Old Fort First Baptist Church

[lulzers]

Good god, the lot of you are frakin' retards. Churches all over the state and country are used as polling places. There is no violation.

[just saying]

OFpreacher wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm not arguing that adultery, divorce or remarriage are right or acceptable. These are real issues that threaten "the family" in the same way that homosexual marriage does. However the difference is that none of these things redefine what marriage is. I do believe legislation to make divorce more difficult with the exception of abusive relationships would be a step in the right direction. But this thread is on the issue of gay marriage. So I was speaking to that issue. Again I'm not in favor of restricting gays from enjoying the same civil liberties as heterosexuals. The only problem I have is defining such relationships as marriage and those relationships being recognized by federal and local governments as maraige. I say let people live their own lives as Christians or nonchristians. But I want the assurance that religious liberties are protected at the same time.

@OF preacher - do you agree with Dan Cathy of chick fil A?

"Last week, Chick fil A’s president and COO, Dan Cathy defended the Biblical interpretation of what constitutes a family by speaking out against gay marriage. On the subject ,Cathy stated the following about same sex marriage vs. the traditional family –

“I think we’re inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say that we know better than You as to what constitutes a marriage.”(ABC News)

During another interview on the topic of same sex marriage, Cathy said –

"I pray God's mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we have the audacity to define what marriage is about."

[OFpreacher]

I'm not real familiar with his comments, but the Chick Fi Lay guy doesn't get to decide who God pours out His judgement on and neither do I. The bottom line is this: God doesn't call sinners to live lives of holiness, but He does call Christians to. God does however offer freedom from sin to sinners, but He puts the ball in your court. You get to decide to believe or not believe. Like 90% of the times in scripture when God judged a nation or people it was His nation or people He Judged. The purpose of Gods judgement as the bible teaches is to refine and purify His people not rid the world of sinners. If you are asking if I believe homosexuality is a sin, the answer is yes. But so is cheating on your taxes, so is over eating or drunkenness. The Gospel of Jesus Christ has nothing to do with homosexuality specifically. Sin is not just the actions of sinners. Sin is the condition of our heart. Even if a drunkard stops drinking and a cheater stops cheating the sinful condition of their heart remains. The bible teaches that Jesus is the only remedy for a sinful heart, and I choose to believe that. You may not make that same choice. Even Jesus said narrow is the gate and difficult is the way and there are few who find it. What I preach is an alternative to sin, and the choice is yours.

[Just saying]

Man, you are sooo wrapped up in that dogma. There is so much more you could know (if you had the desire),but I see you are in a comfort zone.

Regardless, denying equal rights to another group of human beings based on YOUR religious beliefs is still bigotry.

[OFpreacher]

Just saying wrote:

Man, you are sooo wrapped up in that dogma. There is so much more you could know (if you had the desire),but I see you are in a comfort zone.
Regardless, denying equal rights to another group of human beings based on YOUR religious beliefs is still bigotry.

If you read my posts I'm not in favor of denying anyone any thing. The only dog I have in this fight is my own religious liberties. For me the only issue is the word marriage. I fear that if homosexual relationship are recognized as marriages by state and federal governments it may limit free speech and especially Christian speech.

[mm-mm-good]

My district's voting place is a church, so why shouldn't they have a say?

[just saying]

OFpreacher wrote:

<quoted text>
If you read my posts I'm not in favor of denying anyone any thing. The only dog I have in this fight is my own religious liberties. For me the only issue is the word marriage. I fear that if homosexual relationship are recognized as marriages by state and federal governments it may limit free speech and especially Christian speech.

Why do you fear it may limit free speech? Why are you afraid that will happen? How can a simple word "marriage" be so threatening?

[OFpreacher]

just saying wrote:

<quoted text>
Why do you fear it may limit free speech? Why are you afraid that will happen? How can a simple word "marriage" be so threatening?

There has been talk for several years about hate speech legislation, and there are many law makers who have said they would support such a bill. If this were law it would limit speech. There would be things you can and cannot say. You might ask why is that a bad thing? Well in a few Scandinavian countries now both gay marriage protection and hate speech legislation have jailed preachers for reading aloud from their bibles. The legal argument used by the government was that homosexual marriage is protected by the state, therefore speech concerning it shall be regulated by the state. That's the long answer. The short answer is history.

[Just saying]

OFpreacher wrote:

<quoted text>
There has been talk for several years about hate speech legislation, and there are many law makers who have said they would support such a bill. If this were law it would limit speech. There would be things you can and cannot say. You might ask why is that a bad thing? Well in a few Scandinavian countries now both gay marriage protection and hate speech legislation have jailed preachers for reading aloud from their bibles. The legal argument used by the government was that homosexual marriage is protected by the state, therefore speech concerning it shall be regulated by the state. That's the long answer. The short answer is history.

Man, that sounds selfish. Seriously, YOU are worried that a lawmaker could make a law to put YOU in jail if you were to speak your mind that you think homosexuality is wrong?

And all along I thought you were worried about the family. You, who have have a bastard child.(That's what they called them). Some things have come a long ways.

Now, if your bastard child turns out to be gay, maybe your mind will be forced to expand to realize that there may be more than one way for people to love each other.

[OFpreacher]

Just saying wrote:

<quoted text>
Man, that sounds selfish. Seriously, YOU are worried that a lawmaker could make a law to put YOU in jail if you were to speak your mind that you think homosexuality is wrong?
And all along I thought you were worried about the family. You, who have have a bastard child.(That's what they called them). Some things have come a long ways.
Now, if your bastard child turns out to be gay, maybe your mind will be forced to expand to realize that there may be more than one way for people to love each other.

It's only selfish if I was trying to restrict the behavior of other people. I just believe there is an answer that can preserve the freedom of what happens in bedrooms whether it's right or wrong, while at the same time preserve religious speech whether right or wrong. As for my autistic son that you felt the need to call names; I would love him regardless of what choices he makes.

[Just saying]

OFpreacher wrote:

<quoted text>
It's only selfish if I was trying to restrict the behavior of other people. I just believe there is an answer that can preserve the freedom of what happens in bedrooms whether it's right or wrong, while at the same time preserve religious speech whether right or wrong. As for my autistic son that you felt the need to call names; I would love him regardless of what choices he makes.

Was not trying to call your son "names" - you said you had a child out of wedlock and I was trying to make a point that was apparently missed.

[Just saying]

QUESTIONS FOR OLD FORT MINISTER

First of all, seeing as how the institution of marriage predates recorded history, how is it that a 2000 year old book is able to claim that marriage is only for heterosexual Christians?

Are you saying that if a gay couple were to marry, they could not also be Christians because they would be considered non-believers? Would they be destined for hell?

Do you agree with Rev Jerry Falwall who said,” AIDS is not just God’s punishment for homosexuals; it is God’s punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals.”

Do you agree with Pat Robertson who said,“Planned parenthood is teaching kids to fornicate, teaching people to have adultery, every kind of bestiality, homosexuality, lesbianism – everything that the Bible condemns.”

Do you agree with Fred Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church who has a website with an automated tally of the number of days a particular, named, deceased homosexual has been burning in hell?

Do you still agree with OF Preacher who says.” Again I'm not in favor of restricting gays from enjoying the same civil liberties as heterosexuals. The only problem I have is defining such relationships as marriage and those relationships being recognized by federal and local governments as maraige. I say let people live their own lives as Christians or nonchristians. But I want the assurance that religious liberties are protected at the same time”

Would any of the above quality as hate speech in your opinion?

[OFpreacher]

Just saying wrote:

<quoted text>
Was not trying to call your son "names" - you said you had a child out of wedlock and I was trying to make a point that was apparently missed.

Yeah I usually don't see the point in insulting children. It's funny to me how it's the Christians that are called racist bigots and haters, but I've been respectful. I answered every question with out crass or sarcasm. But it's the ones who say they are tolerant that call names and insult children.

[OFpreacher]

Just saying wrote:

QUESTIONS FOR OLD FORT MINISTER
First of all, seeing as how the institution of marriage predates recorded history, how is it that a 2000 year old book is able to claim that marriage is only for heterosexual Christians?
Are you saying that if a gay couple were to marry, they could not also be Christians because they would be considered non-believers? Would they be destined for hell?
Do you agree with Rev Jerry Falwall who said,” AIDS is not just God’s punishment for homosexuals; it is God’s punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals.”
Do you agree with Pat Robertson who said,“Planned parenthood is teaching kids to fornicate, teaching people to have adultery, every kind of bestiality, homosexuality, lesbianism – everything that the Bible condemns.”
Do you agree with Fred Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church who has a website with an automated tally of the number of days a particular, named, deceased homosexual has been burning in hell?
Do you still agree with OF Preacher who says.” Again I'm not in favor of restricting gays from enjoying the same civil liberties as heterosexuals. The only problem I have is defining such relationships as marriage and those relationships being recognized by federal and local governments as maraige. I say let people live their own lives as Christians or nonchristians. But I want the assurance that religious liberties are protected at the same time”
Would any of the above quality as hate speech in your opinion?

I think it's clear by everything Ive written in this thread that I don't agree with most of the examples you've cited. I even disagree with the chick Fi lay guy in some of the things he said, but I respect their right to say them. I respect your right to speak. If the government were locking up gay rights activists, I would be just as adamant.

[Just saying]

I was just trying to make the point that the way people feel about "things" change. We don't use that hate word "bastard" any more. We don't use the word illegitimate (I think you used that term earlier though I might be wrong) anymore either. I would never call a child illegitimate or a bastard in my wildest dreams. I'm sorry it was personal. But you must know that many people also have children who grow up and are gay and they love them as much as you love your son. Try to imagine just letting people who love each other get married. Families have evolved. The man, woman plus children model is becoming rare. Let's embrace love and support love. AMEN

[OFpreacher]

Just saying wrote:

I was just trying to make the point that the way people feel about "things" change. We don't use that hate word "bastard" any more. We don't use the word illegitimate (I think you used that term earlier though I might be wrong) anymore either. I would never call a child illegitimate or a bastard in my wildest dreams. I'm sorry it was personal. But you must know that many people also have children who grow up and are gay and they love them as much as you love your son. Try to imagine just letting people who love each other get married. Families have evolved. The man, woman plus children model is becoming rare. Let's embrace love and support love. AMEN

Like I said before, there has to be an answer that protects religious speech and the lifestyle choices of everyone. And I believe we can do it without insuring each other.

[Jesus]

I wouldn't be out there amongst the masses trying to protect religion and religious speech. Read the bible again and pray on it.

[whoa there]

OFpreacher wrote:

<quoted text>
No, probably not, but Jesus would deffinately be an advocate for freedom

'cept for freedom for the gays to marry, of course.

[OFpreacher]

whoa there wrote:

<quoted text>
'cept for freedom for the gays to marry, of course.

Why is it so important to the gay community for Christians to condone your life style. I've said over and over that I'm not trying to keep anyone from doing anything. Why is a religious word that important. I've explained where I'm coming from on this. I'm just not sure what your point is.

[whoa there]

Heterosexual here all the way.

what about gays of faith?