rest,  you got so angry in your rant against the New Testament that you became incomprehensible......(re-read what you posted....:) )....a Christian is one who actually HEARS, BELIEVES,  and DOES WHAT GOD SAID TO DO.....anyone not fitting that is not a Christian by definition....I'd say I'm a Christian who meets that definition......are you????

[jv_coach]

http://www.albertmohler.com/2015/03/31/the-briefing-03-31-15/

 

This is a short podcast

1) Criticism of Indiana religious liberty law piles on, showing priority of sexual revolution

[Tee]

I certainly could be misinformed.  In a Religious Ed. class I took in 1977, if memory serves me correct, Alexander Campbell and some others separated and formed the church of Christ ( no cap in church) to represent the New Test and its beliefs.  other stuff such as a capella restrictions, segregation, etc...

 

anyway, i am a hear, believe and doer, etc... good luck with your beliefs and sincerely hope they bring you peace and salvation.

 

P.S. put in a good word for the Pope.

[Bobcat1]

Governor aims to curb religious freedom bill

 

http://www.aol.com/article/2015/04/01/arkansas-governor-urges-changes-to-religious-objection-bill/21160312/

[RETIREDFAN1]

I certainly could be misinformed.  In a Religious Ed. class I took in 1977, if memory serves me correct, Alexander Campbell and some others separated and formed the church of Christ ( no cap in church) to represent the New Test and its beliefs.  other stuff such as a capella restrictions, segregation, etc...

 

anyway, i am a hear, believe and doer, etc... good luck with your beliefs and sincerely hope they bring you peace and salvation.

 

P.S. put in a good word for the Pope.

 

Christ founded the New Testament Church....He bought and paid for it with His Blood.....Campbell read the New Testament and found that where he was worshiping was not following God's pattern and decided to get back to it......he didn't "found" anything....you won't find any "segregation" in the Lord's Church......

 

You are not, or you would be following the Pattern GOD put forth, instead of what a group of men put together.....

[Tee]

formed not found is what I stated.  Am I wrong in that some church of Christ were Jefferson like in their views and made African Americans sit separate?  It was around 1800ish?  

 

Group of Men being who?  Jesus and his Apostles?  Why no instruments in church?

[smitty]

Who said I disagreed?  Lol

Excellent!    :D

[Mr. Buddy Garrity]

Excellent!    :D

I didn't say I agreed either ;)

[RETIREDFAN1]

formed not found is what I stated.  Am I wrong in that some church of Christ were Jefferson like in their views and made African Americans sit separate?  It was around 1800ish?  
 
Group of Men being who?  Jesus and his Apostles?  Why no instruments in church?

you should not think of the New Testament Church in terms of a denomination....not being denominational with each congregation being completely INDEPENDENT from any other congregation, if some of them did that, they were sinning and going against God's Word......

Group of men like your "church fathers".....you are definitely not following what was taught by Jesus and His Apostles......

I don't have to show you why there are no instruments in church....you have to show ME where you get the authority to have them .....but since you probably have never read the Bible, I'll tell you where to look....Ephesians 5: 9, Colossians 3: 16, James 5: 13 just to name a few....NEVER in the New Testament where local congregations gather to worship, will you ever hear of them doing anything but SINGING....no instruments.....their example, since they were in direct contact with the Holy Spirit, is what we in the Lord's Church follow.....

[Bobcat1]

We're getting off topic.

[smitty]

I didn't say I agreed either ;)

LOL! 

[tvc184]

I finally got around to reading the IN law. I can't see the controversy.

 

It reminds me of "Hands up, don't shoot" and "Romney has not filed an income tax return" which were both found to be outright lies and known to be outright lies when they were stated. It is a political agenda of convenience when no such reality exists. It is like someone saying today, "I demand that we end slavery in the USA now and quit waiting", all the while knowing that it ended 150 years ago. It is nothing but a straw man argument.

 

The actual law says that the "state" may not enforce any action that may substantially interfere with religion. 

 

It speaks nothing of any protected class under federal law and speaks nothing of individuals or businesses. 

 

The law says that "state action" (the prohibited act that goes against religion) is defined as "implementation or action based on implementation of a state or local law". I cannot contemplate how that is being portrayed as not serving people based on race, religion, national origin, etc. 

 

The relief for a claimed grievance is the business that is being discriminated against (for example the company that does not want to bake a cake because the state forbids it) is to go to court and claim your religious freedom was discriminated against. The way the law looks to me, it is the bakery that has to file for the injunction or other relief. It is not the person that asks the cake to be baked. The law in no way allows individual discrimination by anyone.

 

Of course that is just the law and has nothing to do with the current political rant that is based on emotion of a claimed law that does not exist. 

 

Back to your regularly scheduled arguments on religion that have nothing to do with this faux discrimination............... 

[LumRaiderFan]

I finally got around to reading the IN law. I can't see the controversy.
 
It reminds me of "Hands up, don't shoot" and "Romney has not filed an income tax return" which were both found to be outright lies and known to be outright lies when they were stated. It is a political agenda of convenience when no such reality exists. It is like someone saying today, "I demand that we end slavery in the USA now and quit waiting", all the while knowing that it ended 150 years ago. It is nothing but a straw man argument.
 
The actual law says that the "state" may not enforce any action that may substantially interfere with religion. 
 
It speaks nothing of any protected class under federal law and speaks nothing of individuals or businesses. 
 
The law says that "state action" (the prohibited act that goes against religion) is defined as "implementation or action based on implementation of a state or local law". I cannot contemplate how that is being portrayed as not serving people based on race, religion, national origin, etc. 
 
The relief for a claimed grievance is the business that is being discriminated against (for example the company that does not want to bake a cake because the state forbids it) is to go to court and claim your religious freedom was discriminated against. The way the law looks to me, it is the bakery that has to file for the injunction or other relief. It is not the person that asks the cake to be baked. The law in no way allows individual discrimination by anyone.
 
Of course that is just the law and has nothing to do with the current political rant that is based on emotion of a claimed law that does not exist. 
 
Back to your regularly scheduled arguments on religion that have nothing to do with this faux discrimination...............

Darn facts.

[stevenash]

I finally got around to reading the IN law. I can't see the controversy.

 

It reminds me of "Hands up, don't shoot" and "Romney has not filed an income tax return" which were both found to be outright lies and known to be outright lies when they were stated. It is a political agenda of convenience when no such reality exists. It is like someone saying today, "I demand that we end slavery in the USA now and quit waiting", all the while knowing that it ended 150 years ago. It is nothing but a straw man argument.

 

The actual law says that the "state" may not enforce any action that may substantially interfere with religion. 

 

It speaks nothing of any protected class under federal law and speaks nothing of individuals or businesses. 

 

The law says that "state action" (the prohibited act that goes against religion) is defined as "implementation or action based on implementation of a state or local law". I cannot contemplate how that is being portrayed as not serving people based on race, religion, national origin, etc. 

 

The relief for a claimed grievance is the business that is being discriminated against (for example the company that does not want to bake a cake because the state forbids it) is to go to court and claim your religious freedom was discriminated against. The way the law looks to me, it is the bakery that has to file for the injunction or other relief. It is not the person that asks the cake to be baked. The law in no way allows individual discrimination by anyone.

 

Of course that is just the law and has nothing to do with the current political rant that is based on emotion of a claimed law that does not exist. 

 

Back to your regularly scheduled arguments on religion that have nothing to do with this faux discrimination............... 

Eloquence at its finest