|
this is a discussion within the Saints Community Forum; As for the rest? Do what everyone else in history has done. start your own church, take all the passages from any and all religions and come up with something that works for ya. That is the way it has ...
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
07-17-2015, 09:53 AM | #41 |
LB Mentallity
|
Re: Is the flour De Lis Offensive.
As for the rest? Do what everyone else in history has done. start your own church, take all the passages from any and all religions and come up with something that works for ya.
That is the way it has been done since religion began. Jews to Muslim to Catholic to Protestants to Methodist to Baptist to whatever religious group listed afterward and there are many. That is just western Christianity. Hell eastern based religion are up for grabs too. mix and match as far as i am concerned. just come up with something that brings you the peace and spirituality you deserve as husbands and wives. Add an "s" problem solved Much to about nothing in my book. Maybe just to lazy to start a religion or just to bored not to start trouble. We all have a minority of trouble makers on every side of a topic that is no way representative of the majority they say they are speaking for. Ireland was smart. people voted it in and avoided all of this crap. it would have passed a general election vote easily here in the states. To be honest most of America could really care less either way. There is the swing vote it needed. But no it went the legal route so lawyers can make more money, Morality of the issue? I can not cast the first stone because I am not without sin and I can not sit in judgement because my version of God says it is not my job to do. Yep God comes in many different version to satisfy all pallets of taste. Kind like Baskin-Robbins. All religions mold God to their needs. I often wonder if God believes we see him as a schizophrenic. I am sure everyone of these so called prophets that twist his words to start a new church got B slapped at the gates for making a mess out a simple message. Do unto others as you would have others do unto you. end of story. I wish everyone all the happiness in the world. Best of luck to everyone when judgement day comes. we all will need it. If not. I look forward to bumping into everyone as a particle of energy somewhere out there in cosmos someday. |
"We may have lost the game, but you'll be hurting tomorrow." Doug Atkins
Last edited by hagan714; 07-17-2015 at 10:23 AM.. |
|
Latest Blogs | |
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn
Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey
CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey |
07-17-2015, 11:56 AM | #42 |
Re: Is the flour De Lis Offensive.
| |
07-17-2015, 01:49 PM | #43 |
Merces Letifer
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 4,161
|
Re: Is the flour De Lis Offensive.
Originally Posted by hagan714
I don't think we can do that. As far as I understand it, citizens do not vote on the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution. We can vote on proposed laws, but once the challenge is raised as to whether any law is unconstitutional, it is up to the courts to make a decision.
|
07-17-2015, 06:12 PM | #44 |
Site Donor 2015
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 1,389
|
Re: Is the flour De Lis Offensive.
Being offended is a self inflicted wound.
Stories like this make me wanna shoot myself in the face. People... smh Where the hell is the world going? I suspect women in the media is the problem. Like this stupid article I took a screenie. I coudn't bear to read it. |
Last edited by Exxcalibur; 07-17-2015 at 06:17 PM.. |
|
07-17-2015, 08:49 PM | #45 |
1000 Posts +
|
Re: Is the flour De Lis Offensive.
Originally Posted by Tobias-Reiper
You are without a doubt the biggest troll on this site. What part of separation of church and state did you not understand? I made it clear people can do whatever they want within their own boundaries. Marriage was created for people to make their relationship legitimate and acceptable to God. You can disagree with that, and not believe in God all you want, but that is why it came into existence. Since that time it has been made into whatever people want to think it is.
If you are gay and want to be in a relationship, do what you want, but you don't need to be married. I'm white, but what if I said I want to be considered a Native American so I can try to qualify for some of that trust fund money? That would be pretty dumb. Well with homosexuals, they don't want to worry themselves with morality but they want to get in on the benefits. Yet there are other ways of getting those benefits. This is about the "progressive" movement pushing their way through all remaining barriers. It really has less to do with gays as it does for the overall movement, and I've mentioned that before on this site. You say I'm pushing my beliefs on others? Negative. Again, I am very clear that while I don't support everything that people believe in, I'm not asking them to bend over backwards for me, just don't infringe on things that are sacred for me and those who share the same faith as me. I have news for you, there is only one truth. You can interpret what you believe to be true in many ways, but there can only be one truth. So what kind of christian would I be if I said "well it says this in the bible, but I guess I can make an exception for you"? That's wishy washy, and dishonest. If you think my words are rambling, then that says a lot about your comprehension skills. We don't vote on interpretation of the constitution? What is there to interpret? There were certain checks and balances in there to prevent the court from just arbitrarily deciding what law is or what it means. Individual states were supposed to have their own say. I'VE VOTED AGAINST SEX MARRIAGE IN THIS STATE. And now, suddenly, the states have no voice? Good luck coming up with a lie to explain that away. I never said the Bible was the constitution. But the constitution had a law... what was it again? Oh yeah, that ole separation of church and state again. If you enjoy being controlled by the courts, good luck to you. And lastly, divorce rates have nothing to do with the "essence of marriage" I spoke of. People who cheat on each other or beat each other or in violation of many things. You think I support those people? Sin comes in many forms, and it's all equally evil. No one is perfect, but we should strive to be. That means when you make a mistake, you own up, learn from it and repent. People who refuse to acknowledge their sins can not be forgiven. And those people are everywhere, unfortunately. If you don't believe in God in the first place, it will never even occur to you. Why don't you just for a moment consider that God is real. Would it matter how long ago the Bible was written? If it is the word of God, does it become outdated? What if I tell you the stories of your ancestors are outdated and that no one should believe it? Time can't bend truth, only people choose to do so. |
If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.
|
|
07-17-2015, 11:23 PM | #46 |
Merces Letifer
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 4,161
|
Re: Is the flour De Lis Offensive.
Calling me names is not going to make you right, you know?
With the bible, there is no actual evidence most it says is remotely factual. For example: what proof can you give me that Jesus came back to life? Or that he cured leprosy? Or that he made fish and bread rain from the skies? None whatsoever, other than words written by someone a couple thousand years ago, who by the way, was not God himself. You ask if I've ever considered whether God is real, and I take it you mean the Judaeo-Christian God...I'll ask you this: do you really know why you are a Christian and believe in the Judaist God? |
'Cause the simple man pays the thrills, the bills and the pills that kill
|
|
07-18-2015, 12:34 AM | #47 |
1000 Posts +
|
Re: Is the flour De Lis Offensive.
Originally Posted by Tobias-Reiper
Everything I said to you, I stand by 100%. The Constitution was supposed to protect the rights of the church as much as any other party. These judges have usurped the constitution in their rulings. You're basically telling me it's ok for the supreme court top do whatever they want, just because they can. That's a very dangerous thing.
Secondly, I am not contradicting myself in speaking of separation of church and state. My point is very simple. Marriage is (meaning should be) for the church. But I'm not legally forbidding homosexual from entering into some other kind of civil union. It takes no advantages away from them, while allowing the church to practice marriage under it's own laws. Now I'm aware that this will not always include Christian churches, but in cases where people DO try to get married in, say, a protestant church and the pastor says no, the church will be in danger of losing it's tax exempt status, and that isn't to mention the public display it will likely be made into. Just look at how people yourself respond to me taking a stance. And as far as I know you aren't gay. anytime someone on tv is asked for an honest answer about homosexuality and says something as simple as " I don't agree with it", he gets bashed and told to apologize. What do I mean by essence of marriage? Simple. One man, one woman, united before God. If a man marries a woman, and proceeds to beat her, he is breaking the sanctity of marriage just as much as a homosexual in an obviously much different manner. Sin is Sin. The thing about a same sex marriage is that it's a sin before it even gets started. Now the law doesn't define it that way anymore, yes, I know. Calling me a bible thumper is the oldest trick in the book. You don't like that I'm not a cowardly PC tool like almost everyone else. I'm not here for a high five. You don't like that I said there is only one truth? Prove me wrong then. When I said that I made sure to leave the door open for your beliefs, but you're too eager to attack my words and paint me as a hypocrite instead of reading what I say and giving an actual response. I said you can interpret the truth however you want... That means even if you think I'm wrong and you're right (which is the case for both us) there is still only one truth. We can't both be right. In theory, we could both be wrong. But there is a truth, as to how we got here and who is really in charge, or if you are an atheist, that we all just got here from some massive cosmic fart. There aren't multiple answers. Do I have physical evidence on hand to show you? No, not personally, and neither does an atheist have physical evidence that we weren't created. Why do I believe in God? I'll give you the answer that is easiest to understand. Prophesy. The bible WAS written a long time ago, meaning it couldn't have knowledge of anything going on recently without divine knowledge. There have been many,many prophecies that have been fulfilled, to perfection. Many of those prophecies were fulfilled within the time frame of the bible, as it was written over a very long period of time. So if you want something more current, look no further than end time prophecy. The signs are everywhere and America is filling out just about the entire list. It would take a lot longer to go through it all, so here is a link with a lot information including where to look in the bible and see it for yourself. Prophecy Being Fulfilled in Current Events This isn't new to any of us who have followed it, but it is clearly accelerating. |
If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.
|
|
07-18-2015, 07:51 AM | #48 |
Site Donor 2015
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 1,389
|
Re: Is the flour De Lis Offensive.
Here's a poem for you, Tobias.
The Hollow Men by T S Eliot - Famous poems, famous poets. - All Poetry |
07-18-2015, 07:57 AM | #49 |
LB Mentallity
|
Re: Is the flour De Lis Offensive.
Originally Posted by Tobias-Reiper
That is what the lawyers want you to believe.
Gay marriage had nothing to do with a constitutional change. Or any such interpenetration of it. That is just not true. The battle over state rights was at issue thus constitutional. Not the act of marriage itself. A simple nation wide petition would have forced the issue on a ballot. Much like in the last election were businesses were given the same rights as people in covering up campaign contributions. It easily could have been handle this way. Even without having to word the options as double negatives to make sure it passed. By going the legal route it allows for more aggressive changes that really only the extremist of the movement want. IE California doing away with husband and wife terminology because it was anti gay and offensive. Me? I am offended that if i go in and get married we are now a couple. So I am to spend the rest of life making sure anyone who inquires to the state of our marriage is hetero and not homo. This is just the start of making everyone's life more complicated than it has to be. If i lived in California. This will spread. Why not two simple options husband and wife or couple. hell inter mix them wife and wife and husband and husband even you pick. At least equality is reach. Addition is more peaceful than subtraction. I thought that was the overall goal of this. Who benefits in the end? not the people. All of this just adds fuel to fire of an already semi volatile situation. It will grow from extreme left vs extreme Right to include those of us who were on the fence about the issue whole time. This will get out of control Now so called equality is screwing with my life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. That is why when it went to the courts i saw this mess coming. something so simple made so dangerous. The lawyers are laughing all the way to the bank. Yes we could have done the same as Ireland. The courts could have ruled it so also. They have that right to put it into our hands as a people. But that does not happen anymore in our present day version of democracy. They wanted the mess. It just perpetuation the income of their profession. This is why Ireland put it to the vote and did not address it as a constitutional issue. They knew this is what would happen. Now they can get married and that is were it ends. Which is exactly what gay couple wanted. They did not want to open this can of worms. My Irish relatives are having a field day with topic. yet another topic to bust my chops about. off to the political section in 3 2 1 |
"We may have lost the game, but you'll be hurting tomorrow." Doug Atkins
Last edited by hagan714; 07-18-2015 at 08:22 AM.. |
|
07-18-2015, 04:52 PM | #50 |
Merces Letifer
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 4,161
|
Re: Is the flour De Lis Offensive.
Originally Posted by burningmetal
No. I am telling you is that the SCOTUS ultimately interprets the US Constitution. That is all.
As for prophesies, please. Just about every culture that has any prophesies, they all refer to similar things: natural disasters, war, an evil nation that would conquer the world, pestilence, famine, persecution... but it doesn't occur to you, all of those, humans have experienced them in one way or another, over and over, for millions of years. So what a stretch it is to predict them, uh? |
'Cause the simple man pays the thrills, the bills and the pills that kill
|
|
|
|
LinkBacks (?)
LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/73137-flour-de-lis-offensive.html
|
||||
Posted By | For | Type | Date | Hits |
The Latest New Orleans Saints News | SportSpyder | This thread | Refback | 07-12-2015 11:15 PM | 1 |
The Latest New Orleans Saints News | SportSpyder | This thread | Refback | 07-12-2015 05:38 PM | 1 |
Is the flour De Lis Offensive. | This thread | Refback | 07-12-2015 02:45 PM | 5 |