Texas Pastor Protection Bill

[Sam]

I'm not sure what you meant by your statements about exclusion, aggression, and the thumb in the eye, then.

Aggression and unnecessary provocation are not identical to oppression.

[Cow Poke]

And though Cow Poke certainly sincerely believes this is a real threat, it's not.

So, the gay guy who talked to his pastor about the militant intents of his "community" is a liar? And the gay guy (possibly the same one, but I don't know that) who testified FOR the bill is risking being labeled a traitor to his own community for... grins?

[RumTumTugger]

Never claimed they were being oppressed. Since my entire thrust has been this is largely a redundant restatement of Constitutional rights, I can't even see how that interpretation makes sense.

apparently it is necessary whether you want to admit it or not Sam Mayor Parker proved it.

[Paprika]

Never claimed they were being oppressed. Since my entire thrust has been this is largely a redundant restatement of Constitutional rights, I can't even see how that interpretation makes sense.

So why make it another thumb in the eye for the LGBT community? Needless aggression in the name of "defense".

But this is punching down.

I'm sure you have a great explanation for these.

[Zymologist]

Never claimed they were being oppressed. Since my entire thrust has been this is largely a redundant restatement of Constitutional rights, I can't even see how that interpretation makes sense.

I'm not sure what you meant by your statements about exclusion, aggression, and the thumb in the eye, then.

[Sam]

Right, so if Cow Poke wants to know how many people you've saved as an asinine way of trying to win the argument, don't resist but let him also know how much of your income you give to God's work so he can judge and disqualify even more.

Did you miss the part where I said that I supported the right to moral and LEGAL defense? All I said in reference to that verse is that it is a problematic teaching when it comes to the legal process.

Maybe it's cause I'm typing 9n a tablet but I'm pretty sure that was clearly written...

[RumTumTugger]

What stand is being taken here? Not "We won't endorse gay marriage, do what you will."

Rather, this is pretty explicitly "We want the protections we already explicitly enjoy under the Constitution to also be placed into statutory law so 'everyone knows'."

I have no problem with people of conscience taking a stand. I also have no problem articulating a moral and legal defense of such a stand (though, again, we run into some... Problematic teachings of Christ there). But this is punching down. And though Cow Poke certainly sincerely believes this is a real threat, it's not. It's just not allowed under our Constitution. And I guarantee more time and money have been spent to craft and advocate this legislation than will ever be spent on trials to force clergy to officiate same-sex weddings in their religious roles.

None so blind as those who refuse to see. Why are you purposely keeping yourself IGNOREnt who is doing the punching down it is not CP and the other Pastors it is Mayor Parker and her ilk that did it and are the reason this BILL is necessary. you must be one of the Bullies Useful idiots who choose blame the victims for what the bullies are doing when the victims try to protect themselves. well Sam good thing Texas is not like you and the other useful idiots who will let the bullies attack with impunity and blame the victim for the attack.

Go Texas stand up to the Bullies stop them before they use GREENMAIL TACTICS in order to trample over the God given Constitutionally protected rights of the others.

[Paprika]

Matthew 5:40, right.?

Right, so if Cow Poke wants to know how many people you've saved as an asinine way of trying to win the argument, don't resist but let him also know how much of your income you give to God's work so he can judge and disqualify even more.

[Sam]

While Cow Poke's 'how many people have you saved' is as banal as ever, Sam's portrayal of the bill as oppressing homosexuals is completely abominable. Stop trying to falsely portray them as victims here.

Never claimed they were being oppressed. Since my entire thrust has been this is largely a redundant restatement of Constitutional rights, I can't even see how that interpretation makes sense.

[Sam]

Is it bad for the courts to officially agree to this interpretation of these freedoms, so that they won't be redefined later? I'll have you know that while pastors in Denmark do have the freedom to deny gays a marriage ceremony, they were only allow to do this after most of them denied when the government told them that they ought to allow it from now on.



Oh really, such as?



Punching whom? The courts? The Christians don't have the power in this relationship, Houston proved that much with Mayor Anise Parker.



I hope you're right.



I'll pray the courts will always see it like that. Unlike what happened with freedom of worship becoming freedom from religion.



An ounce of prevention...

This isn't about the courts ; this is about the legislature. The courts wouldn't have a part in this until the statute was challenged.

Matthew 5:40, right.?

Freedom of worship still exists over here, have no fear.

[Paprika]

While Cow Poke's 'how many people have you saved' is as banal as ever, Sam's portrayal of the bill as oppressing homosexuals is completely abominable. Stop trying to falsely portray them as victims here.

[Leonhard]

I think one possibility is to go underground. Let the world around us rot and fester, while we become bastions for our faith on a very grassroots/interpersonal level. We can keep putting our fingers in holes, but the dam will eventually crumble, and maybe only when the world is swimming in its own filth people will find themselves attracted to the hope and sanctity of the Gospel message. It seems to me that darker days are ahead and are unavoidable, and maybe we ought to turn to those early church Christians for inspiration for how to deal with it. A number of good things can come from this too, I think. We will see a burning off of the chaff where those who were Christians in name only separate themselves from the faith. And there is, of course, always hope for the parousia.

I don't know. Just a thought.

Reminds me of a rhyme an Angel is said to have told St. Athanasius "Qui salvus esse fuge tage et quesce" ("If you want to save your soul, flee into the dessert, observe silence and recline in God's presence") which is what he did.

It might be a solution, in fact I think Christianity is likely going to become a minority with a much harder identity than what we're used to today.

[Leonhard]

Rather, this is pretty explicitly "We want the protections we already explicitly enjoy under the Constitution to also be placed into statutory law so 'everyone knows'."

Is it bad for the courts to officially agree to this interpretation of these freedoms, so that they won't be redefined later? I'll have you know that while pastors in Denmark do have the freedom to deny gays a marriage ceremony, they were only allow to do this after most of them denied when the government told them that they ought to allow it from now on.

we run into some... Problematic teachings of Christ there

Oh really, such as?

But this is punching down.

Punching whom? The courts? The Christians don't have the power in this relationship, Houston proved that much with Mayor Anise Parker.

And though Cow Poke certainly sincerely believes this is a real threat, it's not.

I hope you're right.

It's just not allowed under our Constitution.

I'll pray the courts will always see it like that. Unlike what happened with freedom of worship becoming freedom from religion.

And I guarantee more time and money have been spent to craft and advocate this legislation than will ever be spent on trials to force clergy to officiate same-sex weddings in their religious roles.

An ounce of prevention...

[Adrift]

What else would you have us do?

I think one possibility is to go underground. Let the world around us rot and fester, while we become bastions for our faith on a very grassroots/interpersonal level. We can keep putting our fingers in holes, but the dam will eventually crumble, and maybe only when the world is swimming in its own filth people will find themselves attracted to the hope and sanctity of the Gospel message. It seems to me that darker days are ahead and are unavoidable, and maybe we ought to turn to those early church Christians for inspiration for how to deal with it. A number of good things can come from this too, I think. We will see a burning off of the chaff where those who were Christians in name only separate themselves from the faith. And there is, of course, always hope for the parousia.

I don't know. Just a thought.

[Sam]

The world is rearing its ugly head Sam.

Does it mean something to take a stand, even if it might not gain us anything? Yes, so when we go before God we can at least say that we had no part, directly or indirectly in what happened. "Not us O Lord." Right now the world is getting all its been asking for, gay marriage, abortion, infidelity as "normality", no moral objectivity, no real consequences of actions and a lessening of responsibility and human dignity.

I'll take any stand against one of those issues, even if its just to defend the corner I'm standing on. Even if I might lose, or it might be pointless. Its still a fight worth fighting.

What else would you have us do?

What stand is being taken here? Not "We won't endorse gay marriage, do what you will."

Rather, this is pretty explicitly "We want the protections we already explicitly enjoy under the Constitution to also be placed into statutory law so 'everyone knows'."

I have no problem with people of conscience taking a stand. I also have no problem articulating a moral and legal defense of such a stand (though, again, we run into some... Problematic teachings of Christ there). But this is punching down. And though Cow Poke certainly sincerely believes this is a real threat, it's not. It's just not allowed under our Constitution. And I guarantee more time and money have been spent to craft and advocate this legislation than will ever be spent on trials to force clergy to officiate same-sex weddings in their religious roles.