Karen Pence is Teaching at School that Bars LGBT Students and Teachers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good for her.
Marriage is only between a man and a woman. Every other variation is a love union and commitment.

The law says otherwise. Are you stuck in 1950?

I don't care what your ''law'' says. In some countries the law says it's OK to eat people.

this is the semantics argument again

The problem is that we mixed state functions with religious functions.

The government calls EVERYTHING marriage, whether it is a civil union or a religious sacrament.

You can do whatever the hell you want in your church. I'm going to think you're a bigot, but religious freedom and all that.

But the Constitution, as per the Supreme Court, allows for religious equality.

I personally think it would have made more sense for courts to stop issuing marriage licenses and just rename them to civil unions if you are looking at the property rights aspect of it.

Actually, I think the courts should be issueing marriage licenses and religious institutions shouldn't be involved in the process at all, except in a ceremonial way. Kind of like you have a birthday because you have a birth certificate issued by the government that states when you were born. Whether you have a party or not is up to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good for her.
Marriage is only between a man and a woman. Every other variation is a love union and commitment.

Bullshit. Married people of all sorts have children. Protected legal spousal rights.

Maybe you refer to some religious ceremony? No one GAF about that.

I don't GAF about what you think. Marriage is between a man and a woman.

DP here and I don't GAF about what you think. Nor do the courts and that is why dear uncle was finally able to marry the love of his live after decades of living with him. Hurrah for love!

Definitely! Best of everything to them but this is not marriage. Marriage is between a man and a woman.

Hey, ignorant religious nutter, you are wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anybody remember what Tipper Gore did about music? I don't either. She is of no consequence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, the curiously ignorant reaction by a small vocal group in the progressive movement has demonstrated how incompatible their ideas and goals are with the principles that has made this country great.

Please show me in the US Constitution where the United States of America is a Christian nation.

this

the truth is several of the Founding Fathers were NOT believers

+100000

religion has ZERO place in government

A number of the original states had established churches in their constitution at the time of the founding which enforced religious taxes on their populations which continued until the 1830's. Laws prohibiting certain religious groups from holding office continued through the first half of the 19th century.

The 1st amendment establishment clause was there because of those established churches, which were an outgrowth of several colonies originally being religous colonies. Setting one particular church up as the national established church would have caused considerable problems in the late 18th century.

I'm amazed that people don't remember this from history class.

You can certainly make an argument that the national government was not a Christian government, but the fact is that several of the States were religious governments. You would have to note, that the social and cultural norms of the United States have been and still are Christian.

It's not very Christian to demonize poor people trying to come here for a better life. Nor was it very Christian to enslave people and then make them third class citizens for a hundred years. You'll have to call those "norms" something else besides Christian.

I'm amazed you don't remember these things from history class.

I abhor slavery, but you need to look at the historical context.

Why do you consider slavery to be incompatible with Christianity? Clearly if you remembered your history classes, you would know the exact biblical passages that southerners used to defend the institution.

You might also remember that not once does Jesus denounce the institution, namely because he wasn't concerned with making this world better, but saving people for the next.

The new and old testiment aren't anti-slavery. In fact, slaves are told to obey their masters as they would Christ. Slaves were considered to be free "spiritually", but not free under the law.

You also need to read the biblical passages on nations, it's not quite what you think it is.

Unlike many "Christians" who believe in "Hippie Jesus", I've actually read the bible. It's rather strange that many supposed christians haven't.

You've read the Bible. Did you skip Philemon, or did the pages stick together so you missed this short New Testament book? In it, Paul writes that he could COMMAND Philemon to release his slave Onisemus, a brother in Christ, but instead would appeal to the Christian love he should have for his brother. The passages of slaves being told to obey their masters is as a testimony to their masters that may lead to their salvation. Paul similarly wrote of himself that he rejoiced in his imprisonments because it was an opportunity to share the Gospel to those in prison.

The whole arc of the Old Testament is bringing the Israelites out of slavery. Christ died on the cross to release us from the bonds of slavery. Christians are told to judge hold other in higher esteem than themselves, which would preclude slavery. I don't care what segregationists of the South tried to make the Bible say; they were wrong. People have been misquoting and misusing the Bible for centuries for their own purposes. The LORD will deal with them as they deserve.

This whole shibboleth of the Bible condoning slavery is nonsense and slander against Christianity by those who no nothing of it and don't care to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, the curiously ignorant reaction by a small vocal group in the progressive movement has demonstrated how incompatible their ideas and goals are with the principles that has made this country great.

Please show me in the US Constitution where the United States of America is a Christian nation.

this

the truth is several of the Founding Fathers were NOT believers

+100000

religion has ZERO place in government

A number of the original states had established churches in their constitution at the time of the founding which enforced religious taxes on their populations which continued until the 1830's. Laws prohibiting certain religious groups from holding office continued through the first half of the 19th century.

The 1st amendment establishment clause was there because of those established churches, which were an outgrowth of several colonies originally being religous colonies. Setting one particular church up as the national established church would have caused considerable problems in the late 18th century.

I'm amazed that people don't remember this from history class.

You can certainly make an argument that the national government was not a Christian government, but the fact is that several of the States were religious governments. You would have to note, that the social and cultural norms of the United States have been and still are Christian.

It's not very Christian to demonize poor people trying to come here for a better life. Nor was it very Christian to enslave people and then make them third class citizens for a hundred years. You'll have to call those "norms" something else besides Christian.

I'm amazed you don't remember these things from history class.

I abhor slavery, but you need to look at the historical context.

Why do you consider slavery to be incompatible with Christianity? Clearly if you remembered your history classes, you would know the exact biblical passages that southerners used to defend the institution.

You might also remember that not once does Jesus denounce the institution, namely because he wasn't concerned with making this world better, but saving people for the next.

The new and old testiment aren't anti-slavery. In fact, slaves are told to obey their masters as they would Christ. Slaves were considered to be free "spiritually", but not free under the law.

You also need to read the biblical passages on nations, it's not quite what you think it is.

Unlike many "Christians" who believe in "Hippie Jesus", I've actually read the bible. It's rather strange that many supposed christians haven't.

You've read the Bible. Did you skip Philemon, or did the pages stick together so you missed this short New Testament book? In it, Paul writes that he could COMMAND Philemon to release his slave Onisemus, a brother in Christ, but instead would appeal to the Christian love he should have for his brother. The passages of slaves being told to obey their masters is as a testimony to their masters that may lead to their salvation. Paul similarly wrote of himself that he rejoiced in his imprisonments because it was an opportunity to share the Gospel to those in prison.

The whole arc of the Old Testament is bringing the Israelites out of slavery. Christ died on the cross to release us from the bonds of slavery. Christians are told to judge hold other in higher esteem than themselves, which would preclude slavery. I don't care what segregationists of the South tried to make the Bible say; they were wrong. People have been misquoting and misusing the Bible for centuries for their own purposes. The LORD will deal with them as they deserve.

This whole shibboleth of the Bible condoning slavery is nonsense and slander against Christianity by those who no nothing of it and don't care to.

Yet at the same time Romans 13?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, the curiously ignorant reaction by a small vocal group in the progressive movement has demonstrated how incompatible their ideas and goals are with the principles that has made this country great.

Please show me in the US Constitution where the United States of America is a Christian nation.

this

the truth is several of the Founding Fathers were NOT believers

+100000

religion has ZERO place in government

A number of the original states had established churches in their constitution at the time of the founding which enforced religious taxes on their populations which continued until the 1830's. Laws prohibiting certain religious groups from holding office continued through the first half of the 19th century.

The 1st amendment establishment clause was there because of those established churches, which were an outgrowth of several colonies originally being religous colonies. Setting one particular church up as the national established church would have caused considerable problems in the late 18th century.

I'm amazed that people don't remember this from history class.

You can certainly make an argument that the national government was not a Christian government, but the fact is that several of the States were religious governments. You would have to note, that the social and cultural norms of the United States have been and still are Christian.

It's not very Christian to demonize poor people trying to come here for a better life. Nor was it very Christian to enslave people and then make them third class citizens for a hundred years. You'll have to call those "norms" something else besides Christian.

I'm amazed you don't remember these things from history class.

I abhor slavery, but you need to look at the historical context.

Why do you consider slavery to be incompatible with Christianity? Clearly if you remembered your history classes, you would know the exact biblical passages that southerners used to defend the institution.

You might also remember that not once does Jesus denounce the institution, namely because he wasn't concerned with making this world better, but saving people for the next.

The new and old testiment aren't anti-slavery. In fact, slaves are told to obey their masters as they would Christ. Slaves were considered to be free "spiritually", but not free under the law.

You also need to read the biblical passages on nations, it's not quite what you think it is.

Unlike many "Christians" who believe in "Hippie Jesus", I've actually read the bible. It's rather strange that many supposed christians haven't.

You've read the Bible. Did you skip Philemon, or did the pages stick together so you missed this short New Testament book? In it, Paul writes that he could COMMAND Philemon to release his slave Onisemus, a brother in Christ, but instead would appeal to the Christian love he should have for his brother. The passages of slaves being told to obey their masters is as a testimony to their masters that may lead to their salvation. Paul similarly wrote of himself that he rejoiced in his imprisonments because it was an opportunity to share the Gospel to those in prison.

The whole arc of the Old Testament is bringing the Israelites out of slavery. Christ died on the cross to release us from the bonds of slavery. Christians are told to judge hold other in higher esteem than themselves, which would preclude slavery. I don't care what segregationists of the South tried to make the Bible say; they were wrong. People have been misquoting and misusing the Bible for centuries for their own purposes. The LORD will deal with them as they deserve.

This whole shibboleth of the Bible condoning slavery is nonsense and slander against Christianity by those who no nothing of it and don't care to.

How do you reconcile your position with the biblical commands for wives to submit to their husbands?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, the curiously ignorant reaction by a small vocal group in the progressive movement has demonstrated how incompatible their ideas and goals are with the principles that has made this country great.

Please show me in the US Constitution where the United States of America is a Christian nation.

this

the truth is several of the Founding Fathers were NOT believers

+100000

religion has ZERO place in government

A number of the original states had established churches in their constitution at the time of the founding which enforced religious taxes on their populations which continued until the 1830's. Laws prohibiting certain religious groups from holding office continued through the first half of the 19th century.

The 1st amendment establishment clause was there because of those established churches, which were an outgrowth of several colonies originally being religous colonies. Setting one particular church up as the national established church would have caused considerable problems in the late 18th century.

I'm amazed that people don't remember this from history class.

You can certainly make an argument that the national government was not a Christian government, but the fact is that several of the States were religious governments. You would have to note, that the social and cultural norms of the United States have been and still are Christian.

It's not very Christian to demonize poor people trying to come here for a better life. Nor was it very Christian to enslave people and then make them third class citizens for a hundred years. You'll have to call those "norms" something else besides Christian.

I'm amazed you don't remember these things from history class.

I abhor slavery, but you need to look at the historical context.

Why do you consider slavery to be incompatible with Christianity? Clearly if you remembered your history classes, you would know the exact biblical passages that southerners used to defend the institution.

You might also remember that not once does Jesus denounce the institution, namely because he wasn't concerned with making this world better, but saving people for the next.

The new and old testiment aren't anti-slavery. In fact, slaves are told to obey their masters as they would Christ. Slaves were considered to be free "spiritually", but not free under the law.

You also need to read the biblical passages on nations, it's not quite what you think it is.

Unlike many "Christians" who believe in "Hippie Jesus", I've actually read the bible. It's rather strange that many supposed christians haven't.

You've read the Bible. Did you skip Philemon, or did the pages stick together so you missed this short New Testament book? In it, Paul writes that he could COMMAND Philemon to release his slave Onisemus, a brother in Christ, but instead would appeal to the Christian love he should have for his brother. The passages of slaves being told to obey their masters is as a testimony to their masters that may lead to their salvation. Paul similarly wrote of himself that he rejoiced in his imprisonments because it was an opportunity to share the Gospel to those in prison.

The whole arc of the Old Testament is bringing the Israelites out of slavery. Christ died on the cross to release us from the bonds of slavery. Christians are told to judge hold other in higher esteem than themselves, which would preclude slavery. I don't care what segregationists of the South tried to make the Bible say; they were wrong. People have been misquoting and misusing the Bible for centuries for their own purposes. The LORD will deal with them as they deserve.

This whole shibboleth of the Bible condoning slavery is nonsense and slander against Christianity by those who no nothing of it and don't care to.

How do you reconcile your position with the biblical commands for wives to submit to their husbands?

Why don't you read the text? The verse directly above that says we are all to submit to one another. And the instructions to husbands cover more verses than this one, including to give up their lives for their wives. And that doesn't touch on slavery. I'm not sure what your point is, but husbands are told to sacrifice greatly for their wives. A sober Christian husband would never bring this up with his wife as a point of dominance, because the command for the husband is so much greater. There's nothing to reconcile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, the curiously ignorant reaction by a small vocal group in the progressive movement has demonstrated how incompatible their ideas and goals are with the principles that has made this country great.

Please show me in the US Constitution where the United States of America is a Christian nation.

this

the truth is several of the Founding Fathers were NOT believers

+100000

religion has ZERO place in government

A number of the original states had established churches in their constitution at the time of the founding which enforced religious taxes on their populations which continued until the 1830's. Laws prohibiting certain religious groups from holding office continued through the first half of the 19th century.

The 1st amendment establishment clause was there because of those established churches, which were an outgrowth of several colonies originally being religous colonies. Setting one particular church up as the national established church would have caused considerable problems in the late 18th century.

I'm amazed that people don't remember this from history class.

You can certainly make an argument that the national government was not a Christian government, but the fact is that several of the States were religious governments. You would have to note, that the social and cultural norms of the United States have been and still are Christian.

It's not very Christian to demonize poor people trying to come here for a better life. Nor was it very Christian to enslave people and then make them third class citizens for a hundred years. You'll have to call those "norms" something else besides Christian.

I'm amazed you don't remember these things from history class.

I abhor slavery, but you need to look at the historical context.

Why do you consider slavery to be incompatible with Christianity? Clearly if you remembered your history classes, you would know the exact biblical passages that southerners used to defend the institution.

You might also remember that not once does Jesus denounce the institution, namely because he wasn't concerned with making this world better, but saving people for the next.

The new and old testiment aren't anti-slavery. In fact, slaves are told to obey their masters as they would Christ. Slaves were considered to be free "spiritually", but not free under the law.

You also need to read the biblical passages on nations, it's not quite what you think it is.

Unlike many "Christians" who believe in "Hippie Jesus", I've actually read the bible. It's rather strange that many supposed christians haven't.

You've read the Bible. Did you skip Philemon, or did the pages stick together so you missed this short New Testament book? In it, Paul writes that he could COMMAND Philemon to release his slave Onisemus, a brother in Christ, but instead would appeal to the Christian love he should have for his brother. The passages of slaves being told to obey their masters is as a testimony to their masters that may lead to their salvation. Paul similarly wrote of himself that he rejoiced in his imprisonments because it was an opportunity to share the Gospel to those in prison.

The whole arc of the Old Testament is bringing the Israelites out of slavery. Christ died on the cross to release us from the bonds of slavery. Christians are told to judge hold other in higher esteem than themselves, which would preclude slavery. I don't care what segregationists of the South tried to make the Bible say; they were wrong. People have been misquoting and misusing the Bible for centuries for their own purposes. The LORD will deal with them as they deserve.

This whole shibboleth of the Bible condoning slavery is nonsense and slander against Christianity by those who no nothing of it and don't care to.

Yet at the same time Romans 13?

Romans 13 tells Christians to obey the law. I'm not sure what your point is. And Acts 5 says the disciples, when presented with a command to disobey the LORD, said, "We must obey God, not man." Is there a law somewhere I'm not aware of that REQUIRES us to have slaves?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, the curiously ignorant reaction by a small vocal group in the progressive movement has demonstrated how incompatible their ideas and goals are with the principles that has made this country great.

Please show me in the US Constitution where the United States of America is a Christian nation.

this

the truth is several of the Founding Fathers were NOT believers

+100000

religion has ZERO place in government

A number of the original states had established churches in their constitution at the time of the founding which enforced religious taxes on their populations which continued until the 1830's. Laws prohibiting certain religious groups from holding office continued through the first half of the 19th century.

The 1st amendment establishment clause was there because of those established churches, which were an outgrowth of several colonies originally being religous colonies. Setting one particular church up as the national established church would have caused considerable problems in the late 18th century.

I'm amazed that people don't remember this from history class.

You can certainly make an argument that the national government was not a Christian government, but the fact is that several of the States were religious governments. You would have to note, that the social and cultural norms of the United States have been and still are Christian.

It's not very Christian to demonize poor people trying to come here for a better life. Nor was it very Christian to enslave people and then make them third class citizens for a hundred years. You'll have to call those "norms" something else besides Christian.

I'm amazed you don't remember these things from history class.

I abhor slavery, but you need to look at the historical context.

Why do you consider slavery to be incompatible with Christianity? Clearly if you remembered your history classes, you would know the exact biblical passages that southerners used to defend the institution.

You might also remember that not once does Jesus denounce the institution, namely because he wasn't concerned with making this world better, but saving people for the next.

The new and old testiment aren't anti-slavery. In fact, slaves are told to obey their masters as they would Christ. Slaves were considered to be free "spiritually", but not free under the law.

You also need to read the biblical passages on nations, it's not quite what you think it is.

Unlike many "Christians" who believe in "Hippie Jesus", I've actually read the bible. It's rather strange that many supposed christians haven't.

You've read the Bible. Did you skip Philemon, or did the pages stick together so you missed this short New Testament book? In it, Paul writes that he could COMMAND Philemon to release his slave Onisemus, a brother in Christ, but instead would appeal to the Christian love he should have for his brother. The passages of slaves being told to obey their masters is as a testimony to their masters that may lead to their salvation. Paul similarly wrote of himself that he rejoiced in his imprisonments because it was an opportunity to share the Gospel to those in prison.

The whole arc of the Old Testament is bringing the Israelites out of slavery. Christ died on the cross to release us from the bonds of slavery. Christians are told to judge hold other in higher esteem than themselves, which would preclude slavery. I don't care what segregationists of the South tried to make the Bible say; they were wrong. People have been misquoting and misusing the Bible for centuries for their own purposes. The LORD will deal with them as they deserve.

This whole shibboleth of the Bible condoning slavery is nonsense and slander against Christianity by those who no nothing of it and don't care to.

How do you reconcile your position with the biblical commands for wives to submit to their husbands?

Also, are you suggesting that the husband-wife relationship is one of slavery? The Bible is clear that the marriage relationship is a picture of Christ's relationship with the church, for whom He died, and for whom he makes continual intercession with the Father for its sanctification. This is as far from a master-slave relationship as you can get. This is one of the large reasons Christians cannot support gay marriage, because marriage is held as a representation of our relationship with Christ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, the curiously ignorant reaction by a small vocal group in the progressive movement has demonstrated how incompatible their ideas and goals are with the principles that has made this country great.

Please show me in the US Constitution where the United States of America is a Christian nation.

this

the truth is several of the Founding Fathers were NOT believers

+100000

religion has ZERO place in government

A number of the original states had established churches in their constitution at the time of the founding which enforced religious taxes on their populations which continued until the 1830's. Laws prohibiting certain religious groups from holding office continued through the first half of the 19th century.

The 1st amendment establishment clause was there because of those established churches, which were an outgrowth of several colonies originally being religous colonies. Setting one particular church up as the national established church would have caused considerable problems in the late 18th century.

I'm amazed that people don't remember this from history class.

You can certainly make an argument that the national government was not a Christian government, but the fact is that several of the States were religious governments. You would have to note, that the social and cultural norms of the United States have been and still are Christian.

It's not very Christian to demonize poor people trying to come here for a better life. Nor was it very Christian to enslave people and then make them third class citizens for a hundred years. You'll have to call those "norms" something else besides Christian.

I'm amazed you don't remember these things from history class.

I abhor slavery, but you need to look at the historical context.

Why do you consider slavery to be incompatible with Christianity? Clearly if you remembered your history classes, you would know the exact biblical passages that southerners used to defend the institution.

You might also remember that not once does Jesus denounce the institution, namely because he wasn't concerned with making this world better, but saving people for the next.

The new and old testiment aren't anti-slavery. In fact, slaves are told to obey their masters as they would Christ. Slaves were considered to be free "spiritually", but not free under the law.

You also need to read the biblical passages on nations, it's not quite what you think it is.

Unlike many "Christians" who believe in "Hippie Jesus", I've actually read the bible. It's rather strange that many supposed christians haven't.

You've read the Bible. Did you skip Philemon, or did the pages stick together so you missed this short New Testament book? In it, Paul writes that he could COMMAND Philemon to release his slave Onisemus, a brother in Christ, but instead would appeal to the Christian love he should have for his brother. The passages of slaves being told to obey their masters is as a testimony to their masters that may lead to their salvation. Paul similarly wrote of himself that he rejoiced in his imprisonments because it was an opportunity to share the Gospel to those in prison.

The whole arc of the Old Testament is bringing the Israelites out of slavery. Christ died on the cross to release us from the bonds of slavery. Christians are told to judge hold other in higher esteem than themselves, which would preclude slavery. I don't care what segregationists of the South tried to make the Bible say; they were wrong. People have been misquoting and misusing the Bible for centuries for their own purposes. The LORD will deal with them as they deserve.

This whole shibboleth of the Bible condoning slavery is nonsense and slander against Christianity by those who no nothing of it and don't care to.

Yet at the same time Romans 13?

Romans 13 tells Christians to obey the law. I'm not sure what your point is. And Acts 5 says the disciples, when presented with a command to disobey the LORD, said, "We must obey God, not man." Is there a law somewhere I'm not aware of that REQUIRES us to have slaves?

No Romans 13 tells Christians to submit to the authority of those put above them because they were put there by God for your own good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anybody remember what Tipper Gore did about music? I don't either. She is of no consequence.

She had music labeled. I remember. Back then when we had records, you could see the stickers - explicit lyrics!

I remember.

[Anonymous]

This cracks me up that people waste time arguing about allegories written two thousand years ago as if they were produced by anything other than ok writers from the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, the curiously ignorant reaction by a small vocal group in the progressive movement has demonstrated how incompatible their ideas and goals are with the principles that has made this country great.

Please show me in the US Constitution where the United States of America is a Christian nation.

this

the truth is several of the Founding Fathers were NOT believers

+100000

religion has ZERO place in government

A number of the original states had established churches in their constitution at the time of the founding which enforced religious taxes on their populations which continued until the 1830's. Laws prohibiting certain religious groups from holding office continued through the first half of the 19th century.

The 1st amendment establishment clause was there because of those established churches, which were an outgrowth of several colonies originally being religous colonies. Setting one particular church up as the national established church would have caused considerable problems in the late 18th century.

I'm amazed that people don't remember this from history class.

You can certainly make an argument that the national government was not a Christian government, but the fact is that several of the States were religious governments. You would have to note, that the social and cultural norms of the United States have been and still are Christian.

It's not very Christian to demonize poor people trying to come here for a better life. Nor was it very Christian to enslave people and then make them third class citizens for a hundred years. You'll have to call those "norms" something else besides Christian.

I'm amazed you don't remember these things from history class.

I abhor slavery, but you need to look at the historical context.

Why do you consider slavery to be incompatible with Christianity? Clearly if you remembered your history classes, you would know the exact biblical passages that southerners used to defend the institution.

You might also remember that not once does Jesus denounce the institution, namely because he wasn't concerned with making this world better, but saving people for the next.

The new and old testiment aren't anti-slavery. In fact, slaves are told to obey their masters as they would Christ. Slaves were considered to be free "spiritually", but not free under the law.

You also need to read the biblical passages on nations, it's not quite what you think it is.

Unlike many "Christians" who believe in "Hippie Jesus", I've actually read the bible. It's rather strange that many supposed christians haven't.

You've read the Bible. Did you skip Philemon, or did the pages stick together so you missed this short New Testament book? In it, Paul writes that he could COMMAND Philemon to release his slave Onisemus, a brother in Christ, but instead would appeal to the Christian love he should have for his brother. The passages of slaves being told to obey their masters is as a testimony to their masters that may lead to their salvation. Paul similarly wrote of himself that he rejoiced in his imprisonments because it was an opportunity to share the Gospel to those in prison.

The whole arc of the Old Testament is bringing the Israelites out of slavery. Christ died on the cross to release us from the bonds of slavery. Christians are told to judge hold other in higher esteem than themselves, which would preclude slavery. I don't care what segregationists of the South tried to make the Bible say; they were wrong. People have been misquoting and misusing the Bible for centuries for their own purposes. The LORD will deal with them as they deserve.

This whole shibboleth of the Bible condoning slavery is nonsense and slander against Christianity by those who no nothing of it and don't care to.

Yet at the same time Romans 13?

Romans 13 tells Christians to obey the law. I'm not sure what your point is. And Acts 5 says the disciples, when presented with a command to disobey the LORD, said, "We must obey God, not man." Is there a law somewhere I'm not aware of that REQUIRES us to have slaves?

No Romans 13 tells Christians to submit to the authority of those put above them because they were put there by God for your own good.

Please read before you post. It begins: “Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities...”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This cracks me up that people waste time arguing about allegories written two thousand years ago as if they were produced by anything other than ok writers from the time.

Haha. I was just thinking the same thing.

Maybe 2000 years from now two people will be debating the deep meaning of DCUM posts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who cares, she is such a non-entity.

Apparently people do care as they discussing it everywhere. Go figure.