One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Legislating Morality
Page <<first <prev 8 of 19 next> last>>
Mar 14, 2024 14:59:31   #
Rose42
 
Unintended Consequences wrote:
So do I follow Joshua who called on God to slay his enemies or Jesus who told us to turn the other cheek?


Turning the other cheek applies to insults not violence

Reply
Mar 14, 2024 15:03:40   #
RascalRiley Loc: Somewhere south of Detroit
 
Rose42 wrote:
Turning the other cheek applies to insults not violence

Turning the other cheek to insults is some we all get lots of practice doing here on OPP. 🙂

Reply
Mar 14, 2024 15:07:24   #
padremike Loc: Phenix City, Al
 
NotMAGA wrote:
Should any government have the right to legislate morality according to their religion?

Muslim girls are still being subjected to "honor deaths" in Muslim countries and even in countries like the UK where their families have relocated. Their fathers, uncles and brothers believe things such as marrying a non-Muslim or just showing their bare face in a TikTok video shames the family so badly they need to put these girls to death.

Does anyone condone the beatings and killings that have occurred here in the US to young gay men simply because they are gay? (I hope not!)

There is almost nothing new under the sun and you can be sure that includes abortions and homosexuality.

"Vengeance is mine" says the Lord. It's up to each man and woman to make their own peace with God, and God will not force them. He INVITES.
Should any government have the right to legislate ... (show quote)


Get the Phillips out. It's time to tighten up a few screws. The concern is not about legislating morality, the bigger concern is about legislating immorality.

Legislating immorality destroyed the sanctity of marriage and the nuclear family.

Legislating immorality allows a woman to premeditate and then carry out the executation of her unborn child.

Legislating immorality provides special protections for sexual perverts, the entire LGBTQ crowd; protections not extended to "normal" people.

Legislating immorality gave pornography protection under the 1st Amendment.

I could list many more issues of codified immorality but I expect your eyes have already glazed over.

Many laws do, in fact, promote morality. For example it's moral to force and enforce the reduction of speed in school zones. I think you get the drift of that sort of reasoning don't you?

I would remind you that none of the issues I first listed as immoral were matters of much concern until those immoral and ungodly issues you also advocate were introduced and promoted in the political party you support. I'm old enough to remember when not a single one was an issue of national concern. Folks knew right from wrong, good from evil. Now there's millions like you.

It's very apparent that you've relegated God into your own Progressive Democratic process where you hold the power& where you determine good and evil and then you benevolently offer up your demands for God to accede. That's not going to work out too good for you in the end. You might need a readjustment to your moral and spiritual GPS.

Reply
 
 
Mar 14, 2024 15:20:55   #
Strycker Loc: The middle of somewhere else.
 
NotMAGA wrote:
One problem with using a 230+ year old document on which to base our government is that it has not kept up with the huge growth in population over time.
It's possible amendments ARE needed - but the ones DJ wanted to change would have allowed for less fairly allocated representation, not more.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/01/we-need-talk-about-amending-constitution/677065/


The document is 230+ years old and our toys and lifestyles have changed but human nature has not. The document is meant to protect the masses from the control of the few. That has not changed.

Your second statement is not true. DJ wants to maintain the integrity of the elections. Universal mail in voting and ballot harvesting does not guarantee election integrity. It allows the appearance and potential for the opposite on a massive scale.

Reply
Mar 14, 2024 15:36:13   #
zillaorange
 
NotMAGA wrote:
Freudian slip is showing
Unless you were being facetious or making a stab at humor with your second sentence. 😜


NOT KILL

Reply
Mar 14, 2024 15:37:14   #
zillaorange
 
Parky60 wrote:
Are you sure you typed that correctly?


NOT KILL OR

Reply
Mar 14, 2024 15:38:14   #
Knightlady
 
NotMAGA wrote:
I have and keep them in mind.

Did you know the Catholic and Protestant versions of the Ten Commandments - the ones taught to their little ones and sometimes posted inside the church - are not the same?


I did not know that. Interesting

Reply
 
 
Mar 14, 2024 16:39:36   #
American Vet
 
RascalRiley wrote:
“ American Vet wrote:
Yes, I am quite sure America was founded on Christian principles.”

If America was founded on Christian principles it must have been Christians who founded America.

Native Americans were slaughtered by those that stole their land.


I believe I have mentioned before: Get a history book and have an educated adult read it to you.

Reply
Mar 14, 2024 16:43:00   #
American Vet
 
RascalRiley wrote:
Turning the other cheek to insults is some we all get lots of practice doing here on OPP. 🙂


Awwww, poor wittle RR.........

Reply
Mar 14, 2024 16:56:15   #
martsiva
 
RascalRiley wrote:
“The Constitution is very clear in the First Amendment”

Until it isn’t.
Both parties are working on ways to limit disinformation and fake news. Anything that contradicts the leader or the party in power’s objectives.
That which needs to be silenced.

For the good of the country of course.


The Republicans are not censoring free speech - the Democrats YOU support ARE!!

Reply
Mar 14, 2024 17:07:51   #
RascalRiley Loc: Somewhere south of Detroit
 
RascalRiley wrote:
“The Constitution is very clear in the First Amendment”

Until it isn’t.
Both parties are working on ways to limit disinformation and fake news. Anything that contradicts the leader or the party in power’s objectives.
That which needs to be silenced.

For the good of the country of course.

Supreme Court to weigh government role in online misinformation.

https://rollcall.com/2024/03/14/supreme-court-to-weigh-government-role-in-online-misinformation/

Reply
 
 
Mar 14, 2024 17:16:47   #
padremike Loc: Phenix City, Al
 
Knightlady wrote:
I did not know that. Interesting


Same Commandments just numbered differently.

Reply
Mar 14, 2024 17:22:05   #
Knightlady
 
padremike wrote:
Same Commandments just numbered differently.


Didn't know that either! Man, I'm on a learning roll

Reply
Mar 14, 2024 17:28:35   #
RascalRiley Loc: Somewhere south of Detroit
 
Knightlady wrote:
Didn't know that either! Man, I'm on a learning roll

Less than half of the Ten have any relevance for Christians today.

Reply
Mar 14, 2024 17:35:00   #
padremike Loc: Phenix City, Al
 
RascalRiley wrote:
Less than half of the Ten have any relevance for Christians today.


Why don't you shut up, take off your yellow stained tennis shoes and quietly tiptoe to perdition. You are such a pompous ass.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 8 of 19 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.