The only thing I would ask Bezos for is a job.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
White Christianity seething in its own soup.
- Thread starter Agent47
- Start date
- Status
Banker taking care of his money...fine with meMaybe you can be a specisl order baker for his KKK orders.
How about one of us going to local muslim/jewish caterer and ask for Jesus is Lord cake?
Yes! The religious left hopes to force Evangelicals to do whatever the federal government dictates but sooner or later the weapon will be used against them. You cannot force a person to do something against his religious liberty. When Clinton was President, as you know, Hillary copied Mussolini's healthcare plan and part of that was that students would not be allowed to choose an area of specialty in medical school but would have to study whatever the government decided. Bezos is using his ownership of the Washington Post to force his political views on the American people because being the richest man in the world and owner of Amazon is not enough for Bezos--he wants to be the American dictator. If Hillary had been elected, Evangelicals would have already experienced a high arrest rate. but Islam, allied with the left for the time being, would have been exempt from lawsuits over same-sex marriages. Hillary would have also arrested Catholics for not performing abortions in Catholic hospitals and for not paying for birth control in their health insurance plans.
Democrats are just in it for the money. As American poet e.e. cummings wrote many years ago:
Humanity i love you
because you would rather black the boots of
success than enquire whose soul dangles from his
watch-chain which would be embarrassing for both
parties....
Hmmm. Trump favors ending the abortion holocaust. You favor politicians who want to continue the holocaust. I believe that means Trump, at the very least, has better moral credentials that you. Simple deduction, really.
Hmmm. Trump favors ending the abortion holocaust. You favor politicians who want to continue the holocaust. I believe that means Trump, at the very least, has better moral credentials that you. Simple deduction, really.
Trump never changed his beliefs. He has simply LIED as he OFTEN does to get your vote.
Ironice they have to go back almost 20 to find a tape of Trump when he was as immoral as they are.
Accept reality. Roe vs. Wade was passed by a Republican Supreme Court (6R+3D) in 1973. The Chief Justice was Republican and a Republican wrote the Majority decision. YOUR party is responsible for legal abortion in America. In 45 years they haven't reversed their pro-abortion law. They don't want to because that would mean losing the vote of duped "Evangelical Christians" like you who always vote Republican based on that one issue. As the Bible says get the beam out of your own eye before trying to remove the mote from youir brother's eye.
Roe v Wade was a court case, and is not passed by Republicans or Democrats. I don't know who feed you the above line, but it's fallacious.
Regardless, those that passed and uphold it have your support. That's the point. Republicans for many years have been trying to appoint judges that will strike it down. That's why I support them now. Democrats, who you support, are fighting to keep the holocaust going. That's the camp you're in.
I've mentioned this before, but if RvW was a threat to you, you'd be busting down the doors to vote Republican. You'd be screaming in the streets, "please save me." But since you're in the clear, and only the unborn are threatened, you sit back and laugh. That's not moral, my friend, that's cowardice.
Last edited:
I really doubt the republicans on that Court were Justice Thomas clones, if they were, would have been 9-0 against!
What is your major objective for a president to do? Appoint a Supreme Court justice that will vote to take down Roe vs. Wade correct? Six of the Justices that ruled on Roe vs. Wade were appointed by Republican presidents. This decision was enacted in the same way you want to take it down, by the Supreme Court. Therefore it was a republican decision. If you think the Republican party really wanted to reverse their decision don't you think they could have done that in 45 years? How long are you willing to wait? Another 45 years? Get real. This has been a great political move for the GOP. They're hypocrites and you support their murder.
What's your point? I'm talking about history, what actually happened. Do you believe that no change in 45 years demonstrates a strong indication that Republicans ever want to change Roe vs. Wade?
Last edited:
Republicans having appointed those judges in no way mean Republicans have ever supported their decision. Only a liberal would think up something like that.
Except there has be all kinds of changes. Check your history ...
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't know how I missed this thread. Anyway, it's a broad brush fallacy being wielded by strawmen.
Author asserts white Christians "like guns"; provided link says self-identified pro-lifers oppose gun control, says nothing about a love affair with guns.
Author asserts white Christians "don't like immigrants"; provided link says bare majority of 53% say immigrants threaten traditional American values, nothing about personal feelings towards them.
Author asserts white Christians are "excited about the death penalty"; provided link never used that adverb, merely says they support it (and only 59%.)
I could go on and on but you get the idea.
I see the OP did a drive-by on this one.
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL
Author asserts white Christians "like guns"; provided link says self-identified pro-lifers oppose gun control, says nothing about a love affair with guns.
Author asserts white Christians "don't like immigrants"; provided link says bare majority of 53% say immigrants threaten traditional American values, nothing about personal feelings towards them.
Author asserts white Christians are "excited about the death penalty"; provided link never used that adverb, merely says they support it (and only 59%.)
I could go on and on but you get the idea.
I see the OP did a drive-by on this one.
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL
Exactly, this thread link is just a religious left rant based upon bad theology. This Professor Mathewes is most interested in gays getting cakes baked by people who don't want to do it for religious reasons but the Professor doesn't mention going to Dearborn, Michigan, for his cake. The Professor probably works for Jeff Bezos, owner of Amazon and owner of the Washington Post. Bezos has made it clear that he hates Trump. Now we can guess that Bezos hates white Christians, also.
Here is what the Washington Post said in part: "Earlier this month, the Supreme Court heard a case from a baker who argued his Christian convictions led him to refuse to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple....When we’ve reached a place where good Christian folk think it’s a matter of major theological principle not to sell pastries to gay people...."
What the religious left is asking is that the government have the power to determine everyone's job description and they are blaming Evangelicals for opposing them on this baking of cakes for same-sex marriages, saying that if Hillary were President, she would have forced Evangelicals on behalf of gays and lesbians, which fact we already know--which explains in part why Hillary lost and why the religious left if unimportant even within the Democrat Party.
What the religious left is asking is that the government have the power to determine everyone's job description and they are blaming Evangelicals for opposing them on this baking of cakes for same-sex marriages, saying that if Hillary were President, she would have forced Evangelicals on behalf of gays and lesbians, which fact we already know--which explains in part why Hillary lost and why the religious left if unimportant even within the Democrat Party.
I'm not sure I'm following your point. i would agree that some republicans in the past picked bad judges. Bush 41 picked some bad judges. But their record has been very good over the last 40 years. How have the democrats done in the last 40 years? Can you name a single good judge appointed by Carter, Clinton or Obama?
Quite the strawman argument. No one is making that argument.
- Status