|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
And, so as the article said, no deal is better than a bad deal. not really, i've already laid out on another thread that yall chose to ignore, yet again, on why iran having nukes poises no threat to anyone. Any militant government having nukes is a risk. Frankly, any more governments having nukes is a risk, and here's why. There have been numerous uprisings in Iran over the past 10-15 or so years. The current Iranian government came to power as the result of a coup. Let's say that, somehow, the same thing happens again, and the Iranians have nukes. Let's say that one of the religious leaders decides that since they are going out anyway, they should take out an enemy with them, and they launch nukes at Israel, and the Muslim countries around them who practice a different brand of Islam. Can't happen? I wouldn't bet on it. These countries where the governments are in no way guaranteed are always a concern when they have nukes. Look at the concern we had with Pakistan when they had the government change from Musharraf. There was a lot of concern over who would have their finger on the button. While no one expects that any reasonable person would ever decide to make a nuclear first strike today, all it takes is one launch, and the more countries that have nuclear weapons, the more likely it is that it could happen. I am in the camp of greatly reducing the number of nuclear weapons in the world, (including our own stockpiles) instead of increasing it.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480 |
And, so as the article said, no deal is better than a bad deal. not really, i've already laid out on another thread that yall chose to ignore, yet again, on why iran having nukes poises no threat to anyone. Any militant government having nukes is a risk. Frankly, any more governments having nukes is a risk, and here's why. There have been numerous uprisings in Iran over the past 10-15 or so years. The current Iranian government came to power as the result of a coup. Let's say that, somehow, the same thing happens again, and the Iranians have nukes. Let's say that one of the religious leaders decides that since they are going out anyway, they should take out an enemy with them, and they launch nukes at Israel, and the Muslim countries around them who practice a different brand of Islam. Can't happen? I wouldn't bet on it. These countries where the governments are in no way guaranteed are always a concern when they have nukes. Look at the concern we had with Pakistan when they had the government change from Musharraf. There was a lot of concern over who would have their finger on the button. While no one expects that any reasonable person would ever decide to make a nuclear first strike today, all it takes is one launch, and the more countries that have nuclear weapons, the more likely it is that it could happen. I am in the camp of greatly reducing the number of nuclear weapons in the world, (including our own stockpiles) instead of increasing it. thats the difference. see if everyone talks about trying to reduce nukes, including in their own country, then sure, i'd be against Iran having them. but thats not the case. its never been the case. so i deal with reality. and the reality is that its hypocritical for the country with not only the most nukes, but the only country to use nukes, regardless of the reason, to try and tell other government they shouldn't have them. thats all i'm saying.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 |
Israel is much more militant than Iran; Israel possess nukes.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
That's debatable ..... but regardless, does it make sense to add extraordinarily destructive weapons into a potentially unstable situation?
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 |
What foreign nation has Iran attacked in recent history?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480 |
That's debatable ..... but regardless, does it make sense to add extraordinarily destructive weapons into a potentially unstable situation? no, because in todays world, they are status symbols. i've already gone over this 4 times now. having nukes shows your capabilities as a country. now they could be taken seriously in world discussions, like G20 summits, UN meetings, hell, maybe even get into NATO. Iran is simply looking for a seat at the table. in order to sit at the big boys table, you have to have big boy toys. i mean seriously, is that REALLY a hard concept to grasp for some of yall?
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
What foreign nation has Iran attacked in recent history? You can be a danger without actually firing a shot, especially in that area of the world.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 |
I know you don't mean this intentionally, but step back for a moment. This is sorta like the same argument about Obama=liberal=antichrist, or even Bush=Conservative=Theocracy.
Iran=Middle East=Dangerous isn't true. I think Swish outlined why Iran, despite a wacky ayatollah with weird social policy, does quite well socioeconomically. If they're financially stable then we don't need to worry about them.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
How is Iran economically and/or socially stable? They ruthlessly oppress anyone who speaks out against the government, and their economy is a wreck. Their unemployment rate is 13%. Their economy is in recession, shrinking 1.7% last year. They have a 35.2% rate of inflation. Source They are also being crippled further by falling oil prices. The have a judiciary that is tied to the religious leadership of the country, making changes through the courts almost impossible. Their government is extremely corrupt financially. I am curious as to how you see them as being socioeconomically or financially stable?
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 |
Never did I say social. Socioeconomics means the social economics as a whole. Honestly, the only difference between us an Iran is the inflation and our economy not built on oil.
Socially they have a long ways to do. I won't deny that.
Still, this doesn't make them out to be this giant boogeyman that every conservative pundit makes them out to be.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480 |
How is Iran economically and/or socially stable? They ruthlessly oppress anyone who speaks out against the government, and their economy is a wreck. Their unemployment rate is 13%. Their economy is in recession, shrinking 1.7% last year. They have a 35.2% rate of inflation. Source They are also being crippled further by falling oil prices. The have a judiciary that is tied to the religious leadership of the country, making changes through the courts almost impossible. Their government is extremely corrupt financially. I am curious as to how you see them as being socioeconomically or financially stable? sounds like America. yet we still believe we have the moral high ground(lol) to have nukes. you're making this extremely easy right now, YTown.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823 |
If they're financially stable then we don't need to worry about them.
If they don't have Nukes, we never have to worry about them despite what their economy does or how much Moolah the Mullah makes.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480 |
If they're financially stable then we don't need to worry about them.
If they don't have Nukes, we never have to worry about them despite what their economy does or how much Moolah the Mullah makes. So why don't you ever advocate going in and taking the nukes from north korea? you keep dodging this question.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
How is Iran economically and/or socially stable? They ruthlessly oppress anyone who speaks out against the government, and their economy is a wreck. Their unemployment rate is 13%. Their economy is in recession, shrinking 1.7% last year. They have a 35.2% rate of inflation. Source They are also being crippled further by falling oil prices. The have a judiciary that is tied to the religious leadership of the country, making changes through the courts almost impossible. Their government is extremely corrupt financially. I am curious as to how you see them as being socioeconomically or financially stable? sounds like America. yet we still believe we have the moral high ground(lol) to have nukes. you're making this extremely easy right now, YTown. I am not going to argue that we are not heading down a dangerous path in this country as well. In fact, I have argued that for quite some time now. I have also said, even in this thread, in fact, that we should be reducing our stockpiles of nuclear weapons. The difference between us and them, at least the most obvious, is that their courts follow the Koran to the letter, and our courts seem intent upon stamping out any influence of the Bible in American culture and society completely.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823 |
If they're financially stable then we don't need to worry about them.
If they don't have Nukes, we never have to worry about them despite what their economy does or how much Moolah the Mullah makes. So why don't you ever advocate going in and taking the nukes from north korea? you keep dodging this question. Uh, because they have Nukes.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480 |
How is Iran economically and/or socially stable? They ruthlessly oppress anyone who speaks out against the government, and their economy is a wreck. Their unemployment rate is 13%. Their economy is in recession, shrinking 1.7% last year. They have a 35.2% rate of inflation. Source They are also being crippled further by falling oil prices. The have a judiciary that is tied to the religious leadership of the country, making changes through the courts almost impossible. Their government is extremely corrupt financially. I am curious as to how you see them as being socioeconomically or financially stable? sounds like America. yet we still believe we have the moral high ground(lol) to have nukes. you're making this extremely easy right now, YTown. I am not going to argue that we are not heading down a dangerous path in this country as well. In fact, I have argued that for quite some time now. I have also said, even in this thread, in fact, that we should be reducing our stockpiles of nuclear weapons. The difference between us and them, at least the most obvious, is that their courts follow the Koran to the letter, and our courts seem intent upon stamping out any influence of the Bible in American culture and society completely. yea, and if you haven't noticed, them following the Quran to the letter has seen them yet to attack anybody. the Quran says to only use violence when somebody is violent toward them or their religion. noticed how nobody is doing that to them, and they haven't attacked anyone? Their words to Israel is more or less the same level North Korea: Talks trash about South Korea, AKA, thats all it is, trash talk. they know not only will they not attack Israel, they can't. A lot of people don't realize that this nuke agreement with the US all but guarantees that they won't attack Israel now. y'all have to think outside of this American media spectrum, and starting looking at the world in an outside view. We are making an agreement with a country, regardless of what you think, has actually some of the most progressive laws in the middle east. it will be ok.
Last edited by Swish; 02/21/15 04:25 PM.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480 |
If they're financially stable then we don't need to worry about them.
If they don't have Nukes, we never have to worry about them despite what their economy does or how much Moolah the Mullah makes. So why don't you ever advocate going in and taking the nukes from north korea? you keep dodging this question. Uh, because they have Nukes. don't jump off the moral high horse now. you talking all big and tough about stopping dangerous countries from having nukes. by your logic, we need to go into NK and take their nukes from them. even though they've had them for a while not and haven't shot ONE.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
Why haven't they "attacked anyone"? Because they cannot win. If they have nukes, then maybe their opinion changes. I never thought that I would ever hear that a nuclear Iran is a good idea.  Anyway, carry on. I have to go rest my back.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823 |
If they're financially stable then we don't need to worry about them.
If they don't have Nukes, we never have to worry about them despite what their economy does or how much Moolah the Mullah makes. So why don't you ever advocate going in and taking the nukes from north korea? you keep dodging this question. Uh, because they have Nukes. don't jump off the moral high horse now. you talking all big and tough about stopping dangerous countries from having nukes. by your logic, we need to go into NK and take their nukes from them. even though they've had them for a while not and haven't shot ONE. Uh, Nukes can destroy your entire invasion force. Nukes can sink a nearby Fleet. NK didn't invade anybody since the 50's but just like Iran, once they have Nukes, we won't be able ti take them away without a huge loss of life. This really isn't so hard to understand.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480 |
If they're financially stable then we don't need to worry about them.
If they don't have Nukes, we never have to worry about them despite what their economy does or how much Moolah the Mullah makes. So why don't you ever advocate going in and taking the nukes from north korea? you keep dodging this question. Uh, because they have Nukes. don't jump off the moral high horse now. you talking all big and tough about stopping dangerous countries from having nukes. by your logic, we need to go into NK and take their nukes from them. even though they've had them for a while not and haven't shot ONE. Uh, Nukes can destroy your entire invasion force. Nukes can sink a nearby Fleet. NK didn't invade anybody since the 50's but just like Iran, once they have Nukes, we won't be able ti take them away without a huge loss of life. This really isn't so hard to understand. it works visa versa, why do you think NOBODY has shot one yet!! nobody wants their OWN country to get jacked up. god......
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823 |
Now you are changing the subject. We have an opportunity to keep Iran from having Nukes. If we let the cat out of the bag with Iran like we did with NK, it ties our hands. Why would you want to put your loved ones in that position when you can easily prevent it?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 |
I love ideological boogeymen.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823 |
I love ideological boogeymen. Boogeymen are just nonsense till they kick down your door. History is full of little boogeymen who became the butchers of millions. Closing ones eyes to reality is not wise. It can get you killed.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480 |
Now you are changing the subject. We have an opportunity to keep Iran from having Nukes. If we let the cat out of the bag with Iran like we did with NK, it ties our hands. Why would you want to put your loved ones in that position when you can easily prevent it? some Americans have loved ones getting torn up in Africa by somebody who is currently doing more destruction than any nuke can accomplished: Boko Harram. yet we're doing nothing about it. We got home grown Terrorism, groups of people not getting properly educated in our own damn country, yet for some reason we are worried about a country not even in the same hemisphere as us, as if they pose more of a threat? come on.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
yea, and if you haven't noticed, them following the Quran to the letter has seen them yet to attack anybody.
the Quran says to only use violence when somebody is violent toward them or their religion.
What do they do with gays there? Has nothing to do with nukes, I know.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480 |
yea, and if you haven't noticed, them following the Quran to the letter has seen them yet to attack anybody.
the Quran says to only use violence when somebody is violent toward them or their religion.
What do they do with gays there? Has nothing to do with nukes, I know. you're right, it doesn't. and let's be real, they are doing to gays what christians would do in this country if it were legal. let's not beat around the bush on that. Christianity and Islam have and continue to have a nasty track record when it comes to people who don't fit religious agenda's. the difference is our government doesn't allow that nonsense for the most part.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
and let's be real, they are doing to gays what christians would do in this country if it were legal. Some might, but those who follow the Bible would not. Would we approve of such relationships? No. Would we approve of no fault divorce, where it is easy to leave your spouse for any reason at all? No. Would we support extramarital relationships? No. There are many things that we would not approve of, but if we started executing everyone who sins, this country would be absolutely empty in no time flat. We do not believe in killing those who sin, but rather helping people to turn from sin. However, do some people take things too far with regards to one particular sin over all others? Absolutely. That doesn't mean that we would be lining people up for gas chambers or something.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480 |
and let's be real, they are doing to gays what christians would do in this country if it were legal. Some might, but those who follow the Bible would not. Would we approve of such relationships? No. Would we approve of no fault divorce, where it is easy to leave your spouse for any reason at all? No. Would we support extramarital relationships? No. There are many things that we would not approve of, but if we started executing everyone who sins, this country would be absolutely empty in no time flat. We do not believe in killing those who sin, but rather helping people to turn from sin. However, do some people take things too far with regards to one particular sin over all others? Absolutely. That doesn't mean that we would be lining people up for gas chambers or something. Really? Cause when all that nonsense was allowed, YALL absolutely had zero problem burning "witches" or anybody that were against God. Let's not forget that slavery was absolutely justified by Christians, and up until the civil rights movement the Jim crow laws and segregation was being justified by religious people as well. Like I said. The track history isn't exactly promising. And they were more of a bible thumper than you could ever hope to be.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
You are right that there have been such examples. They were wrong in their actions.
Certain White people once owned slaves. We learned better. Black Africans once sold other Black Africans into slavery. I think that they also learned. History is full of such things.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 2,075
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 2,075 |
M and let's be real, they are doing to gays what christians would do in this country if it were legal. Some might, but those who follow the Bible would not. Would we approve of such relationships? No. Would we approve of no fault divorce, where it is easy to leave your spouse for any reason at all? No. Would we support extramarital relationships? No. There are many things that we would not approve of, but if we started executing everyone who sins, this country would be absolutely empty in no time flat. We do not believe in killing those who sin, but rather helping people to turn from sin. However, do some people take things too far with regards to one particular sin over all others? Absolutely. That doesn't mean that we would be lining people up for gas chambers or something. As sinners that we all are, we need to focus on the trash in our own backyards and OUR relationship with our Lord and Savior and leave others to do the same. The world would be a much better place if, as Christians, we could leave it at that.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
M and let's be real, they are doing to gays what christians would do in this country if it were legal. Some might, but those who follow the Bible would not. Would we approve of such relationships? No. Would we approve of no fault divorce, where it is easy to leave your spouse for any reason at all? No. Would we support extramarital relationships? No. There are many things that we would not approve of, but if we started executing everyone who sins, this country would be absolutely empty in no time flat. We do not believe in killing those who sin, but rather helping people to turn from sin. However, do some people take things too far with regards to one particular sin over all others? Absolutely. That doesn't mean that we would be lining people up for gas chambers or something. As sinners that we all are, we need to focus on the trash in our own backyards and OUR relationship with our Lord and Savior and leave others to do the same. The world would be a much better place if, as Christians, we could leave it at that. I disagree wholeheartedly with that. Christians stood soilently as divorce was made simple to accomplish for any reason whatsoever, leading to rampant divorce, and more than half of all marriages ending in divorce. Was that a positive outcome? Christians stood by silently as society changed and the family was torn apart by out of wedlock children. Was that a positive outcome? Christians stood by and allowed for adultery to become unchallenged, and even acceptable by society. Was that a positive outcome? Christians have to speak their minds, and act as the conscience of society, or else we wind up with things like this happening. Even when Christians do act to try and prevent atrocities, like abortion, they are unsuccessful. However, they are always unsuccessful when they don't even try. Christians need to watch out for their own "logs in their eyes" to be sure, but that does not mean that we should sit by quietly as changes that go in direct opposition to the moral teachings of the Bible are put forth. Is that what Jesus would have done? Did he sit by quietly when He saw corruption in the Jewish religious leadership? Of course not. Christians need to remember that we are not perfect, only forgiven. That does not mean that we should stand by quietly as people are encouraged to sin as freely as they like.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,194
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,194 |
The sad reality is that it seems avid Christians are turning every issue on this message board into a religious diatribe.
Laws and policy are not being discussed based on law, the Constitution or any other factor that truly are the principals they are actually based on. Instead, we constantly hear about how religion and religious beliefs should dictate it.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 |
It's the persecution complex of "you're stepping on my religious freedoms".
What many fail to understand is that religion doesn't give you the right to discriminate based on your own beliefs.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 2,075
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 2,075 |
M M and let's be real, they are doing to gays what christians would do in this country if it were legal. Some might, but those who follow the Bible would not. Would we approve of such relationships? No. Would we approve of no fault divorce, where it is easy to leave your spouse for any reason at all? No. Would we support extramarital relationships? No. There are many things that we would not approve of, but if we started executing everyone who sins, this country would be absolutely empty in no time flat. We do not believe in killing those who sin, but rather helping people to turn from sin. However, do some people take things too far with regards to one particular sin over all others? Absolutely. That doesn't mean that we would be lining people up for gas chambers or something. As sinners that we all are, we need to focus on the trash in our own backyards and OUR relationship with our Lord and Savior and leave others to do the same. The world would be a much better place if, as Christians, we could leave it at that. I disagree wholeheartedly with that. Christians stood soilently as divorce was made simple to accomplish for any reason whatsoever, leading to rampant divorce, and more than half of all marriages ending in divorce. Was that a positive outcome? Christians stood by silently as society changed and the family was torn apart by out of wedlock children. Was that a positive outcome? Christians stood by and allowed for adultery to become unchallenged, and even acceptable by society. Was that a positive outcome? Christians have to speak their minds, and act as the conscience of society, or else we wind up with things like this happening. Even when Christians do act to try and prevent atrocities, like abortion, they are unsuccessful. However, they are always unsuccessful when they don't even try. Christians need to watch out for their own "logs in their eyes" to be sure, but that does not mean that we should sit by quietly as changes that go in direct opposition to the moral teachings of the Bible are put forth. Is that what Jesus would have done? Did he sit by quietly when He saw corruption in the Jewish religious leadership? Of course not. Christians need to remember that we are not perfect, only forgiven. That does not mean that we should stand by quietly as people are encouraged to sin as freely as they like. Yes, knew you would and that is OK. I attone to no one except my Lord and Savior. That is the only way forgiveness can be granted. Guaranteed, I will not need a bump from you or anyone else for my salvation! Thanks anyway!!
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
Guaranteed, I will not need a bump from you or anyone else for my salvation! I am not sure that I understand this statement. We all have to answer for our sins, and according to the Bible, there is only one acceptable answer. If we are Christians, then the answer is Jesus Christ. Period. I do not dispute that, and, in fact, I celebrate it. Many people allow, and even seem to want the law be stripped of all Biblical influence. Why? If we we don't believe in the Bible, and in Jesus Christ as the Son of God, the Messiah, the Savior of all who live, and the only way to God and heaven, can we really be Christians. Jesus taught certain ideas during His time on earth. If we don't believe what He taught, can we truly be Christians. If we claim to be Christians, but do not do the biggest things that Christ taught, then are we Christians? If we run and hide from our beliefs and convictions, then are we Christians? If we act ashamed of what our Lord taught us, then are we Christians? I don't understand how people can believe in Jesus Christ ...... but don't seem to want anything to do with Him. They act as though the things He taught, either personally, or through the Apostle Paul after his divine conversion, are somehow outdated, and outright wrong. So many act ashamed about anything Christian, answering "Well, aren't you a Christian?" with something like a murmured "Well .. yeah .. but .. I don't really believe all of that stuff." Many have very little actual knowledge of what the Bible, and Jesus, actually teach. They know the basics, but the specifics are missing, so they don't know that many things in today's world were already addressed by Jesus Christ. So they fill in the blanks with their desire to go along with the world, instead of what the Bible, and Jesus, teach. I think that a lot of people want to be "convenient Christians". They want to be Christians, as long as they really never have to do anything, or take a stand against what the world desires. They want to be Christians as long as they don't really expect anyone to expect them to do what Jesus taught. They want to be Christians as long as they don't have to do what Jesus actually said. I want to ask a question, of anyone who wants to answer it. What is Jesus' most important teaching? What one thing did He want to make sure that people understood above all else? What was His purpose in coming to earth, being born as a human child, living a perfect life, and dying on the cross? In short, if we are Christians, and follow Christ as a result, then what is the most important aspect of that? What did Jesus want us to do as Christians? Here's mine. Matthew: 28:19 and Mark 16:15.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 2,075
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 2,075 |
N Guaranteed, I will not need a bump from you or anyone else for my salvation! I am not sure that I understand this statement. We all have to answer for our sins, and according to the Bible, there is only one acceptable answer. If we are Christians, then the answer is Jesus Christ. Period. I do not dispute that, and, in fact, I celebrate it. Many people allow, and even seem to want the law be stripped of all Biblical influence. Why? If we we don't believe in the Bible, and in Jesus Christ as the Son of God, the Messiah, the Savior of all who live, and the only way to God and heaven, can we really be Christians. Jesus taught certain ideas during His time on earth. If we don't believe what He taught, can we truly be Christians. If we claim to be Christians, but do not do the biggest things that Christ taught, then are we Christians? If we run and hide from our beliefs and convictions, then are we Christians? If we act ashamed of what our Lord taught us, then are we Christians? I don't understand how people can believe in Jesus Christ ...... but don't seem to want anything to do with Him. They act as though the things He taught, either personally, or through the Apostle Paul after his divine conversion, are somehow outdated, and outright wrong. So many act ashamed about anything Christian, answering "Well, aren't you a Christian?" with something like a murmured "Well .. yeah .. but .. I don't really believe all of that stuff." Many have very little actual knowledge of what the Bible, and Jesus, actually teach. They know the basics, but the specifics are missing, so they don't know that many things in today's world were already addressed by Jesus Christ. So they fill in the blanks with their desire to go along with the world, instead of what the Bible, and Jesus, teach. I think that a lot of people want to be "convenient Christians". They want to be Christians, as long as they really never have to do anything, or take a stand against what the world desires. They want to be Christians as long as they don't really expect anyone to expect them to do what Jesus taught. They want to be Christians as long as they don't have to do what Jesus actually said. I want to ask a question, of anyone who wants to answer it. What is Jesus' most important teaching? What one thing did He want to make sure that people understood above all else? What was His purpose in coming to earth, being born as a human child, living a perfect life, and dying on the cross? In short, if we are Christians, and follow Christ as a result, then what is the most important aspect of that? What did Jesus want us to do as Christians? Here's mine. Matthew: 28:19 and Mark 16:15. You are reading way too much in to what I am saying. The only way I can be forgiven of my sins is to repent and ask for forgiveness and that is betwen me and my Lord and Savior. All I am saying is I will not need you or anyone else to point out my sins for me. That is not your job!!! Simply put, that is not your job!!! God will handle it and will be between us. I am the only one, the ONlY one who, at the end of my life, will know and understand my life in Christ. Sorry, that is none of your business. Clean up your own back yard.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823 |
jc
And now we understand why there are soooo many separate Christian Religions and Churches on the planet. Even WE can't agree on what the Boss wants.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204
~ Legend
|
|
~ Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204 |
jc
And now we understand why there are soooo many separate Christian Religions and Churches on the planet. Even WE can't agree on what the Boss wants. That's weird since you guys all keep saying that "It's written in the bible." as an excuse to continue discriminating against people.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
So, do you think that Jesus wants us to go take up our crosses and follow Him, and to do as He said for us to do, or do you think that He expects us to quietly sit at home, and dent Him, as Peter did, if knowing Him becomes uncomfortable?
Why do people think that Christians should leave their beliefs at the door of their home on their way out? Do those with opposing beliefs do so? Do those who worship the world and its pleasures do so? Do those who worship their own greed and avarice do so? Do those who want all manner of sin to be made not only legal, but acceptable as well to all men, do so? Of course they don't.
So what happens? Do we get a world that is closer to what Jesus wanted for us, or further away from what He commanded, and wanted for us? Are we doing as He commanded us to do, or are we making up our own rules, because that is easier and not as "uncomfortable"?
I know what the answers were in my own life. I suspect that I was no different than many, if not most who call themselves Christians.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Iranian nuclear weapons
|
|
