Featured You cannot be pro-life and anti-refugee!

Onesimus was a slave, and he had obligations to Philemon. Refugees usually are not runaway slaves. There is no indication that Philemon was trying to murder Onesimus. That is not the case with many refugees.

This is a false comparison.

 

Perhaps to get them on the voting rolls?

HankD

 

Come on Hank. You are more intelligent than that.

 

ROFL. What a stretch of an example. But, yes, a church could be a sanctuary for him. Centuries of precedence for such things. Would I approve it ... probably not. But that is not the question.

 

Can one be pro-liberty and anti-Trump?

http://ijr.com/2017/02/795979-pro-t...n=ods&utm_term=ijamerica&utm_content=politics

 

Yes.

The real question is can a person be pro-Trump and pro-liberty? I say, "No."
Why?
Because Trump is not pro-liberty.

 

And are those who oppose him such as they smash windows, burn cars, pepper spray people in the face, set a girl's hair on fire, and beat up a kid for wearing a a MAGA cap?

 

They are anarchists who want to bring about anarchy. There are two ways of attempting to bring about anarchy. One though lawless activities. The other like your buddy McConnell by bringing about anarchy and discord by shirking his responsibilities.

 

As I said, anti-Trump. If anti-Obama demonstrators did such things as the current anti-presidents are doing, is anarchists what you would call them? Or fascists? nazis? revolutionaries?....

 

Per Bible, Pro life, anti abortion, anti terrorist refugees!

 

Struck a nerve?

HankD

 

Indeed and pro-self defense and pro-gun for those that do slip in.

 

And leaving your doors unlocked, failing to protect your family is hate.

 

"Perhaps to get them on the voting rolls."

Yeah. He should have dropped the "Perhaps."

 

Same way God bombed Sodom and Gommarah?

 

Oh, the loving Muslim parents who will kill their wives and children if they convert to Christianity? It is apparently a common practice in Muslim dominant societies:

"Muslim Man Strangles Wife, Tries to Murder His Five Children for Converting to Christianity in Uganda" - LINK
There thousands of refugees resettled in the US each year. The debate is about numbers, and the ability to vet them beforehand.

 

Beware of those who try to guilt you into supporting wide-open immigration. They're not your friend. They're hostile to your Christianity.

The US was wrong to surrender its Christian culture to militant secularism. The US is wrong to surrender its economy and culture to those who don't share American values. If your neighbor's house is falling apart, he needs to fix it, maybe with your help. But, you have no obligation to let your neighbor move into your house and take it over because he's unwilling to fix his own home. On the contrary, you have the obligation to preserve the quality of your home for your family, which is done by not allowing your neighbor to move in.

In biblical Israel, immigrants weren't allowed to buy land. And, immigrants would be executed or deported if they failed to abide by the standards of the Law of Moses (Judaism). God told the Israelites to be good neighbors and to treat foreigners kindly, but at the same time, Israelites were forbidden to surrender land or culture to immigrants.

 

Well, I guess one can't be pro-immigration and anti-foreign intervention. Since we can't logistically move everyone living under bad conditions to the USA, we might as well enact regime change in these other countries.

It's just logical.

 

My apologies for not reading through the whole thread.

Has someone already pointed out the logical fallacy with the thread title? Namely, for the thread title to be true, and be relevant to "pro-life," that it must be proven that refugees are facing death? If such cannot be proven, then "anti-refugee" is not equivalent to "anti-life."