Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

For Those Interested in a More Balanced Perspective

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • For Those Interested in a More Balanced Perspective

    There is a lot of talk these days with one party telling a different ideology what they believe ... and the other ideology responding with it's own perspective of what the first party really believes.

    This article in USA Today offers a more balanced perspective but, I warn you, it is written by a Christian pastor. Also, please bear in mind, it is an opinion on which you can form your own opinion (or not as you choose):

    In one week we have seen two telling turns in the societal development of the United States.

    Michael Sam, a talented football prospect, made history when the St. Louis Rams drafted him to play in the NFL. President Obama and many others are celebrating — because Sam is gay.

    In contrast, brothers David and Jason Benham, who had signed to film an HGTV show, got the boot and will never have their TV show — because they are conservative Christians.

    ...

    It saddens me that some conservatives would celebrate if Sam had not gotten drafted— because of his lifestyle. It equally saddens me that others celebrate Christians being barred from a TV show — because of their beliefs. The Benham brothers cancellation was another in a new trend of Christians being forced out of careers, including the resignation of Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich. He created JavaScript but is no longer welcome at Mozilla because of his beliefs.

    When talented people are barred from the marketplace — so that ideologues can press their agenda, we all lose. It doesn't matter if the ideologues are conservative Christians, LGBT activists, or any other group. The moment we begin using our social power to destroy the careers of folks who disagree with us, we begin destroying the variegated threads that make up the tapestry of American life.
    I agree with the Pastor. How about you?

  • #2
    Re: For Those Interested in a More Balanced Perspective

    Originally posted by Good1 View Post
    There is a lot of talk these days with one party telling a different ideology what they believe ... and the other ideology responding with it's own perspective of what the first party really believes.

    This article in USA Today offers a more balanced perspective but, I warn you, it is written by a Christian pastor. Also, please bear in mind, it is an opinion on which you can form your own opinion (or not as you choose):



    I agree with the Pastor. How about you?
    I would agree but I don't want to get audited by the IRS and investigated by the NSA.

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #3
      Re: For Those Interested in a More Balanced Perspective

      Originally posted by Lutherf View Post
      I would agree but I don't want to get audited by the IRS and investigated by the NSA.
      Get yourself the Rocky Mountain Survival Knife.

      It comes with an NSA proof compass.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #4
        Re: For Those Interested in a More Balanced Perspective

        Originally posted by Good1 View Post
        I agree with the Pastor. How about you?
        I agree people should not have their careers hurt because of what they say.

        This knee jerk reaction to distance somebody like the plague because they said something a lot of people think is riricurous.

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #5
          Re: For Those Interested in a More Balanced Perspective

          Originally posted by Lutherf View Post
          I would agree but I don't want to get audited by the IRS and investigated by the NSA.
          Neither do I ... so maybe we just keep this between us.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #6
            Re: For Those Interested in a More Balanced Perspective

            Originally posted by Good1 View Post
            There is a lot of talk these days with one party telling a different ideology what they believe ... and the other ideology responding with it's own perspective of what the first party really believes.

            This article in USA Today offers a more balanced perspective but, I warn you, it is written by a Christian pastor. Also, please bear in mind, it is an opinion on which you can form your own opinion (or not as you choose):



            I agree with the Pastor. How about you?
            Yeah, I agree with him.

            All that we have done, well, they, is simply swap one object of intolerance for another. Certain groups who were not tolerated under the old morality, are now tolerated, and they have turned into what they railed against. The intolerant. Irony.

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #7
              Re: For Those Interested in a More Balanced Perspective

              Originally posted by Good1 View Post
              There is a lot of talk these days with one party telling a different ideology what they believe ... and the other ideology responding with it's own perspective of what the first party really believes.

              This article in USA Today offers a more balanced perspective but, I warn you, it is written by a Christian pastor. Also, please bear in mind, it is an opinion on which you can form your own opinion (or not as you choose):



              I agree with the Pastor. How about you?
              I agree with much of what he said, I especially like the tapestry metaphor & this part:

              "When talented people are barred from the marketplace — so that ideologues can press their agenda, we all lose."

              & is this why we can't have nice things? We ALL lose when ideologues (of any flavor) are put in the driver's seat (talk about mixing metaphors!).

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #8
                Re: For Those Interested in a More Balanced Perspective

                Originally posted by Quinn View Post
                I agree with much of what he said, I especially like the tapestry metaphor & this part:

                "When talented people are barred from the marketplace — so that ideologues can press their agenda, we all lose."

                & is this why we can't have nice things? We ALL lose when ideologues (of any flavor) are put in the driver's seat (talk about mixing metaphors!).
                I don't mind even ardent idealogues driving. But, as the book of Ecclesiastes (3:1ff) says, there is a season for everything. I like some of the idealogues in this community who can mount a cogent argument (which is not all of them).

                What I do not appreciate is an idealogue sitting in the white house insisting he knows better than I and if I disagree, well tough! I don't appreciate those of a more arrogant persuasion leading my church or my town, either.

                In my opinion, it is about time someone started holding the feet of the church to the fire in regards to how they treat the marginalized of our society. Reality has been out there on short term missions and so have I: We have seen the rejected and despised of whom Jesus spoke regularly. The church is told to minister to these people and, yet, one dares show up at our doorstep, and we're too busy "worshipping" to take care of their needs?

                OMG. . . WHAT IF A HOMOSEXUAL showed up in church?

                scream.jpg

                What will we DO ... Who will talk to them (or will we just sit a respectable distance away and glare at them disapprovingly). THAT is what keeps me up at night.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #9
                  Re: For Those Interested in a More Balanced Perspective

                  You are only intolerant if you don't agree with the liberal position.

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #10
                    Re: For Those Interested in a More Balanced Perspective

                    Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
                    You are only intolerant if you don't agree with the liberal position.
                    IMO, Christ's body, the church, is called to significantly more than simply "tolerance."

                    A lot of churches tolerate the poor and other marginalized. Few churches (in my experience ... others' might differ) actually reach out to them, embrace them, show them Christ's love (as we are commanded to do).

                    THEN, when we are confronted with our tolerance, we have the temerity to get indignant. "HOW DARE you challenge my 'christianity'. How dare you 'judge' me."

                    One of my favorite, and one of the most poignant, convicting songs from Casting Crowns says it:

                    But if we are the body, why aren't His arms reaching? Why aren't His hands healing? Why aren't His words teaching?
                    and if we are the body, why aren't His feet going, why is His love not showing them there is a way .... there is a way?

                    (and this is my favorite part)
                    A traveler is far away from home. He sheds his coat and quietly sinks into the back row. The weight of their judgemental glances, tell him his chances are better off on the Road...

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #11
                      Re: For Those Interested in a More Balanced Perspective

                      This one looks like it have a little more dept than being fired for being Christian...

                      One of them is reported at saying Gay people about gay people:
                      "We are not going to allow the demonic forces and agendas behind them to destroy life."

                      There is a fair bit of stuff there. Just to point out I don't consider someone who says that as Christian, I consider them to being Religious Zealots.

                      IMHO, Christianity is about loving one another not hating...

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #12
                        Re: For Those Interested in a More Balanced Perspective

                        Originally posted by CowboyTed View Post
                        This one looks like it have a little more dept than being fired for being Christian...

                        One of them is reported at saying Gay people about gay people:
                        "We are not going to allow the demonic forces and agendas behind them to destroy life."

                        There is a fair bit of stuff there. Just to point out I don't consider someone who says that as Christian, I consider them to being Religious Zealots.

                        IMHO, Christianity is about loving one another not hating...
                        I agree with that Ted.

                        "Loving" doesn't always have to mean "accepting" either. We are not directed to accept sin (any sin) but, in fact, we are admonished to call out sin (any sin) and cast it from amongst us. But, as you note, we are primarily told to "love God and LOVE ONE ANOTHER." Casting out "sin" too often gets understood to mean we have to cast out the sinner and that is simply not accurate. PARTICULARLY in light of Christ's pronouncement that none of us are without sin so it usually comes down to [this group of church members] throwing a sinner out because his sin is not the same as THEIR sin and they don't feel comfortable.

                        Left unchecked and allowed to flourish, in my opinion (and as you seem to be angling towards), those congregations become the Wesboro baptist churches and I also do not consider those people to be living the life Christ told us to live.

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #13
                          Re: For Those Interested in a More Balanced Perspective

                          Originally posted by Good1 View Post
                          I agree with that Ted.

                          "Loving" doesn't always have to mean "accepting" either. We are not directed to accept sin (any sin) but, in fact, we are admonished to call out sin (any sin) and cast it from amongst us. But, as you note, we are primarily told to "love God and LOVE ONE ANOTHER." Casting out "sin" too often gets understood to mean we have to cast out the sinner and that is simply not accurate. PARTICULARLY in light of Christ's pronouncement that none of us are without sin so it usually comes down to [this group of church members] throwing a sinner out because his sin is not the same as THEIR sin and they don't feel comfortable.

                          Left unchecked and allowed to flourish, in my opinion (and as you seem to be angling towards), those congregations become the Wesboro baptist churches and I also do not consider those people to be living the life Christ told us to live.
                          All people are born into a world of sin, and are sinners themselves. But Christ also told us to be perfect, even as the Father is perfect. You cannot just listen to Christ when he said all sin, but ignore him when he says for us to be perfect, which means sinless. Understanding the Teachings is the first step. If you don't understand the first step, the last step will be out in left field somewhere.

                          If a person loves the Creator and then loves the other as he loves himself, that would cure the world of its problems which have plagued humanity since day 2. Yet most people cannot love the other as they love themselves. In fact, they live lives that illustrate that they love so few, other than themselves. Selective love has no place in following Christ.

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #14
                            Re: For Those Interested in a More Balanced Perspective

                            Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
                            All people are born into a world of sin, and are sinners themselves. But Christ also told us to be perfect, even as the Father is perfect. You cannot just listen to Christ when he said all sin, but ignore him when he says for us to be perfect, which means sinless. Understanding the Teachings is the first step. If you don't understand the first step, the last step will be out in left field somewhere.

                            If a person loves the Creator and then loves the other as he loves himself, that would cure the world of its problems which have plagued humanity since day 2. Yet most people cannot love the other as they love themselves. In fact, they live lives that illustrate that they love so few, other than themselves. Selective love has no place in following Christ.
                            Please resist the urge to proselytize your gnosticism here.

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #15
                              Re: For Those Interested in a More Balanced Perspective

                              Originally posted by Good1 View Post
                              I agree with the Pastor. How about you?
                              The Pastor is both right and wrong.

                              The assessment is correct on what is happening today. It is very true that we have subsets of America determined to remove from the "marketplace" those that disagree with them. Perhaps better said, disagree with that moving target political correctness. It is also true that both certain LGBT activists groups and conservative Christian groups are guilty of this.

                              Where he is wrong (I say wrong meaning, by omission) is how we got here. You could say it started the moment we became a nation independent from England, with roots going back even further. It started the moment we turned to government authority to be a nation's moral compass. There is enough anger among these groups that we are talking about to forget that little bit of history with all this militant behavior. But, we are certainly stuck with the repercussions of those decisions. Government involvement in marriage. Government involvement in employment. Different treatment based on country of origin. Different treatment of assets, estate movement, and tax liability. Putting "Under God" in the pledge and "In God we Trust" on the dollar. No matter where you turn over our nation's short history we continually ask the government to do something we see as ideal forgetting the repercussions of taking a group and telling them they socially do not belong, or matter, or somehow lesser, etc.

                              Personally I do not have any problem with Michael Sam playing in the NFL, nor do I have a problem with David and Jason Benham having a show on HGTV. But I am in the extreme minority when it comes to that opinion. I can see "being the first openly Gay player in the NFL" being something LGBT groups would celebrate, at the same time I can see others celebrate he did not go first round. But, I am not going to either party. I also think HGTV did what others have done facing similar concerns, avoided the issue by terminating whoever said something not politically correct. I think it was a bad move on their part.

                              What we are stuck with now is something the Pastor said well, it is most unfortunate that both sides of the fence will probably ignore it for this and so many other social matters we have to contend with. It is too bad so many of his messages are largely ignored by so many, including those claiming to champion his cause.

                              "We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools." -Martin Luther King, Jr.

                              מה מכילות החדשות?

                              Working...
                              X